Part 14

Professor Schmidt's literary work covered a field of extraordinary breadth. Besides numerous works and text-books in systematic and anatomical zoölogy and life histories, he published popular lectures and essays in many different periodicals, recensions, reviews of books, translations, and even political articles. It would be impossible to give a complete bibliography of his works, because he left no notes respecting them. A list of his publications in zoölogy, by Professor von Graff, includes ninety-nine titles.

Correspondence.

SCIENTIFIC METHOD AND THE BIBLE.

_Editor Popular Science Monthly_:

SIR: I have read with great interest an article in the July number of your Monthly entitled Scientific Method and its Application to the Bible. So far as I am able to understand the writer's views, I must certainly decline to accept some of his conclusions. The vital teaching of his paper appears to me to be this: it is proper to apply scientific methods to the study of the Bible so far as to inquire into its structure, the date of its composition, its composite authorship and the sources from which it was compiled, and the names of its authors; but certain truths are distinctly taught in it of a supernatural character which must be accepted because they are a revelation of God's will, and not because they are found to be true by intellectual apprehension and logical reasoning. Indeed, to think of understanding them by intellectual processes is "unscientific beyond hope of pardon."

It is conceded that "the stifling of thought and of investigation into what might lead men away from the truth and the faith once delivered to the saints" was instrumental in causing the barrenness in scientific work for twelve hundred years of the middle ages, between Hipparchus and Copernicus, and that "the same causes are more or less at work at all times to hinder the growth of science and the extension of scientific method." He still, however, insists that there is limitation to human inquiry and ecclesiastical bounds beyond which thought must not go. There are still revelations of truths which the intellect can not perceive, and which can only be understood by "an exercise of faith." It is no longer the Mosaic line which scientists are forbidden to cross, but the "spiritual verities" must not be questioned. There are some revelations which, in the language of Huxley, "they are to hold for the certainest of truths, to be doubted only at the peril of their salvation."

Was it not Martin Luther who called Copernicus a "fool" for trying "to reverse the entire science of astronomy" in the face of revealed truths? "To accept the truth as revealed by God and to acquiesce in it is the part of a good mind," said Melanchthon in condemning Copernicus. "Who will venture to place the authority of Copernicus above that of the Holy Spirit?" said Calvin. Verily, his unpardonable sin was "investigating the truths which are distinctly taught in the Bible," which required an "exercise of faith" and were not to be "apprehended intellectually."

The question seems a reasonable one to ask, To what authority shall we look for knowledge and interpretation of these spiritual truths which are not accessible by scientific study? How shall we know that they are truths at all? I am aware that here the testimony of Christian conscientiousness is sometimes held to be the court of last resort, which I interpret to mean that if one intuitively reaches the conclusion that something is true it is true, the most positive evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. Certainly, no other fact is better established in all human history than the truth of witchcraft, if we admit the potency of this authority. If we reject this, must we not then fall back upon ecclesiastical infallibility as the final interpreter of truth? And this the essayist, in his paper, declines to argue.

Now, can there be any such thing as scientific investigation within such prescribed limitations? Or scientific study of the Bible itself which excludes from its province the so-called spiritual revelations which it contains? One might naturally think that the primary purpose of all the critical study of the books, authors, and structure of the Bible was to learn just what these distinct truths it teaches are. But what bearing can this study have upon the question, being but an intellectual process with which the essential truths are disconnected, which only come by revelation?

Higher criticism can not hold permanently such an untenable position. It must either go backward to an infallible book, or an infallible interpretation of it by authority, or it must go forward to the consideration of the Bible as a collection of books of ancient literature, to be examined without restrictions. The truths which it contains are to be ascertained by "apprehending intellectually" and "reasoning logically," in the same manner as with other books written by religious leaders in ancient times. Any halting between these two positions is only for temporary rest. No permanent foothold can ever be gained on such a foundation of quicksand. An impassable dead line in biblical study is indicative of the theological and not the scientific method.

LEWIS DAYTON BURDICK.

MCDONOUGH, N. Y.

A CORRECTION.

_Editor Popular Science Monthly_:

SIR: A correspondent, Mr. C. Wood Davis, of Peotone, Kansas, appears to think it his duty to prove that we can not produce wheat enough in this country to meet our own future demands, and apparently regards it as a personal matter when any one contests this position. He also thinks he has found a small error in long division in the last article which you printed from me on this question which I can not find, but which if found and corrected would have no influence on the general argument.

