‘ hy Vy yi ther ‘ 5% Hi M C ’ . ty Weber pe be ea ——— * Sas titel Met & —— +e Ts : rye) ) ——= ———— ‘ ‘ i ’ 4 t re) ; ‘ ——— aa 2 z Lo aerators vastts ——= (4 ses " le) a) . —C. ; ges —r- ws a © \ ae : a ity a= os — ‘ ‘ S>=- Satay ; 2S Rts —-—- 4 ee Sue — : a ‘ J ‘ ; ‘ H yr hb aed ‘ pe ; me A ‘ ’ te ; art ! thpad y Jp tyre | ; PEP ar errr eke teatente , . 3 ‘ abe nh OF 4 rt ie eae seetiac tenets Wa hes iy aa 5 PP A oe Ne PAPO VEN Abe eee , ‘ A i hb nh’s aia > gin / Mehta §: noe Ge ta ‘ } ay Pabermae cali hg ey 7 eT) mx ; 4 , ne ot sitar Ed Pi of ‘ F ‘ ae ier ete ; eer j “a ie Mh 5 rir fi i rue & pahrasdepi di boeas ri ii Gung Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2007 with funding from Microsoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/centuryofscienceOOdanauoft Y, rey 19 F303 toes ety . if ‘a : a Me : ot . a ed TEs i eee YL : “4 " = - ; . - ed - . - * a. wl, a 4 -~ ‘ = 1 * by a Par e ; " &s ‘Fu; b fs ; : ) rss a7 © A i - t f s " a se oh Ayo in _. j YALE UNIVERSITY MRS. HEPSA ELY SILLIMAN MEMORIAL LECTURES In the year 1883 a legacy of eighty thousand dollars was left to. the President and Fellows of Yale College in the city of New Haven, to be held in trust, as a gift from her children, in memory of their beloved and honored mother, Mrs. Hepsa Ely Silliman. On this foundation Yale College was requested and directed to establish an annual course of lectures designed to illustrate the presence and prov- idence, the wisdom and goodness of God, as manifested in the natural and moral world. These were to be designated as the Mrs. Hepsa Ely Silliman Memorial Lectures. It was the belief of the testator that any orderly presentation of the facts of nature or history contributed to the end of this foundation more effectively than any attempt to emphasize the elements of doctrine or of creed; and he therefore provided that lectures on dogmatic or polemical theology should be excluded from the scope of this foundation, and that the subjects should be selected rather from the domains of natural science and history, giving special prominence to astronomy, chemistry, geology, and anatomy. It was further directed that each annual course should be made the basis of a volume to form part of a series constituting a memorial to Mrs. Silliman. The memorial fund came into the possession of the Corporation of Yale University in the year 1901; and the present volume constitutes the fourteenth of the series of memorial lectures. SILLIMAN MEMORIAL LECTURES PUBLISHED BY YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS ELECTRICITY AND MATTER. By JosrPpH JOHN THOMSON, D.SC., LL.D., PH.D., F.R.S., Fellow of Trinity College and Cavendish Professor of Experimental Physics, Cambridge University. (Fourth printing.) Price $1.50 net. THE INTEGRATIVE ACTION OF THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. By CHARLES S. SHERRINGTON, D.SC., M.D., HON. LL.D. TOR., F.R.S., Holt Pro- fessor of Physiology, University of Liverpool. (Fifth Printing.) Price $5.00 net. RADIOACTIVE TRANSFORMATIONS. By Ernest RUTHERFORD, D.SC., LL.D., F.R.S., Macdonald Professor of Physics, McGill University. Price $5.00 net. EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL APPLICATIONS OF THER- MODYNAMICS TO CHEMISTRY. By Dr. WALTER NERNST, Professor and Director of the Institute of Physical Chemistry in the University of Berlin. Price $1.50 net. PROBLEMS OF GENETICS. By WILLIAM BATESON, M.A., F.R.S., Director of the John Innes Horticultural Institution, Merton Park, Surrey, England. (Second printing.) Price $5.00 net. STELLAR MOTIONS. With Special Reference to Motions Determined by Means of the Spectrograph. By WILLIAM WALLACE CAMPBELL, SC.D., LL.D., Director of the Lick Observatory, University of California. (Second printing.) Price $5.00 net. THEORIES OF SOLUTIONS. By SvanTE ARRHENIUS, PH.D., SO.D., M.D., Director of the Physico-Chemical Department of the. Nobel Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. (Third printing.) Price $3.00 net. IRRITABILITY. A Physiological Analysis of the General Effect of Stimuli in Living Substanees. By Max VERWORN, M.D., PH.D., Professor at Bonn Physiological Institute. (Second printing.) Price $5.00 net. PROBLEMS OF AMERICAN GEOLOGY. By Witu1Am Norts Ricz, FraNK D. ADAMS, ARTHUR P. COLEMAN, CHARLES D. WALCOTT, WALDE- MAR LINDGREN, FREDERICK LESLIE RANSOME, AND WILLIAM D, MATTHEW. (Second printing.) Price $5.00 net. THE PROBLEM OF VOLCANISM. By JosepH Paxson IDDINGS, PH.B., ad (Second printing.) Price $5.00 net. ORGANISM AND ENVIRONMENT AS ILLUSTRATED BY THE PHYSIOLOGY OF BREATHING. By Joun Scott HALDANE, M.D., LL.D., F.R.S., Fellow of New College, Oxford Uniwersity. (Second printing.) Price $1.25 net. Ye ky Be Pe» PO A CENTURY OF SCIENCE IN AMERICA . WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE . AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 1818-1918 BY _ EDWARD SALISBURY DANA- CHARLES SCHUCHERT HERBERT E. GREGORY - JOSEPH BARRELL - GEORGE OTIS SMITH RICHARD SWANN LULL- LOUIS V. PIRSSON WILLIAM E. FORD-R. B. SOSMAN- HORACE L. WELLS HARRY W. FOOTE. LEIGH PAGE- WESLEY R. COE AND GEORGE L. GOODALE i INT > Wa NEW HAVEN YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS LONDON - HUMPHREY MILFORD: OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS MDCCCCXVIIL 43 me sy "a | one” COPYRIGHT, 1918, BY ; “ ¥ 3 - ‘S - i : a ; (A J GY Pee a et ' a” PREFATORY NOTE The present book commemorates the one-hundredth anniversary of the founding of the American Journal of Science by Benjamin Silliman in July, 1818. The opening chapter gives a somewhat detailed account of the early days of the Journal, with a sketch of its subsequent history. The remaining chapters are devoted to the principal branches of science which have been prominent in the pages of the Journal. They have been written with a view to showing in each case the position of the science in 1818 and the general progress made during the century; special prominence is given to American science and particularly to the contributions to it to be found in the Journal’s pages. Refer- ences to specific papers in the Journal are in most cases included in the text and give simply volume, page, and date, as (24, 105, 1833); when these and other references are in considerable number they have been brought together as a Bibliography at the end of the chapter. The entire cost of the present book is defrayed from the income of the Mrs. Hepsa Ely Silliman Memorial Fund, estab- lished under the will of Augustus Ely Silliman, a nephew of Benjamin Silliman, who died in 1884. Certain of the chapters here printed have been made the basis of a series of seven Silli- man Lectures in accordance with the terms of that gift. The selection of these lectures has been determined by the conveni- ence of the gentlemen concerned and in part also by the nature of the subject. TABLE OF CONTENTS | Page Prefatory Note vii I. The American Journal of Science from 1818 to 1918. Bdward Balisbary Dang. . i... ces cec cease 13 II. A Century of Geology: The Progress of Historical Geology in North America. Charles Schuchert 60 III. A Century of Geology: Steps of Progress in the Interpretation of Land Forms. Herbert E. MES 2 ayy 9 15s ko ois xl CN ad mT Ra SUEY hm 122 IV. A Century of Geology (continued): The Growth of Knowledge of Earth Structure. Joseph PMNMMUEE Sch °C soa. 25 od. aim ¥incip aie 9 die Reyer ee vee 153 VY. A Century of Government Geological Surveys. RNAEEY MITA CUDTURY 4 52 5.0 «2; eo x'd0's. 0:0 OS's hee BAY 193 VI. On the Development of Vertebrate Paleontology. PRIRTAIURCESWOTR LAL ¢<'sicc.gccseeseecdenbeuses 217 VII. The Rise of Petrology as a Science. Louis V. ; TERE es Fe leet oa ob Xe Bk 0h sw RS e eed vee’ 248 VIII. The Growth of Mineralogy from 1818 to 1918. CEM EEO 6.25 5's e gisck oes die 0'e'¥ ones 6 oie 0.4 268 IX. The Work of the Geophysical Laboratory of the Carnegie Institution of Washington. R. B. NET Ue EE og oo also elas ae Ee ware dels 284 X. The Progress of Chemistry during the Past One Hundred Years.. Horace L. Wells and Harry ERNIE. 5 Gyadly Sp vig 2 (kd wlee'e aa gle Pee eae ke aes 288 XI. A Century’s Progress in Physics. Leigh Page.... 335 XII. A Century of Zoology in America. Wesley R. Coe 391 XIII. The Development of Botany since 1818. George L. MERE TG kk CE sae Ge Chis aened dew da vies ¥ « 439 PORTRAITS ES Frontispiece From a painting by U. D. Tenney, Esq., in possession of Miss Henrietta W. Hubbard . Benjamin MNO. 5554 os cx Sha keeas nes opposite page 28 MOM IC TIRNB. ce cesar es ee es eee 5, SG Seatward S, Dana,.................0cccceee es $e ' 48 Asa Gray. SOs MBAS 6 0 6 0 0.0 60 0 9 dee oe S bheie oe 8 6 “< “c“ 444 DUUIPEAIBEWIN ee eee cee eves nf ‘© 459 “e A CENTURY OF SCIENCE IN AMERICA I THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE FROM 1818 TO 1918 By EDWARD S. DANA Introduction. WON July, 1818, one hundred years ago, the first number of the American Journal of Science and Arts was given to the public. This is the only scientific i periodical in this country to maintain an uninterrupted _ existence since that early date, and this honor is shared _ with hardly more than half a dozen other independent _ scientific periodicals in the world at large. Similar pub- _ hications of learned societies for the same period are also _ very few in number. It is interesting, on the occasion of this centenary, to _ glance back at the position of science and scientific liter- _ ature in the world’s intellectual life in the early part of _ the nineteenth century, and to consider briefly the mar- _ velous record of combined scientific and industrial prog- ress of the hundred years following—subjects to be handled in detail in the succeeding chapters. It is fitting also that we should recall the man who founded the | Journal, the conditions under which he worked, and the difficulties he encountered. Finally, we must review, but more briefly, the subsequent history of what has so often been called after its founder, ‘‘Silliman’s Journal.”’ The nineteenth century, and particularly the hundred years in which we are now interested, must always stand out in the history of the world as the period which has 1 14 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE combined the greatest development in all departments of science with the most extraordinary industrial progress. It was not until this century that scientific investigation used to their full extent the twin methods of observation and experiment. In cases too numerous to mention they have given us first, a tentative hypothesis; then, through the testing and correcting of the hypothesis by newly acquired data, an accepted theory has been arrived at; finally, by the same means carried further has been established one of nature’s laws. Early Science-—Looking far back into the past, it seems surprising that science should have had so late a growth, but the wonderful record of man’s genius in the monuments he erected and in architectural remains shows that the working of the human mind found expres- sion first in art and further man also turned to litera- ture. So far as man’s thought was constructive, the early results were systems of philosophy, and explana- tions of the order of things as seen from within, not as shown by nature herself. We date the real beginning of science with the Greeks, but it was the century that pre- ceded Aristotle that saw the building of the Parthenon and the sculptures of Phidias. Even the great Aristotle himself (384-322 B. C.) though he is sometimes called the ‘‘founder of natural history,’’ was justly accused by Lord Bacon many centuries later of having formed his theories first and then to have forced the facts to agree with them. The bringing together of facts through observation alone began, to be sure, very early, for it was the motion of the sun, moon, and stars and the relation of the earth to them that first:excited interest, and, especially in the countries of the East, led to the accumulation of data as to the motion of the planets, of comets and the occur- rence of eclipses. But there was no coérdination of these facts and they were so involved in man’s super- stition as to be of little value. In passing, however, it is worthy of mention that the Chinese astronomical data accumulated more than two thousand years before the Christian era have in trained hands yielded results of no small significance. Doubtless were full knowledge available as to the AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 15 science existing in the early civilizations, we should rate it higher than we can at present, but it would probably prove even then to have been developed from within, like the philosophies of the Greeks, and with but minor influence from nature herself. It is indeed remarkable that down to the time with which we are immediately con- cerned, it was the branches of mathematics, as arithmetic and geometry and later their applications, that were first and most fully developed: in other words those lines of science least closely connected with nature. Of the importance to science of the Greek school at Alexandria in the second and third centuries B. C., there ean be no question. The geometry of Euclid (about 300 B. C.) was marvelous in its completeness as in clearness of logical method. Hipparchus (about 160-125 B. C.) gave the world the elements of trigonometry and devel- oped astronomy so that Ptolemy 260 years later was able to construct a system that was well-developed, though in error in the fundamental idea as to the relative position of the earth. It is interesting to note that the Almagest of Ptolemy was thought worthy of republication by the Carnegie Institution only a year or two since. This great astronomical work, by the way, had no successor till that of the Arab Ulugh Bey in the fifteenth century, - which within a few months has also been made available by the same Institution. To the Alexandrian school also belongs Archimedes _ (287-212 B. C.), who, as every school boy knows, was the _ founder of mechanics and in fact almost a modern physi- _ @al experimenter. He invented the water screw for rais- _ ing water; he discovered the principle of the lever, _ which appealed so keenly to his imagination that he called for.a zot o76, or fulcrum, on which to place it so as to move the earth itself. He was still nearer to modern physics in his reputed plan of burning up a hostile fleet _by converging the sun’s rays by a system of great mirrors. To the Romans, science owes little beyond what is implied in their vast architectural monuments, buildings and aqueducts which were erected at home and in the countries of their conquests. The elder Pliny (23-79 A. D.) most nearly deserved to be called a man of science, 16 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE but his work on natural history, comprised in thirty- seven volumes, is hardly more than a compilation of fable, fact, and fancy, and is sometimes termed a collec- | tion of anecdotes. He lost his life in the ‘‘grandest . geological event of antiquity,’’ the eruption of Vesuvius, which is vividly described by his nephew, the younger Pliny, in ‘‘one of the most remarkable literary produc- tions in the domain of geology’’ (Zittel). With the fall of Rome and the decline of Roman civ- ilization came a period of intellectual darkness, from which the world did not emerge until the revival of learn- ing in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Then the extension of geographical knowledge went hand in hand with the development of art, literature, and the birth of a new science. Copernicus (1473-1543) gave the world at last a sun-controlled solar system; Kepler (1571-1630) formulated the laws governing the motion of the planets; Galileo (1564-1642) with his telescope opened up new vistas of astronomical knowledge and laid the founda- tions of mechanics; while Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519), painter, sculptor, architect, engineer, musician and true scientist, studied the laws of falling bodies and solved — the riddle of the fossils in the rocks. Still later Newton (1642-1727) established the law of gravitation, developed the calculus, put mechanics upon a solid basis and also worked out the properties of lenses and prisms so that his Optics (1704) will always have a prominent place in the history of science. From the time of the Renaissance on science grew steadily, but it was not till the latter half of the eight- eenth century that the foundations in most of the lines recognized to-day were fully laid. Much of what was accomplished then is, at least, outlined in the chapters following. Our standpoint in the early years of the nineteenth century, just before the American Journal had its begin- ning, may be briefly summarized as follows: A desire for knowledge was almost universal and, therefore, also’ a general interest in the development of science. Mathe- matics was firmly established and the mathematical side of astronomy and natural philosophy—as physics was then called—was well developed. Many of the phenom- AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 17 ena of heat and their applications, as in the steam engine of Watt, were known and even the true nature of heat had been almost established by our countryman, Count Rum- ford; but of electricity there were only a few sparks of knowledge. Chemistry had had its foundation firmly laid by Priestley, Lavoisier, and Dalton, while Berzelius was pushing rapidly forward. Geology had also its roots down, chiefly through the work of Hutton and William Smith, though the earth was as yet essentially an unexplored field. Systematic zoology and botany had been firmly grounded by Buffon, Lamarck and Cuvier, on the one hand, and Linnzus on the other; but of all that is - embraced under the biology of the latter half of the nineteenth century the world knew nothing. The state- ments of Silliman in his Introductory Remarks in the ‘first number, quoted in part on a following page, put the matter still more fully, but they are influenced by the enthusiasm of the time and he could have had little com- prehension of what was to be the record of the next one hundred years. Now, leaving this hasty and incomplete retrospect and coming down to 1918, we find the contrast between to-day and 1818 perhaps most strikingly brought out, on the material side, if we consider the ability of’ man, in the early part of the nineteenth century, to meet the demands upon him in the matter of transportation of himself and _his property. In 1800, he had hardly advanced beyond his ancestor of the earliest civilization; on the contrary, he was still dependent for transportation on land upon the muscular efforts of himself and domesticated ani- mals, while at sea he had only the use of sails in addition. The first application of the steam engine with commercial success was made by Fulton when, in 1807, the steamboat ““Clermont’’ made its famous trip on the Hudson River. Since then, step by step, transportation has been made more and more rapid, economical and convenient, both on land and water. This has come first through the per- fection of the steam engine; later through the agency of electricity, and still further and more universally by the use of gasolene motors. Finally, in these early years of the twentieth century, what seemed once a wild dream of 18 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE the imagination has been realized, and man has gained the conquest of the air; while the perfection of the sub- marine is as wonderful as its work can be deadly. Hardly less marvelous is the practical annihilation of space and time in the electric transmission of human thought and speech by wire and by ether waves. While, still further, the same electrical current now gives man his artificial illumination and serves him in a thousand ways besides. But the limitations of space have also been conquered, during the same period, by the spectroscope which brings a knowledge of the material nature of the sun and the fixed stars and of their motion in the line of sight; while - spectrum analysis has revealed the existence of many new elements and opened up vistas as to the nature of matter. The chemist and the physicist, often working together in the investigation of the problems lying between their two departments, have accumulated a staggering array of new facts from which the principles of their sciences have been deduced. Many new elements have been dis- covered, in fact nearly all called for by the periodic law; the so-called fixed gases have been liquefied, and now air in liquid form is almost a plaything; the absolute zero has been nearly reached in the boiling point of helium; physical measurements in great precision have been car- ried out in both directions for temperatures far beyond any scale that was early conceived possible; the atom, once supposed to be indivisible, has been shown to be made up of the much smaller electrons, while its disintegration in radium and its derivatives has been traced out and with consequences only as yet partly understood but cer- tainly having far-reaching consequences; at one point we seem to be brought near to the transmutation of the elements which was so long the dream of the alchemist. Still again photography has been discovered and per- fected and with the use of X-rays it gives a picture of the structure of bodies totally opaque to the eye; the same X-rays seem likely to locate and determine the atoms in the crystal. Here and at many other points we are reaching out to a knowledge of the ultimate nature of matter. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 19 In geology, vast progress has been made in the knowledge of the earth, not only as to its features now exhibited at or near the surface, but also as to its history in past ages, of the development of its structure, the minute history of its life, the phenomena of its earth- quakes, volcanoes, ete. Geological surveys in all civilized countries have been carried. to a high degree of per- fection. In biology, itself a word which though used by Lamarck did not come into use till taken up by Huxley, and then by Herbert Spencer in the middle of the cen- tury, the progress is no less remarkable as is well devel- oped in a later chapter of this volume. Although not falling within our sphere, it would be wrong, too, not to recognize also the growth of medicine, especially through the knowledge of bacteria and their functions, and of disease germs and the methods of com- bating them. The world can never forget the debt it owes to Pasteur and Lister and many later investigators in this field. To follow out this subject further would be to encroach upon the field of the chapters following, but, more important and fundamental still than all the facts dis- covered and the phenomena investigated has been the _ establishment of certain broad scientific principles which have revolutionized modern thought and shown the rela- tion between sciences seemingly independent. The law _ of conservation of energy in the physical world and the _ principle of material and organic evolution may well be - said to be the greatest generalizations of the human mind. Although suggestions in regard to them, particu- larly the latter, are to be found in the writings of early authors, the establishment and general acceptance of these principles belong properly to the middle of the nineteenth century. They stand as the crowning achieve- _ment of the scientific thought of the period in which we - are interested. _ Any mere enumeration of the vast fund of knowledge accumulated by the efforts of man through observation and experiment in the period in which we are interested would be a dry summary, and yet would give some meas- ure of what this marvelous period has accomplished. As 20 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE in geography, man’s energy has in recent years removed the reproach of a ‘‘Dark Continent,”’ of ‘‘unexplored’’ central Asia and the once “inaccessible polar regions,’’ so in the different departments of science, he has opened up many unknown fields and accumulated vast stores of knowledge. It might even seem as if the limit of the unknown were being approached. There remains, how- ever, this difference in the analogy, that in science the fundamental relations—as, for example, the nature of gravitation, of matter, of energy, of electricity; the actual nature and source of life—the solution of these © and other similar problems still lies in the future. What the result of continued research may be no one can pre- dict, but even with these possibilities before us, it is hardly rash to say that so great a combined progress of pure and applied science as that of the past hundred years is not likely to be again realized. Scientific Periodical Literature in 1818. The contrast in scientific activity between 1818 and 1918 is nowhere more strikingly shown than in the amount of scientific periodical literature of the two periods. Of the thousands of scientific journals and reg- ular publications by scientific societies and academies to-day, but a very small number have carried on a con- tinuous and practically unbroken existence since 1818. This small amount of periodical scientific literature in the early part of the last century is significant as giving a fair indication of the very limited extent to which scientific investigation appealed to the intellectual life of the time. Some definite facts in regard te the scientific publications of those early days seem to be called for. Learned societies and academies, devoted to literature and science, were formed very early but at first for ocea- sional meetings only and regular publications were in most cases not begun till a very much later date. Some of the earliest—not to go back of the Renaissance—are the following: 1560. Naples, Academia Secretorum Nature. 1603. Rome, Accademia dei Lincei. 1651. Leipzig, Academia Nature Curiosum. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE a1 1657. Florence, Accademia del Cimento. 1662. London, Royal Society. 1666. Paris, Académie des Sciences. 1690. Bologna, Accademia delle Scienze. 1700. Berlin, Societas Regia Scientiarum. This was the forerunner of the K. preuss. Akad. d. Wissenschaften. The Royal Society of London, whose existence dates _ from 1645, though not definitely chartered until 1662, began the publication of its ‘‘Philosophical Transac- tions’’ in 1665 and has continued it practically unbroken to the present time; this is a unique record. Following this, other early—but in most cases not continuous— publications were those of Paris (1699); Berlin (1710) ; Upsala (1720); Petrograd, 1728; Stockholm (1739); -and Copenhagen (1743). For the latter half of the eighteenth century, when the foundations of our modern science were being rapidly laid, a considerable list might be given of early publica- tions of similar scientific bodies. Some of the prominent ones are: Gottingen (1750), Munich (1759), Brussels (1769), Prague (1775), Turin (1784), Dublin (1788), ete. The early years of the nineteenth century saw the begin- - nings of many others, particularly in northern Italy. It is to be noted that, as stated, only rarely were the publi- cations of these learned societies even approximately continuous. In the majority of cases the issue of trans- actions or proceedings was highly irregular and often interrupted. In this country the earliest scientific bodies are the following: Philadelphia. American Philosophical Society, founded in 1743. Transactions were published 1771-1809; then inter- rupted until 1818 e¢ seq. Boston. American Academy of Arts and Sciences, founded in 1780. Memoirs, 1785-1821; and then 1833 et seq. New Haven. Connecticut ‘Academy of Arts and Sciences, _ begun in 1799. Memoirs, vol. 1, 1810-16; Transactions, 1866 et seq. Philadelphia. Academy of Natural Sciences, begun in 1812. Journal, 1817-1842; and from 1847 et seq. New York. Lyceum of Natural History, 1817; later (1876) became the New York Academy of Sciences. Annals from 1823 ; Proceedings from 1870. 22 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE The situation is somewhat similar as to independent scientific journals. A list of the names of those started only to find an early death would be a very long one, but interesting only historically and as showing a spasmodic but unsustained striving after scientific growth. It seems worth while, however, to give here the names of the periodicals embracing one or more of the sub- jects of the American Journal, which began at a very early date and most of which have maintained an unin- terrupted existence down to 1915. It should be added that certain medical journals, not listed here, have also had a long and continued existence.! Early Scientific Journals. 1771-1823. Journal de Physique, Paris; title changed several times. 1787-. Botanical Magazine. (For a time known as Curtis’s Journal.) 1789-1816. Annales de Chimie, Paris. Continued from 1817 on as the Annales de Chimie et de Physique. 1790. Journal der Physik, Halle (by Gren); from 1799 on became the Annalen der Physik (und Chemie), Halle, Leipzig. The title has been somewhat changed from time to time though publication has been continuous. Often referred to by the name of the editor-in-chief, as Gren, Gilbert, Poggendorff, Wiedemann, ete. 1795-1815. Journal des Mines, Paris, continued from 1816 as the Annales des Mines. 1796-1815. Bibliothéque Britannique, Geneva. From 1816- 1840, Bibliothéque Universelle, ete. 1846-1857, Archives des Sci. phys. nat. Since 1858 generally known as the Bibliothéque Universelle. 1797. Journal of Natural Philosophy, Chemistry and the Arts (Nicholson’s Journal) London; united in 1814 with the Philosophical Magazine (Tilloch’s Journal). 1798-. The Philosophical Magazine (originally by Tilloch). This absorbed Nicholson’s Journal (above) in 1814; also the Annals of Philosophy (Thomson, Phillips) in 1827 and Brew- sters’ Edinburgh Journal of Science in 1832. 1798-1803. Allgemeines Journal de Chemie (Scherer’s J ournal). 1803-1806; continued as Neues Allg. J. ete. (Geh- len’s Journal.) ‘Later title repeatedly changed and finally (1834 et seq.) Journal fiir praktische Chemie. 1816-18. Journal of Science and the Arts, London. 1819- ee ee al AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 23 30, Quarterly J. ete. 1830-31, Journal of the Royal Institution of Great Britain. 1818. American Journal of Science and Arts until 1880, when ‘‘the Arts’’ was dropped, New Haven, Conn. First Series, 1-50, 1818-1845; Second Series, 1-50, 1846-1870; Third Series, 1-50, 1871-1895; Fourth Series, 1-45, 1896-June, 1918. 1818. Flora, or Allgemeine botanische Zeitung. Regensburg, Munich. 1820-1867. London Journal of Arts and Sciences (after 1855, Newton’s Journal). 1824-. Annales des sciences naturelles. Paris. 1826-. Linnea, Berlin, Halle; from 1882 united with Jahrb. d. K. botan. Gartens. 1828-1840. Magazine of Natural History, London; united 1838 with the Annals of Natural History, and known since 1841 -as the Annals and Magazine of Natural History. 1828—. Journal of the Franklin Institute, Philadelphia, from 1826; earlier (1825) the American Mechanics Magazine. 1832—. Annalen der Chemie (und Pharmacie) often known as Liebig’s Annalen. Leipzig, Lemgo. _ The Founder of the American Journal of Science. The establishment of a scientific journal in this country in 1818 was a pioneer undertaking, requiring of its founder a rare degree of energy, courage, and confidence in the future. It was necessary, not only to obtain the material to fill its pages and the money to carry on the enterprise, but, before the latter end could be accom- plished, an audience must be found among those who had hitherto felt little or no interest in the sciences. This great work was accomplished by Benjamin Silliman, *‘the guardian of American Science,’’ whose influence was second to none in the early development of science in this country. Before speaking in some detail of the early years of this Journal and of its subsequent history, it is proper that some words should be given to its founder. Benjamin Silliman, son of a general prominent in the Revolutionary War, was born in Trumbull, Connecticut, on August 8, 1779. He was a graduate of Yale College of the class of 1796. Though at first a student of law and accepted for the bar in Connecticut, he was called in 1802 by President Timothy Dwight—a man of rare breadth of “24 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE mind—to occupy the newly-made chair of chemistry, min- eralogy (and later geology) in Yale College at New Haven. To fit himself for the work before him he carried on extensive studies at home and in Philadelphia and spent the year 1805 in travels and study at London and Edinburgh, and also on the Continent. His active duties began in 1806 and from this time on he was in the service of Yale College until his resignation in 1853. From the first, Silliman met with remarkable success as a teacher and public lecturer in arousing an interest in science. His breadth of knowledge, his enthusiasm for his chosen subjects and power of clear presentation, com- © bined with his fine presence and attractive personality, made him a great leader in the science of the country and ' gave him a unique position in the history of its develop- ment. Much might be said of the man and his work, but, the best tribute is that of James Dwight Dana, given in his inaugural address upon the occasion of his beginning his duties as Silliman professor of geology in Yale College. This was delivered on February 18, 1856, in what was then known as the ‘‘Cabinet Building.’? Dana says in part: ‘In entering upon the duties of this place, my thoughts turn rather to the past than to the subject of the present hour. I feel that it is an honored place, honored by the labors of one who has been the guardian of American Science from its child- hood; who here first opened to the country the wonderful records of geology; whose words of eloquence and earnest truth were but the overfiow of a soul full of noble sentiments and warm sympathies, the whole throwing a peculiar charm over his learning, and rendering his name beloved as well as illus- trious. Just fifty years since, Professor Silliman took his sta- tion at the head of chemical and geological science in this college. Geology was then hardly known by name in the land, out of these walls. Two years before, previous to his tour in Europe, the whole cabinet of Yale was a half-bushel of unlabelled stones. On visiting England he found even in London no school publie or private, for geological instruction, and the science was not named in the English universities. To the mines, quarries, and cliffs of England, the crags of Scotland, and the meadows of Holland he looked for knowledge, and from these and the teach- ings of Murray, Jameson, Hall, Hope, and Playfair, at Edin- burgh, Professor Silliman returned, equipped for duty,—albeit. f, ca ee eee RE TR are ee Lt : = ee AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 25 a great duty,—that of laying the foundation, and creating almost out of nothing a department not before recognized in any institution in America. He began his work in 1806. The science was without books— and, too, without system, except such as its few cultivators had each for himself in his conceptions. It was the age of the first beginnings of geology, when Wernerians and Huttonians were arrayed in a contest. . . . Professor Silliman when at Edin- burgh witnessed the strife, and while, as he says, his earliest predilections were for the more peaceful mode of rock-making, these soon yielded to the accumulating evidence, and both views became combined in his mind in one harmonious whole. The science, thus evolved, grew with him and by him; for his own labors contributed to its extension. Every year was a year of - expansion and onward development, and the grandeur of the opening views found in him a ready and appreciative response. And while the sciences and truth have thus made progress here, through these labors of fifty years, the means of study in the institution have no less increased. Instead of that half- bushel of stones, which once went to Philadelphia for names, in a candle-box, you see above the largest mineral cabinet in the country, which but for Professor Silliman, his attractions and _ his personal exertions together, would never have been one of _ the glories of old Yale. . _ Moreover, the American Journal of Science,—now in its thirty-seventh year and seventieth volume [1856],—projected _ and long-sustained solely by Professor Silliman, while ever dis- tributing truth, has also been ever gathering honors, and is one of the laurels of Yale. _ We rejoice that in laying aside his studies, after so many _ years of labor, there is still no abated vigor. . . . He retires as one whose right it is to throw the burden on others. Long ‘may he be with us, to enjoy the good he has done, and cheer us _ by his noble and benign presence.’’ _ In.addition to these words of Dana, much of vital interest in regard to Silliman and his work will be gathered from what is given in the pages immediately following, quoted from his personal statements in the early volumes of the Journal. The Early Years of the Journal. Inno direction did Silliman’s enthusiastic activities in Science produce a more enduring result than in the found- 2 so MORE ESPECIALLY OF es iS) < MINERALOGY, GEOLOGY, (3 2 AND THE < OP OTHER BRANCHES OF NATURAL HISTORY ;@™ p CP22 ne INCLUDING ALSO DY" 2B a AGRICULTURE en 88 AND THE es : ORNAMENTAL AS WELL AS USEFUL ons ee p ARTS. Uy SP: CONDUCTED BY ONS PROFESSOR OF CHEMISTRY, MINERALOGY, ETC IN YALE COLLEGE, AUTHOR OF Dy TRAVELS IN ENGLAND, SCOTLAND, AND HOLLAND, ETC Ow tL A VOL. I.....NO. I. QD" C2 —— WHO eps ENGRAVING IN THE PRESENT NO. Ee New apparatus for the combustion of Tar, &e. by fhe vapaur of sy water. oe — 68 8.8.2 -QO08S—— on Cay Pew-jork : Si PUBLISHED BY J. FASTBURN AND CO. LITERARY ROOMS, BROADWAY, Sy AND BY HOWE AND SPALDING, NEW-HAVEN CYPp, ame Qf QS Abraham Paul, printer. 5), . 1818. aie ees Me Ne ENC e eerie die ck AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 27 ing and carrying on of the Journal. The first sugges- tion in regard to the enterprise was made to Silliman by his friend, Colonel George Gibbs, from whom the famous Gibbs collection of minerals was bought by Yale College in 1825. Silliman says (25, 215, 1834) : **Col. Gibbs was the person who first suggested to the Editor the project of this Journal, and he urged the topie with so much zeal and with such cogent arguments, as prevailed to induce the effort in a case then viewed as of very dubious success. The subject was thus started in November, 1817; proposals for the Journal were issued in January, 1818, and the first number appeared in July of that year.’’ He adds further (50, p. iii, 1847) that the conversation here recorded took place ‘‘on an accidental meeting on board the steamboat Fulton in Long Island Sound.’’ This was some ten years after Robert Fulton’s steam- boat, the Clermont, made its pioneer trip on the Hudson river, already alluded to. The incident is not without significance in this connection. The deck of the ‘‘Ful- ton’’ was not an inappropriate place for the inauguration of an enterprise also great in its results for the country. In the preface to the concluding volume of the First Series (loc. cit.) Silliman adds the following remarks which show his natural modesty at the thought of under- taking so serious a work. He says: Although a different selection of an editor would have been much preferred, and many reasons, public and personal, con- eurred to produce diffidence of success, the arguments of Col. ' Gibbs, whose views on subjects of science were entitled to the most respectful consideration, and had justly great weight, being pressed with zeal and ability, induced a reluctant assent; and accordingly, after due consultation with many competent judges, the proposals were issued early in 1818, embracing the whole range of physical science and its applications. The Editor in entering on the duty, regarded it as an affair for life, _and the thirty years of experience which he has now had, have proved that his views of the exigencies of the service were not erroneous. _ The plan with which the editor began his work and the lines laid down by him at the outset can only be made clear by quoting entire the ‘‘Plan of the Work’’ which 28 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE opens the first number. It seems desirable also to give this in its original form as to paragraphs and typog- raphy. The first page of the cover of the opening num- ber has also been reproduced here. It will be seen that the plan of the young editor was as wide as the entire range of science and its applications and extended out to music and the fine arts. This seems strange to-day, but it must be remembered how few were the organs of pub- lication open tc contributors at the time. If the plan was unreasonably extended, that fact is to be taken not only as an expression of the enthusiasm of the editor, as yet inexperienced in his work, but also of the time when the sciences were still in their infancy. He says (1, pp. v, vi): ‘““PLAN OF THE WORK. This Journal is intended to embrace the circle of Tur Puys- ICAL SCIENCES, with their application to THz Arts, and to every useful purpose. It is designed as a deposit for original American communica- tions; but will contain also occasional selections from Foreign — Journals, and notices of the progress of science in other coun- tries. Within its plan are embraced Natura History, in its three great departmenel of Mrner- ALoGy, Botany, and Zoouoey ; Cuemistry and Navurau. PHILOSOPHY, in their various branches: and MATHEMATICS, pure and mixed. It will be a leading object to illustrate American NATURAL History, and especially our MineraLoey and GEroLoey. The AppiicaTions of these sciences are obviously as numer- ous as physical arts, and physical wants; for no one of these arts or wants can be named which is not connected with them. While Science will be cherished for its own sake, and with a due respect for its own inherent dignity; it will also be employed as the handmaid to the Arts. Its numerous applica- tions to AGRICULTURE, the earliest and most important of them; to our MANnuractures, both mechanical and chemical; and to our Domestic Economy, will be earefully sought out, and faithfully made. It is also within the design of this Journal to receive communi- eaticns on Music, Scuuprure, ENerAvine, PAmntiIne, and gener- ally on the fine and liberal, as well as useful arts; On Military and Civil Engineering, and the art of Navigation. ee Te AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 29 Notices, Reviews, and Analyses of new scientific works, and of new Inventions, and Specifications of Patents; Biographical and Obituary Notices of scientific men; essays on CoMPARATIVE ANATOMY and PuHysioLoay, and generally on such other branches of medicine as depend on scientific prin- ciples ; Meteorological Registers, and eagorks of Agricultural Experi- ments: and we would leave room also for interesting miscellane- ous things, not perhaps exactly included under either of the _ above heads. Communications are respectfully solicited from men of science, and from men versed in the practical arts. Learned Societies are invited to make this Journal, occasion- ally, the vehicle of their communications to the Public. The editor will not hold himself responsible for the sentiments and opinions advanced by his correspondents; but he will con- sider it as an allowed liberty to make slight verbal alterations, _ where errors may be presumed to have arisen from inadver- tency.’’ In the ‘‘Advertisement’’ which precedes the above statement in the first number, the editor remarks some- _ what naively that he ‘‘does not pledge himself that all the _ subjects shall be touched upon in every number. This is plainly impossible unless every article should be very short and imperfect. . The whole subject is eee in all its relations in _ the ‘‘Introductory Remarks’’ which open the first vol- ume. No apology is needed for quoting at considerable length, for only in this way can the situation be made clear, as seen by the editor in 1818. Further we gain _here a picture of the intellectual life of the times and, not less interesting, of the mind and personality of the writer. — With a frank kindliness, eminently characteristic of the man, as will be seen, he takes the public fully into his confidence. In the remarks made in subsequent vol- umes,—also extensively quoted—the vicissitudes in the conduct of the enterprise are brought out and when suc- cess was no longer doubtful, there is a tone of quiet satisfaction which was also characteristic and which the circumstances fully justified. The Inrropuctory Remarks begin as follows: The age in which we live is not less distinguished by a vigorous _ and successful cultivation of physical science, than by its numer- 2 30 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE ous and important applications to the practical arts, and to the common purposes of life. In every enlightened country, men illustrious for talent, worth and knowledge, are ardently engaged in enlarging the bound- aries of natural science; and the history of their labors and discoveries is communicated to the world chiefly through the medium of scientific journals. The utility of such journals has thus become generally evident; they are the heralds of science; they proclaim its toils and its achievements; they demonstrate — its intimate connection as well with the comfort, as with the intellectual and moral improvement of our species; and they often procure for it enviable honors and substantial rewards. Mention is then made of the journals existing in England and France in 1818 ‘‘which have long enjoyed a high and deserved reputation.’’ He then continues: From these sources our country reaps and will long continue to reap, an abundant harvest of information: and if the light of science, as well as of day, springs from the East, we will wel- come the rays of both; nor should national pride induce us to reject so rich an offering. But can we do nothing in return? In a general diffusion of useful information through the vari- ous classes of society, in activity of intellect and fertility of resource and invention, producing a highly intelligent popula- tion, we have no reason to shrink from a comparison with any country. But the devoted cultivators of science in the United States are comparatively few: they are, however, rapidly increasing in number. Among them are persons distinguished for their capacity and attainments, and, notwithstanding the local feelings nourished by our state sovereignties, and the rival claims of several of our larger cities, there is evidently a predis- position towards a concentration of effort, from which we may hope for the happiest results, with regard to the advancement of both the science and reputation of our country. Is it not, therefore, desirable to furnish some rallying point, some object sufficiently interesting to be nurtured by common efforts, and thus to become the basis of an enduring, common interest? To produce these efforts, and to excite this interest, nothing, perhaps, bids fairer than a ScrmenTIFIC JOURNAL, The valuable work already accomplished by various medical journals is then spoken of and particularly that of the first scientific periodical in the United States, Bruce’s Mineralogical Journal. This, as Silliman says peat etn AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 31 (1, p. 3, 1818), although ‘‘both in this country and in Europe received in a very flattering manner,’’ did not survive the death of its founder, and only a single vol- ume of 270 pages appeared (1810-1813). Silliman continues: _No one, it is presumed, will doubt that a journal devoted to science, and embracing a sphere sufficiently extensive to allure to its support the principal scientific men of our country, is greatly needed; if cordially supported, it will be successful, and if successful, it will be a great public benefit. Even a failure, in so good a cause, (unless it should arise from - Incapacity or unfaithfulness,) cannot be regarded as dishonour- able. It may prove only that the attempt was premature, and that our country is not yet ripe for such an undertaking; for _ without the efficient support of talent, knowledge, and money, it cannot long proceed. No editor can hope to carry forward such a work without the active aid of scientific and practical men; but, at the same time, the public have a right to expect that he will not be sparing of his own labour, and that his work shall be generally marked by the impress of his own hand. To this extent the editor cheerfully acknowledges his obligations to the public; and it will be his endeavour faithfully to redeem his pledge. Most of the periodical works of our country have been short- lived. This, also, may perish in its infancy; and if any degree - of confidence is cherished that it will attain a maturer age, it is derived from the obvious and intrinsic importance of the under- taking; from its being built upon permanent and momentous national interests; from the evidence of a decided approbation of the design, on the part of gentlemen of the first eminence, obtained in the progress of an extensive correspondence; from assurance of support, in the way of contributions, from men of ability in many sections of the union; and from the existence of such a crisis in the affairs of this country and of the world, as appears peculiarly auspicious to the success of every wise and good undertaking. An interesting discussion follows (pp. 5-8) as to the claims of the different branches of science, and the extent to which they and their applications had been already developed, also the spheres still open to discovery. The Introductory Remarks close, as follows: In a word, the whole circle of physical science is directly applicable to human wants and constantly holds out a light to 32 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE the practical arts; it thus polishes and benefits society and everywhere demonstrates both supreme intelligence and harmony and beneficence of design in the Creator. The sciénce of mathematics, both pure and mixed, can never cease to be interesting and important to man, as long as the relations of quantity shall exist, as long as ships shall traverse the ocean, as long as man shall measure the surface or heights of the earth on which he lives, or calculate the distances and examine the relations of the planets and stars; and as long as the iron reign of war shall demand the discharge of projectiles, or the construction of complicated defences. The closing part of the paragraph shows the infiuence exerted upon the mind of the editor by the serious wars of the years preceding 1818, a subject alluded to again at the close of this chapter. In February, 1822, with the completion of the fourth volume, the editor reviews the situation which, though encouraging is by no means fully assuring. He says (preface to vol. 4, dated Feb. 15, 1822): Two years and a half have elapsed, since the publication of . the first volume of this Journal, and one year and ten months since the Editor assumed the pecuniary responsibility. . . . The work has not, even yet, reimbursed its expenses, (we speak not of editorial or of business compensation,) we intend, that it has not paid for the paper, printing and engraving; the proprietors of the first volume being in advance, on those accounts, and the Editor on the same score, with respect to the aggregate expense of the three last volumes. This deficit is, however, no longer increasing, as the receipts, at present, just about cover the expense of the physical materials, and of the manual labour. A reiterated disclosure of this kind is not grateful, and would scarcely be manly, were it not that the public, who alone have the power to remove the difficulty, have a right to a frank exposition of the state of the case. As the patronage is, however, growing gradually more extensive, it is believed that the work will be eventually sustained, although it may be long before it will command any thing but gratuitous intellectual labour. . . . ‘ These facts, with the obvious one,—that its pages are supplied with contributions from all parts of the Union, and oceasionally ‘from Europe, evince that the work is received as a national and not as a local undertaking, and that the community consider it as having no sectional character. Encouraged by this view of ee eg rae ae * < om, a ee AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 33 the subject, and by the favour of many distinguished men, both at home and abroad, and supported by able contributors, to whom the Editor again tenders his grateful acknowledgments, he will still persevere, in the hope of contributing something to the advancement of our science and arts, and towards the. elevation of our national character. - Jn the autumn of the same year, the editor closes the fifth volume with a more confident tone (Sept. 25, 1822) : A trial of four years has decided the point, that the American Publie will support this Journal. Its pecuniary patronage is now such, that although not a lucrative, it is no longer a hazard- ous enterprise. It is now also decided, that the intellectual resources of the country are sufficient to afford an unfailing _ supply of valuable original communications and that nothing but perseverance and effort are necessary to give perpetuity to _the undertaking. The decided and uniform expression of public favour which the Journal has received both at home and abroad, affords the Editor such encouragement, that he cannot hesitate to per- severe—and he now renews the expression of his thanks to the _ friends and correspondents of the work, both in Europe and the United States, requesting at the same time a continuance of their friendly influence and efforts. _ Still again in the preface to the sixth volume (1823) he _ takes the reader more fully into his confidence and shows _ that he regards the enterprise as no longer of doubtful success. He says: The conclusion of a new volume of a work, involving so much care, labour and responsibility, as are necessarily attached, at the present day, to a Journal of Science and the Arts, natur- ally produces in the mind, a state of not ungrateful calmness, and a disposition, partaking of social feeling, to say something to those who honour such a production, by giving to it a small share of their money, and of their time. The Editor’s first impression was, that the sixth volume should be sent into the _ world without an introductory note, but he yields to the impulse already expressed, and to the established usages of respectful courtesy to the public, which a short preface seems to imply. He has now persevered almost five years, in an undertaking, regarded by many of the friends whom he originally consulted, as hazardous, and to which not a few of them prophetically alloted only an ephemeral existence. It has been his fortune to 34 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE prosecute this work without, (till a very recent period,) returns, adequate to its indispensable responsibilities ;—under a heavy pressure of professional and private duty; with trying fluctua- tions of health, and amidst severe and reiterated domestic afflictions. The world are usually indulgent to allusions of this nature, when they have any relation to the discharge of public duty; and in this view, it is with satisfaction, that the Editor adds, that he has now to look on formidable difficulties, only in retrospect, and with something of the feeling of him, who sees a powerful and vanquished foe, slowly retiring, and leaving a field no longer contested. This Journal which, from the first, was fully supplied with original communications, is now sustained by actual payment, to such an extent, that it may fairly be considered as an estab- lished work; its patronage is regularly increasing, and we trust it will no longer justify such remarks as some of the following, from the pen of one of the most eminent scientific men in Europe. ‘‘Nothing surprises me more, than the little encourage- ment which your Journal,’’ (‘‘which I always read with very great interest, and of which I make great use,’’) ‘‘experiences in America—this must surely arise from the present depressed condition of trade, and cannot long continue.’’ Six years more of uninterrupted editorial work passed by, the sixteenth volume was completed, and the editor was now in a position to review the whole situation up to 1829. This preface (dated July 1, 1829), which is quoted nearly in full, cannot fail to be found particularly inter- esting and from several standpoints, not the least for the insight it gives into the writer’s mind. It is also note- worthy that at this early date it was found possible to pay for original contributions, a privilege far beyond the means of the editor of to-day. When this Journal was first projected, very few believed that it would succeed. Among others, Dr. Dorsey wrote to the editor; ‘‘I predict a short life for you, although I wish, as the Spaniards say, that you may live a thousand years.’’ The work has not lived a thousand years, but as it has survived more than the hundredth part of that period, no reason is apparent why it may not con- tinue to exist. To the contributors, disinterested and arduous as have been their exertions, the editor’s warmest thanks are due; and they are equally rendered to numerous personal friends for their unwavering support: nor ought those sub- AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 35 seribers to be forgotten who, occupied in the common pursuits _ of life, have aided, by their money, in sustaining the hazardous novelty of an American Journal of Science. A general appro- bation, sufficiently decided to encourage effort, where there was - no other reward, has supported the editor; but he has not been inattentive to the voice of criticism, whether it has reached him in the tones of candor and kindness, or in those of severity. We must not look to our friends for the full picture of our faults. He is unwise who neglects the maxim— —fas est ab hoste doceri, and we may be sure, that those are quite in earnest, whose pleasure it is, to place faults in a strong light and bold relief; and to throw excellencies into the shadow of total eclipse. Minds at once enlightened and amiable, viewing both in their _ proper proportions, will however render the equitable verdict; Non ego paucis offendar maculis,— It is not pretended that this Journal has been faultless; there may be communications in it which had been better omitted, and it is not doubted that the power to command intellectual effort, by suitable pecuniary reward, would add to its purity, as a record of science, and to its richness, as a repository of dis- -eoveries in the arts. But the editor, even now, offers payment, at the rate adopted _ by the literary Journals, for able original communications, con- taining especially important facts, investigations and discoveries - in science, and practical inventions in the useful and ornamental Arts. As however his means are insufficient to pay for all the copy, _- it is earnestly requested, that those gentlemen, who, from other _ motives, are still willing to write for this Journal, should con- _ tinue to favor it with their communications. That the period when satisfactory compensation can be made to all writers whose _ pieces are inserted, and to whom payment will be acceptable, is not distant, may perhaps be hoped, from the spontaneous expres- sion of the following opinion, by the distinguished editor of one of our principal literary journals, whose letter is now before me. ‘‘The character of the American Journal is strictly national, and it is the only vehicle of communication in which _an inquirer may be sure to find what is most interesting in the wide range of topics, which its design embraces. It has become in short, not more identified with the science than the literature of the country.’’ It is believed that a strict examination of its contents will prove that its character has been decidedly scientific; and the opinion is often expressed to the editor, that 36 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE in common with the journals of our Academies, it is a work of reference, indispensable to him who would examine the progress of American science during the period which it covers. That it might not be too repulsive to the general reader, some miscel- laneous pieces have occasionally occupied its pages; but in smaller proportion, than is common with several of ‘the most distinguished British Journals of Science. Still, the editor has been frequently solicited, both in public and private, to make it more miscellaneous, that it might be more acceptable to the intelligent and well educated man, who does not cultivate science; but he has never lost sight of his great object, which was to produce and concentrate original American effort in science, and thus he has foregone pecuniary returns, which by pursuing the other course, might have been rendered important. Others would not have him admit any thing that is not strictly and technically scientific; and would make this journal for mere professors and amateurs; especially in regard to those numerous details in natural history, which although important to be registered, (and which, when pre- sented, have always been recorded in the American Journal,) can never exclusively occupy the pages of any such work without repelling the majority of readers. If this is true even in Great Britain it is still more so in this country; and our savants, unless they would be, not only the exclusive admirers, but the sole purchasers of their own works, must permit a little of the graceful drapery of general literature to flow around the cold statues of science. The editor of this Journal, strongly inclined, both from opinion and habit, to gratify the cultivators of science, will still do everything in his power to promote its high interests, and as he hopes in a better manner than heretofore; but these respectable gentlemen will have the courtesy, to yield something to the reading literary, as well as scientific public, and will not, we trust, be disgusted, if now and then an Qasis relieves the eye, and a living stream refreshes the traveller. Not being inclined to renew the abortive experiment, to please every body, which has been so long renowned in fable; the editor will endeavor to pursue, the even tenor of his way; altogther inclined to be courteous and useful to his fellow travellers, and hoping for their kindness and services in return. The Close of the First Series. The ‘‘First Series,’’ as it was henceforth to be known, closed with the fiftieth volume (1847, pp. xx + 347). This final volume is devoted to an exhaustive index to the sali tee ber thier ese 2. a” Pe AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 37 forty-nine volumes preceding. In the preface (dated April 19, 1847) the elder Silliman, now the senior editor, reviews the work that had been accomplished with a frank expression of his feeling of satisfaction in the vic- tory won against great obstacles; with this every reader must sympathize. He quotes here at length (but in slightly altered form) the matter from the first volume (1818), which has been already reproduced almost entire, and then goes on as follows (pp. xi e¢ seq.) : | Such was the pledge which, on entering upon our editorial labors in 1818, we gave to the public, and such were the views which we then entertained, regarding science and the arts as connected with the interests and honor of our country and of mankind. - In the retrospect, we realize a sober but grateful - feeling of satisfaction, in having, to the extent of our power, discharged these self-imposed obligations; this feeling is chas- tened also by a deep sense of gratitude, first to God for life and power continued for so high a purpose; and next, to our noble and of contributors, whose labors are recorded in half a century of volumes, and in more than a quarter of a century of years. _ We need not conceal our conviction, that the views expressed in these ‘‘Introductory Remarks,’’ have been fully sustained _ by our fellow laborers. Should we appear to take higher ground than becomes us, we find our vindication in the fact, that we have heralded _ ¢ehiefly the doings and the fame of others. The work has indeed borne throughout ‘‘the impress’’ of editorial unity of design, and much that has flowed from one pen, and not a little from _the pens of others, has been without a name. The materials _ for the pile, have however been selected and brought in, chiefly _by other hands, and if the monument which has been reared should prove