The Science Congress. TO THE EDITOR.

Otago Witness, Issue 2603, 3 February 1904, Page 14

The Science Congress. TO THE EDITOR.

Sis, — In Professor David's presidential address he quotes Sir lsorma.ii Locky&r a? follows: "la Go-rmany there is a Scientifio National Council. ... It considers everything relating to the use of brainpower in pooee — from alterations in school regulations and the organisation of tho universities to railway rates and fiscal duties." Sir Norman goes on to suggest that in England a scientific council might be appointed a3 a committee of the Privy Council. This suggestion is most valuable. Should, however, a British scientific national council be called into being, on© is constrained! to hoDe it will at least give due prominence to the soundness of the claim tha.t it is impossible to tax a nation into prosperity, and show also that su-ch grotesque assertions as that given the imposition of a duty the foreigner will pay it is at once not newi and not true, d&spite the declaration to the contrary by tm eminent British politician. Sir Norman again : "Itis a question of drilled battalions against an undisciplined! i,Tmy: of the use of the scientific spirit as 1 opposed to the hope of "muddling through.' " lls this so? Well, let us compare the broad results in a commercial sense achieved on the one hand by the "drilled battalions' imbued with a " scientific spirit" and on th& I other by the- " undisciplined army" buoyed. I opposed to the hope of ' muddling through ' " ! iJet us by all means learn anything we possibly can frenn Germany which mak&s for national wellbeing, and wo can learn much, I but let us also avoid the " smug pessimism," involved in the be-lief that the country i 3 ruined, referred to by Professor David Iv&t us compare the national income of the two Empires. Germany, with a pcp«la,tioa of 55 millions, has a national income of 1300 miLicn pounds, whil=t Grer-t Britain, with a population of 41i millions, earng 1650 million pounds. Then take the average money wages of skilled workmen in the two countries (these are taken from, the Bcardi of Trade- Blue Book): — ! United Kingdom. Garmany. Caoit-nl cities ..42/ .. 24/ Other citie3 .... 36/ .. 22/6 Then as to the cost of living for a typical workman's family for food only: — In Germany 160 4d is need-ed; in Britain, 15s 6di for the same i&eins. Wo now eom-e to the trad© per head of population : — Period: 3375-9 1830-4. IS3S-9. 1830-4. 1895-00. TT.K. .. 15/10/4 18/3/6 14/17-10 15/10/2 16/3/11 Cr c rruany .. 713/1 6,16/11 6/14/11 7/4/11 6/1/1 These figures unquestionably teach us this: that if wo on cur oart can learn much from Germany. Germany on her pari has much to learn from us. Great Britain, at anyrate, has not for the past 25 years deliberately and persistently sold a vast portion of her national product at less than: cost price and fquare-d the account by -exacting an exorbitant profit from her own. people. Has Germany done this? Yes, with sugar, much to Britain's advantage, and, I have littlo doubt, quite against the* wishes or advieo of the Scientific National Council. Vested interests created by Protection have to be considered.

The hi-tory of British eommarce for a century past completely contradicts Sir Norman) Lockyer's assumption thot in Britain a decreasing trade means a de<;roasine- nationnal income. Sir Alfred Bateman bac.es up his Board of Trarle returns by st.itinj most emphatically that noither "Hritish trado nor British n.como is dearoa-mg-, an i no hisrh&r authority exi=ts.— l am, etc., W. M. B.