§ In France the body who elect to offices in the Institute, are men of

the highest intellectual attainments, whose suffrage it is an honour to

receive, and who, during the existence of the monarchy, constituted one

amongst the classes out of whom Peers of France were selected.

In England, out of about 800 Fellows of the Royal Society, the greater

part of them know nothing of science, and of course their votes swamp

those of the members most competent to pronounce opinions. The new mode

of admitting fellows of the Royal Society, has had a good effect in

improving the qualification of those admitted; but unfortunately, its

operation is so slow that it will be many years before the Society is

relieved from its incumbrances.

§ In the Academy of Sciences at Paris, the office of Secretary is an

object of ambition even to men of the highest scientific attainments. It

is usually held by persons of the greatest eminence, who are themselves

at the same time carrying out original inquiries on subjects connected

with their official duties. It is sufficient to cite the names of

Delambre, of Fourier, of Cuvier, and of Arago.

In England the Secretary of the Royal Society of London occupies no such

position. To some of our most eminent men, it may, when young, have been

an object of ambition to hold it for a few years: but considering the

very moderate pay of 100_l._ a-year, and how considerable a portion of

time must be occupied by its duties if conscientiously fulfilled, it is

rare that any man of original talent and independent feeling will join

in the intrigues by which it is too frequently obtained.

In consequence of this state of things, the officers of the Royal

Society are most frequently third or fourth-rate men, who not having

sufficient occupation in their own professions, seek the office as a

means of adding to their income. Or, they may be, in some cases,

military men, who being paid by the public for other duties, are glad to

get relieved from them without the loss of their emoluments. Persons

holding offices in the Royal Society ought by their scientific eminence

to confer dignity on their office: instead of acquiring a position in

the world by its acceptance.

§ Again, the justice of the decisions of the Council in awarding their

medals, has been publicly impeached. A very few years since, a general

meeting of the Society was summoned on the requisition of several of its

members, to inquire into the circumstances attending the award of

certain Royal medals. It was admitted by the President that there had

been considerable irregularities in some of the awards, and the Council

only escaped a vote of censure in consequence of some little want of

management in those who proposed it.

During this discussion one of the Fellows of the Royal Society got up,

and remarked that although this case was very bad, it became trifling

when compared with the circumstances attending the very first award of

the Royal medals; for on that occasion the Council had wilfully violated

the laws they had themselves established for their distribution, and

that on his formally demonstrating the facts by reference to their own

minutes, they with singular consistency refused to alter their unfair

and unjust decision.

§ Difficulties of another kind arise respecting the Presidents of

Societies. When the office of President is really or practically a

permanent one, it is very difficult to carry on the business of the

Society if the President is a person of exalted rank, or if he do not

permanently reside in London.

In either case it usually happens that a secretary or treasurer, or

other officer who is resident, insensibly becomes the means of

communication with the President, who is naturally anxious to be

acquainted with the feelings and wishes of the body over which he

presides. The most honest officer can scarcely fail to have some little

bias towards his own opinions: he will naturally mix more with those who

approve of, than with those who differ from them, and will consequently,

although perhaps unintentionally, communicate to the President a

one-sided view of his own, as the dominant opinion of the Society.

The President, on the other hand, however really anxious he may be to

introduce any amendments which he conceives advantageous for the

Society, will naturally doubt their policy if informed that they are not

in unison with the opinions of the body. He will communicate with his

treasurer, secretary, or other officer, and almost always express his

concurrence in the course proposed to him as being the most agreeable to

the body at large.

The officer, receiving such a reply, will naturally mention at the

Council the opinions of the President. He may even from good nature

allow the Council to think that the President himself _originated_ the

views he only _adopted_ because he believed them to be those of the

Society.

Under such circumstances, it is difficult to oppose the expressed wishes

of the absent President, and strangely enough, without any intentional

deceit, President, Council, and Society are supposed to be unanimous in

doing what each by itself thinks inexpedient.

§ It is true that by great kindness, good sense, and decision of

character, the Prince or absent President may in some cases mitigate or

prevent these evils. Such cases, however, are the exception, not the

rule.