He also rebukes me in a most earnest manner for the alleged misuse of the chemical term "phosphate of potash," which crept into my article in connection with the right use of the term "phosphate of lime," when I referred to the mineral phosphates of Kentucky, Tennessee, and Florida. Technically he is apparently right. There is no permanent form or no natural mineral form of phosphate of potash which can be removed from place to place. Yet my article was revised by an experienced geologist, thoroughly familiar with the chemistry of the soil, before I sent it to you, and he failed to correct this technical error. My own knowledge of chemistry is very limited.

It might be inferred, as my irascible correspondent points out, from the manner in which I have called attention to the deposits of mineral phosphates in Kentucky and Tennessee, that I thought these deposits would yield phosphates of lime and phosphates of potash each in a separate movable form, which could not be a fact. Yet my critic will doubtless admit that the soils of many parts of this country are stocked with potash sufficient for a very long period.

Many years ago, when I began the study of the cotton plant and its growth, under the leadership of the late Prof. William B. Rogers, I made reference to the existence of the vast supplies of phosphate of lime and potash, which are necessary to the growth of the cotton plant, in the Southern soils. I derived my conception of their origin in the lowlands and plateaus in marine formations from Professor Rogers, and also from the works of Professor Shaler. One may also impute the large amount of potash that is found in the valleys and mountain lands to the disintegration of the gneiss and other rocks of the Appalachian chain, which have never been washed out by glacial action or by glacial streams. If any one has been misled by this slight misuse of chemical terms it may be well to state that phosphate of potash does not exist, and I am told that it can not exist, in a separate removable form.

We have not as yet discovered any large deposit or mine like that of Stassfurt, in Prussia, yielding potash in a commercial form in which it can be widely distributed. We import annually thousands of tons of potash from Stassfurt. This deposit was discovered, as I am informed, by accident, and it may be hoped that a similar accident may occur in this country. These mines were originally opened for the production of salt. In boring for salt the product of a stratum above or below the salt, I know not which, was brought up, which was thrown aside as worthless until an inquisitive visiting chemist examined it and thus discovered this great source of potash. We possess enormous beds of salt, of soda, and of alkalies, scattered throughout the area of this country, in connection with which it may be hoped that we may hereafter discover a deposit of mineral potash, or of the mineral from which potash may be derived cheaply and in large quantities.

These two exceptions which have been taken to my article have no real connection with the substance of the argument, which stands independently either of the undiscoverable error in long division or of the technical fault in the use of the term "phosphate of potash." Yours very truly,

EDWARD ATKINSON.

BOSTON, _June 7, 1899_.

Editor's Table.

_AN OLD-FASHIONED MORAL._

Voltaire's Candide is not a book that can be recommended for general reading; yet it contains perhaps as good a moral as could easily be found in a wide range of books aiming more distinctly at edification. The hero, after many vicissitudes and copious experience of the deceitfulness of riches and the miseries of an ill-regulated life, made the blessed discovery that peace and health and independence were to be obtained by the industrious cultivation of a small piece of ground. He had a friend called Martin who associated himself with him in his agricultural labors, but who had rather a fine talent for discussing abstract questions. Candide would listen to him for a while, but never allowed him to get very far without breaking in with the observation, "Mais surtout il faut cultiver notre jardin" ("But above everything else we must cultivate our garden"). Here was safety, here was balm for painful recollections, here was about the best that the world had it in its power to give; and Candide, chastised by misfortune, wanted to stick to that.

This is an age of copious and unending discussion of social and political problems. Discussion is well in its way; but perhaps the problems would not be so acute if there was less discussion and more cultivating of gardens. It may indeed be said, with no small degree of plausibility, that the greed to be rich, the unwillingness, so to speak, to cultivate a garden which only promises a moderate reward, is at the bottom of a large part of our troubles. Wisdom cries aloud and tells the world that happiness is not to be found in riches; but the cry is little heeded. The whole lesson of higher education is that happiness springs from within and not from without; but thousands take what they can of the higher education while declining the lesson. Science unlocks a world of beauty and wonder, and offers to the mind a constant succession of interesting subjects of contemplation; but thousands again ask nothing of science except to show them the way to wealth. Precisely similar in a multitude of cases is the demand made of art and literature. It is well-nigh a century since Wordsworth lamented the decay of "plain living and high thinking." Have the succeeding years brought any improvement in this respect? It is much to be feared they have not. Wealth is, if possible, more than ever the ideal of society, and plain living is terribly at a discount.

