War of words: The public science of the British scientific community and the origins of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, 1914-16

British Journal for the History of Science

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 461-481

  Hull, Andrew ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0011597404     PISSN: 00070874     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0007087499003775     Document Type: Article

References (102)

1. Keith Vernon, 'Science and technology' in The First World War in British History (ed. K. Constantine and M. B. Rose), London, 1995, 81-105, 94.
2. F. M. Turner, 'Public science in Britain, 1880-1919', Isis (1980), 71, 589-608.
3. Turner, op. cit. (2), 589.
4. Turner, op. cit. (2), 592.
5. Turner, op. cit. (2), 592.
6. The classics here include Donald Cardwell, The Organisation of Science in England, London, 1957; 'Science and World War One', Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (1975), Series A, 342, 447-56; Hilary and Steven Rose, Science and Society, Harmondsworth, 1970; J. B. Poole and Kay Andrews (eds.), The Government of Science in Britain, London, 1972; Ian Varcoe, 'Scientists, Government and organised research in Great Britain 1914-16: the early history of the DSIR', Minerva, (1970), 8, 192-216; Roy and Kay MacLeod, 'The social relations of science and technology, 1914-1939', in The Fontana Economic History of Europe (Vol. V): The Twentieth Century (Part 1) (ed. C. M. Cipolla), Glasgow, 1976, 301-63.
7. The classics here include Donald Cardwell, The Organisation of Science in England, London, 1957; 'Science and World War One', Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (1975), Series A, 342, 447-56; Hilary and Steven Rose, Science and Society, Harmondsworth, 1970; J. B. Poole and Kay Andrews (eds.), The Government of Science in Britain, London, 1972; Ian Varcoe, 'Scientists, Government and organised research in Great Britain 1914-16: the early history of the DSIR', Minerva, (1970), 8, 192-216; Roy and Kay MacLeod, 'The social relations of science and technology, 1914-1939', in The Fontana Economic History of Europe (Vol. V): The Twentieth Century (Part 1) (ed. C. M. Cipolla), Glasgow, 1976, 301-63.
8. The classics here include Donald Cardwell, The Organisation of Science in England, London, 1957; 'Science and World War One', Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (1975), Series A, 342, 447-56; Hilary and Steven Rose, Science and Society, Harmondsworth, 1970; J. B. Poole and Kay Andrews (eds.), The Government of Science in Britain, London, 1972; Ian Varcoe, 'Scientists, Government and organised research in Great Britain 1914-16: the early history of the DSIR', Minerva, (1970), 8, 192-216; Roy and Kay MacLeod, 'The social relations of science and technology, 1914-1939', in The Fontana Economic History of Europe (Vol. V): The Twentieth Century (Part 1) (ed. C. M. Cipolla), Glasgow, 1976, 301-63.
9. The classics here include Donald Cardwell, The Organisation of Science in England, London, 1957; 'Science and World War One', Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (1975), Series A, 342, 447-56; Hilary and Steven Rose, Science and Society, Harmondsworth, 1970; J. B. Poole and Kay Andrews (eds.), The Government of Science in Britain, London, 1972; Ian Varcoe, 'Scientists, Government and organised research in Great Britain 1914-16: the early history of the DSIR', Minerva, (1970), 8, 192-216; Roy and Kay MacLeod, 'The social relations of science and technology, 1914-1939', in The Fontana Economic History of Europe (Vol. V): The Twentieth Century (Part 1) (ed. C. M. Cipolla), Glasgow, 1976, 301-63.
10. The classics here include Donald Cardwell, The Organisation of Science in England, London, 1957; 'Science and World War One', Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (1975), Series A, 342, 447-56; Hilary and Steven Rose, Science and Society, Harmondsworth, 1970; J. B. Poole and Kay Andrews (eds.), The Government of Science in Britain, London, 1972; Ian Varcoe, 'Scientists, Government and organised research in Great Britain 1914-16: the early history of the DSIR', Minerva, (1970), 8, 192-216; Roy and Kay MacLeod, 'The social relations of science and technology, 1914-1939', in The Fontana Economic History of Europe (Vol. V): The Twentieth Century (Part 1) (ed. C. M. Cipolla), Glasgow, 1976, 301-63.