to be ‘‘aere perennius,’’ the honor is not the sole property of the architect; those who have quarried, hewn and polished the granite and the marble, are fully entitled to the enduring record of their names already deeply cut into the massy blocks, which themselves have furnished. If a retrospective survey of the labors of thirty years on this occasion has rekindled a degree of enthusiasm, it is a natural result of an examination of all our volumes from the contents _ of which we have endeavored to make out a summary both of the laborers and their works. The series of volumes must ever form a work of permanent interest on account of its exhibiting the progress of American science during the long period which it covers. Comparing 38 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE 1817 with 1847, we mark on this subject a very gratifying change. The cultivators of science in the United States were then few— now they are numerous. Societies and associations of various names, for the cultivation of natural history, have been insti- tuted in very many of our cities and towns, and several of them have been active and efficient in making original observations and forming collections. A summary follows presenting some facts as to the growth of scientific societies and scientific collections in this country during the period involved: Then the striking contrast between 1818 and 1847 in the matter of organized effort toward scientific exploration is dis- cussed, as follows (pp. xvi et seq.): When we began our Journal, not one of the States had been surveyed in relation to its geology and natural history; now those that have not been explored are few in number. State collections and a United States Museum hold forth many allure- ments to the young naturalist, as well as to the archxologist and the student of his own race. The late Exploring Expedition [Wilkes] with the National Institute, has enriched the capital with treasures rarely equalled in any country, and the Smith- sonian Institution recently organized at Washington, is about to begin its labors for the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men. It must not be forgotten that the American Association of Geologists and Naturalists—composed of individuals assembled from widely separate portions of the Union—by the seven ses- sions which it has held, and by its rich volume of reports, has produced a concentration and harmony of effort which promise happy results, especially as, like the British Association, it visits different towns and cities in its annual progress. Astronomy now lifts its exploring tubes from the observatories of many of our institutions. - Even the Ohio, which within the memory of the oldest living men, rolled along its dark waters through interminable forests, or received the stains of blood from deadly Indian warfare, now beholds on one of its most beautiful hills, and near its splendid city, a permanent obser- vatory with a noble telescope sweeping the heavens, by the hand of a zealous and gifted observer. At Washington also, under the powerful patronage of the general government, an excellent observatory has been established, and is furnished with superior instruments, under the direction of a vigilant and well instructed astronomer—seconded by able and zealous assistants. Here also (in Yale College) successful observations have been AMERICAN J OURNAL OF SCIENCE 39 made with good instruments, although no permanent building has been erected for an Observatory. We only give single examples by way of illustration, for the history of the progress of science in the United States, and of institutions for its promotion, during the present generation, would demand a volume. It is enough for our purpose that science is understood and valued, and the right methods of prosecuting it are known, and the time is at hand when its moral and intellectual use will be as obvious as its physical applica- tions. Nor is it to be forgotten that we have awakened an European interest in our researches: general science has been illustrated by treasures of facts drawn from this country, and our discoveries are eagerly sought for and published abroad. While with our co-workers in many parts of our broad land, we rejoice in this auspicious change, we are far from arrogating it to ourselves. Multiplied labors of many hands have produced the great results. In the place which we have occupied, we have persevered despite of all discouragements, and may, with our numerous coadjutors, claim some share in the honors of the day. We do not say that our work might not have been better done—but we may declare with truth that we have done all in our power, and it is something to have excited many others to effort and to have chronicled their deeds in our annals. Let those that follow us labor with like zeal and perseverance, and - _ the good cause will continue to advance and prosper. It is the eause of truth—science is only embodied and sympathized truth and in the beautiful conception of our noble Agassiz—‘‘it tells the thought of God.’’ The preface closes with some personal remarks: _ In tracing back the associations of many gone-by years, a host of thoughts rush in, and pensive remembrance of the dead who have labored with us casts deep shadows into the vista through which we view the past. Anticipation of the hour of discharge, when our summons shall arrive, gives sobriety to thought and checks the confidence which health and continued power to act might naturally inspire, were we not reproved, almost every day, by the death of some co-eval, co-worker, companion, friend or patron. This very hour is saddened by such an event,—but we will continue to labor on, and strive to be found at our post of duty, until there is nothing more for us to do; trusting our hopes for a future life in the hands of Him who placed us in the midst of the splendid garniture of this lower world, and who has made not less ample provision for another and a better. 40 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE Editorial and financial.—The editorial labors on the Journal were carried by the elder Silliman alone for twenty years from 1818 to 1838. As has been clearly shown in his statements, already quoted, he was, after the first beginning, personally responsible also for the finan- cial side of the enterprise. With volume 34 (1838) the name of Benjamin Silliman, Jr., is added as co-editor on the title page. He was graduated from Yale College the year preceding and at this date was only twenty-one years old. His aid was unquestionably of much service from the beginning and increased rapidly with years and experience. The elder Silliman introduces him in the preface to vol. 34 (1838) and comes back to the subject again in the preface to vol. 50 (1847). The whole edi- torial situation is here presented as follows: ‘‘During twenty years from the inception of this Journal, the editor labored alone, although overtures for editorial eco-opera- tion had been made to him by gentlemen commanding his con- fidence and esteem, and who would personally have been very acceptable. It was, however, his opinion that the unity of © purpose and action so essential to the success of such a work were best secured by individuality; but he made every effort, and not without success, to conciliate the good will and to secure the assistance of gentlemen. eminent in particular departments of knowledge. On the title page of No. 1, vol. 34, published in July, 1838, a new name is introduced: the individual to whom it belongs having been for several years more or less concerned in the management of the Journal, and from his education, position, pursuits and taste, as well as from affinity, being almost identified with the editor, he seemed to be quite a natural ally, and his adoption into the editorship was scarcely a violation of individual unity. His assistance has proved to be very import- ant:—his near relation to the senior editor prevents him from saying more, while justice does not permit him to say less.’’ As is distinctly intimated in the preceding paragraph the elder Silliman was fortunate in obtaining the assist- ance in his editorial labors of numerous gentlemen inter- ested in the enterprise. Their codperation provided many of the scientific notices, book reviews and the like contained in the Miscellany with which each number closed. It is impossible, at this date, to render the credit due to Silliman’s helpers or even to mention them by eee ee | ae ap nd en i AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE. 41° name. Very early Asa Gray was one of these as occa- sional notes are signed by his initials. Dr. Levi Ives of New Haven was another. Prof. J. Griscom of Paris also sent numerous contributions even as early as 1825 (see 9, 154, 1825; 22, 192, 1832; 24, 342, 1833, and others). Some statements have already been quoted from the early volumes as to the business part of Silliman’s enter- _ prise. The subject is taken up more fully in the preface to volume 50 (1847). No one can fail to marvel at the energy and optimism required to push the Journal for- ward when conditions must have been so difficult and encouragement so scanty. He says (pp. iii, iv): This Journal first appeared in July, 1818, and in June, 1819, the first volume of four numbers and 448 pages was completed. This seale of publication, originally deemed sufficient, was found inadequate to receive all the communications, and as the receipts proved insufficient to sustain the expenses, the work, having but three hundred and fifty subscribers, was, at the end of the year, abandoned by the publishers. ‘ An unprofitable enterprise not being attractive to the trade, _ ten months elapsed before another arrangement could be carried into effect, and, therefore, No. 1 of vol. 2 was not published until April, 1820. The new arrangement was one of mutual responsi- _ bility for the expenses, but the Editor was constrained neverthe- less to pledge his own personal credit to obtain from a bank the funds necessary to begin again, and from this responsibility he was, for a series of years, seldom released. The single volume per annum being found insufficient for the communications, two volumes a year were afterward published, commencing with the second volume. ‘The publishers whose names appear on the title page of the four numbers of the first volume are ‘‘J. Hastburn _& Co., Literary Rooms, Broadway, New York’’ and Howe _& Spalding, New Haven.’’ For the second volume and those immediately following the corresponding state- ment ‘‘printed and published by S. Converse [New Haven] for the Editor.’’ Silliman adds (p. iv): At the conclusion of vol. 10, in February, 1826, the work was again left upon the hands of its Editor; all its receipts had been _ absorbed by the expenses, and it became necessary now to pay a heavy sum to the retiring publisher, as an equivalent for his 42 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE copies of previous volumes, as it was deemed necessary either to control the work entirely or to abandon it. The Editor was not willing to think of the latter, especially as he was encouraged by public approbation, and was cheered onward in his labors by eminent men both at home and abroad, and he saw distinetly that the Journal was rendering service not only to science and the arts, but to the reputation of his country. He reflected, moreover, that in almost every valuable enterprise perseverance in effort is necessary to success. He being now sole proprietor, a new arrangement was made for a single year, the publishers being at liberty, at the end of that time, to retire, and the Editor to resume the Journal should he prefer that course. The latter alternative he adopted, taking upon himself the entire concern, including both the business and the editorial duties, and of course, all the correspondence and accounts. From that time the work has proceeded without interruption, two volumes per annum having been published for the last twenty years; and its pecuniary claims ceased to be onerons, although its means have never been large. Later in the same preface he adds (p. xiv): It may be interesting to our readers to know something of the patronage of the Journal. It has never reached one thousand paying subscribers, and has rarely exceeded seven or eight hundred—for many years it fluctuated between six and seven hundred. It has been far from paying a reasonable editorial compensa- tion; often it has paid nothing, and at present it does little more than pay its bills. The number of engravings and the extra labor in printer’s composition, cause it to be an expensive work, while its patronage is limited. It is difficult at this date to give any adequate state- ment of the amount of encouragement and active assist- ance given to Silliman by his scientific colleagues in New Haven and elsewhere—a subject earlier alluded to. It is fortunately possible, however, to acknowledge the gen- erous aid received by the Journal in the early days from a source near at hand. It has already been noted in another place that the dawning activity of science at New Haven was recognized by the founding of the ‘‘Connecti- cut Academy of Arts and Sciences,’’ formally estab- lished at New Haven in 1799 and the third scientific body — to be organized in this country. From the beginning of yy =e a » * AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 43 the Journal in 1818, the Connecticut Academy freely gave its support both in papers for publication and at least on one occasion later it gave important financial aid. Upon the occasion of the celebration of the centennial anniversary of the Academy on October 11, 1899, Pro- fessor, later Governor, Baldwin, the president of the Academy, discusses this subject in some detail. He says in part: To support his [Silliman’s] undertaking, a vote had been passed in February [1818], ‘‘that the Committee of Publication may allow such of the Academy’s papers as they think proper, to be published in Mr. Silliman’s Scientific Journal.’’ Free use was made of this authority, and a large part of the contents of the Journal was for many years drawn from this _ source. In some cases this fact was noted in publication ;? but in most it was not. In 1826, when the J ournal was in great need of financial sup- port, the ‘Academy further voted to pay for a year the cost of printing such of its papers as might be published in it. In Baldwin’s Annals of Yale College, published in 1831, it is described as a publication ‘‘honorable to the science of our common country,’’ and having ‘‘an additional value as being adopted as the acknowledged organ of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences.’’ Many active campaigns were carried on over the country through paid agents to obtain new subscribers for the Journal and it was doubtless due to these efforts that the nominal subscription list was, at times, as already noted, relatively large as compared with that of a later date. The new subscribers in many cases, however, did not remain permanently interested, often failed to pay their bills, and the uncertain and varying demand upon the supply of printed copies was doubtless one soy why many single numbers became early out of prin An interesting sidelight is thrown upon the efforts of - Silliman to interest the public in his work, at its begin- ning, by a letter to the editor from Thomas J efferson, then seventy-five years of age. The writer is indebted to Mr. Robert B. Adam of Buffalo for a copy of this letter and its interest justifies its being reproduced here entire. The letter is as follows: 44 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE Monticello, Apr. 11. 718. Sir The unlucky displacement of your letter of Mar 3 has been the cause of delay in my answer. altho’ I have very generally withdrawn from subscribing to or reading periodical publica- tions from the love of rest which age produces, yet I willingly subscribe to the journal you propose from a confidence that the talent with which it will be edited will entitle it to attention among the things of select reading for which alone I have time now left. be so good as to send it by mail, and the receipt of the 1st number will be considered as announcing that the work is commenced and the subscription money for a year shall be forwarded. Accept the assurance of my great esteem and respect. Th. Jefferson Professor Silliman. . Contributors.—An interesting summary is also given by Silliman of the contributors to the Journal and the extent of their work (vol. 50, pp. xii, xiii) ; he says: We find that there have been about 600 contributors of orig- inal matter to the Journal, and we have the unexpected satis- faction of believing that probably five-sixths of them are still living; for we are not certain that more than fifty are among the dead; of perhaps fifty more we are without information, and if that additional number is to be enrolled among the “‘stel- ligeri,’’? we have still 500 remaining. Among them are not a | few of the veterans with whom we began our career, and several of these are still active contributors. Shall we then conclude that the peaceful pursuits of knowledge are favorable to long life? This we think is, ceteris paribus, certainly true: but in the present instance, another reason can be assigned for the large amount of survivorship. As the Journal has advanced and death has removed its scientific contributors, younger men and men still younger, have recruited the ranks, and volunteers have enlisted in numbers constantly increasing, so that the flower of the host are now in the morning and meridian of life. We have been constantly advancing, like a traveller from the equinoctial towards the colder zones,—as we have increased our latitude, stars have set and new stars have risen, while a few planetary orbs visible in every zone, have continued to cheer us on our course. The number of articles, almost exclusively original, contained in the Journal is about 1800, and the Index will show how many ee Ge eee ee ee ee ee & i re ot et ae Lae Rie Pat, AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 45 have been contributed by each individual; we have doubtless ~ included in this number some few articles republished from foreign Journals—but we think they are even more than coun- terbalanced by original communications without a name and by editorial articles, both of which have been generally omitted in the enumeration. Of smaller articles and notices in the Miscellany, we have not made any enumeration, but they evidently are more numerous than the regular articles, and we presume that they may amount to at least 2500. Of party, either in politics or religion, there is no trace in our work; of personalities there are none, except those that relate to priority of claims or other rights of individuals. Of these vindications the number is not great, and we could heartily have wished that there had been no occasion for any. General Scope of Articles—Many references will be found in the chapters following which throw light upon the character and scope of the papers published in the Journal, particularly in its early years; a few additional statements here may, however, prove of interest. One feature that is especially noticeable is the frequent publication of articles planned to place before the read- ers of the Journal in full detail subjects to which they might not otherwise have access. These are sometimes translations; sometimes republications of articles that had already appeared in English periodicals; again, they are exhaustive and critical reviews of important memoirs or books. The value of this feature in the early history of the Journal, when the distribution of scientific literature had nothing of the thoroughness characteristic of recent years, is sufficiently obvious. It is also interesting to note the long articles of geo- logical description and others giving lists of mineral or botanical localities. Noteworthy, too, is the attempt to keep abreast of occurring phenomena as in the many notes on tornadoes and storms by Redfield, Loomis, ete. ; on auroras at different localities; on shooting stars by _ Herrick, Olmstead and others. = The wide range of topics treated of is quite in accord- _ ance with the plan of the editor as given on an earlier page. Some notes, taken more or less at random, may serve to illustrate this point. An extended and quite 3 46 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE technical discussion of ‘‘Musical Temperament’’ opens the first number (1, pp. 9-35) and is concluded in the same volume (pp. 176-199). An article on ‘‘Mystery’’ is given by Mark Hopkins, A.M., ‘‘late a tutor of Williams Col- lege’’ (13, 217, 1828). There is an essay on ‘‘Gypsies’’ by J. Griscom (from the Revue Encyclopédique) in vol- ume 24 (pp. 342-345, 1833), while some notes on American gypsies are added in vol. 26 (p. 189, 1834). The ‘‘divin- ing rod’’ is described at length in vol. 11 (pp. 201-212, 1826), but without giving any comfort to the eredulous; on the contrary the last paragraph states that ‘‘the pre- tensions of diviners are worthless, etc.’’ A long article by J. Finch on the forts of Boston harbour appeared in 1824 (8, 338-348); the concluding paragraph seems worthy of quotation: ‘Many centuries hence, if despotism without, or anarchy within, should cause the republican institutions of America to fade, then these fortresses ought to be destroyed, because they would be a constant reproach to the people; but until that period, they should be preserved as the noblest monuments of liberty.”’ The promise to include the fine arts is kept by the pub- lication of various papers, as of the Trumbull paintings (16, 163, 1829); also by a series of articles on ‘‘architec- ture in the United States’’ (17, 99, 1830; 18, 218, 220, 1830) and others. Quite in another line is the paper by J.-W. Gibbs (33, 324, 1838) on ‘‘Arabic words in English.’’ A number of related linguistic papers by the same author are to be found in other volumes. Papers in pure mathematics are also not infrequent, though now not considered as falling within the field of the Journal. Applied science takes a prominent place through all the volume of the First Series. An interesting paper is that on Eli Whitney, containing an account of the cotton gin; this is accompanied by an excellent portrait (21, 201-264, 1832). The steam engine and its application are repeat- edly discussed and in the early volumes brief accounts are given of the early steamboats in use; for example, between Stockholm and St. Petersburg (2, 347, 1820); Trieste and Venice (4, 377, 1822); on the Swiss Lakes ee a. a 2 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 47 (6, 385, 1823). The voyage of the first Atlantic steam- boat, the ‘‘Savannah,’’ which crossed from Savannah to Liverpool in 1819, is described (38, 155, 1840); men- tion is also made of the ‘‘first iron boat’’ (3, 371, 1821; 5, 396, 1822). A number of interesting letters on “Steam Navigation’’ are given in vol. 35, 160, 162, 332, 333, 336; some of the suggestions seem very quaint, viewed in the light of the experience of to-day. A very early form of explosive engine is described at length by Samuel Morey (11, 104, 1826); this is an article that deserves mention in these days of gasolene motors. Even more interesting is the description by Charles Gris- wold (2, 94, 1820) of the first submarine invented by David Bushnell and used in the Revolutionary War in August, 1776. An account is also given of a dirigible balloon that may be fairly regarded as the original ances- tor of the Zeppelin (see 11, 346, 1826). The whole sub- * ject of aérial navigation is treated at length by H. Strait (25, pp. 25, 26, 1834) and the expression of his hopes for the future deserve quotation: “‘Conveyance by air can be easily rendered as safe as by water or land, and more cheap and speedy, while the universal _ and uniform diffusion of the air over every portion of the - earth, will render aérial navigation preferable to any other. To carry it into effect, there needs only an immediate appeal on a sufficiently large scale, to experiment; reason has done her part, when experiment does hers, nature will not refuse to sanction the whole. Aérial navigation will present the works of nature in all their charms; to commerce and the diffusion of knowledge, it will bring the most efficient aid, and it can thus be rendered serviceable to the whole human family.’’ A subject of quite another character is the first discus- sion of the properties of chloroform (chloric ether) and its use as an anesthetic (Guthrie, 21, 64, 405, 1832; 22, 105, 1832; Levi Ives, 21, 406). Further interesting communications are given of the first analyses of the gas- tric juice and the part played by it in the process of digestion. Dr. William Beaumont of St. Louis took advantage of a patient who through a gun-shot wound was left with a permanent opening into his stomach through which the gastric juice could be drawn off. The 48 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE results of Dr. Beaumont and of Professor Robley Dungli- son, to whom samples were submitted, are given in full in the life of Beaumont by Jesse S. Myer (St. Lonis, 1912). The interest of the matter, so far as the Journal is concerned, is chiefiy because Dr. Beaumont selected Professor Silliman as a chemist to whom samples for examination were also submitted. An account of Silli- man’s results is given in the Beaumont volume referred to (see also 26, 193, 1834). Desiring the support of a chemist of wider experience in organic analysis, he also sent a sample through the Swedish consul to Berzelius in Stockholm. After some months the sample was received and it is interesting to note in a perfectly fresh condi- tion; it is to be regretted, however, that the Swedish chemist failed to add anything to the results already obtained in this country (27, 40b, 1835). The above list, which might be ereatly extended, seems to leave little eround for the implied criticism replied to - by Silliman as follows (16, p. v, 1829) : A celebrated scholar, while himself an editor, advised me, in a letter, to introduce into this Journal as much ‘‘readable’’ matter as possible: and there was, pretty early, an earnest but respectful recommendation in a Philadelphia paper, that Litera- ture, in imitation of the London Quarterly Journal of Science, &e. should be in form, inscribed among the titles of the work. The Second, Third and Fourth Series. The Seconp Series of the Journal, as already stated, began with January, 1846. Up to this time the publica- tion had been a quarterly or two volumes annually of two numbers each. From 1846 until the completion of an additional fifty volumes in 1871, the Journal was made a bimonthly, each of the two yearly volumes having three numbers each. Furthermore, a general index was given for each period of five years, that is for every ten volumes. Much more important than this change was the addi- tion to the editorial staff of James Dwight Dana, Silli- man’s son-in-law. Dana returned from the four-years eruise of the Wilkes Exploring Expedition in 1842; he settled in New Haven, was married in 1844, and in 1850 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 49 was appointed Silliman professor of Geology in Yale College. He was at this time actively engaged in writ- . ing his three quarto reports for the Expedition and hence did not begin his active professional duties in Yale College until 1856. Part of his inaugural address was quoted on an earlier page. Dana had already performed the severe labor of pre- paring the complete index to the First Series, a volume of about 350 pages, finally issued in 1847. From the beginning of the Second Series he was closely associated with his brother-in-law, the younger Silliman. Later the editorial labor devolved more and more upon him and the larger part of this he carried until about 1890. His work, was, however, somewhat interrupted during periods of ill health. This was conspicuously true during a year’s absence in Europe in 1859-60, made necessary in the search for health; during these periods the editorial _ responsibility rested entirely upon the younger Silliman. Of Dana’s contributions to science in general this is not the place to speak, nor is the present writer the one to dwell in detail upon his work for the Journal. This sub- ject is to such an extent involved in the history of geology and zoology, the subjects of several succeeding chapters, that it is adequately presented in them. It may, however, be worth stating that in the bibliog- raphy accompanying the obituary notice of Dana (49, 329-356, 1895) some 250 titles of articles in the Journal are enumerated; these aggregate approximately 2800 pages. The number of critical notes, abstracts, book reviews, etc., could be also given, were it worth while, but what is much more significant in this connection, than their number or aggregate length, is the fact that these notices are in a large number of cases—like those of Gray in botany—minutely critical and original in matter. They thus give the writer’s own opinion on a multitude of different subjects. It was a great benefit to Dana, as it was to science also, that he had this prompt means at hand of putting before the public the results of his active brain, which continued to work unceasingly even in times of health prostration. This may be the most convenient place to add that as Dana became gradually less able to carry the burden of 50 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE the details involved in editing the Journal in addition to his more important scientific labors, particularly from 1890 on, this work devolved more and more upon his son, the present editor, whose name was added to the editorial staff in 1875, with volume 9, of the Third Series. The latter has served continuously until the present time, with the exception of absences, due to ill health, in 1893-94 and in 1903; during the first of these Professor Henry 8. Williams and during the second Professor H. KE. Greg- ory occupied the editorial chair. The Turrp Serres began in 1871, after the completion of the one-hundredth volume from the beginning in 1818. At this date the Journal was made a monthly and as such it remains to-day. Fifty volumes again completed this series, which closed in 1895. The Fourtnu Serres began with January, 1896, and the present number for July, 1918, is the opening one of the forty-sixth volume or, in other words,—the one hundred and ninety-sixth volume of the entire issue since 1818. The Fourth Series, according to the precedent estab- lished, will end with 1920. Associate Editors——In 1851 the new policy was intro- duced of adding ‘‘ Associate Editors’’ to the staff. The first of these was Dr. Wolcott Gibbs of Cambridge. He began his duties with the eleventh volume of the Second Series in 1851 and continued them with unceasing care and thoroughness for more than twenty years. Ina note dated Jan. 1, 1851 (11, 105), he says: It is my intention in future to prepare for the columns of this Journal abstracts of the more important physical and chemical memoirs contained in foreign scientific journals, accompanied by references, and by such critical observations as the occasion may demand. Contributions of a similar character from others will of course not be excluded by this arrangement, but I shall hold myself responsible only for those notices which appear over my initials. The departments covered by Dr. Gibbs, in his excellent monthly contributions, embraced chemistry and physics, and these subjects were carried together until 1873 when they were separated and the physical notes were fur- AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 51 nished, first by Alfred M. Mayer and later successively by E. C. Pickering (from 1874), J. P. Cooke (from 1877), and John Trowbridge (from 1880). ‘The first instalment of the long series of notes in chemistry and chemical physics by George F. Barker was printed in volume 50, 1870. He came in at first to occasionally relieve Dr. Gibbs, but soon took the entire responsibility. His name was placed among the associate editors on the cover in 1877 and two years later Dr. Gibbs formally retired. It may be added that from the beginning in 1851 to the present time, the notes in ‘‘Chemistry and Physics’’ have been continued almost without interruption. The other departments of science have been also fully represented in the notes, abstracts of papers pub- lished, book notices, etc., of the successive numbers, but as with the chemistry and physics the subject of botany was long treated in a similar formal manner. For the notes in this department, the Journal was for many years indebted to Dr. Asa Gray, who became associate editor in 1853, two years after Gibbs, although he had been a not infrequent contributor for many years previously. Gray’s contributions were furnished with great regu- larity and were always critical and original in matter. _ They formed indeed one of the most valuable features of the Journal for many years; as botanists well appre- ciate, and, as Professor Goodale has emphasized in his _ chapter on botany, Gray’s notes are of vital importance ~ - in the history of the development of his subject. With _ Gray’s retirement from active duty, his colleague, George W. Goodale, took up the work in 1888 and in 1895 William G. Farlow, also of Cambridge, was added as an associate editor in cryptogamic botany. At this time, however, and indeed earlier, the sphere of the Journal had unavoidably contracted and botany perforce ceased to occupy the prominent place it had long done in the _ Journal pages. This is not the place to present an appreciation of the truly magnificent work of Asa Gray. It may not be out of place, however, to call attention to the notice of Gray written for the Journal by his life-long friend, James D. eae (35, 181, 1888). The opening paragraph is. as ollows: «be A CENTURY OF SCIENCE ‘‘Our friend and associate, Asa Gray, the eminent botanist of America, the broad-minded student of nature, ended his life of unceasing and fruitful work on the 30th of January last. For thirty-five years he has been one of the editors of this Jour- nal, and for more than fifty years one of its contributors; and through all his communications there is seen the profound and always delighted student, the accomplished writer, the just and genial critic, and as Darwin has well said, ‘The lovable man.’ ”’ The third associate editor, following Gray, was Louis Agassiz, whose work for science, particularly in his - adopted home in this country, calls for no praise here. His term of service extended from 1853 to 1866 and, par- ticularly in the earlier years, his contributions were nu- merous and important. The next gentleman in the list was Waldo I. Burnett, of Boston, who served one year only, and then followed four of Dana’s colleagues in New Haven, of whose generosity and able assistance it would be impossible to say too much. These gentlemen were Brush in mineralogy; Johnson in chemistry, particularly on the agricultural side; Newton in mathematics and astronomy, whose contributions will be spoken of else- where; and Verrill—a student of Agassiz—in zoology. All of these gentlemen. besides their frequent and important original articles, were ever ready not only to give needed advice, but also, to furnish brief communi- cations, abstracts of papers and book reviews, and other- wise to aid in the work. Verrill particularly furnished | } the Journal a long list of original and important papers, chiefly in systematic zoology, extending from 1865 almost down to the present year. His abstracts and book notices also were numerous and trenchant and it is not too much to say that without him the Journal never could have filled the place in zoology which it so long held. Much later the list of New Haven men was increased by the addition of Henry 8. Williams (1894), and O. C. Marsh (1895). Of the valuable work of those more or less closely asso- ciated in the conduct of the Journal at the present time, it would not be appropriate to speak in detail. It must suffice to say that the services rendered freely by them have been invaluable, and to their aid is due a large part . of the success of the Journal, especially since the Fourth AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE 53 Series began in 1896. But even this statement is inade- quate, for the editor-in-chief has had the generous assist- ance of other gentlemen, whose names have not been placed on the title page, and who have also played an important part in the conduct of the Journal. This policy, indeed, is not a matter of recent date. Very early in the First Series, Professor Griscom of Paris, as already noted, furnished notes of interesting scientific ‘discoveries abroad. Other gentlemen have from time to time acted in the same capacity. The most prominent of them was Professor Jerome Nicklés of Nancy, France, who regularly furnished a series of valuable notes on varied subjects, chiefly from foreign sources, extending from 1852 to 1869. On the latter date he met an untimely death in his laboratory in connection with experiments upon hydrofluoric acid (47, 434, 1869). It may be added, further, that one of ‘the striking features about the Journal, especially in the earlier half century of its existence, is the personal nature of many of its contributions, which were very frequently in the form of letters written to Benjamin Silliman or J. D. Dana. This is perhaps but another reflection of the extent to which the growth of the magazine centered around these two men, whose wide acquaintance and broad scientific repute made of the Journal a natural place to record the new and interesting things that were being discovered in science. The following list gives the names and dates of ser- vice, as recorded on the Journal title pages, of the gen- tlemen formally made Associate Editors: DOME OGIDDS ... 320 e cee seuss (2) 11, 1851 to (3) 18, 1879 a Sue. Peete SS Be. 1887 NMI ORR ke ce tee ees “#16, 1853: **- (2) 41, 1866 emo. Ienrnett ....... 6... es 7 kG, eee Oo. Ads, L800 SS 6 N- 00, 19800 °°(3). 18, 1879 Samuel W. Johnson ........... eta eet. |S 2S, LISTS Hubert A. Newton ............. (2) 38, 1864 to (4) 1, 1896 Addison E. Verrill ........ Rrewany ‘< 47, 1869 mired M. Mayer... ....5....4. (3) 5, 1873 to (8) 6, 1873 Edward C. Pickering ........... Sot, tae fe ** 13> 1877 mmerec. . (Darwer yokes ieee ‘¢ 14,1877 ‘* (4), 29, 1910 EY Es) COOMC peiccin ods oie e ss *¢ 14, 1877 ‘* (3) 47, 1894 54 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE John Trowbridge .............. (3) 19, 1880 George W. Goodale ............ ‘< 35, 1888 Henry §. Wailliams.... 0.26205. ‘< 47, 1894 Henry P. Bowditch ............ ‘* 49, 1895 to (4) 8, 1899 Witham G, darlow .4:.......5.. ‘< 49, 1895 Othniel CA eke se seats ve oe oat Ke ‘*< 49, 1895 to (4) 6, 1899 Henry A. Rowland ............ (4) 1, 1896 ** ** 10, 1900 SOSEPR A IUIOP Voss ee ee aes ‘<1, 1836 egies VS Pirseon 0. 6 ek EE $f Sot ee William ‘M. (Davis) 2.6 scs the Paleozoic and then for comparatively short intervals between the periods. Therefore rates of denudation, solution, sedimentation, and evolution have varied ‘greatly throughout the geological ages. These differ- ences, however, relate to degrees of operation, and not to kinds of processes; but the differences in degree of operation react mightily on our views as to the age of the earth. | Geologic time had, for Hutton, no ‘‘vestige of a begin- ning, no prospect of an end.’’ In other words, geologic time is infinite. He did not, however, discover a method by which the chronology of the earth could be determined. First Important Teat-books.—In 1822 appeared the ablest text-book so far published, and the pattern for most of the later ones, Outlines of the Geology of Eng- land and Wales, by W. D. Conybeare (1787-1857) and W. Phillips (1775-1828). ‘‘In this excellent volume all that was then known regarding the rocks of the country, from the youngest formations down to the Old Red Sandstone, was summarized in so clear and methodical a manner as to give a powerful impulse to the cultivation of geology in England’’ (Geikie). This book is reviewed at great length by Edward Hitcheock in the Journal (7, 203, 1824). To indicate how far historical geology had progressed up to 1822 in England, a digest of the geological column as presented in this text-book is given in the following table, along with other information. A text-book writer of yet greater influence was Charles Lyell (1797-1875), whose Principles of Geology appeared in three volumes between 1830 and 1833. This and his other books were kept up to date through many editions, and his Hlements of Geology is, as Geikie says, ‘‘the hand book of every English geologist’? working with the fos- siliferous formations. on HISTORICAL GHOLOGY 67 The Rise of Geology in North America. The Generating Centers—In America, geology had its rise independently in three places: in the two scientific societies of Boston and Philadelphia, and dominantly in Benjamin Silliman of Yale College. Stated in another way, we may say that geology in America had its origin in the following pioneers and founders: first, in William Maclure at Philadelphia, and next in Benjamin Silliman at New Haven. Through the influence of the latter, Amos Eaton, the botanist, became a geologist and taught geology at Williams College and later at the Rensselaer School in Troy, New York. Through the same influence _ Rev. Edward Hitchcock also became a geologist and taught the subject after 1825 at Amherst College. Silliman was the first to take up actively the teach- ing of mineralogy and geology based on collections of specimens. He spread the knowledge in popular lectures throughout the Hastern States, graduated many a stu- dent in the sciences, making of some of them professional teachers and geologists, provided all with a journal wherein they could publish their research, organized the first geological society and through his students the first official geological surveys, and by kind words and acts stimulated, fostered, and held together American scien- tific men for fifty years. Of him it has been truly said that he was ‘‘the guardian of American science from its _childhood.’’ The American Academy in Boston.—The second oldest scientific society, but the first one to publish on geological subjects, was the American Academy of Arts and Sciences of Boston, instituted and publishing since 1780. _ Up to the time of the founding of this Journal, there had appeared in the publications of the American Academy about a dozen papers of a geologic character, none of which need to be mentioned here excepting one by S. L. and J. F. Dana, entitled ‘‘Outlines of the Mineralogy and Geology of Boston,’’ published in 1818. This is an early and important step in the elucidation of one of the most intricate geologic areas, and is further noteworthy for its | geologic map, the third one to appear, the older ones being by Maclure and Hitchcock (Merrill). THE GEOLOGICAL COLUMN IN 1822 Present Ameri C.&P.