Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 37.djvu/424

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

the subject. It is clear that very many volunteer canvassers will be needed to secure success. Each census blank contains instructions to the collector and places for twenty-five names; and special blanks for the "Yes" cases are furnished in addition. I shall be most happy to supply these blanks to any one who will be good enough to make application for them to

Yours truly,
(Professor) William James,
Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.


Editor Popular Science Monthly:

Sir: Mr. Chidsey's article upon The Mysterious Music of Pascagoula, in your April number, recalls a recent experience of mine. While cruising on the west coast of Florida, we lay at anchor one night at Rocky Point in Old Tampa Bay, and heard most distinctly a very curious musical note of some denizen of the water. The sound consisted of a single note, and was continuous for a long time. It recalled the singing of telegraph wires, or the hum of a planing-mill, or the music of an Æolian harp. It occasionally approached or receded, and more than one such note—apparently from different animals—could at times be heard at once. In our cabin the sound seemed very distinct, but it was in reality probably faint, as it was hardly, or not at all, audible upon deck. My companion and myself have both cruised along the Gulf coast south of that point before, but had never heard this sound anywhere else; our captain, also, had never heard it anywhere else, but said it was always to be heard at Rocky Point, which is a principal oystering-ground for Tampa. The sound bore no resemblance to that of the drum, which is very common in Florida, and which is a booming, interrupted noise. Its most remarkable peculiarity was its steady continuance—it certainly often lasted without interruption for several minutes.

Yours, etc.,William M. Meigs.
216 South Third Street,
Philadelphia, April 16, 1890.



TO many of our friends, as we learn from letters that reach us from time to time, the position that The Popular Science Monthly takes up on political and economical questions appears more or less "one-sided." They would wish us, if we can not throw our influence on the side of paternal and protective government, at least to hold the scales even between that system and the anti-paternal, anti-protective system, to which manifestly our preference is given. We are sorry to disappoint any who find our pages sufficiently interesting to command their attention, but we do not see that we can abandon our present attitude. There is enough of trimming, enough of compromise, enough of the non-committal style of writing in the newspaper press: a magazine that professes to represent science may be pardoned for being true to what it conceives to be the teachings of science. What we are compelled to see in the restrictions that governments impose upon the course of trade is not a true statesmanship or a generous public policy, but simply a series of transactions, or, as they are now more familiarly called, "deals" with different private interests. Who can truthfully deny that this is the case? Certain manufacturers ask for protection and get it. What is their object in asking? Surely their own private gain. What do they ask? That other people may be forced to buy their goods, so long as the price is kept within a certain figure which is fixed far above the value of such goods in the markets of the world. Is this a righteous demand to make? It seems to us far from righteous. It seems to us that a man who approaches the Legislature with a request that the power may be conferred upon him by law to force his goods at a high price upon people who could buy, and would much prefer to buy, other goods at a lower price, comes forward with an essentially immoral proposition. But what if the people at large accept the proposition, it may be asked. What if they are willing to impose a heavy tax upon them-