11. The classics here include Donald Cardwell, The Organisation of Science in England, London, 1957; 'Science and World War One', Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (1975), Series A, 342, 447-56; Hilary and Steven Rose, Science and Society, Harmondsworth, 1970; J. B. Poole and Kay Andrews (eds.), The Government of Science in Britain, London, 1972; Ian Varcoe, 'Scientists, Government and organised research in Great Britain 1914-16: the early history of the DSIR', Minerva, (1970), 8, 192-216; Roy and Kay MacLeod, 'The social relations of science and technology, 1914-1939', in The Fontana Economic History of Europe (Vol. V): The Twentieth Century (Part 1) (ed. C. M. Cipolla), Glasgow, 1976, 301-63.
12. Peter Alter, The Reluctant Patron: Science and the State in Britain, 1850-1920, Oxford, 1987; Vernon, op. cit. (1).
13. Peter Alter, The Reluctant Patron: Science and the State in Britain, 1850-1920, Oxford, 1987; Vernon, op. cit. (1).
14. Turner, op. cit. (2), 592.
15. The few existing accounts of military/naval research largely concentrate on the new bodies through which civilian scientists entered the machinery of government. See, for example, Roy MacLeod and E. Kay Andrews, 'Scientific advice in the war at sea, 1915-1917: the Board of Invention and Research', Journal of Contemporary History (1971), 6, 3-40; Michael Pattison, 'Scientists, inventors and the military in Britain, 1915-19: the Munitions Inventions Department', Social Studies of Science (1983), 13, 521-68; Steve Sturdy, 'From the trenches to the hospitals at home: physiologists, clinicians and oxygen therapy', in Medical Innovations in Historical Perspective (ed. J. V. Pickstone), (London, 1992), 104-23; Roy MacLeod, 'The chemists go to war: the mobilization of civilian chemists and the British war effort, 1914-18', Annals of Science (1993), 50, 455-81. However, some accounts do explore the development of science in the services, as well as looking at the wartime relations with civilian science. On this see, for example, L. F. Haber, The Poisonous Cloud: Chemical Warfare in the First World War, Oxford, 1986; and Guy Hartcup, The War of Invention: Scientific Developments, 1914-18, London, 1988.
16. The few existing accounts of military/naval research largely concentrate on the new bodies through which civilian scientists entered the machinery of government. See, for example, Roy MacLeod and E. Kay Andrews, 'Scientific advice in the war at sea, 1915-1917: the Board of Invention and Research', Journal of Contemporary History (1971), 6, 3-40; Michael Pattison, 'Scientists, inventors and the military in Britain, 1915-19: the Munitions Inventions Department', Social Studies of Science (1983), 13, 521-68; Steve Sturdy, 'From the trenches to the hospitals at home: physiologists, clinicians and oxygen therapy', in Medical Innovations in Historical Perspective (ed. J. V. Pickstone), (London, 1992), 104-23; Roy MacLeod, 'The chemists go to war: the mobilization of civilian chemists and the British war effort, 1914-18', Annals of Science (1993), 50, 455-81. However, some accounts do explore the development of science in the services, as well as looking at the wartime relations with civilian science. On this see, for example, L. F. Haber, The Poisonous Cloud: Chemical Warfare in the First World War, Oxford, 1986; and Guy Hartcup, The War of Invention: Scientific Developments, 1914-18, London, 1988.