§ In a work containing views on the state of science in England,

foreigners at least will expect that I should take some notice of my own

calculating engines.

I had hoped that the history of the transactions between myself and the

government respecting them, as related in the eleventh chapter of the

History of the Royal Society by Mr. Weld, together with the two

criticisms on that work in the Athenæum,[18] would have rendered any

further explanation on my part unnecessary. Many persons, however, who

admit these as fully explaining the part I was compelled to take, have

at the same time expressed to me their doubts that some occult agency

was at work to prejudice the government, and have asked who were its

scientific advisers on such an important subject, during the long period

in which the Difference Engine was in abeyance.

§ I have not been blind to the passions and interests of men. My own

pursuits were of such a character that they interfered with those of

none of my colleagues in the paths of science; and perhaps I may have

trusted too much to this circumstance as exempting me from rivalry and

jealousy.

As a reformer both in science and in politics, I knew that I should

excite enmity in the minds of some honest men, and also in those of many

other persons who dreaded inquiry into jobs not yet exposed. When I

published the Decline of Science, in 1830, I certainly was not aware how

many would include themselves in the latter class: but had I foreseen

it, I should not have altered my course. To have met and to have

defeated intrigue by watchfulness, might not have been a difficult task,

but it would have required too great a sacrifice of time devoted to far

higher objects. It was, moreover, an occupation for which I had little

taste.

The time, however, has now arrived when, having given up all expectation

of constructing the Analytical Engine from the drawings which I had

caused to be made at very great expense, I think it right to state the

result of my own observations, and especially to point out the facts

that have come to light to confirm them. These, if they do not open the

eyes of some, who, having been themselves deceived, have done me

injustice, will at all events be of use for the future, and may save the

young and inexperienced enthusiast of science from embarking in

undertakings, honourable to the country, but ruinous to himself.

It has often been remarked, that an event in itself trivial sometimes

leads to results with which it seems to have no conceivable connexion.

A beaver constructing his dwelling on the plateau of the Andes, may have

turned the course of a river, which otherwise would shortly have joined

the Pacific, into a valley through which, after lengthened wanderings,

it now flows into the Atlantic Ocean.

So, by some strange combination of circumstances, a quarrel in which I

had no part, and with whose origin I am unacquainted, seems to have had

an unanticipated effect in impeding the construction of the Calculating

Engines.

At the time of the foundation of the Astronomical Society, Sir James

South, whose observatory and whose house were hospitably open to every

cultivator of astronomy, was on terms of intimate friendship with almost

all of those persons at that period most eminent in science. It is

sufficient to mention the names of Wollaston and Davy, and to add that

when the late Mr. Fallows was appointed Astronomer at the Cape, although

previously a stranger, he became for several months the guest of Sir

James South, who assisted him in acquiring that practical knowledge of

instruments so necessary in his new avocation.[19]

§ In 1829 Sir James South was elected President of the Astronomical

Society. It now appears, however, that previously to this appointment,

_a party had been formed_ adverse to Sir J. South, which party, with the

view of thwarting him, placed in the office of Secretary the Rev.

Richard Sheepshanks, Fellow of Trinity Coll., Cambridge.[20]

In March, 1831, the Board of Visitors of the Royal Observatory of

Greenwich, met at the Admiralty, to consider the propriety of separating

the duties of Superintendent of the Nautical Almanac from those of

Astronomer Royal. The new arrangement was advocated, amongst others, by

Sir J. South, and after some discussion, in which Capt. Beaufort and

myself took part, it was ultimately carried. As we were leaving the

meeting-room, Mr. Sheepshanks addressing me said: “I am determined to

put down Sir James South, and if you and other respectable men will give

him your support, I will put you down.” He at the same time told me he

“intended to put Captain Beaufort down.”

During the course of 1832, it was found that the large equatorial

mounting which had been contrived and executed by Troughton, for his

friend Sir J. South’s twelve-inch object-glass, was an entire failure.