We believe, however, that in the deliberate choice of plain living by an influential portion of society there lies a greater potency of social reform than in all the schemes of socialistic reconstruction. The most hurtful thing in the world to-day is the false glamour of wealth. It is against this evil influence that we want an insurrection, not against capital as such. Weaken the fascination of wealth, and, in the same degree that you do so, you increase the moral responsibility of those who are its possessors. The luxury of the present age has run to a dangerous extreme. Advice in such a matter may seem idle, but the discovery that Candide made is one that the world at large must make some day. True happiness is the natural accompaniment of honest industry and moderate living. Such conditions make high thinking possible, and give a savor to all enjoyments. There have been times when men, to save their souls, would go forth into the wilderness or the desert. Such sacrifices are not needed in the present day; there is a very respectable measure of salvation to be won in cultivating a garden.

_THE TROUBLES OF ORTHODOXY._

The thought of the age has now reached a point of development at which it has become almost impossible for any man of trained intellect to say that he receives on authority pure and simple any statement which admits or should admit of direct verification--for example, any statement dealing with matters of a historical or scientific character. This, if we mistake not, is the true secret of the troubles over doctrinal questions which have lately broken out in more than one division of the Christian Church. It is not so much that there has been a revolt against doctrines as such, as that a need is felt by thinking and cultivated men to seek for higher grounds of belief than those hitherto deemed sufficient. This has led to a certain generalization of belief, if we may so call it, which to less cultivated minds looks almost like an abandonment of the most essential doctrines of the Christian faith. Such a view of the matter, however, we hold to be entirely erroneous. The men we are thinking of--and Dr. Briggs and Bishop Potter may be taken as conspicuous examples--have the interests of religion and of their fellow-men at heart. They do not wish to force upon others a mode of looking at religious questions for which they are not prepared; but, for their own part, they find it necessary to restate the articles of their religious faith in terms which do not absolutely conflict with the principles of reason. This rectification of terms is imposed in part by the conditions of thought in the modern world, but to an equal extent at least by what may be called an inward expansion of the doctrines themselves. Who that holds any truth, scientific or other, does not feel impelled to seek for it continually a wider interpretation and application? Not otherwise is it, we hold, with religious doctrines; they have their own law of growth and development, and he who would arrest the process condemns them to atrophy and decay.

It is charged against both the scholars we have mentioned that they speak of the Bible as literature, and say that in determining its meaning we must keep in view the same class of considerations which would guide us in dealing with other literary monuments. There is nothing in this which need alarm any thoughtful person. It would be doing less than justice to the Bible to deny that many parts of it are literature of a very high order; and it would be doing less than justice to our own intellects to deny that the conception of the Bible as literature is a great help to its correct interpretation. Religion, in the view of such men as we have mentioned, does not depend upon the meaning given to a text or the acceptance or rejection of any specific statement of fact. There is nothing specially "religious" in believing that the Epistle to the Hebrews was written by St. Paul, or that the adventures of Jonah were precisely as described in the book that bears his name. Grant that the organ of religious apprehension is faith, yet each age must settle for itself the question as to what is the proper scope of faith and what of reason. In the present day reason can deal with many things which at one time were thought to be entirely within the domain of faith, and it would be rash to say that the frontier has even yet received its final rectification. If we rightly understand the position of Dr. Briggs and Bishop Potter, they hold that religion is essentially an attitude of mind and heart, a seeing of the invisible, an instinctive recognition of a supreme moral authority, a sense that every human being is called to nothing less than holiness of life. They reverence the Scriptures because in them, as in no other body of writings in the world, the realities of religion are both expressed and implied. They do not demand of the Bible perfect agreement with either scientific or historic truth; they are content if they find in it the spiritual basis of human life, a scheme of thought that links the individual human being with an infinite origin and an infinite destiny. From their standpoint the value of the Bible for the highest moral purposes would in no way be increased if every word in it which touches on scientific or historical questions had the seal of all the academies in the Old World and the New.