| Wer- | Other poe F cae Conybeare and Phillips 1822 nerian| writ- classification orders| orders! ers Psychozoic or Recent Alluvial Z 2/o| 4% Pleistocene Diluvial fo) 3 5 oO . . a : Upper Marine formation (Crag 5 = P S | Nicene | Neogene | “Bagshot sand, and Isle of Wight)“ | | & Freshwater formations eB g 5 Oligocene London Clay = © Eocene t Paleoge ©’ Plastic Clay a Cretaceous Chalk . Beds between Chalk and Oolite Comanchian 1887 Series (Chalk Marle, Green Sand, Weald Clay, Iron Sand) (|Upper Oolitic division (Purbeck] 4% 2 beds, Portland Oolite, Kimmer-| 3 n g idge Clay) rs) B S| Middle Oolitic division (Coral Rag, Z & S ; Oxford Clay) 4 o b Jurassic 1829 + | Lower Oolitic division (Cornbrash, 3 S) S Stonesfield Slate, Forest Marble,| & | 8 | © Great Oolite, Fullers’ Earth, In-| 2% fx, g ferior Oolite, Sand and Marle-| 3 8 stone l | Lias Triassic 1834 New Red Sandstone : Lo] g Permian 1841 Magnesian Limestone | 5 a eH Coal Measures Bek gy 2 | Pennsylvanian 1891 aes 2 S | Mississippian 1869 | Millstone Grit and Shale 3 8 B | &§ Old Red Sandstone S35 3 ; fo Devonian 1839 o| “@ Silurian 1835 ql 3 Ordovician 1879 = 5 (=Lower Silurian 1835) Cambrian 1833 Unresolved Oo "8 | Keweenawan} § Submedial 2 2 ° | Animikian SiS 3 ee ° fo) . = g | Huronian E 2% 5 & Sudburian = and 5 : 1 1c ec ilee 23 3-2 | Keewatin go Inferior Orders 28 Soraonne a4 < Hs = te eRe HISTORICAL GHOLOGY 69 Early Geology in Philadelphia.—The oldest scientific society is the American Philosophical Society of Phila- delphia, started by the many-sided Benjamin Franklin in 1769, and which has published since 1771. Up to the time of the founding of the Journal in 1818, there had appeared in the publications of this society thirteen papers of a geologic nature, nearly all small building stones in the rising geologic story of North America. The only fundamental ones were Maclure’s Observations of 1809 and 1817. Later, in this same city, there was organized another scientific society that came to be for a long time the most active one in America. This was the Academy of Natural Sciences, started in 1812 with ' seven members, but it was not until 1817 and the election of William Maclure as its first president that the work of the Academy was of a far-reaching character. Here was built up not only a society for the advancement of the natural sciences and publications for the dissemination of such knowledge, but, what is equally important, the first large library and general museum. William Maclure (1763-1840), correctly named by Sil- liman the ‘‘father of American geology,’’ was born and - edueated in Scotland, and died near Mexico City. A merchant of London until 1796, when he had already amassed ‘‘a considerable fortune,’’ he made a first short visit to New York City in 1782. In 1796 he again came to America, this time to become a citizen of this country and a liberal patron of science. About 1803, single-handed and unsustained by gov- érnment patronage, Maclure interested himself most zealously and efficiently in American geology. In 1809 he published his Observations on the Geology of the United States, Explanatory of a Geological Map. This work he revised ‘‘on a yet more extended scale,’’ issuing it in 1817 with 130 pages of text, accompanied by a large colored geological map. _ Silliman, the Pioneer Promoter of Geology.—tin 1806 when Benjamin Silliman (1779-1864) began actively to teach chemistry and mineralogy, all the sciences in Amer- ica were in a very backward state, and the earth sciences were not recognized as such in the curricula of any of our colleges. Silliman gave his first lecture in chemistry on 70 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE April 4, 1804. In the summer of that year, Yale College asked him to go to England to purchase material for the College, and great possibilities for broadening his knowledge now loomed before him. As Silliman himself (43, 225, 1842) has told the interesting story of his sojourn in England and Scotland, it is worth while to restate a part of it here. ‘‘Passing over to England in the spring of 1805, and fixing my residence for six months in London, I found there no school, public or private, for geological instruction, and no association — for the cultivation of the science, which was not even named in the English universities.”’? In geology ‘‘Edinburgh was then far in advance of London . . . Prof. Jameson having recently returned from the school of Werner, fully instructed in the doc- trines of his illustrious teacher, was ardently engaged to maintain them, and his eloquent and acute friend, the late Dr. John Mur- ray, was a powerful auxiliary in the same cause; both of these philosophers strenuously maintaining the ascendancy of the aqueous over the igneous agencies, in the geological phenomena of our planet. On the other hand, the disciples and friends of Dr. Hutton were not less active. He died in 1797, and his mantle fell upon Sir James Hall, who, with Prof. Playfair and Prof. Thomas Hope, maintained with signal ability, the igneous theory of Hutton. It did not become one who was still a youth and a novice, to enter the arena of the geological tournament where such powerful champions waged war; but it was very interest- ing to view the combat, well sustained as it was on both sides, and protracted, without a decisive issue, into a drawn battle... The conflicts of the rival schools of Edinburgh—the Neptun- ists and the Vulcanists, the Wernerians and the Huttonians, were sustained with great zeal, energy, talent, and science; they were indeed marked too decidedly by a partisan spirit, but this very spirit excited untiring activity in discovering, arranging, and criticising the facts of geology. It was a transition period between the epoch of geological hypotheses and dreams, which had passed by, and the era of strict philosophical induction, in which the geologists of the present day are trained . I was a diligent and delighted listener to the discussions of both schools. Still the igneous philosophers appeared to me to assume more than had been proved regarding internal heat. In imagination we were plunged into a fiery Phlegethon, and I was glad to find relief in the cold bath of the Wernerian ocean, where my predilections inclined me to linger.”’ HISTORICAL GEOLOGY val Silliman’s Students and Their Publications.—Silli- man’s first student to take up geology as a profession was Denison Olmstead (1791-1859), educator, chemist, and geologist, who was graduated from Yale in 1813. Four years later he was under special preparation with Silli- man in mineralogy and geology, and in that year was _ appointed professor of chemistry in the University of North Carolina. In 1824-1825 Olmstead issued a Report on the Geology of North Carolina, which is the first offi- cial geological report issued by any state in America, ‘fa conspicuous and solitary instance,’’ according to Hitchcock’s review of it (14, 230, 1828), ‘‘in which any of our state governments have undertaken thoroughly to develop their mineral resources.’’ Amos Eaton (1776-1842), lawyer, botanist, surveyor, and one of the founders of American geology, was a graduate of Williams College in the class of 1799. He studied with Silliman in 1815, attending his lectures on chemistry, geology, and mineralogy. He also enjoyed access to the libraries of Silliman and of the bot- anist, Levi Ives, in which works on botany and materia medica were prominent, and was a diligent student of the - College cabinet of minerals. He settled as a lawyer and land agent in Catskill, New York, and here in 1810 he ‘gave a popular course of lectures on botany, believed to have been the first attempted in the United States. - In 1818 appeared Eaton’s first noteworthy geological publication, the Index to the Geology of the Northern States, a text-book for the classes in geology at Williams- town. The controlling principle of this book was Wer- nerism, a false doctrine from which Haton was never able to free himself. This book was ‘‘written over _anew’’ and published in 1820. _ While at Albany in 1818, Governor De Witt Clinton asked Haton to deliver a course of lectures on chemistry and geology before the members of the legislature of New York. It is believed that Eaton is the only Ameri- can having this distinction, and because of it he became acquainted with many leading men of the state, inter- esting them in geology and its application to agriculture _by means of surveys. In this way was sown the idea 72 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE which eventually was to fructify in that great official work: The Natural History of New York. (See 43, 215, 1842; and Youmans’ sketch of Haton’s life, Pop. Sei. Monthly, Nov. 1890.) Hdward Hitchcock (1793-1864), reverend, state geolo- gist, college president, and another of the founders of American geology, was largely self-taught. Previous to 1825, when he entered the theological department of Yale College, he had met Amos Eaton, who interested him in botany and mineralogy, and between 1815 and 1819 he had made lists of the plants and minerals found about his native town, Deerfield, Massachusetts. Therefore, while studying theology at Yale it was natural for him also to take up mineralogy and geology with Silliman, whose acquaintance he had made at least as early as 1818. Hitchcock, who was destined to be one of the most prominent figures of his time, was appointed in 1825 to the chair of chemistry and natural history at Amherst College. His first geologic paper, one of five pages, appeared in 1815. Three years later appeared his more important paper on the Geology and Mineralogy of a Section of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont (1, 105, 436, 1818). This is also noteworthy for its geological map, the next one to be published after those of Maclure of 1809 and 1817. In 1823 came a still greater work, A Sketch of the Geology, Mineralogy, and Scenery of the Regions contiguous to the River Connecti- cut (6, 1, 200, 1823; 7, 1, 1824). Here the map above referred to was greatly improved, and the survey was one of the most important of the older publications. Youmans in his account of Hitchcock (Pop. Sei. Monthly, Sept. 1895) says: ‘‘The State of Massachusetts commissioned him to make a geological survey of her territory in 1830. Three years were spent in the explorations, and the work was of such a high char- acter that other States were induced to follow the example of — Massachusetts . . . The State of New York sought his advice — in the organization of a survey, and followed his suggestions, — particularly in the division of the territory into four parts, and appointed him as the geologist of the first district. He entered — upon the work, but after a few days of labor he found that he © must necessarily be separated from his family, much to his dis- © HISTORICAL GEOLOGY 73 inclination. He also conceived the idea of urging a more thor- ough survey of his own State; hence he resigned his commission and returned home. The effort for a resurvey of Massachusetts was successful, and he was recommissioned to do the work. The results appeared in 1841 and 1844.’’ _ Oliver P. Hubbard was assistant to Silliman in 1831- 1836, and then up to 1866 taught chemistry, mineralogy, © and geology at Dartmouth College. James G. Percival was graduated at Yale in 1815, and in 1835 he and C. U. Shepard of Amherst College were appointed state geol- ogists of Connecticut. Their report was issued in 1842. James Dwight Dana (1813-1895) was undoubtedly the ablest of all of Silliman’s students. Graduated at Yale in 1833, he spent fifteen months in the United States Navy as instructor in mathematics, cruising off France, Italy, Greece, and Turkey. In 1836 he was assistant to Silliman, and in 1837, at the age of twenty-four years, he published his widely used System of Mineralogy. Two years later Dana joined the Wilkes Exploring Expe- dition as mineralogist, returning to America in 1842; his - geological results of this expedition were published in 1849. In 1863, during the Rebellion, he published his Manual of Geology, and through four editions it remained for forty years the standard text-book for American geologists. First American Geological Society—The founding in 1807 of the Geological Society of London, the parent of geological societies, undoubtedly had its stimulating effect on Silliman, and with his marked organizing ability he began to think of forming an American society of the same kind. This he brought about the year following the appearance of the Journal, that is, in 1819. The American Geological Society, begun in 1819 (1, 442, 1819), was terminated in 1830 (17, 202, 1830). The first meeting ( September 6, 1819) and all the subsequent ones were held in the cabinet of Yale College. The brief records of the doings of this society are printed in vol- umes ‘1, 10, 15, and 18 of the Journal. Silliman was the | attraction at the meetings, surrounded by his mineral - eabinet, and he gave ‘‘the true scientific dress to all the naked mineralogical subjects’? discussed. 74 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE Wernerian Geology in North America. The Father of American Geology.—Historical Geology begins in America with William Maclure’s Observations on the Geology of the United States, issued in 1809. This was the first important original work on North ’ American geology, and its colored geological map was the first one of the area east of the Mississippi River. The classification was essentially the Wernerian system. All of the strata of the Coastal Plain, now known to range from the Lower Cretaceous to Recent, were referred to the Alluvial. To the west, over the area of the Piedmont, were his Primitive rocks, while the older Paleozoic formations of the Appalachian ranges were referred to the Transition. West of the folded area, all was Floetz or Secondary, or what we now know as Paleozoic sedi- mentaries. The Triassic of the Piedmont area and that | i of Connecticut he called the Old Red Sandstone, and the coal formations of the interior region he said rested upon the Secondary. The second edition of the work in 1817 was much improved, along with the map, which was also printed on a more correct geographic base. (For greater detail, see Merrill, Contributions to the History of American Geology, 1906.) Even though Maclure’s geologic maps are much gen- eralized, and the scheme of classification adopted a very |) broad one, they are in the main correct, even if they do emphasize unduly the rather simple geologic structure of North America. This fact is patent all through Maclure’s description. Cleaveland also refers to it in his treatise of 1816, and Silliman in the opening volume of the Journal (1, 7, 1818) says: ‘*The outlines of Amer- can geology appear to be particularly grand, simple, and instructive.’’ Then, all the kinds of rocks were compre- hended under four classes, Primitive, Transition, Allu- vial, and Volcanic. It is also interesting to note here that in 1822 Maclure had lost faith in the aqueous origin of the igneous rocks and writes of the Wernerian system as ‘‘fast going out of fashion’? (5, 197, 1822), while Hitchcock said about the same thing in 1825 (9, 146). The Work of Eaton—Amos Eaton, after traveling 10,000 miles and completing his Erie Canal Report in HISTORICAL GEOLOGY 75 1824, ‘‘reviewed the whole line several times,’’ and pub- lished in 1828 in the Journal (14, 145) a paper on Geolog- ical Nomenclature, Classes of Rocks, etc.- The broader classification is the Wernerian one of Primitive, Transi- tion, and Secondary classes. Under the first two he has _fossiliferous early Paleozoic formations, but does not know it, because he pays no attention anywhere to the detail of the entombed fossils, and all of his Secondary is what we now call Paleozoic. The correlations of the latter are faulty throughout. Then came his paper of 1830, Geological Prodromus (17, 63), in which he says: ‘‘I intend to demonstrate _... that all geological strata are arranged in five analo- gous series; and that each series consists of three forma- _ tions; viz., the Carboniferous [meaning mud-stones], _ Quartzose, and Calcareous.’? We seem to see here _ expressed for the first time the idea of ‘‘cycles of sedi- mentation,’’ but Eaton does not emphasize this idea, and the localities given for each ‘‘formation’’ of ‘‘analogous series’’ demonstrate beyond a doubt that he did not have a sedimentary sequence. The whole is simply a jumble of unrelated formations that happen to agree more or less in their physical characters. _ **T intend to demonstrate,’’ he says further, ‘‘that _ the detritus of New Jersey, embracing the marle, which _ contains those remarkable fossil relics, is antediluvial, or _ the genuine Tertiary formation.’’ This correlation had _ been clearly shown by Finch in 1824 (7, 31) and yet both are in error in that they do not distinguish the included _ Cretaceous marls and greensands as something apar from the Tertiary. _ One gets impatient with the later writings of Eaton, _ because he does not become liberalized with the progres- Sive ideas in stratigraphic geology developing first in Europe and then in America, especially among the geolo- ists of Philadelphia. Therefore it is not profitable to ollow his work further. _ Harly American Teaxt-books of Geology—trThe first American text-book of geology bears the date of Boston 1816 and is entitled An Elementary Treatise on Mineral- ogy and Geology, its author being Parker Cleaveland of Bowdoin College. The second edition appeared in 1822. 76 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE It also had a geologic map of the United States, practi- cally a copy of Maclure’s. To mineralogy were devoted 585 pages, and to geology 55, of which 37 describe rocks and 5 the geology of the United States. The chronology is Wernerian. Of ‘‘geological systems’’ there are two, ‘‘primitive and secondary rocks.’’ In 1818 appeared Amos Eaton’s Index to the Geology of the Northern States, having 54 pages, and in 1820. came the second edition, ‘‘wholly written over anew,’’ — with 286 pages. The theory of the later edition is still that of Werner, with ‘‘improvements of Cuvier and Bakewell,’’? and yet one sees nowadays but little in it of the far better English text-book. Eaton did very little to advance philosophic geology in America. What is of most value here are his personal observations in regard to the local geology of western Massachusetts, Connecticut, southwestern Vermont, and eastern New — York (1, 69, 1819; also Merrill, p. 234). We come now to the most comprehensive and advanced of the early text-books used in America. This is the third English edition of Robert Bakewell’s Introduction to Geology (400 pages, 1829), and the first American edi- tion ‘‘with an Appendix Containing an Outline of his Course of Lectures on Geology at Yale College, by Ben- jamin Silliman’’ (128 pages). Bakewell’s good book is in keeping with the time, and while not so advanced as — Conybeare and Phillips’s Outlines of 1822, yet is far more so than Silliman’s appendix. The latter is general and not specific as to details; it is still decidedly Wer- nerian, though in a modified form. Silliman says he is ‘‘neither Wernerian nor Huttonian,’’ and yet his sum- mary on pages 120 to 126 shows clearly that he was not only a Wernerian but a pietist as well. Unearthing of the Cenozoic and Mesozoic in North America. The Discerning of the Tertiary—The New England States, with their essentially igneous and metamorphic formations, could not furnish the proper geologic enyvi- ronment for the development of stratigraphers and — paleontologists. So in America we see the rise of such geologists first in Philadelphia, where they had easy HISTORICAL GEOLOGY 17 access to the horizontal and highly fossiliferous strata of _ the coastal plain. The first one to attract attention was Thomas Say, after him came John Finch, followed by Lardner Vanuxem, Isaac Lea, Samuel G. Morton, and PA. Conrad. These men not only worked out the succession of the Cenozoic and the upper part of the te but blazed the way among the Paleozoic strata as well. _ Thomas Say (1787-1834), in 1819, was the first Ameri- can to point out the chronogenetic value of fossils in his article, Observations on some Species of Zoophytes, Shells, ete., principally Fossil (1, 381). He correctly states that the progress of geology ‘‘must be in part founded on a knowledge of the different genera and _ species of reliquiz, which the various accessible strata of the earth present.’’ Say fully realizes the difficulties in _ the study of fossils, because of their fragmental charac- _ ter and changed nature, and that their correct interpre- _ tation requires a knowledge of similar living organisms. The application of what Say pointed out came first in John Finch’s Geological Essay on the Tertiary Forma- tions in America (7, 31, 1824). Even though the paper is still laboring under the mineral system and does not _ discern the presence of Cretaceous strata among his Ter- tiary formations, yet Finch also sees that ‘‘fossils con- stitute the medals of the ancient world, by which to ascer- tain the various periods.’’ _ Finch now objects to the wide misuse in America of the term alluvial and holds that it is applied to what is elsewhere known as Tertiary. He says: **Geology will achieve a triumph in America, when the term alluvial shall be banished from her Geological Essays, or con- fined to its legitimate domain, and then her tertiary formations will be seen to coincide with those of Europe, and the formations of London, Paris, and the Isle of Wight, will find kindred asso- ciations in. Virginia, the Carolinas, Georgias, the Floridas, and jana.’ The formations as he has them from the bottom “upwards are: (1) Ferruginous sand, (2) Plastic clay, 3) Caleaire Silicieuse of the Paris: Basin, (4) London Clay, (5) Caleaire Ostrée, (6) Upper marine formation, (7) Diluvial. | 5 78 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE The grandest of these early stratigraphic papers, however, is that by Lardner Vanuxem (1792-1848), of only three pages, entitled ‘‘Remarks on the Characters and Classification of Certain American Rock Forma- tions’’ (16, 254, 1829). Vanuxem, a cautious man and a profound thinker, had been educated at the Paris School of Mines. James Hall told the writer in a conversation that while the first New York State Survey was in oper- ation, all of its members looked to Vanuxem for advice. In the paper above referred to, Vanuxem points out in a very concise manner that: ‘‘The alluvial of Mr. Maclure . . . contains not only well characterized alluvion, but products of the tertiary and second- ary classes. Littoral shells, similar to those of the English and Paris basins, and pelagic shells, similar to those of the chalk deposition or latest secondary, abound in it. These two kinds of shells are not mixed with each other; they occur in different earthy matter, and, in the southern states particularly, are at different levels. The incoherency or earthiness of the mass, and our former ignorance of the true position of the shells, have been the sources of our erroneous views.’’ ‘The second error of the older geologists, according to Vanuxem, was the extension of the secondary rocks over ‘‘the western country, and the back and upper parts of New York.’’ They are now called Paleozoic. Some had ~ even tried to show the presence of Jurassic here because of the existence of odlite strata. ‘‘It was taken for granted, that all horizontal rocks are secondary, and as the rocks of these parts of the United States are horizon- tal in their position, so they were supposed to be second- ary.’’ He then shows on the basis of similar Ordovician fossils that the rocks of Trenton Falls, New York, recur at Frankfort in Kentucky, and at Nashville in Tennessee. ‘‘Tt is also certain that an uplifting or downfalling force, or both, have existed, but it is not certain that either or both these forces have acted in a uniform man- ner. .. . Innumerable are the facts, which have fallen under my observation, which show the fallacy of adopt- ing inclination for the character of a class,’’ such as the Transition class of strata. He then goes on to say that in the interior of our country the so-called secondary rocks are horizontal and in the mountains to the east the HISTORICAL GEOLOGY 79 same strata are highly inclined. ‘‘The analogy, or iden- tity of rocks, I determine by their fossils in the first instance, and their position and mineralogical characters in the second or last instance.’’ : It appears that Isaac Lea (1792-1886) in his Contri- butions to Geology, 1833, was the first to transplant to America Lyell’s terms, Pliocene, Miocene, and Eocene, proposed the previous year. The celebrated Claiborne locality was made known to Lea in 1829, and in the work here cited he describes from it 250 species, of which 200 are new. The horizon is correlated with the London Clay and with the Calcaire Grossier of France, both of Eocene time (25, 413, 1834). Timothy A. Conrad began to write about the Ameri- ean Tertiary in 1830, and his more important publica- tions were issued at Philadelphia. His papers in the Journal begin with 1833 and the last one on the Tertiary is in 1846. The Tertiary faunas and stratigraphy have been modernized by William H. Dall in his monumental work of 1650 pages and 60 plates entitled ‘‘Contributions to the Tertiary Fauna of Florida’’ (1885-1903). Heremore _ than 3160 forms of the Atlantic and Gulf deposits are described, but in order to understand their relations to the fossil faunas elsewhere and to the living world, the author studied over 10,000 species. Since then, many other workers have interested themselves in the Tertiary problems. Much good work is also being done in the Pacific States where the sequence is being rapidly developed. The Discerning of the Eastern Cretaceous.—The Cre- taceous sequence was first determined by that ‘‘active and acute geologist,’’ Samuel G. Morton (1799-1851), but that these rocks might be present along the Atlantic border had been surmised as early as 1824 by Edward Hitchcock (7, 216). Vanuxem, as above pointed out, indicated the presence of the Cretaceous in 1829. In this same year Morton proved its presence before the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences. Between 1830 and 1835 Morton published a series of papers in the Journal under the title ‘‘Synopsis of the Organic Remains of the Ferruginous Sand Formation of 80 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE the United States, with Geological Remarks’’ (17, 274, et seq.). In these he describes the Cretaceous fossils and — demonstrates that the ‘‘Diluvial’’ and Tertiary strata of the Atlantic border also have a long sequence of Creta- ceous formations. In the opening paper he writes: ‘‘I consider the mar! of New Jersey as referable to the great ferruginous sand series, which in Prof. Buckland’s arrangement is designated by the name of green sand. ... On the continent this series is called the ancient chalk . . . lower chalk,’’ ete. Again, the marls of New Jersey are ‘‘geologically equivalent to those beds which in Europe are interposed between the white chalk and the Odlites.’’ This correlation is with the European Lower Cretaceous, but we now know the marls to be of Upper Cretaceous age. Although Eaton objected stren- uously to Morton’s correlation, we find M. Dufresnoy of France saying, ‘‘Your limestone above green sand reminds me very much of the Mestricht beds,’’ a correla- tion which stands to this day (22, 94, 1832).* In 1833 Mor- ton announces that the Cretaceous is known all along the Atlantic and Gulf border, and in the Mississippi valley. “ as the Taconic system. The Middle and Upper Cam- brian series can be continued for the present under the term Cambrian system, a term, however, that is by no means in good standing for these formations, as will be demonstrated under the discussion of the Silurian con- troversy. «<< Psi ee a LA et LATE I LST OEY it, lh ac ta il tte esl ts, peo a i. | HISTORICAL GHOLOGY 95 The Silurian Controversy. Just as in America the base of the Paleozoic was involved in a protracted controversy, so in England the Cambrian-Silurian succession was a subject of long debate between Sedgwick and Murchison, and among the succeeding geologists of Europe. The history of the solution is so well and justly stated in the Journal by James D. Dana under the title ‘‘Sedgwick and Murchi- son: Cambrian and Silurian’’ (39, 167, 1890), and by Sir Archibald Geikie in his Text-book of Geology, 1903, that all that is here required is to briefly restate it and to bring the solution up to date. Adam Sedgwick (1785-1873) and R. I. Murchison (1792-1871) each began to work in the areas of Cam- bria (Wales) and Siluria (England) in 1831, but the terms Cambrian and Silurian were not published until 1835. Murchison was the first to satisfactorily work out the sequence of the Silurian system because of the simpler structural and more fossiliferous condition of his area. Sedgwick, on the other hand, had his academic duties to perform at Cambridge University, and being an older and more conservative man, delayed publishing his final results, because of the further fact that his area was far more deformed and less fossiliferous. In 1834 they were working in concert in the Silurian area, and Sedgwick said: ‘‘I was so struck by the clearness of the natural sections and the perfection of his workmanship that I received, I might say, with implicit faith every- thing which he then taught me. . . . The whole ‘Silurian system’ was by its author placed above the great undu- lating slate-rocks of South Wales.’’ At that time Mur- chison told Sedgwick that the Bala group of the latter, now known to be in the middle of the Lower Silurian, could not be brought within the limits of the Silurian system, and added, ‘‘I believe it to plunge under the true Liandeilo-flags,’’ now placed next below the Bala and above the Arenig, which at the present is regarded as at the base of the Ordovician. The Silurian system was defined in print by Murchison in July, 1835, the Upper Silurian embracing the Ludlow and Wenlock, while the Lower Silurian was based on the 96 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE Caradoc and Llandeilo. Murchison’s monumental work, The Silurian System, of 100 pages and many plates of fossils, appeared in 1838. The Cambrian system was described for the first time by Sedgwick in August, 1835, but the completed work—a classic in geology—Synopsis of the Classification of the British Paleozoic Rocks, along with M’Coy’s Descriptions of British Paleozoic Fossils, did not appear until 1852- 1855. Sedgwick’s original Upper Cambrian included the greater part of the chain of the Berwyns, where he said it was connected with the Llandeilo flags of the Silurian. The Middle Cambrian comprised the higher mountains of Cernarvonshire and Merionethshire, and the Lower Cambrian was said to occupy the southwest coast of Cernarvonshire, and to consist of chlorite and mica schists, and some serpentine and granular limestone. In 1853 it was seen that the fossiliferous Upper Cambrian included the Arenig, Llandeilo, Bala, Caradoc, Coniston, _Hirnant, and Lower Llandovery. On the other hand, it was not until long after Murchison and Sedgwick passed away that the Middle and Lower Cambrian were shown to have fossils, but few of those that characterize what is now called Lower, Middle, and Upper Cambrian time. Not until long after the original announcement of the Cambrian system did Sedgwick become aware ‘‘of the unfortunate mischief-involving fact’’ that the most fos- siliferous portion of the Cambrian—the Upper Cambrian —and at that time the only part yielding determinable fossils, when compared with the Lower Silurian was seen to be an equivalent formation but with very dif- ferent lithologic conditions. He began to see in 1842 that his Cambrian was in conflict with the Silurian sys- tem, and four years later there were serious divergencies of views between himself and Murchison. The climax of the controversy was attained in 1852, when Sedgwick was extending his Cambrian system upwards to include the Bala, Llandeilo, and Caradoc, a proceeding not unlike that of Murchison, who earlier had been extending his Silurian downward through all of the fossiliferous Cam- brian to the base of the Lingula flags. Dana in his review of the Silurian-Cambrian contro- versy states: ‘‘The claim of a worker to affix a name toa HISTORICAL GEOLOGY 97 series of rocks first studied and defined by him cannot be disputed.’’ We have seen that Murchison had priority of publication in his term Silurian over Sedgwick’s Cam- brian, but that in a complete presentation, both strati- graphically and faunally, the former had years of prior - definition. What has even more weight is that geologists nearly everywhere had accepted Murchison’s Silurian system as founded upon the Lower and Upper Silurian formations. A nomenclature once widely accepted is almost impossible to dislodge. However, in regard to the controversy it should not be forgotten that it was only Murchison’s Lower Silurian that was in conflict with Sedgwick’s Upper Cambrian. As for the rest of the Cambrian, that was not involved in the controversy. Dana goes on to state that science may accept a name, or not, according as it is, or is not, needed. In the prog- ress of geology, he thought that the time had finally been _ reached when the name Cambrian was a necessity, and he included both Cambrian and Silurian in the geologi- eal record. The ‘‘Silurian,’’ however, included the Lower and Upper Silurian—not one system of rocks, but two. It is now twenty-seven years since Dana came to this _ conclusion, at a time when it was believed that there was more or less continuous deposition not only between the formations of a system but between the systems them- - selves as well. To-day many geologists hold that in the course of time the oceans pulsate back and forth over the continents, and accordingly that the sequence of marine sedimentation in most places must be much broken, and to-day we know that the breaks or land inter- vals in the marine record are most marked between the eras, and shorter between all or at least most of the periods. Furthermore, in North America, we have learned that the breaks between the systems are most marked in the interior of the continent and less so on or toward its margins. Hardly any one now questions the fact of a long land interval between the Lower Silurian and Upper Silurian in England, and it is to Sedgwick’s credit that he was the first to point out this fact and also the presence of an unconformity. It therefore follows that we cannot con- tinue to use Silurian system in the sense proposed by 98 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE Murchison, since it includes two distinct systems or periods. Dana, in the last edition of his Manual of Geology (1895), also recognizes two systems, but curiously he saw nothing incongruous in ealling them ‘“‘Lower Silurian era’’ and ‘‘Upper Silurian era.’’ It certainly is not conducive to clear thinking, however, to refer to two systems by the one name of Silurian and to speak of them individually as Lower and Upper Silurian, thus giving the impression that the two systems are but parts of one—the Silurian. Each one of the parts has its independent faunal and physical characters. We must digress a little here and note the work of Joachim Barrande (1799-1883) in Bohemia. In 1846 he published a short account of the ‘‘Silurian system’’ of Bohemia, dividing it into étages lettered C to H. Between 1852 and 1883 he issued his ‘‘Systéme Silurien du Centre de la Bohéme,’’ in eighteen quarto volumes with 5568 pages of text and 798 plates of fossils—a mon- umental work unrivalled in paleontology. In the first volume the geology of Bohemia is set forth, and here we see that étages A and B are Azoic or pre-Cambrian, and C to H make up his Silurian system. Etage C has his ‘¢Primordial fauna,’’ now known to be of Paradoxides or Middle Cambrian time, while D is Lower Silurian, E is Upper Silurian, F is Lower Devonian, and G and H are Middle Devonian. From this it appears that Barrande’s Silurian system is far more extensive than that of Murchi- son, embracing twice as many periods as that of England and Wales. About 1879 there was in England a nearly general agreement that Cambrian should embrace Barrande’s Primordial or Paradoxides faunas, and in the North Wales area be continued up to the top of the Tremadoe slates. To-day we would include Middle and Upper Cambrian. Lower Cambrian in the sense of containing the Olenellus faunas was then unknown in Great Britain. Lapworth, recognizing the distinctness of the Lower Silurian as a system, proposed in 1879 to recognize it as such, and named it Ordovician, restricting Silurian to - Murchison’s Upper Silurian. This term has not been widely used either in Great Britain or on the Continent, but in the last twenty years has been accepted more and HISTORICAL GEOLOGY 99 more widely in America. Even here, however, it is in direct conflict with the term Champlain, proposed by the New York State Geologist in 1842. In 1897 the International Geological Congress pub- lished E. Renevier’s Chronographie Géologique, wherein we find the following: ( Upper or Silurian Ludlowian (Murchison 1839). (Murchison, re- Wenlockian (Murchison 1839). stricted, 1835). Landoverian (Murchison). : Eve Caradocian (Murchison 1839). ar . See his). Landeilian (Murchison 1839). P * | Arenigian (Sedgwick 1847). Lower or Cambrian Potsdamian (Emmons 1838). (Sedgwick, re- Menevian (Salter and Hicks 1865). | _ stricted, 1835). Georgian (Hitchcock 1861). Silurian Period. _ Regarding this period, which, by the way, is not very unlike that of Barrande, Renevier remarks that it is ‘‘as important as the Cretaceous or the Jurassic. Lapworth even gives it a value of the first order equal to the Pro- tozoic era.’’ In the above there is an obvious objection in the double usage of the term Silurian, and this difficulty was met later on in Lapparent’s Traité by the proposal to substi- tute Gothlandian for Silurian. Of this change Geikie remarks: ‘‘Such an arrangement .. . might be adopted if it did not involve so serious an alteration of the nomen- clature in general use.’’ On the other hand, if dias- trophism and breaks in the stratigraphic and faunal sequence are to be the basis for geologic time divisions, we cannot accept the above scheme, for it recognizes but one period where there are at least four in nature. Conclusions.—We have arrived at a time when our knowledge of the stratigraphic and faunal sequence, plus the orogenic record as recognized in the principle of diastrophism, should be reflected in the terminology of the geologic time-table. It would be easy to offer a satis- factory nomenclature if we were not bound by the law of priority in publication, and if no one had the geologic chronology of his own time ingrained in his memory. In addition, the endless literature, with its accepted nomenclature, bars our way. Therefore with a view of 100 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE ereating the least change in geologic nomenclature, and of doing the greatest justice to our predecessors that. the present conditions of our knowledge will allow, the fol- lowing scheme is offered: Silurian period. Llandovery to top of Ludlow in Europe. Alexandrian-Cataract-Medina to top of Manlius in America. Champlain (1842) or Ordovician (1879) period. Arenig to top of Caradoc in Europe. Beekmantown to top of Richmondian in America. Cambrian period. In the Atlantic realm, begins with the Paradoxides, and in the Pacific, with the Bathyuriseus and Ogygopsis faunas. The close is involved in Ulrich’s provi- sionally defined Ozarkian system. When the latter is estab- lished, the Ozarkian period will hold the time between the Ordovician and the Cambrian. Taconic period. For the world-wide Olenellus or Mesonacide faunas. Paleogeography. When geologists began to perceive the vast significance of Hutton’s doctrine that ‘‘the ruins of an earlier world lie beneath the secondary strata,’’ and that great masses of bedded rocks are separated from one another by periods of mountain making and by erosion intervals, it was natural for them to look for the lands that had fur- nished the débris of the accumulated sediments. In this way paleogeography had its origin, but it was at first of a descriptive and not of a cartographic nature. The word paleogeography was proposed by T. Sterry Hunt in 1872 in a paper entitled ‘‘The Paleogeography of the North American Continent,’’ and published in the Journal of the American Geographical Society for that year. It has to do, he says, with the ‘‘geographical his- tory of these ancient geological periods.’’ It was again prominently used by Robert Etheridge in his presidential address before the Geological Society of London in 1881. Since Canu’s use of the term in 1896, it has been fre- quently seen in print, and now is generally adopted to signify the geography of geologic time. The French were the first to make paleogeographic maps, and Jules Marcou relates in 1866 that Hlie de Beaumont, as early as March, 1831, in his course in the College of France and at the Paris School of Mines, used HISTORICAL GHOLOGY : 101 to outline the relation of the lands and the seas in the center of Hurope at the different great geologic periods. His first printed paleogeographic map appeared in 1833, and was of early Tertiary time. Other maps by Beau- mont were published by Beudant in 1841-1842. The Sicilian geologist Gemmellaro published six maps of his country in 1834, and the Englishman De La Beche had one in the same year. In America the first to show such maps was Arnold Guyot in his Lowell lectures of 1848, James D. Dana published three in the 1863 edition of his Manual of Geology. Of world paleogeographic maps, Jules Marcou produced the first of Jurassic time, pub- lishing it in France in 1866, but the most celebrated of these early attempts was the one by Neumayr published in 1883 in connection with his Ueber klimatische Zonen wahrend der Jura- und Kreidezeit. The first geologist to produce a series of maps showing the progressive geologic geography of a given area was Jukes-Brown, who in the volume entitled ‘‘The Building of the British Isles,’’ 1888, included fifteen such maps. Karpinsky published fourteen maps of Russia, and in 1896 Canu in his Essai de paléogéographie has fifty-seven of France and Belgium. Lapparent’s Traité of 1906 is famous for paleogeographic maps, for he has twenty- three of the world, thirty-four of Europe, twenty-five of France, and ten taken from other authors. Schuchert in 1910 published fifty-two to illustrate the paleogeography of North America, and also gave an extended list of such published maps. Another article on the subject is by Th. Arldt, ‘‘Zur Geschichte der Paliogeographischen Rekon- structionen,’’ published in 1914. Edgar Dacqué in 1913 also produced a list in his Palaogeographischen Karten, ' and two years later appeared his book of 500 pages, Grundlagen und Methoden der Palaiogeographie, where the entire subject is taken up in detail. _ Conclusions—Since 1833 there have been published not less than 500 different paleogeographic maps, and of this number about 210 relate to North America. Never- theless paleogeography is still in its infancy, and most maps embrace too much geologic time, all of them tens of thousands, and some of them millions of years. The geographic maps of the present show the conditions of 102 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE the strand-lines of to-day, and those made fifty years ago have to be revised again and again if they are to be of value to the mariner and merchant. Therefore in our future paleogeographic maps the tendency must ever be toward smaller amounts of geologic time, if we are to show the actual relation of water to land and the move- ments of the periodic floodings. Moreover, the ancient shore lines are all more or less hypothetic and are drawn in straight or sweeping curves, unlike modern strands with their bays, deltas, and headlands, and the ancient lands are featureless plains. We must also pay more attention to the distribution of brackish- and fresh-water deposits. The periodically rising mountains will be the first topographic features to be shown upon the ancient lands, and then more and more of the drainage and the general climatic conditions must be portrayed. In the seas, depth, temperature, and currents are yet to be deciphered. Finally, other base maps than those of the geography of to-day will have to be made, allowing for the compression of the mountainous areas, if we are to show the true geographic configurations of the lands and seas of any given geologic time. Paleometeorology. In accordance with the Laplacian theory, announced at the beginning of the nineteenth century, all of the older geologists held that the earth began as a hot star, and that in the course of time it slowly cooled and finally attained its present zonal cold to tropical climatic condi- tions. That the earth had very recently passed through a much colder climate, a glacial one, came into general acceptance only during the latter half of the previous century. Rise.