17. The few existing accounts of military/naval research largely concentrate on the new bodies through which civilian scientists entered the machinery of government. See, for example, Roy MacLeod and E. Kay Andrews, 'Scientific advice in the war at sea, 1915-1917: the Board of Invention and Research', Journal of Contemporary History (1971), 6, 3-40; Michael Pattison, 'Scientists, inventors and the military in Britain, 1915-19: the Munitions Inventions Department', Social Studies of Science (1983), 13, 521-68; Steve Sturdy, 'From the trenches to the hospitals at home: physiologists, clinicians and oxygen therapy', in Medical Innovations in Historical Perspective (ed. J. V. Pickstone), (London, 1992), 104-23; Roy MacLeod, 'The chemists go to war: the mobilization of civilian chemists and the British war effort, 1914-18', Annals of Science (1993), 50, 455-81. However, some accounts do explore the development of science in the services, as well as looking at the wartime relations with civilian science. On this see, for example, L. F. Haber, The Poisonous Cloud: Chemical Warfare in the First World War, Oxford, 1986; and Guy Hartcup, The War of Invention: Scientific Developments, 1914-18, London, 1988.
18. The few existing accounts of military/naval research largely concentrate on the new bodies through which civilian scientists entered the machinery of government. See, for example, Roy MacLeod and E. Kay Andrews, 'Scientific advice in the war at sea, 1915-1917: the Board of Invention and Research', Journal of Contemporary History (1971), 6, 3-40; Michael Pattison, 'Scientists, inventors and the military in Britain, 1915-19: the Munitions Inventions Department', Social Studies of Science (1983), 13, 521-68; Steve Sturdy, 'From the trenches to the hospitals at home: physiologists, clinicians and oxygen therapy', in Medical Innovations in Historical Perspective (ed. J. V. Pickstone), (London, 1992), 104-23; Roy MacLeod, 'The chemists go to war: the mobilization of civilian chemists and the British war effort, 1914-18', Annals of Science (1993), 50, 455-81. However, some accounts do explore the development of science in the services, as well as looking at the wartime relations with civilian science. On this see, for example, L. F. Haber, The Poisonous Cloud: Chemical Warfare in the First World War, Oxford, 1986; and Guy Hartcup, The War of Invention: Scientific Developments, 1914-18, London, 1988.
19. The few existing accounts of military/naval research largely concentrate on the new bodies through which civilian scientists entered the machinery of government. See, for example, Roy MacLeod and E. Kay Andrews, 'Scientific advice in the war at sea, 1915-1917: the Board of Invention and Research', Journal of Contemporary History (1971), 6, 3-40; Michael Pattison, 'Scientists, inventors and the military in Britain, 1915-19: the Munitions Inventions Department', Social Studies of Science (1983), 13, 521-68; Steve Sturdy, 'From the trenches to the hospitals at home: physiologists, clinicians and oxygen therapy', in Medical Innovations in Historical Perspective (ed. J. V. Pickstone), (London, 1992), 104-23; Roy MacLeod, 'The chemists go to war: the mobilization of civilian chemists and the British war effort, 1914-18', Annals of Science (1993), 50, 455-81. However, some accounts do explore the development of science in the services, as well as looking at the wartime relations with civilian science. On this see, for example, L. F. Haber, The Poisonous Cloud: Chemical Warfare in the First World War, Oxford, 1986; and Guy Hartcup, The War of Invention: Scientific Developments, 1914-18, London, 1988.
20. The few existing accounts of military/naval research largely concentrate on the new bodies through which civilian scientists entered the machinery of government. See, for example, Roy MacLeod and E. Kay Andrews, 'Scientific advice in the war at sea, 1915-1917: the Board of Invention and Research', Journal of Contemporary History (1971), 6, 3-40; Michael Pattison, 'Scientists, inventors and the military in Britain, 1915-19: the Munitions Inventions Department', Social Studies of Science (1983), 13, 521-68; Steve Sturdy, 'From the trenches to the hospitals at home: physiologists, clinicians and oxygen therapy', in Medical Innovations in Historical Perspective (ed. J. V. Pickstone), (London, 1992), 104-23; Roy MacLeod, 'The chemists go to war: the mobilization of civilian chemists and the British war effort, 1914-18', Annals of Science (1993), 50, 455-81. However, some accounts do explore the development of science in the services, as well as looking at the wartime relations with civilian science. On this see, for example, L. F. Haber, The Poisonous Cloud: Chemical Warfare in the First World War, Oxford, 1986; and Guy Hartcup, The War of Invention: Scientific Developments, 1914-18, London, 1988.
