Science, the knowledge of the vast system of orderly, inexorable activities under which we exist, and of which we, and all that we can apprehend, are but more or less significant parts, is not only to be regarded as a gratification of our curiosity, as food for our imagination, and the basis of our philosophical theories. It is, in addition to these, a thing of unparalleled importance to the immediate daily welfare of every man, woman, and child, and upon its due cultivation and use depend the future welfare, even the existence, of whole races of mankind. It is a startling fact that so few of those who undertake to lead and to legislate for the people of this country have any real conviction, or even a dim understanding of this truth.

In November 1906 a Committee appointed by the Government took evidence as to the desirability of continuing the international investigation of the North Sea, upon which Great Britain entered five years ago in conjunction with other Northern States. Only a few weeks before, a number of scientific experts engaged in this study of the North Sea, with a view to gaining such knowledge of that great “waste of waters” as may help the nations of adjacent lands to draw from it stores of food without destroying the source or recklessly injuring the supply, were entertained at dinner, at the Guildhall, by the City Fathers, and treated to speeches by hereditary legislators. The view expressed by these speakers was that the interests of the great fishing industry and of the fish trade were best understood by the practical fisherman. Science was a “handmaid,” useful in her place, but not to be permitted to undermine established interests and the hoary wisdom of the practical man, her employer. A German expert of high official position, one of the guests, took a different line. He was astonished, even shocked, that Great Britain, the State most largely concerned in the North Sea fisheries, should be hesitating about continuing to take part in the international investigation. In Germany, he said, they took a different course in such matters. Men of business and practical legislators, when called upon to deal with an important problem, sought first of all for scientific knowledge of the conditions in question, as complete and thorough as possible, and then proceeded to act upon the sure foundation gained. More knowledge, much more knowledge as to the causes and conditions at work in regard to the life and movements of fishes in the North Sea was needed. The work of the International Committee must be continued, and his (the German) Government would certainly continue to do its share of the work.

The contrast in the British and the German attitude towards science is what is interesting in this episode. It is true that men of science in this country have to be content to take a very modest part in public affairs, and to allow politicians and self-styled “practical” men to treat science as “a handmaiden”—thankful when science is not regarded as an enemy. But they know well enough, and those who are really “practical men” know, that science is no handmaiden, but in reality the master—the master who must be obeyed; who alone can give true guidance; who alone can save the State. The sooner and the more thoroughly the people of this country have recognised this fact, and insist upon its unqualified acceptance in practice by their representatives and governors, the better for them and their posterity.