Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 17.djvu/444

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
430
THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY.

places as possible is necessary for the sufficient investigation of every earthquake, the commission has taken measures to enlist those persons generally in its own country who are interested in investigations of this kind in coöperation with its work, and is perfecting a special organization for the collection of observations with the aid of such assistants. A special field is assigned to each member of the commission, and he is expected to put himself in communication with persons who may be disposed and competent to aid him in different parts of his district. A tract for distribution has been published under the direction of the commission, which contains a summary of the most recent facts that have been ascertained about earthquakes, and points out the directions in which an increase of knowledge on the subject can be promoted. A number of stations, selected by the commission, are provided with instruments for special observations. The observers are furnished with a schedule of questions respecting the different phases of the earthquakes they may witness, which they are expected to answer as fully as they are able to do. They are also requested to represent the phases of the shock graphically on a chart, where it is possible, to assist in comprehending and reviewing the character of the phenomena. The collected accounts of observations are arranged and preserved in an archive of earthquakes. As the questions concern a subject of general interest, and are useful aids to investigation everywhere, we repeat them entire. They are seventeen in number, as follows: 1. On what day was the earthquake noticed? 2. At what hour? 3. How did your clock agree on the day, or, better, on the hour, of the earthquake, with the nearest telegraph clock? 4. Endeavor to furnish an exact description of the place of observation, the canton, town, situation, whether in the. open or among buildings, in what story of the house; state in what position and what occupation the observer was when the shock was perceived? 5. On what kind of soil does the place of observation stand? Whether the surface be of rock, soil, or peat; depth of the ground to bed-rock, etc.? 6. How many shocks were felt, and during what interval of time? 7. In what direction was the motion? Did it come from below, was it short and in a direction from side to side, or broad, surging in the form of waves, or only a trembling? In case there were more than one shock, was there a difference in the character of the different shocks? With what could the motion be compared, and how did it affect the observer? 8. In what direction was the trembling of the earth felt? 9. How long did the shocks and the subsequent trembling seem to last? 10. What effects did the shaking produce? 11. How might this earthquake be distinguished from others which have previously been noticed by the same observers? 12. Was any noise heard, and, if so, what kind of a noise was it—like thunder, a clinking, a rattling, a clap, or a continuous noise, etc.? 13. Did the noise precede the shaking or follow it, and how long did it last in comparison with the duration of the shocks and of the intervals between them? 14. What particular minor phenomena were observed? Were there, for instance, anything peculiar in the behavior of animals; any drying up, or troubling, or breaking out again of springs; any peculiar rustling in the woods, any gusts of wind simultaneous with the shocks, or abnormal features of the weather? 15. What was noticed with regard to the lakes? 16. Were lighter shocks felt before or after the main shocks, and at what time? 17. Can you mention any other observations made by your acquaintances or in your neighborhood, or can you give the addresses of persons who are able to answer all of these questions, or a part of them?

Precocity a Sign of Inferiority.—M. G. Delaunay, in a communication to the French Société de Biologie, has advanced the opinion that precocity is a sign of biological inferiority. In support of his position he adduces the fact that the lower species develop more rapidly, and are at the same time more precocious, than those higher in the scale. Man is the longest of all in arriving at maturity; and the inferior races of men are more precocious than the superior, as is seen in the children of the Esquimaux, negroes, Cochin-Chinese, Japanese, Arabs, etc., who are, up to a certain age, more vigorous and more intellectual than