21. See David Edgerton, 'Liberal militarism and the British State', New Left Review (1991), 185, 138-69.
22. For more on this see A. Hull, 'Passwords to power: a public rationale for expert influence on central Government policy-making: British scientists and economists, c. 1900-c. 1925', Ph.D. thesis, University of Glasgow, 1994, Chapter 2.
23. Roy and Kay MacLeod, op. cit. (9).
24. See Roy and Kay MacLeod, 'The origins of the DSIR: reflections on ideas and men, 1915-16', Public Administration (1970), 48, 23-48.
25. See Roy MacLeod, 'Science and the Treasury: personalities and policies, 1870-85', in The Patronage of Science in the Nineteenth Century (ed. G. L.'E. Turner), Leiden, 1976; and R. MacLeod and Peter Collins (eds.), The Parliament of Science: The British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1831-1981, Northwood, 1981, passim.
26. See Roy MacLeod, 'Science and the Treasury: personalities and policies, 1870-85', in The Patronage of Science in the Nineteenth Century (ed. G. L.'E. Turner), Leiden, 1976; and R. MacLeod and Peter Collins (eds.), The Parliament of Science: The British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1831-1981, Northwood, 1981, passim.
27. See Roy and Kay MacLeod, op. cit. (13); MacLeod and Collins, op. cit. (14); and especially R. MacLeod, 'Into the twentieth century', Nature (1969), 224, 457-61, and 'Science for imperial efficiency and social change: reflections on the British Science Guild, 1905-1936', Public Understanding of Science (1994), 3, 155-93.
28. See Roy and Kay MacLeod, op. cit. (13); MacLeod and Collins, op. cit. (14); and especially R. MacLeod, 'Into the twentieth century', Nature (1969), 224, 457-61, and 'Science for imperial efficiency and social change: reflections on the British Science Guild, 1905-1936', Public Understanding of Science (1994), 3, 155-93.
29. See Roy and Kay MacLeod, op. cit. (13); MacLeod and Collins, op. cit. (14); and especially R. MacLeod, 'Into the twentieth century', Nature (1969), 224, 457-61, and 'Science for imperial efficiency and social change: reflections on the British Science Guild, 1905-1936', Public Understanding of Science (1994), 3, 155-93.
30. See Roy and Kay MacLeod, op. cit. (13); MacLeod and Collins, op. cit. (14); and especially R. MacLeod, 'Into the twentieth century', Nature (1969), 224, 457-61, and 'Science for imperial efficiency and social change: reflections on the British Science Guild, 1905-1936', Public Understanding of Science (1994), 3, 155-93.
31. Roy MacLeod, Public Science and Public Policy in Victorian England, Aldershot, 1996, p. xiii, (the quotation is from Turner). Notice how he borrows Turner's concept for part of his title, without fully understanding it.
32. Lockyer formally handed over the editorship to Gregory on 6 November 1919, but the younger man had exercised increasing control since 1915. See W. H. G. Armytage, Sir Richard Gregory: His Life and Work, London, 1957. Gregory was knighted in 1919.
33. Sir William Osler, 'Science and war', address to the Leeds Medical School, 1915, as reported in Nature (December 16 1915), 96, 431-3, 431. For a discussion of the uses made of the concept of scientific method in public science, mainly in the nineteenth century, see Richard Yeo, 'Scientific method and the rhetoric of science in Britain, 1830-1917', in The Politics and Rhetoric of Scientific Method (Historical Studies) (ed. R. Yeo and J. A. Schuster), Dordrecht, 1986, 259-97.
34. Sir William Osler, 'Science and war', address to the Leeds Medical School, 1915, as reported in Nature (December 16 1915), 96, 431-3, 431. For a discussion of the uses made of the concept of scientific method in public science, mainly in the nineteenth century, see Richard Yeo, 'Scientific method and the rhetoric of science in Britain, 1830-1917', in The Politics and Rhetoric of Scientific Method (Historical Studies) (ed. R. Yeo and J. A. Schuster), Dordrecht, 1986, 259-97.
