Geology in America

Abstract

I AM somewhat chagrined to find that I appear to you (vol. xi. p. 381) to say that the Geological Survey of Great Britain is especially to blame for the diminution of interest in geology in the country that has done the most for its advancement. My remarks were taken down by a reporter, and I have not seen them in print. The point I sought to make was to the effect that in all matters relating to geology, Massachusetts could not do better than to follow the lead of the British Survey. The only question to be considered was whether it was not open to criticism from an educational point of view. On this matter I expressed no individual opinion, but only restated doubts that I had heard expressed by more than one of your own masters in the science. I feel that geological science owes so much to your noble Survey, that none of its students should subject it to hasty criticism. If it is to have its methods questioned, it should be done by some one far better acquainted with its ways than any person from another country is likely to be. It seems to me, however, that the diminution in the number of geologists, compared with the students of other sciences, if not in absolute number, is clear on simple inspection of the field. It is true not only of Great Britain, but of France and America as well. Of mining engineers there is, I believe, a great plenty; but of men who are trained in field work, who can be trusted to unravel a set of rocks, or who care for the science as a science, and not as a means of winning a living, there are far too few.