until he has learned from his own experience the sources and limits of error in the methods he is to use, just so the student of medicine can not become a good physician until his consciousness is fully awakened to the limitations of the methods he is to use in diagnosis, prognosis and treatment, and to the steps necessary for the safeguarding of the accuracy and the validity of his conclusions.

We have already indicated that the processes of thought needed by the physician in his daily life, i.e., in the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of disease, are the same processes involved in what we have called the scientific method. As a corollary of this it follows that it should be possible to teach the methods and the limitations of medicine on the basis of clinical problems-problems which are not new but which are new to the student. This is undoubtedly true, but it is a matter which requires conscious effort on the part of the teachers. If the student enters the clinic and finds the same attitude toward the problems of medicine which he has heretofore encountered with respect to the problems of physiology; if he finds conclusions arrived at as carefully and as guardedly as in chemistry; if he finds the same attention to the submission of conclusions to critical tests, and to control at autopsy, there is no reason, except the necessity inherent in clinical medicine for frequent immediate action on the basis of rules formulated on the basis of experience, why his clinical training should not give him the same point of view and the same critique which he would acquire through scientific experimentation.

John Stuart Mill, in his "System of Logic,"13 in speaking of the rules of art in general says:

By a wise practitioner rules of conduct will only be considered as provisional. Being made for the most numerous cases, or for those of most ordinary occurrence, they point out the manner in which it will be least perilous to act, where time or means do not exist for analyzing the actual circumstances of the case, or where we can not trust our judgment in estimating them. But they do not at all supersede the propriety of going through (when circumstances permit) the scientific process requisite for framing a rule from the data of the particular case before us.

If the student, on beginning his study of clinical medicine, finds that his teachers, no matter how expert they may be in the art of diagnosis, do, when circumstances permit, go through the scientific process requisite for framing rules from the data of the particular cases before them, he will have the beginning of a sound basis for his career in practice. It is

13 Mill, John Stuart, "System of Logic," Book VI, Chapter XII.

therefore extremely important that the student should have his first contacts with clinical work under anspices where the principles which he has been taught are carried into practice. One of the real weaknesses of medical education has been the carrying on of slipshod methods in dispensaries, and bringing students into their first contact with clinical work in such an atmosphere. As Billroth says:14

The hasty diagnoses and prescriptions in a dispensary furnish the student an opportunity to develop a certain skill in diagnosis and to learn how to make rapid examinations. But this medical routine, which greatly impresses the public and at first the student as well, is only of relative value, and, as the student is sure to learn later, has little worth as scientific training, even though it may make the task of the young doctor easier at the beginning of his practice. Most doctors learn routine all too quickly in the course of their practice; he who begins to acquire it as a student becomes so accustomed to superficial examinations, superficial thinking and superficial treatment, that he is easily spoiled for all serious and penetrative research into a diseased condition. Any quick-thinking person can acquire routine easily and rapidly if he so desires, whereas most persons must be painstakingly trained to careful, meditative, searching thought on the more difficult processes.

The same principle applies of course to the work of the student in the hospital, but fortunately our hospitals have been as a rule much better conducted than our dispensaries. The university's responsibility in this matter, for the dispensaries and hospitals under its control, is clear. The university can go no further with the art of the practice of medicine than to introduce the student to clinical work in order to give him what Cole calls "a final polish by a preceptor system correctly applied." That the preceptor system be correctly applied is of vital importance.

It may appear that the goal in medical education which I have outlined is an impossible one. This is certainly true to the extent that it will, in practice, never be quite attained either by the university or by the student. The success of the university in securing a teaching staff with the requisite vision, energy and patience will be variable, and as to the students, only a few will be able to reap the maximum benefits. But with the goal clearly before it the university should be able to move forward with greater certainty and speed. It should produce better equipped doetors and a greater number of physicians who have their potential capabilities fully developed and who in turn will hasten the conquest of ignorance and superstition.

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

14 Billroth, T., l.c., p. 31.

FRANKLIN C. MCLEAN

CARL H. EIGENMANN

CARL H. EIGENMANN, who died April 24 at Coronado, California, was born in Flehingen, Germany, March 9, 1863. He came to this country when a boy of 17, and located at Rockport, Indiana. Two years later he entered Indiana University, where he graduated in 1886. He remained the next year for graduate study and was given the A.M. degree. He was married to Rosa Smith, of San Diego, California, August 20, 1887, and together they spent the next year at Harvard studying fishes. He was given the Ph.D. degree under Jordan in 1889. The next two. years were spent in collecting fishes for the British Museum in western United States and Canada. He was made professor of zoology at Indiana University in 1891 at the time Jordan left for Stanford. In 1908 when the graduate school was organized, he was made dean. In addition to these positions he was curator of fishes in the Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, from 1909 to 1918. In 1895 he established a freshwater biological station in northern Indiana, and remained as its director until a few years before his death.

