China, its land and its people, with which, in the coming years, we shall have increasingly to do. It is our national need of such understanding, rather than a university's need to round out its philological studies or China's supposed need of our aid and benevolence, which should receive primary emphasis. Naturally, as a university, it is our desire to extend to the Chinese in general and Chinese students in particular any educational advantages which are in our power to offer and which they come here to enjoy, but it is clear that our effectiveness in this regard depends both on our attitude and our understanding, and these can not be right unless our knowledge is sound. It should be our business to promote the study of Chinese civilization. In this study, language, literature, art and archaeology will naturally have their places, but the chief places should be given to history, economics, society, government, philosophy and religion. Our Department of Chinese should be a center of reliable information about China and its people, and particularly about China in the more recent years of its history.

In saying all this, I am repeating what will be familiar to you as the substance of conversations which we have had with Professor Porter. So far as the brief period of two years and our too limited resources would allow, he has carried forward such a programme. He visited individuals, institutions, societies, clubs and corporations interested in China. He familiarized himself with the work of other universities in this country. He went to Europe last summer to examine what is done there. The results of his inquiries with recommendations for the future have been embodied in a special report which he has submitted and which has been sent to you in the course of the year. He leaves the department in the hands of his able colleague, Assistant Professor Thomas F. Carter. Work so admirably begun is in need of hearty and liberal support. Without the accumulation of several years in the Dean Lung Fund, Professor Porter's work could not have been done nor could Professor Carter go forward with his present plans. The annual income of the fund is not sufficient for the Department's needs. It is to be hoped

that the progressive spirit which animates its development will receive recognition and support from those who are interested in and able to further our better understanding of China.

Respectfully submitted,

June 30, 1924

FREDERICK J. E. WOODBRIDGE,

Dean

FACULTIES OF POLITICAL SCIENCE,
PHILOSOPHY AND PURE SCIENCE

A REPORT ON RESEARCH IN ZOOLOGY

FOR THE YEARS 1919-1924 INCLUSIVE

Modern Zoology seeks on the one hand to examine the existing forms and functions of living things, on the other to interpret these as the product of an historical process of evolution. In theory these two aims are inseparable, but in practice they often involve widely different aims and methods. At the time the Department of Zoology was first organized, in 1890-91, the main movement of the subject was along the lines of the Darwinian revolution and was in large degree dominated by studies in comparative morphology and phylogeny with direct reference to problems of descent. The original plans for organizaton of the Department were largely influenced by that situation; but even at that time a new movement in Zoology was getting under way which ultimately led to important developments of those plans. It began as a reaction against certain errors and speculative extravagances of the post-Darwinians, and it was largely determined by growing recognition of the fact that under the existing conditions in Zoology a causal analysis of evolution could not profitably be pursued without better understanding of organisms as they now are. It had become evident that the way to such an understanding must be sought in a closer cooperation between Biology, Physics and Chemistry, and in more extensive use of the experimental methods of the exact sciences in biological research. During the nineties these considerations caused a steady drift towards experimental and quantitative researches in Zoology as distinguished from the descriptive-comparative and speculative activities of preceding years. It steadily gained headway

'This report was originally prepared by the Department of Zoology in the form of replies to a series of specific questions formulated by a special Faculty committee appointed to inquire into the present status of research in the University. Since the first draft was not intended for publication, its form has been somewhat altered for the present purpose.

with the rediscovery of Mendel's laws of heredity; with investigations on experimental embryology; with new advances in cytology, including especially the discovery of the fundamental mechanism of heredity and of sex-determination; with experimental studies on the structures and activities of the simplest forms of life; with new researches on cellphysiology in higher forms; and with the rapid extension of experimental methods in other fields of biological inquiry. The development of the Department in advanced teaching and research could not fail to be greatly affected by all this; and its program of work gradually extended accordingly. The net result was a marked expansion of experimental and other analytical methods of inquiry in the departmental activities; but this did not involve any restriction of morphological comparative work. On the contrary, the present work of the Department in these directions will, we believe, compare favorably with that at any earlier period of our history. It is true, regrettably, that Professors Osborn and Dean, both engaged primarily with research in vertebrate morphology, ultimately withdrew from active participation in instruction in the Department in order to concentrate their activities at the American Museum of Natural History. The work thus relinquished has been ably carried forward both at Columbia and at the Museum, while important. advanced instruction in other morphological fields has been continued and developed. The later expansion of research in the Department has been more especially in the experimental study of heredity and genetics, in protozoology and parasitology, and in cytology and experimental embryology. The Department has made every effort to keep its work in close touch with the most modern advances in these various fields.

(1). RESEARCH IN RECENT YEARS

The more important general lines of investigation in these various fields during the past five years, in alphabetical order, include:

A. At the Columbia laboratory or in immediate connection with it: (1). Investigations by Professor R. H. Bowen in Cytology, particularly on the chondriosomes, Golgi-apparatus and other formed components of the protoplasmic cell-system.

(2). The continued experimental studies by Professor G. N. Calkins and his pupils on the structure and life-history of the Protozoa, in particular on senescence, conjugation and the renewal of vitality in these unicellular organisms.

(3). The researches by Professor W. K. Gregory and his pupils on the evolution of the vertebrates, and the artistic and carefully studied reconstructions by Professor J. H. McGregor of the races of primitive

man.

(4). The continued studies by Professor T. H. Morgan, and a group of associates and advanced students under his direction, in Mendelian heredity, involving an extended experimental analysis of the underlying organization of the germ-plasm. Among those prominently associated in these investigations have been especially A. H. Sturtevant, Calvin Bridges, H. J. Muller and Donald C. Lancefield (the latter now Assistant Professor on our staff). For several years past this work has received substantial aid from subsidies granted by the Carnegie Institution of Washington.

(5). Work in cytology by Professor E. B. Wilson and his pupils, continuing earlier investigations on the chromosomes, and on the formed components of the cytoplasm, with especial reference to heredity and the germ-cells.

B. To the foregoing may be added the following which do not belong to the immediate activities of the Department but are technically more or less under its auspices:

(6). The continued zoographical studies by Professor H. E. Crampton of Barnard College on variation, heredity and geographical distribution of the land-snails of the Pacific Islands.

(7). The extended work of Professor Bashford Dean of the American Museum of Natural History (titular Professor of Vertebrate Zoology at Columbia) on a bibliography of fishes, which has been published in three large volumes.

(8). The continued investigations by Henry Fairfield Osborn, President of the American Museum of Natural History, and Research Professor in Columbia University, on vertebrate paleontology and the evolution of man and the higher vertebrates.

The researches indicated in the above outline have been so numerous that it is not possible to review them in much detail. They have been listed from year to year in the University Bibliographies. The following statements will indicate some of their important features.

The unicellular structure and relatively simple differentiations of the Protozoa make them peculiarly suitable for experimental studies on fundamental problems in biology, including especially those involved in the basic activities of protoplasm. Prominent among these are the nature