35. 'Defects and remedies', anonymous editorial. Nature (February 10 1916), 96, 643-4, 644.
36. 'Scientific research and the chemical industry', anonymous leading editorial, Nature (30 December 1916), 96, 475-6, 476. My emphasis.
37. 'Science and the state', unsigned editorial (by William Ramsay), Nature (October 29 1914), 94, 221-2, 221.
38. Addison wrote in his diary on 3 May 1915 that the Royal Society was 'highly delighted with the news'. From C. Addison, Four and a Half Years, London, 1934, 74, from MacLeod and MacLeod, op. cit. (13), 30.
39. Addison wrote in his diary on 3 May 1915 that the Royal Society was 'highly delighted with the news'. From C. Addison, Four and a Half Years, London, 1934, 74, from MacLeod and MacLeod, op. cit. (13), 30.
40. 'The Government and chemical research', anonymous article in Nature (13 May 1915), 95, 295-6.
41. [Anon.], 'An advisory council on industrial research', Nature (20 May 1915), 95, 321-7, 322. The article reproduced much of the Commons debate referring to the ACSIR from Hansard, Parliamentary Debates, 5th Series, 71, No. 52.
42. [Anon.], 'An advisory council on industrial research', Nature (20 May 1915), 95, 321-7, 322. The article reproduced much of the Commons debate referring to the ACSIR from Hansard, Parliamentary Debates, 5th Series, 71, No. 52.
43. 'An advisory council', op. cit. (24), 323.
44. William Ramsay, 'Science and the state', leading article in Nature (20 May 1915), 95, 309-11.
45. Ramsay, op. cit. (26), 310.
46. Ramsay, op. cit. (26), 310-11.
47. Ramsay, op. cit. (26), 311.
48. All quotations from an anonymous letter to Nature (20 May 1915), 95, 315-17. My emphasis.
49. Details taken from a brief discussion of the wartime organization of the Royal Society in M. Teich, 'Science and food during the Great War: Britain and Germany', in The Science and Culture of Nutrition, 1840-1940 (ed. H. Kamminga and A. Cunningham), Amsterdam, 1995, 213-34.
50. Sturdy, op. cit. (9).
51. Hull, op. cit. (11), Chapter 4; see also David Smith, 'Nutrition science and the two World Wars', in Nutrition in Britain: Science, Scientists and Politics in the Twentieth Century (ed. D. Smith), London, 1997, 142-65.
52. Hull, op. cit. (11), Chapter 4; see also David Smith, 'Nutrition science and the two World Wars', in Nutrition in Britain: Science, Scientists and Politics in the Twentieth Century (ed. D. Smith), London, 1997, 142-65.
53. Gregory had apparently met Armstrong at the BAAS Liverpool meeting in 1896, and the two were promoters of the establishment of a new section to deal with science in education. Armytage, op. cit. (17), 32.
54. H. E. Armstrong, letter to The Times, 21 June 1915, 'The organization of science', 9.
55. All quotations above from Armstrong, op. cit. (35).
56. H. E. Armstrong, 'The development and control of industry by public influences', Address to the AGM of the Society of Chemical Industry, Manchester, 15 July 1915, as reported in Chemical News (13 August 1915), 112, 75-9, 75.
57. Armstrong, op. cit. (37), 78. Original emphasis.
58. Armstrong, op. cit. (37), 79.
59. Armstrong, op. cit. (37), 79.
60. J. A. Fleming, 'Science in the war and after the war' an introductory lecture at University College, London, 6 October 1915, as reported in Nature (14 October 1915), 96, 180-5.