In order to collect materials for a study of degenerative evolution in the blind vertebrates, he made expeditions to the cave regions of Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Texas and Cuba. For a study of fishes he made four trips to South America and sent students on other expeditions.

His contributions to zoology number more than 200. His fellow scientists have spoken concerning the worth of these by electing him to membership in the National Academy of Sciences, the American Philosophical Society, and other societies. While most of his contributions were concerned with taxonomic studies of fishes, his interests were not limited to this field. His study on the germ cells of Cymatogaster was a pioneer piece of work on the origin and segregation of these cells in the vertebrates. At the time he established the biological station, his interests were in the field of variation. In fact that was one of his main reasons for starting a station. The rediscovery of Mendelism in 1900 put an end to such studies and he turned to the cave vertebrates. His study of degenerative evolution stands as a monumental piece of work. At that time he was convinced that the Lamarckian principle was a factor in evolution. In later years when the evidence became overwhelming in the opposite direction he generously changed. His studies of the South American fish fauna were planned in his younger days but were not executed until after the completion of his work on cave forms. Perhaps a man who has never worked in this field is not competent to judge such work, but if I were to

venture an opinion, I should say that they place him in the first rank of ichthyologists of all time. It is very unfortunate that he was not permitted to complete the comprehensive studies he had planned and

undertaken.

It is interesting to know that Dr. Eigenmann entered college with the intention of studying Latin and Greek. Uninspiring teachers in these subjects and contact with Jordan turned him toward zoology and particularly the fishes.

While Dr. Eigenmann's main interests were in research and while he spent most of his time and energy in doing research he was an inspiring teacher. This is clearly shown by the many students who have continued to follow zoology as their life-work. Perhaps in the strictly pedagogical sense he was a failure as a teacher because his one fundamental method was to let the student find things for himself. There was often much floundering around and loss of time but if the student finally arrived he knew how he got there and incidentally had learned something about how to get to the next place. His attitude was not one of indifference toward the student but he used this method because he believed it the best. His interest in his students did not end the moment they left him. He always kept their future interests in mind and when vacancies arose he asked for the graduates who could fill the place. Another of his good qualities as a teacher was his confidence in the student. He believed he could cause a student to strive harder to make good by giving him more than he was actually worth than by giving him less than he was worth and applying the prodding iron. He applied the same method to the younger men in his department. He assigned them a task and left them to sink or swim. By this method he showed his confidence in their ability to accomplish results. Here, as with the student, the method worked. As an associate within his department, Dr. Eigenmann was very exceptional. The work was divided and each was expected to do his part without supervision. While he was head of his department things were managed in a democratic way. Seldom was anything done without consultation with his staff. In fact during the last twelve years of his life he took little part in the management of his department. More than this he always lent his help and encouragement in every way possible, particularly for the advancement of research.

As a man he was, as one of his friends once said of him, a human being. With all his intense interest in his work he always had time to talk to a student or a colleague. It is true that the conversation might end in fishes. Always there was a ready wit, a

sparkle in the eye and a good story. These latter qualities made him an interesting lecturer and were valuable aids in the search for funds for his scientific expeditions. He was a man of determination. It was this characteristic which added to his interest and zeal and carried him through the immense amount of work which he did. He was a fighter for what he believed to be the right. This was demonstrated again and again in the working out of university problems.

I think it should also be said that while on his scientific expeditions to South America and Cuba he always tried to further the friendly relations of those countries and the United States and, I think, to some extent succeeded.

INDIANA UNIVERSITY,

BLOOMINGTON

FERNANDUS PAYNE

THE death of Dr. Carl H. Eigenmann removes one of the most eminent workers in the field of systematic zoology and one of the ablest of natural history teachers, withal the most tireless of explorers.

He was born at Flehingen, Germany, in 1863. In 1865 he came to Rockport, southern Indiana, with an immigrant uncle, and worked his way upward to the State University of Indiana, when he proposed to study law. In his second year in college the old classical course was modified, and students in sophomore Latin were allowed to substitute natural science for the required subject. To the surprise of the professor of Latin it was his best and not the weakest students who took advantage of this breach of tradition. Of these, Carl Eigenmann was the leader. His work was of the highest order, and he soon adopted ichthyology as his specialty, becoming later instructor in zoology under Dr. Jordan; and when Dr. Jordan, with Professor Gilbert, left Indiana in 1891 for Stanford University, he appointed Eigenmann professor of zoology, which position he held for the rest of his life, becoming later dean of the graduate school.