This produced at the time a difference between two friends who esteemed

each other highly, and who had been for years united by reciprocal acts

of kindness in ties of “_very intimate_” friendship. Well acquainted

myself with the character of the parties, and the circumstances of the

case, I have not the slightest doubt that this unfortunate affair might

easily, by the exertions of judicious friends, have terminated in the

entire restoration of their former friendship. But this was a course

which the Rev. R. Sheepshanks took effectual means to prevent. Having

himself a “_personal_” quarrel with Sir James South, he “_offered_” his

services to assist Messrs. Troughton and Simms. He “_offered to go_”

himself to examine the instrument in Sir J. South’s observatory, and

“_got his friend, Professor Airy, to go with him_” for the purpose of

remedying the defects of the Equatorial.

Notwithstanding he was told by Mr. Simms that “_Sir J. South had

declared that no person could have been pitched upon more obnoxious than

yourself_,” he still persevered in obtruding himself into Sir J. South’s

observatory as the agent of Troughton and Simms, until it was at last

discovered that no after contrivances or expense could correct the

errors of an instrument itself radically defective in principle.

It may readily be supposed that the continuance for months of these

visits by Mr. Sheepshanks and Professor Airy, and the _irritating

correspondence_ consequent upon them, which, though _nominally_ that of

Troughton and Simms, was really “_directed by_” the Rev. R. Sheepshanks,

destroyed all hope of a reconciliation. The parties then had recourse to

the Court of King’s Bench, and it was curious to observe the vigour and

energy with which the Rev. R. Sheepshanks applied himself to the

exercise of his earlier studies.[21]

Having _volunteered_ his services to Messrs. Troughton and Simms—he

“_wrote every letter_” for them during the subsequent law-suit—he acted

for them in all the various characters of “_friend_” and “_adviser_”—of

“_workman_” and “_agent_”—of “_attorney_” and “_counsel_;”[22]—he made

an “_affidavit_” in the case—became a _witness_ himself—and undertook to

_intimidate witnesses_ on the opposite side.

This latter performance is fortunately rare in England, and is so

remarkable that it is necessary to give some account of the proceedings.

Not wishing to become involved in so disagreeable a case, I had refused

to be a witness on the part of Sir J. South. Having, however, had some

conversation on the subject with the late Lord Abinger (then Mr.

Scarlett), he represented to me that my evidence was essential for the

justice of the case, and upon that ground I reluctantly waived my

objection to appear as a witness.

Having been examined in chief on the seventeenth day of the Arbitration,

I remained in the room a few minutes after the Arbitrator had left it.

The Rev. R. Sheepshanks, the only other person then present, addressing

me said, “it was necessary to _discredit me_ because I had supported Sir

J. South.” He added that “he would, at a future time, _attack me_

publicly on _another subject_, on account of the part I had taken in

this matter.”

The remembrance of his former threats more than four years before at the

Visitation at the Admiralty, added to the knowledge of the unremitting

perseverance with which he had carried on his hostility to Sir J. South,

satisfied me that it would be unsafe for the cause of truth, and

possibly injurious to myself, if I were not to take measures for making

known the nature of the weapons which the Rev. R. Sheepshanks was

employing. As he had ventured, _after_ my having given evidence on oath,

to threaten me with injury, with the hope of inducing me to modify that

evidence on cross-examination, it appeared to me probable that he might

have been tampering with the evidence of other witnesses in the same

cause, who from their position or circumstances in life, might be

compelled by the fear of his vengeance to shape their evidence so as to

adapt it to his views.

The Rev. R. Sheepshanks discovered on reflection no impropriety in this

course of intimidating witnesses, or of attacking those who could not be

induced to take up his own private quarrels. He thus defended both.

“_I think it allowable to throw down the gauntlet in this manner._”

“_I have another ground of dispute with Captain Beaufort, and certainly

intend to put him down._”

The gallant Admiral has survived many a dangerous day, and needs not the

pen of a friend to protect his honest and well-earned fame.