—Our knowledge of glacial climates had its origin in the Alps, that wonderland of mountains and glaciers. The rise of this knowledge in the Alps is told in a charm- ing and detailed manner by that erratic French- American geologist, Jules Marcou (1824-1898), in his Life, Letters, and Works of Louis Agassiz, 1896. He relates that the Alpine chamois hunter Perraudin in 1815 directed the attention of the engineer De Charpentier to the fact ‘‘that the large boulders perched on the sides of HISTORICAL GEOLOGY 408 the Alpine valleys were carried and left there by gla- ciers.’’ For a long time the latter thought the conclusion extravagant, and in the meantime Perraudin told the same thing to another engineer, Venetz. He, in 1829, convinced of the correctness of the chamois hunter’s views, presented the matter before the Swiss naturalists then meeting at St. Bernard’s. Venetz ‘‘told the Society that his observations led him to believe that the whole Valais has been formerly covered by an immense glacier and that it even extended outside of the canton, covering all the Canton de Vaud, as far as the Jura Mountains, carrying the boulders and erratic materials, which are now scattered all over the large Swiss valley.’’ Hight years earlier, in 1821, similar views had been presented by the same modest naturalist before the Helvetic Society, but it was not until 1833 that De Charpentier found the manuscript and had it published. Venetz’s conclusions were that all of the glaciers of the Bagnes valley ‘‘have very recognizable moraines, which are about a league from the present ice.’’ ‘‘The moraines . . . date from an epoch which is lost in the night of time.’’ Then in 1834 De Charpentier read a paper before the same society, meeting at Lucerne. ‘‘Seldom, if ever, has such a small memoir so deeply excited the scientific world. It was received at first with incredulity and even scorn and mockery, Agassiz being among its opponents.’’ The paper was published in 1835, first at Paris, then at Geneva, and finally in Germany. It *tattracted much attention, and the smile of incredulity with which it was received when read at Lucerne soon changed into a desire to know more about it.’’ Louis Agassiz (1807-1873), who had long been ac- quainted with his countryman, De Charpentier, spent several months with him in 1836, and together they studied the glaciers of the Alps. Agassiz was at first ‘Cadverse to the hypothesis, and did not believe in the great extension of glaciers and their transportation of boulders, but on the contrary, was a partisan of Lyell’s theory of transport by icebergs and ice-cakes ... but from being an adversary of the glacial theory, he | _ returned to Neuchiatel an enthusiastic convert to the views of Venetz and De Charpentier. ... With his 104 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE power of quick perception, his unmatched memory, his perspicacity and acuteness, his way of classifying, judg- ing and marshalling facts, Agassiz promptly learned the whole mass of irresistible arguments collected patiently during seven years by De Charpentier and Venetz, and with his insatiable appetite and that faculty of assimila- tion which he possessed in such a wonderful degree, he digested the whole doctrine of the glaciers in a few weeks. ”’ In July, 1837, Agassiz presented as his presidential address before the Helvetic Society his memorable ‘‘ Dis- cours de Neuchatel,’’ which was ‘‘the starting point of all that has been written on the Ice-age,’’—a term coined at the time by his friend Schimper, a botanist. The first part of this address is reprinted in French in Marcou’s book on Agassiz. The address was received with aston- ishment, much incredulity, and indifference. Among the listeners was the great German geologist Von Buch, who ‘‘was horrified, and with his hands raised towards the sky, and his head bowed to the distant Bernese Alps, exclaimed: ‘O Sancte de Saussure, ora pro nobis!’ ”’ Even De Charpentier ‘‘was not gratified to see his glacial theory mixed with rather uncalled for biological prob- lems, the connection of which with the glacial age was more than problematic.’’ Agassiz was then a Cuvierian catastrophist and creationist, and advanced the idea of a series of glacial ages to explain the destruction of the geologic succession of faunas! Curiously, this theory was at once accepted by, the American paleontologist T. A. Conrad (35, 239, 1839). The classics in elacial geology are Agassiz’s Etudes sur les Glaciers, 1840, and De Charpentier’s Essai sur les Glaciers, 1841. Of the latter book, Marcou states that it has been said: ‘‘It is impossible to be truly a geologist without having read and studied it.’’? In the English language there is Tyndall’s Glaciers of the Alps, 1860. The progress of the ideas in regard to Pleistocene glaciation is presented in the following chapter by H. E. Gregory. . Older Glacial Climates—Hardly had the Pleistocene glacial climate been proved, when geologists began to point out the possibility of even earlier ones. An enthu- HISTORICAL GEOLOGY - 105 siastic Scotch. writer, Sir Andrew Ramsay, in 1855 described certain late Paleozoic conglomerates of middle England, which he said were of glacial origin, but his evidence, though never completely gainsaid, has not been generally accepted. In the following year, an English- man, Doctor W. T. Blanford, said that the Talchir con- glomerates of central and southern India were of glacial origin, and since then the evidence for a Permian glacial climate has been steadily accumulating. Africa is the - Jand of tillites, and here in 1870 Sutherland pointed out that the conglomerates of the Karroo formation were of glacial origin. Australia also has Permian glacial deposits, and they are known widely in eastern Brazil, the Falkland Islands, the vicinity of Boston, and else- where. So convincing is this testimony that all geolo- gists are now ready to accept the conclusion that a glacial climate was as wide-spread in early Permian time as was that of the Pleistocene. In South Africa, beneath the marine Lower Devonian, - occurs the Table Mountain series, 5000 feet thick. The series is essentially one of quartzites, with zones of shales or slates and with striated pebbles up to 15 inches long. The latter occur in pockets and seem to be of glacial origin. There are here no typical tillites, and no striated under- grounds have so far been found. While the evidence of the deposits appears to favor the conclusion that the Table Mountain strata were laid down in cold waters with floating ice derived from glaciers, it is as yet impossible to assign these sediments a definite geologic age. They are certainly not younger than the Lower Devonian, but it has not yet been established to what period of the early Paleozoic they belong. In southeastern Australia occur tillites of wide distri- bution that lie conformably beneath, but sharply sep- arated from the fossiliferous marine Lower Cambrian strata. David (1907), Howchin (1908), and other Aus- _ tralian geologists think they are of Cambrian time, but _ to the writer they seem more probably late Proterozoic - inage. In arctic Norway Reusch discovered unmistak- able tillites in 1891, and this occurrence was confirmed by Strahan in 1897. Tt is not yet certainly known what their age is, but it appears to be late Proterozoic rather 106 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE than early Paleozoic. Other undated Proterozoic tillites occur in China (Willis and Blackwelder 1907), Africa (Schwarz 1906), India (Vredenburg 1907), Canada (Coleman 1908), and possibly in Scotland. The oldest known tillites are described by Coleman in 1907, and occur at the base of the Lower Huronian or in early Proterozoic time. They extend across northern Ontario for 1000 miles, and from the north shore of Lake Huron northward for 750 miles. Fossils as Climatic Indexes.—Paleontologists have long been aware that variations in the climates of the past are indicated by the fossils, and Neumayr in 1883 brought the evidence together in his study of climatic zones mentioned elsewhere. Plants, and corals, cepha- lopods, and foraminifers among marine animals, have long been recognized as particularly good ‘‘life ther- mometers.’’ In fact, all fossils are climatic indicators to some extent, and a good deal of evidence concerning paleometeorology has been discerned in them. This evi- dence is briefly stated in the paper by Schuchert already alluded to, and in W. D. Matthew’s Climate and Evolu- tion, 1915. Sediments as Climatic Indexes.—Johannes Walther in the third part of his EHinleitung—Lithogenesis der Gegenwart, 1894—is the first one to decidedly direct attention to the fact that the sediments also have within themselves a climatic record. In America Joseph Bar- rell has since 1907 written much on the same subject. On the other hand, the periodic floodings of the con- tinents by the oceans, and the making of mountains, due to the periodic shrinkage of the earth, as expressed in T. C. Chamberlin’s principle of diastrophism and in his publications since 1897, are other criteria for estimat- ing the climates of the past. Conclusions.—In summation of this subject Schuchert says: ‘‘The marine ‘life thermometer’ indicates vast stretches of time of mild to warm and equable temperatures, with but slight zonal differences between the equator and the poles. The great bulk of marine fossils are those of the shallow seas, and the evo- lutionary changes recorded in these ‘medals of creation’ are slight throughout vast lengths of time that are punctuated by HISTORICAL GHOLOGY 107 short but decisive periods of cooled waters and great mortality, followed by quick evolution, and the rise of new stocks. The times of less warmth are the miotherm and those of greater heat the pliotherm periods of Ramsay. On the land the story of the climatic changes is different, but in general the equability of the temperature simulates that of the oceanic areas. In other words, the lands also had long- enduring times of mild to warm climates. Into the problem of land climates, however, enter other factors that are absent in the oceanic regions, and these have great influence upon the climates of the continents. Most important of these is the peri- odie warm-water inundation of the continents by the oceans, causing insular climates that are milder and moister. With the vanishing of the floods somewhat cooler and certainly drier climates are produced. The effects of these periodic floods must not be underestimated, for the North American continent was variably submerged at least seventeen times, and over an area of from 154,000 to 4,000,000 square miles. When to these factors is added the effect upon the climate eaused by the periodic rising of mountain chains, it is at once apparent that the lands must have had constantly varying climates. In general the temperature fiuctuations seem to have been slight, but geographically the climates varied between mild to warm pluvial, and mild to cool arid. The arid factor has been of the greatest import to the organic world of the lands. Further, when to all of these causes is added the fact that dur- ing emergent periods the formerly isolated lands were connected by land bridges, permitting intermigration of the land floras and faunas, with the introduction of their parasites and parasitic diseases, we learn that while the climatic environment is of fun- damental importance it is not the only cause for the more rapid evolution of terrestrial life . . Briefly, then, we may conclude that the markedly varying climates of the past seem to be due primarily to periodic changes in the topographic form of the earth’s surface, plus variations in the amount of heat stored by the oceans. The causation for the warmer interglacial climates is the most difficult of all to explain, and it is here that factors other than those mentioned may enter. Granting all this, there still seems to lie back of all these theories a greater question connected with the major changes in paleometeorology. This is: What is it that forces the earth’s topography to change with varying intensity at irregularly rhythmic intervals? . . . Are we not forced to conclude that the earth’s shape changes periodically in response to gravitative forces that alter the body-form?”’ 108 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE Ewolution, Modern evolution, or the theory of life continuously descending from life with change, may be said to have had its first marked development in Comte de Buffon (1707-1788), a man of wealth and station, yet an indus- trious compiler, a brilliant writer, and a popularizer of science. He was not, however, a true scientific investi- gator, and his monument to fame is his Histoire Nat- urelle, in forty-four volumes, 1749-1804. A. 8S. Packard in his book on Lamarck, his Life and Work, 1901, con-. cludes in regard to Buffon as follows: ‘‘The impression left on the mind, after reading Buffon, is that even if he threw out these suggestions and then retracted them, from fear of annoyance or even persecution from the bigots of his time, he did not himself always take them seriously, but rather jotted them down as passing thoughts . . . They appeared thirty-four years before Lamarck’s theory, and though not epoch-making, they are such as will render the name of Buffon memorable for all time.’’ . Chevalier de Lamarck (1744-1829) may justly be regarded as the founder of the doctrine of modern evo- lution. Previous to 1794 he was a believer in the fixity of species, but by 1800 he stood definitely in favor of evolution. Locy in his Biology and its Makers, 1908, states his theories in the following simplified form: ‘‘Variations of organs, according to Lamarck, arise in animals mainly through use and disuse, and new organs have their origin in a physiological need. A new need felt by the animal [due to new conditions in its life, or the environment] expresses itself on the organism, stimulating growth and adaptations in a particular direction.’’ To Lamarck, ‘‘inheritance was a simple, direct trans- mission of those superficial changes that arise in organs within the lifetime of an individual owing to use and disuse.’? This part of his theory has come to be known as ‘‘the inheritance of acquired characters.”’ Georges Cuvier (1769-1832), a peer of France, was a decided believer in the fixity of species and in their crea- tion through divine acts. In 1796 he began to see that among the fossils so plentiful about Paris many were of HISTORICAL GHOLOGY 109 extinct forms, and later on that there was a succession of wholly extinct faunas. This at first puzzling phenom- enon he finally came to explain by assuming that the earth had gone through a series of catastrophes, of which the Deluge was the most recent but possibly not the last. With each catastrophe all life was blotted out, and a new though improved set of organisms was created by divine acts. The Cuvierian theory of catastrophism was widely accepted during the first half of the nineteenth century, and in America Louis Agassiz was long its greatest ‘exponent. It was this theory and the dominance of the brilliant Cuvier, not only in science but socially as well, that blotted out the far more correct views of the more philosophical Lamarck, who held that life throughout the ages had been continuous and that through individual effort and the inheritance of acquired characters had ering the wonderful diversity of the present living world. In 1830 there was a public debate at Paris between Cuvier and Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, the one holding to the views of the fixity of species and creation, the other that life is continuous and evolves into better adapted forms. Cuvier, a gifted speaker and the greatest debater zoology ever had, with an extraordinary memory that never failed him, defeated Saint-Hilaire in each day’s debate, although the latter was in the right. A book that did a great deal to prepare the English- speaking people for the coming of evolution was ‘‘ Ves- tiges of Creation,’’ published in 1844 by an unknown author. In Darwin’s opinion, ‘‘the work, from its power- ful and brilliant style ... has done excellent service in thus preparing the ground for the reception of analogous views.’’ This book was recommended to the readers of the Journal (48, 395, 1845) with the editorial remark that ‘‘we cannot subscribe to all of the author’s -views.”’ We can probably best illustrate the opinions of Amer- icans on the question of evolution just before the appear- ance of Darwin’s great work by directing attention to James D. Dana’s Thoughts on Species (24, 305, 1857). After reading this article and others of a similar nature by Agassiz, one comes to the opinion that unconsciously 7 110 A CENTURY OF SCIENCE both men are proving evolution, but consciously they are firm creationists. It is astonishing that with their extended and minute knowledge of living organisms and their philosophic type of mind neither could see the true significance of the imperceptible transitions between some species, which if they do not actually pass into, at least shade towards, one another. Dana speaks of ‘‘the endless diversities in individu- als’’ that compose a species, and then states that a living species, like an inorganic one, ‘‘is based on a specific amount or condition of concentered force defined in the act or law of creation.’’ Species, he says, are perma- nent, and hybrids ‘‘cannot seriously trifle with the true units of nature, and at the best, can only make tempo- rary variations.’’ ‘‘We have therefore reason to believe from man’s fertile intermixture, that he is one in species: and that all organic species are divine appointments which cannot be obliterated, unless by annihilating the individuals representing the species.’’ Through the activities of the French the world was prepared for the reception of evolution, and now it was already in the minds of many advanced thinkers. In 1860 Asa Gray sent to the editor of the Journal (29, 1) an article by the English botanist, Joseph D. Hooker, entitled ‘‘On the Origination and Distribution of Species,’’ with these significant remarks: ‘‘The essay cannot fail to attract the immediate and profound attention of scientific men . . . It has for some time been manifest that a re-statement of the Lamarckian hypothesis is at hand. We have this, in an improved and truly scientific form, in the theories which, recently propounded by Mr. Dar- win, followed by Mr. Wallace, are here so ably and altogether independently maintained. When these views are fully laid before them, the naturalists of this country will be able to take part in the interesting discussion which they will not fail to call forth.’’ Hooker took up a study of the flora of Tasmania, of which the above cited article is but a chapter, with a view to trying out Darwin’s theory, and he now accepts it. He says, ‘‘Species are derivative and mutable.’’ ‘‘The limits of the majority of species are so undefina- ble that few naturalists are agreed upon them.’’ HISTORICAL GEOLOGY 111 Asa Gray had received from Darwin an advance copy of the book that was to revolutionize the thought of the world, and at once wrote for the Journal a Review of Darwin’s Theory on the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection (29, 153, 1860). This is a splendid, critical but just, scientific review of Darwin’s epoch- making book. Evidently views similar to those of the English scientist had long been in the mind of Gray, for - he easily and quickly mastered the work. He is easy on Dana’s Thoughts on Species, which were idealistic and not in harmony with the naturalistic views of Darwin. On the other hand, he contrasts Darwin’s views at length with those of the creationists as exemplified by Louis Agassiz, and says ‘‘The widest divergence appears.”’ Gray says in part: “