In Indiana, Eigenmann was a vigorous and inspiring teacher of science, leading many of his students to do original work.

He soon carried out on a large scale a detailed exploration of the prodigious fish fauna of the Amazon and ultimately of the other rivers of Brazil. His collections of fishes from this region soon outnumbered all others put together. Before returning to Indiana, Eigenmann was curator of fishes in the California Academy of Sciences and later in the Museum of San Diego. In that city he married Rosa Smith, a fellow student in Indiana, and the author of some notable papers on fishes. In 1888 his great series of papers on Brazilian fishes was begun at

Harvard University where he was enabled to study the enormous and not exaggerated collections made by Professor Agassiz. This paper and seven others, mostly on Brazilian materials, were joint products of himself and his wife, being recorded as "Eigenmann and Eigenmann." On his return as instructor to Indiana a number of reviews of leading families of fishes were published by Jordan and Eigenmann. In 1894, his personal explorations in Brazil began, t be continued as time and funds permitted for the next twenty years. In this work various students assisted. A remarkable feature was the fact that he never failed to receive offers of help from business men who found out what he was trying to do. He made apparently little effort to get such help, bat as in Agassiz's case, there were men "not willing to see so brave a man struggle without aid." A reason for such assistance lay in Eigenmann's plain, unaffected earnestness, and the total absence of any disposition to pose.

By 1904, the work of exploration was well under way and in 1908 it was taken up and supported by the Carnegie Museum at Pittsburgh, when Eigenmann, without leaving the faculty of Indiana, became curator of fishes, adding hundreds of species to the treasures of that museum. This relation was maintained until about 1922. In all, 155 new genera were defined by Eigenmann and his students, 35 by Eigenmann and Eigenmann, and 5 by Jordan and Eigenmann, making a total of 195 new genera, containing about 600 species. Eigenmann's technical papers number upwards of 170. One of the most important is the study of the blind cave-fishes of North Ameries. Of most of the scientific societies of this country be was a member.

Eigenmann was an excellent teacher, a clear-eyed observer, with persistence and energy of the highest rank. Plain and direct, genial and kindly in all his relations, though with no special effort at elegance. he held the affection and respect of his colleagues and students.

In stature, Eigenmann was of medium height. stoutly built and of sturdy, though not distinguished appearance. He enjoyed robust health until his last two years, when he was somewhat broken as a result of mosquito-borne fevers of the torrid zone. His wife and four children, three sons and one daughter, survive him.

DAVID STARR JORDAN

SCIENTIFIC EVENTS

INSTITUTE OF PACIFIC RELATIONS IN the summer of 1925, one hundred and forty unofficial representatives from eight countries met

in Honolulu for a consideration of the racial, political, economic and social problems of interest to nations bordering the Pacific. The apparent cultural conflict between the East and the West was frankly discussed. The conference came to more than one impasse but succeeded in opening windows nto new racial backgrounds. The meetings were given over wholly to fact finding; the main Pacific ssues were defined but no solutions were offered. It was realized that present knowledge of Pacific peoples and natural resources is quite inadequate for intelligent conclusions regarding desirable commercial and cultural relations. With a view to gaining fuller Knowledge the representatives of the conference organized the Institute of Pacific Relations.

The institute is an unofficial body with constituent branches in seven of the countries in and bordering the Pacific Ocean, organized under an international council with headquarters in Hawaii.

The institute aims to serve in the field of social sciences in the Pacific much as the Pacific Science Association serves in the field of pure science. A practical liaison is effected between the two bodies through the presence of some of the same officers on the executives of both bodies and the recognition of the supplementary rôle that they play in the Pacific.

Its purpose is to provide a means for the interchange of opinion and discussion of the chief conflicting issues of the Pacific area, by the assembling of data to throw light upon them and to bring such lata and other pertinent information to the attention of the people of the various countries.

For carrying out its aims the institute provides for (a) biennial conferences, at which selected represenatives appointed by the participating branches meet for discussion; (b) research into questions of mutual concern of the Pacific peoples, such as food-supply, population, immigration, and culture conflicts, carried on by groups of specialists in the various branches; (e) interchange of research findings and more general facts bearing upon Pacific relationships aimed it increasing the understanding of the peoples of his area of one another.