The reader may perhaps be astonished at the statement made in the

preceding pages, and feel disposed to consider it an _ex parte_

statement. It _is entirely_ an _ex parte_ statement: it is not necessary

for its support that the reader should give credence even to that small

part of it which appears to rest on my own evidence before the

Arbitrator. _The whole of it is founded entirely on the testimony of

the_ Rev. R. Sheepshanks _himself._ Every statement of those which are

marked as quotations was either elicited from him on his

cross-examination, or in the few instances in which it came from myself,

its correctness was confirmed by his subsequent admission or

re-statement. After my statement, and the Rev. R. Sheepshanks’ reply to

it, the Arbitrator addressing him said—

“With respect to the matter of fact, you agree?”

Rev. R. Sheepshanks. “Yes, we agree as to the matter of fact.”

Professor Airy, who was afterwards appointed Astronomer Royal, had long

before become as deeply engaged as his friend Mr. Sheepshanks in this

most unfortunate quarrel. Years of aggravating delay and discussion

resulted from the procrastinated reference, and at length one of the

parties, Mr. Troughton, being dead, a decision not satisfactory to

either was given in December 1838. But the inextinguishable desire “to

put down Sir James South” survived the lawsuit which was only used as a

means, and reappeared from time to time through the aid of the press, in

forcible but somewhat unmeasured charges and recriminations between the

Astronomer Royal, the Rev. R. Sheepshanks and others on the one side,

and the astronomer of Campden Hill on the other.

It was a curious though a very painful study, to observe from time to

time the various consequences of this feud.

Against those men of science who refused to forsake their ancient social

relations with Sir James South, a system of disparagement was maintained

which could not fail in the course of time to produce its effects. The

avowed object of the party of which the Rev. R. Sheepshanks was the

organ, was, in his own expressive words, to _discredit and put down

every respectable person_ who supported Sir J. South.

It was melancholy to observe the gradual change in the expression of

opinions by some of those qualified from their knowledge to guide the

opinion of the public. Intimidated at first into silence; the

uncontradicted assertions of those around them then got possession of

their minds, until at length, without any new examination, they were

flattered into an acquiescence in, if not indeed into the expression of,

opinions entirely opposite to their former ones. These new views were

doubtless conveyed by their flatterers to other ears, and thus the

process of “_discrediting every respectable person_” opposed to them,

was carried on under the authority of honourable names.

One after another almost all Sir James South’s old friends and

acquaintance amongst _men of science only, however_, were alienated from

him.

One man was alarmed by the fear that some inaccuracies in his

astronomical publications should be severely criticised. Of another it

was hinted that his mathematics were all wrong, and might be shown up.

Those who were timid feared the anger of the dominant party; those who

were young might have their prospects blighted by even appearing in

friendly relations with him who supported the unequal conflict; those

who were old loved repose, and found it easiest to appear to side with

the most numerous party; whilst those who saw through the whole of it,

had better things wherewith to occupy their minds, than to attend to

such affairs.

It is obvious to all who have observed society that such a system of

“_discrediting_” carried on for a series of years, especially against

one too much occupied or too proud to expose it, must end in

establishing the set of opinions propagated by the party. Honest and

even tolerably well-informed persons, will at length be misled, and be

found to adopt them.

Opinions thus propagated must have had their influence widely spread,

and unless those members of the various administrations with whom

decisions relative to the Difference Engine rested, had been either

highly skilled in mathematical science, or deeply read in human nature,

it would have been almost impossible for them not to have been misled.

The former qualification is unnecessary; the latter is indispensable for

a statesman. Of the _eight_ Prime-ministers with whom I have had

communications relative to the Difference Engine, _one_ only personally

examined it; doubtless not with the view of criticising the mechanism,

but of reading the character of its author. Had my _official_

intercourse with that eminent man commenced earlier or continued later,

the fate of the Calculating Engines would probably have been far

different.

It is always difficult to trace intriguers up to a direct intercourse

with government. In the present case, the vanity of some of them

overcame their judgment, and they gave themselves out as advisers of the

government on scientific subjects. To these I shall not at present

refer, but confine myself to citing from official documents two cases of

direct communication with the government by persons on whose judgment it

appears to have relied.

The Whigs seemed to have had great confidence in the devotion of the

Rev. R. Sheepshanks to their interests, since they took the

extraordinary step of appointing him, although a Clergyman, one of the

Boundary Commissioners under the Reform Bill, and he is, I believe, at

present one of the Standard Measure Commission.