It is not a difficult thing, nor does it require much wisdom, to harry a man whose independent thinking and moral earnestness have forced him to take a different attitude toward some great question from that which is adopted by the multitude. It is easy to present his views in an invidious light, but a more useful task would be to show that all that is essential and precious in religious belief can exist as well in a philosophical as in a popular form. With such a thesis it may not be quite so easy to "score," but it is a pity when the standards of the reporters' room invade the desk of the literary or theological editor. It is upon such men as we have mentioned, men of competent scholarship and earnest spirit, that the task is laid of purifying and liberating the religious consciousness of the age; and we do not hesitate to say that when, from the vantage height of modern knowledge, they affirm with deep conviction the indestructibleness of the religious sentiment and the everlasting reality of its object, they render a service which, from a religious point of view, can not be overestimated.

Scientific Literature.

SPECIAL BOOKS.

In a stout volume[G] of nearly a thousand pages Mr. _Jackson_, the leader of the Jackson-Harmsworth Polar Expedition of 1894-'97, puts into permanent form the record of three years' observations made in Franz-Josef Land, a region beyond the eightieth parallel of latitude, which was accidentally made known to the world twenty years before by the drift of the Tegethoff, the ill-fated vessel of the Austrian expedition of Payer and Weyprecht. As such it is a substantial contribution to arctic literature, and from it much important detail will be obtained by those seeking further adventure in the quest for the pole, and a mass of material, geographic and otherwise, pertaining to the region which forms the subject of the work before us. The meteorological data, covering as they do a longer continuous period of observation in the extreme North than has heretofore been possible, and fittingly supplementing those recorded by Nansen for an almost equal period, will be specially prized by the scientist, even if the facts of the air are not considered to be the main object of arctic research. It is interesting to note, from the observations on temperature, that the lowest record was only -46° F., the extreme rigor, consequently, being only that of Dakota or Manitoba, and marking nearly fifty degrees above what has been observed a thousand miles farther to the south at Verkhoyansk, in Siberia. Nothing approaching the extreme cold (-72°) noted by Kane and by the Nares British Expedition of 1875-'76 has thus been recorded by Nansen, Peary, or Jackson.

[Footnote G: A Thousand Days in the Arctic. By Frederick G. Jackson, Knight, First Class, of the Royal Order of St. Olaf, etc. New York and London: Harper & Brothers, 1899.]

Mr. Jackson's claims to discovery lie mainly in the field of geography; for, while the observations on zoölogy, botany, and geology are by no means meager or lacking in originality, the results obtained have been largely anticipated by other investigators--notably Payer, Leigh Smith, and Nansen. In the domain of geography, however, there is a distinct contribution, and the author has missed no opportunity to add to the catalogue of geographical names by "rounding up," as it were, the numerous points which appeared new to him or were thought worthy of designation. This diligence in applying names, at times to points or places which are wholly insignificant and which could be followed with equal advantage or disadvantage on most of the known coast lines of either Europe or North America, can hardly be said to detract from the value of the discoveries actually made, although their publication, from advance letters received by Mr. Harmsworth's representative in London, has caused hostile comment and bitter controversy, even on the part of British geographers and scientists. Much of Mr. Jackson's work, it was contended, was directed to demolishing the work of Lieutenant Payer in the same region, and toward substituting names for those given, whether with a correct placing or not, by the Austrian commander--in itself a legitimate undertaking, but heralded out, it was claimed, to mask Mr. Jackson's own failure to accomplish the real task of his expedition--the finding of the north pole. Mr. Jackson has certainly very largely remodeled Payer's map of the archipelago, but the new map in no way discredits the attainments of his predecessor, even though showing up many and even glaring inaccuracies in the cartographical details published by him, for allowance must be made for the limitations under which the Austrian commander made his work. The vital points which have to be eliminated from the geography of Payer are: That Franz-Josef Land is a congeries of no very large islands, without continental extent northward, and that much that has been represented to be land is, in fact, water or ice, the appearance of land in the frozen North being frequently suggested by the vast gray and ill-defined ice masses which loom up in fog and mist, both as flat sheets and mountain buttresses.