Survey science on trial: the geographic contours of geology's practical science debate in late Victorian Canada

Abstract

In 1884 the Select Committee on Geological Surveys convened in Ottawa to assess the practical contributions of the Geological Survey of Canada. Critics were concerned that the GSC was too focused on making theoretical contributions to geology rather than on the important task of locating, analyzing and reporting on Canada's promising mineral deposits. GSC officials repudiated this ‘pure vs. practical’ distinction, insisting that their territorially-extensive and intellectually wide-ranging reconnaissance surveys provided abundant practical knowledge to the Canadian public. As a result, GSC officials transformed the 1884 hearings into a spirited debate over what counted as practical science in service of the nation. This paper draws on Thomas Gieryn's insights concerning scientific ‘boundary-work’ and David Livingstone's efforts to ‘think geographically about science’ in order to analyze the hearing room as a short-lived yet consequential scientific ‘speech space’ in which the inherent geographic contours of the practical science debate came clearly into view when government-sponsored survey science was put on trial in 1884. Through a careful analysis of the testimony provided over the course of these hearings, the paper reveals the markedly different geographic perspectives advanced by GSC officials and their critics regarding the proper scale, orientation, and scope of a publicly-funded geological survey.