The Astronomer Royal, besides his situation at Greenwich, has been a

member of several Commissions:—

The Tidal Harbour Commission.

The Standard Measure Commission.

The Harbour of Refuge Commission.

The Railway Gauge Commission.

The following are extracts from his Annual Reports:—

“The Board of Admiralty, on my representation of the interruption to

our business caused by the rating of so many Chronometers, and _by my

own employment on public business unconnected with the Observatory_,

immediately sanctioned the employment of an additional

computer.”—_Astron. Royal, Rep. June 1841_, p. 7.

“On former occasions I have avowed without scruple that I do not

consider the Royal Observatory as a mere isolated place for the

conduct of Astronomical observations. I consider it a part, perhaps

the most important part, of the scientific institutions of this

country.”—P. 18.

“In concluding this long report, I have been uniformly supported by

the _confidence of the government_.”—_Astron. Royal, Rep. June 1844_,

p. 20.

The following extract of a letter from the Astronomer Royal to the late

Sir Robert Peel, shows that his time was so occupied with the labours of

the Railway Gauge Commission, that he was unable to draw up a memorial

which he had himself proposed, even though it related to an astronomical

subject—our colonial observatories.

* * * * “I have been so closely employed on the papers of the Railway

Gauge Commission, that it has been impossible for me to draw up a

memorial before the present time. * * * *

“April 16th, 1846.

To the Right Hon. Sir Robert Peel, Bart., &c.”

“By the giving opinions on subjects of railways and _other mechanical

matters referred to me by Government_, it has appeared that our

energies are not wholly absorbed in the mere Astronomy of the

Observatory.”—_Astron. Royal, Rep. June 1846_, p. 10.

(N.B. The italics do not occur in the original quotations.)

Now it is evident from these extracts from Reports of the Astronomer

Royal to the Board of Visitors and from other facts, that he wishes

himself to be considered the general referee of Government in all

scientific questions.

The office of Astronomer Royal is one of great importance: it requires

the undivided energy and talents of one person, and great as Mr. Airy’s

abilities undoubtedly are, yet it is highly injudicious to divert them

from their legitimate object,—the direction of the many arduous duties

of the establishment over which he presides.

During many years I have frequently found, in my communications with

members of Government on subjects connected with the Calculating

Engines, difficulties on their part which remained entirely

unexplained;—unseen obstacles which were never alluded to, but whose

existence could not be doubted.

Although frequently warned by personal friends that it was unwise to

neglect such machinations as those which I have, at length, been

reluctantly compelled to expose; yet I was unwilling for a long time to

believe that they were directed against myself.

I have now traced the connexion of the Rev. R. Sheepshanks, (who had

avowed his determination “_to discredit me_,” and also to “_attack me on

another subject at a future time_,”) through his friend the Astronomer

Royal, with the Government. According to the Astronomer Royal’s own

statement, he was their adviser on all scientific subjects. The

Government had no other official adviser, and would scarcely have

ventured to decide upon points connected with some of the most profound

questions of mathematics, on their own responsibility.

There are, I am aware, other channels than those of official reports, by

which the Government may have been influenced. I do not, therefore,

expect to find any formal report denying the practical utility of the

Calculating Engines, or the possibility of constructing them.

If there is any such, I claim as a matter of justice, that it be

published. The Difference Engine and the Analytical Engine, are

questions of pure science. If the Astronomer Royal has maintained that

they are either useless or impracticable, then the grounds of that

opinion _must_ have been stated, and, if published, the solidity of

those grounds might be examined.

It now becomes necessary to take a very brief review of the conduct of

Government with respect to the Difference Engine. Having contrived and

executed a small model of a Difference Engine, I published a very short

account of it in a letter to Sir Humphry Davy, in the year 1822. At the

wish of the Government I undertook to construct for them an engine on a

much larger scale, which should print its results. I continued to work

at this Engine until 1834, refusing in the mean time other sources of

profitable occupation, amongst which was an office of about 2,500_l._

a-year. Circumstances over which I had no control then caused the work

to be suspended.