61. R. Ross, 'The organisation of science', letter to Nature (1915-16), 96, 536.
62. On this see Hyman Levy, Modern Science: A Study of Physical Science in the World Today, London, 1939, 95. See also Gary Werskey, 'The visible college: a study of left-wing scientists in Britain, 1918-1939', Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, 1973, The Visible College, London, 1978, and 'British scientists and "outsider" politics, 1931-45', Science Studies (1971), 1, 67-83; and MacLeod and MacLeod, op. cit. (6).
63. On this see Hyman Levy, Modern Science: A Study of Physical Science in the World Today, London, 1939, 95. See also Gary Werskey, 'The visible college: a study of left-wing scientists in Britain, 1918-1939', Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, 1973, The Visible College, London, 1978, and 'British scientists and "outsider" politics, 1931-45', Science Studies (1971), 1, 67-83; and MacLeod and MacLeod, op. cit. (6).
64. On this see Hyman Levy, Modern Science: A Study of Physical Science in the World Today, London, 1939, 95. See also Gary Werskey, 'The visible college: a study of left-wing scientists in Britain, 1918-1939', Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, 1973, The Visible College, London, 1978, and 'British scientists and "outsider" politics, 1931-45', Science Studies (1971), 1, 67-83; and MacLeod and MacLeod, op. cit. (6).
65. On this see Hyman Levy, Modern Science: A Study of Physical Science in the World Today, London, 1939, 95. See also Gary Werskey, 'The visible college: a study of left-wing scientists in Britain, 1918-1939', Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, 1973, The Visible College, London, 1978, and 'British scientists and "outsider" politics, 1931-45', Science Studies (1971), 1, 67-83; and MacLeod and MacLeod, op. cit. (6).
66. H. G. Wells, letter to The Times, 11 June 1915. Cited here from Poole and Andrews, op. cit. (6), 63.
67. H. G. Wells, letter to The Times, 11 June 1915. Cited here from Poole and Andrews, op. cit. (6), 63.
68. 'The mobilisation of science', anonymous leading editorial, Nature (17 June 1915), 95, 419-20, 419.
69. As well as Armstrong's letter of 21 June noted above, op. cit. (35), these included letters to The Times from Philip Magnus (12 June 1915); Professor J. Fleming (15 June); E. H. Griffiths of University College, Cardiff (16 June); F. Greedy (19 June); Patrick Geddes of University College, Dundee (24 June); Henry E. Roscoe (5 August); and from Armstrong again (9 August).
70. W. Ramsay, 'The national organisation of science', address to ninth Annual Meeting of the British Science Guild, Journal of the British Science Guild (September 1915), 1, 13. My emphasis.
71. Ramsay, op. cit. (47).
72. Ramsay, op. cit. (47), 14.
73. Both quotations, Ramsay, op. cit. (47), 15.
74. Ramsay, op. cit. (47).
75. Quoted from Varcoe, op. cit. (6), 206.
76. 'Government Scheme for the Organisation of Scientific and Industrial Research', Cd. 8005, as reprinted in Nature (1915), 95, 604-5. In May 1916 the Colonial Secretary was added. In September 1916 Arthur Henderson, and in February 1917 the Marquis of Crewe were also added.
77. 'Government', op. cit. (53), 604.
78. 'Government', op. cit. (53), 604.
79. 'Government', op. cit. (53), 605.
80. Henry Frank Heath (1869-1946), academic and scientific administrator. Professor of English, Bedford College, 1890-96; Academic Registrar of London University, 1901-03; Director of Special Inquiries and Reports, Board of Education, 1903-16; in charge of Universities Branch, 1910-16; Member of the Treasury Advisory Committee of University and University College Grants, 1909-11; First Secretary, ACSIR, 1915-27. KCB, 1917. DNB.