The National Councils of the Institute command 10table leadership, viz., Sir Mungo McCallum, vicehancellor of the University of Sydney, for Ausralia; Sir Robert L. Borden, for Canada; Dr. David Yui, for China; Hon. Junnosuke Inouye, former inance minister, for Japan; Sir James Allen, retirng commissioner to London, for New Zealand; Mr. F. C. Atherton, for Hawaii; and the late President Ray Lyman Wilbur, of Stanford University, for the United States. These branch officers constitute the Pacific Council, which is the governing body of the nstitute. President Wilbur was chairman of this

council for the period 1925-1927. Associated with these leaders in each national group are outstanding representatives of the universities, the press, business, labor, and social and religious activities.

The National Social Science Research Council of America is cooperating with the American branch of the institute through a committee on international research created especially for this purpose. Dr. James T. Shotwell, of Columbia University, is chairman of this committee.

Preparations are well advanced for the second conference of the institute, which will be held in Honolulu, July 15-29, 1927. In addition to notable delegations from the seven constituent branches, representatives are expected to attend from England and several of the chief island groups of the Pacific. The agenda will include such topics as food supply, population, immigration, effects of entrance of Western culture into Asia, race prejudice, communications, industry, labor, standards of living, and international finance and education.

The institute issues monthly a News Bulletin as a medium of exchange of information and news related to its field.

Mr. Frank C. Atherton is chairman of the central executive committee in Hawaii. The address of the Central Secretariat is McCandless Building, Honolulu.

AWARD OF PRIZES BY THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION FOR SCIENTIFIC EXHIBITS

THE Committee on awards of the American Medical Association, consisting of Drs. P. M. Hickey, Guy C. Lane, Phillip Marvel, Dallis P. Phemister and Ludwig Hektoen, chairman, have made the following awards for exhibits and demonstrations made at the recent meeting of the association in Washington:

Gold Medal:

To F. W. HARTMAN, ADOLPH BOLLIGER and H. P. DOUB, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, for the great significance and excellence of presentation of exhibit on cardiodrenal and cardiac studies, illustrated with specimens showing heart and kidney lesions produced by deep roentgen rays.

Silver Medals:

TO CHEVALIER JACKSON, Philadelphia, for exhibit showing household accidents to children, and their prevention.

TO HIDEYO NOGUCHI, Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, for exhibit illustrating studies of Oroya fever; verruga peruana and trachoma.

Bronze Medals:

TO VILRAY P. BLAIR, St. Louis, for an exhibit on

plastic surgery, dealing with the retracted upper lip and

nose.

To W. M. JAMES, L. B. BATES, L. GETZ and J. J. VALLARINO, Medical Association of the Isthmian Canal Zone from the Ancon, Santa Tomas and Panama Hospitals, for an exhibit illustrating the diagnosis, etiology and pathology of infection with E. histolytica.

Certificates of Merit:

To H. J. CORPER, National Jewish Hospital for Consumptives, Denver, for an exhibit illustrating the cultivation of tubercle bacilli and the organic reaction to tuberculosis.

TO HOWARD Fox, New York, for an exhibit on the fungus diseases of the skin and the excellence of demonstration.

To A. H. MCINDOE and V. S. COUNSELLOR, Mayo Clinic, Mayo Foundation, Rochester, Minn., for an exhibit illustrating pathologic conditions of the liver in corrosion specimens.

TO BERNARD H. NICHOLS, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, for roentgenographic exhibit illustrating normal and abnormal positions of the aorta.

TO ERNEST SCOTT and R. A. MOORE, Ohio State University, Columbus, for exhibit illustrating pathologic anatomy of the kidney.

TO BENJAMIN TERRY, Nashville, for exhibit of a new stain and method in tissue microscopy and excellence of demonstration.

The committee also gives honorable mention to the following:

FLORENCE E. AHLFELDT, Philadelphia, for exhibit illustrating coccidioidal granuloma.

ATHUR J. BEDELL, Albany, for exhibit of photographs of the living eye.

JANET CALDWELL and GEORGE T. CALDWELL, Dallas, for exhibit illustrating bacteriophage.

C. L. KARRENBERG, Hamburg, Germany, for exhibit illustrating fungi and fungus diseases as met in Europe.

THE NATIONAL MUSEUM OF ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRY

THE National Museum of Engineering and Industry held its third annual meeting at its headquarters in the Engineering Societies Building, New York City, on Thursday afternoon, April 28.

Preliminary to the meeting the members tendered a luncheon at the adjoining Engineers Club to the presidents and secretaries of the following societies. who were represented on its board of trustees:

American Society of Civil Engineers

American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers

American Society of Mechanical Engineers