After eight years of repeated applications, and of the most harassing

delay, at the end of 1842 the Government arrived at the resolution of

giving up the completion of the Difference Engine, on the alleged ground

of its expense.

In the mean time, new views had opened out to me the prospect of

performing purely algebraic operations by means of mechanism. To arrive

at so entirely unexpected a result I deemed worthy of any sacrifice, and

accordingly spared no expense in procuring every subsidiary assistance

which could enable me to attain it. Each successive difficulty was met

by new contrivances, and at last I found that I had surmounted all the

great difficulties of the question, and had made drawings of each

distinct department of the Analytical Engine.

Having expended upwards of 20,000_l._ on the experiments and inquiries

which had led me to these results, it would not have been prudent to

attempt the _construction_ of such an engine. I thought, however, that

there were several offices in the appointment of Government for which I

was qualified, and to which, under the circumstances, I had some claim.

I hoped if I had obtained one of these, by fulfilling its laborious

duties for a few years, and by allowing the whole salary to accumulate,

that I might then have been able to retire, and adding the money thus

earned to my own private resources, that I might yet have enough of life

and energy left to _execute_ the Analytical Engine, and thus complete

one of the great objects of my ambition.

Having neither asked nor been offered any acknowledgment for all the

sacrifices I had made, I felt that I had some just claims to one of

these appointments. Every application was unsuccessful; whatever may

have been the reasons, the conduct of Government has been exactly that

which might have been expected had they been the _allies_ or the _dupes_

of the party which thought it necessary, from enmity to Sir James South,

to “discredit” the author of the Analytical Engine.

One only of the many reports which were circulated, I thought it worth

while to contradict, and that cost me more trouble, and wasted more of

my time, than the refutation of the calumny was worth. It was boldly and

perseveringly stated that I had received from the Government a large

pecuniary reward for my services. The fact was, not merely that I never

_did_ receive any such reward, but that I was almost constantly

_advancing money_ to pay the engineer who was constructing the Engine

for the Government, before I had myself received the amount of his bills

from the Treasury.

On tracing up these rumours, they were usually found to arise from a

species of dishonesty very difficult to convict. Thus one person

circulated them widely; when asked for the grounds of the charge, he

referred to certain Parliamentary Papers, and affected to believe that

the sums paid _for the workmen_ were paid to the _inventor_: of course

_he_ could no longer safely propagate the falsehood. Another then took

up the tale, until he was met by the same question, when _he_ not only

expressed his delight at being informed of the truth, but half convinced

his indignant, though credulous auditor, that _he_ would assist in

propagating the correction. Thus the assertion was continually repeated,

until honourable and upright men, who had been deceived and discovered

the deception, were so frequent in society, that it became dangerous to

the character of the traducers to continue the circulation of the

calumny.

Even since the first edition of this work has appeared, one of these

calumnies has been again revived, in the statement that—

The reason why the Government gave up the construction of the original

Difference Engine was, that Mr. Babbage refused to finish _it_, and

wished them to take up the Difference Engine No. 2.

An attempt has been made to prove its truth by a quotation from this

volume, in which the accuser, mistaking dates, assigns the drawings of

the Difference Engine No. 2, which did not exist until 1847, as the

causes of the discontinuance of No. 1, which was given up in 1843. This

charge too is made in the face of a distinct denial by Mr. Babbage that

the late Sir Robert Peel could have been influenced by any such

_supposed_ wish, because he had in his possession a written _disavowal_

of it from Mr. B. himself; it is also made in the teeth of the very

words used by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who, in his letter to Mr.

B. regretting the necessity of giving it up, assigns as its cause “_the

expense_.” Both these latter statements had been already published in

1848.

[16] Reflections on the Decline of Science in England, and on some of

its Causes. 1830.

[17] A small pamphlet, the production of an amiable and excellent

foreign philosopher, cannot be considered an answer: since it did not

_contradict_ the facts, and only answered opinions on science, which

were _not_ maintained in that book.

[18] Athenæum, 14 Oct. 1848, and 16 Dec. 1848.