81. Rayleigh was the most distingushed contemporary mathematician and physicist. He was co-discoverer with Ramsay of argon; Cavendish Professor of Experimental Physics at Cambridge, 1873-84; and Secretary of the Royal Society, 1884-95. He became President of the Executive Committee of the National Physical Laboratory in 1898, President of the Royal Society in 1905 and Chancellor of Cambridge University in 1908. Beilby, a graduate of Edinburgh University, was an industrial chemist and Chairman of the Royal Technical College, Glasgow; Duddell was a consulting engineer, had been President of the Institution of Electrical Engineers and was a member of the Admiralty Board of Invention and Research; McClelland held the Chair of Experimental Physics at University College, Dublin; Hopkinson was Professor of Applied Mechanics at Cambridge; Meldola was at Finsbury Technical College, had been President of the Chemical Society in 1907 and was expert in the chemistry of dyes; Threlfall was an engineer and manufacturing chemist. DNB.
82. The engineer and founder of a marine steam turbine manufacturing firm, Sir Charles A. Parsons was appointed on the retirement of Hopkinson and Professor J. F. Thorpe, Professor of Organic Chemistry at Imperial College, on the death of Meldola.
83. William Syminton (later Sir William) McCormick (1869-1930), scholar and administrator. Professor of English Literature at University College, Dundee, 1890; first Secretary of the Carnegie Trust for Scotland, 1901; Chairman of the University Grants Committee from 1919. Knighted 1911, FRS, 1928. DNB.
84. 'The British Science Guild', R. B. Haldane's presidential address to the British Science Guild, Nature, (1905-6) 73, 11-13.
85. 'The promotion of research by the state', Nature (5 August 1915), 95, 619-20, 620.
86. 'Report of the Committee of the Privy Council for Scientific and Industrial Research for the year 1915-16', Cd. 8336, 1916, 19.
87. R. Gregory, 'Science in national affairs', unsigned leading editorial, Nature (21 October 1915), 96, 195-7; The information that this was indeed by Gregory comes not only from the style and subject matter, but also from Armyrage, op. cit. (17), 68.
88. R. Gregory, 'Science in national affairs', unsigned leading editorial, Nature (21 October 1915), 96, 195-7; The information that this was indeed by Gregory comes not only from the style and subject matter, but also from Armyrage, op. cit. (17), 68.
89. Gregory, op. cit. (64), 195.
90. Gregory, op. cit. (64), 195.
91. W. Ramsay, 'The scientific organisation of industries', Nature (30 December 1915), 96, 480-1, 481. Original emphasis.
92. 'A hoped-for revolution in Britain', editorial by R. Ross, in 'Notes', section of Science Progress (July 1915), No. 37, 151-3, 152-3.
93. See for example E. B. Poulton (Hope Professor of Zoology at Oxford), Science and the Great War, Oxford, 1915, 4, 22-3 and 31. See also 'Science and Government', his Third Galton Lecture to the Eugenics Education Society, 16 February 1916, Nature (24 February 1916), 96, 717-18.
94. See for example E. B. Poulton (Hope Professor of Zoology at Oxford), Science and the Great War, Oxford, 1915, 4, 22-3 and 31. See also 'Science and Government', his Third Galton Lecture to the Eugenics Education Society, 16 February 1916, Nature (24 February 1916), 96, 717-18.
95. For full biographical details, see W. J. O'Connor, British Physiologists, 1885-1914: A Biographical Dictionary, Manchester, 1991, 135-9.
96. Letter from William Maddock Bayliss, 23 October 1915, published as 'Science in national affairs', Nature (4 November 1915), 96, 260-1.
97. R. Gregory, 'Reply of the Editor', Nature (4 November 1915), 96, 261.
98. See Philip Gummett, Scientists in Whitehall, Manchester, 1980, 24-5.
99. Alter, op. cit. (7), 208, quoting R. L. Morant to Selby-Bigge, 21 June 1915, Public Record Office, Ed 24/1576. My emphasis.
100. See Michael D. King, 'Science and the professional dilemma', in Penguin Social Sciences Survey 1968 (ed. J. Gould), Harmondsworth, 1968, 34-73.
101. Gummett, op. cit. (73), 22-6.
102. For a reappraisal of Haldane in relation to science see A. Hull, '"Knowledge is Power?": a new view of some aspects of the relations of science and politics in Edwardian Britain', M.Sc. thesis, University of Manchester, 1989, especially Chapter 4.