[19] Sir James South, in conjunction with Sir John Herschel, completed

the examination of 380 double and triple stars; a work for which the

authors were awarded the great Astronomical prize of the Institute of

France in 1825, and the Medal of the Astronomical Society of London in

1826.

[20] “When he [Sir J. S.] was elected President, I [Rev. R. S.] was

elected Secretary to keep him in order.”

[21] At an earlier period of his life, his studies were directed

towards the profession of the law.

[22] On the 19th July, 1836, at the 23d meeting under the Arbitrator,

the Rev. R. Sheepshanks _cross-examined_ Mr. Savage the Architect.

CHAPTER XIII.

CALCULATING ENGINES.

It is not a bad definition of _man_ to describe him as a _tool-making

animal_. His earliest contrivances to support uncivilized life, were

tools of the simplest and rudest construction. His latest achievements

in the substitution of machinery, not merely for the skill of the human

hand, but for the relief of the human intellect, are founded on the use

of tools of a still higher order.

The successful construction of all machinery depends on the perfection

of the tools employed, and whoever is a master in the art of tool-making

possesses the key to the construction of all machines.

The Crystal Palace, and all its splendid contents, owe their existence

to _tools_ as the physical means:—to intellect as the guiding power,

developed equally on works of industry or on objects of taste.

The contrivance and the construction of tools, must therefore ever stand

at the head of the industrial arts.

The next stage in the advancement of those arts is equally necessary to

the progress of each. It is the art of drawing. Here, however, a

divergence commences: the drawings of the artist are entirely different

from those of the mechanician. The drawings of the latter are

Geometrical projections, and are of vast importance in all mechanism.

The resources of mechanical drawing have not yet been sufficiently

explored: with the great advance now making in machinery, it will become

necessary to assist its powers by practical yet philosophical rules for

expressing still more clearly by signs and by the letters themselves the

mutual relations of the parts of a machine.

As we advance towards machinery for more complicated objects, other

demands arise, without satisfying which our further course is absolutely

stopped. It becomes necessary to see at a glance, not only every

_successive_ movement of each amongst thousands of different parts, but

also to scrutinize all contemporaneous actions. This gave rise to the

Mechanical Notation, a language of signs, which, although invented for

one subject, is of so comprehensive a nature as to be applicable to

many. If the whole of the facts relating to a naval or military battle

were known, the mechanical notation would assist the description of it

quite as much as it would that of any complicated engine.

This brief sketch has been given partly with the view of more distinctly

directing attention to an important point in which England excels all

other countries—the art of _contriving and making tools_; an art which

has been continually forced upon my own observation in the contrivance

and construction of the Calculating Engines.

When the first idea of inventing mechanical means for the calculation of

all classes of astronomical and arithmetical tables, occurred to me, I

contented myself with making simple drawings, and with forming a small

model of a few parts. But when I understood it to be the wish of the

Government that a large engine should be constructed, a very serious

question presented itself for consideration:—

Is the present state of the art of making machinery sufficiently

advanced to enable me to execute the multiplied and highly complicated

movements required for the Difference Engine?

After examining all the resources of existing workshops, I came to the

conclusion that, in order to succeed, it would become necessary to

advance the art of construction itself. I trusted with some confidence

that those studies which had enabled me to contrive mechanism for new

wants, would be equally useful for the invention of new tools, or of

other methods of employing the old.

During the many years the construction of the Difference Engine was

carried on, the following course was adopted. After each drawing had

been made, a new inquiry was instituted to determine the mechanical

means by which the several parts were to be formed. Frequently sketches,

or new drawings, were made, for the purpose of constructing the tools or

mechanical arrangements thus contrived. This process often elicited some

simpler mode of construction, and thus the original contrivances were

improved. In the mean time, many workmen of the highest skill were

constantly employed in making the tools, and afterwards in using them

for the construction of parts of the engine. The knowledge thus acquired

by the workmen, matured in many cases by their own experience, and often

perhaps improved by their own sagacity, was thus in time disseminated

widely throughout other workshops. Several of the most enlightened

employers and constructors of machinery, who have themselves contributed

to its advance, have expressed to me their opinion that if the

Calculating Engine itself had entirely failed, the money expended by

Government in the attempt to make it, would be well repaid by the

advancement it had caused in the art of mechanical construction.

It is somewhat singular, that whilst I had anticipated the difficulties

of construction, I had not foreseen a far greater difficulty, which,

however, was surmounted by the invention of the Mechanical Notation.

The state of the _Difference Engine_ at the time it was abandoned by the

Government, was as follows: A considerable portion of it had been made;

a part (about sixteen figures) was put together; and the drawings, the

whole of which are now in the Museum of King’s College at Somerset

House, were far advanced. Upon this engine the Government expended about

£17,000.

The drawings of the _Analytical Engine_ have been made entirely at _my

own cost_: I instituted a long series of experiments for the purpose of

reducing the expense of its construction to limits which might be within

the means I could myself afford to supply. I am now resigned to the

necessity of abstaining from its construction, and feel indisposed even

to finish the drawings of one of its many general plans. As a slight

idea of the state of the drawings may be interesting to some of my

readers, I shall refer to a few of the great divisions of the subject.

ARITHMETICAL ADDITION.—About a dozen plans of different mechanical

movements have been drawn. The last is of the very simplest order.

CARRIAGE OF TENS.—A larger number of drawings have been made of modes of

carrying tens. They form two classes, in one of which the carriage takes

place successively; in the other it occurs simultaneously, as will be

more fully explained at the end of this chapter.

MULTIPLYING BY TENS.—This is a very important process, though not

difficult to contrive. Three modes are drawn; the difficulties are

chiefly those of construction, and the most recent experiments now

enable me to use the simplest form.

DIGIT COUNTING APPARATUS.—It is necessary that the machine should count

the digits of the numbers it multiplies and divides, and that it should

combine these properly with the number of decimals used. This is by no

means so easy as the former operation: two or three systems of

contrivances have been drawn.

COUNTING APPARATUS.—This is an apparatus of a much more general order,

for treating the indices of functions and for the determination of the

repetitions and movements of the Jacquard cards, on which the Algebraic

developments of functions depend. Two or three such mechanisms have been

drawn.

SELECTORS.—The object of the system of contrivances thus named, is to

choose in the operation of Arithmetical division the proper multiple to

be subtracted; this is one of the most difficult parts of the engine,

and several different plans have been drawn. The one at last adopted is,

considering the object, tolerably simple. Although division is an

inverse operation, it is possible to perform it entirely by mechanism

without any tentative process.

REGISTERING APPARATUS.—This is necessary in division to record the

quotient as it arises. It is simple, and different plans have been

drawn.

ALGEBRAIC SIGNS.—The means of combining these are very simple, and have

been drawn.

PASSAGE THROUGH ZERO AND INFINITY.—This is one of the most important

parts of the Engine, since it may lead to a totally different action

upon the formulæ employed. The mechanism is much simpler than might have

been expected, and is drawn and fully explained by notations.

BARRELS AND DRUMS.—These are contrivances for grouping together certain

mechanical actions often required; they are occasionally under the

direction of the cards; sometimes they guide themselves, and sometimes

their own guidance is interfered with by the Zero Apparatus.

GROUPINGS.—These are drawings of several of the contrivances before

described, united together in various forms. Many drawings of them

exist.

GENERAL PLANS.—Drawings of all the parts necessary for the Analytical

Engine have been made in many forms. No less than thirty different

general plans for connecting them together, have been devised and

partially drawn; one or two are far advanced. No. 25 was lithographed at

Paris in 1840. These have been superseded by simpler or more powerful

combinations, and the last and most simple has only been sketched.

A large number of Mechanical Notations exist, showing the movements of

these several parts, and also explaining the processes of arithmetic and

algebra to which they relate. One amongst them, for the process of

division, covers nearly thirty large folio sheets.

About twenty years after I had commenced the first Difference Engine,

and after the greater part of these drawings had been completed, I found

that almost every contrivance in it had been superseded by new and more

simple mechanism, which the construction of the Analytical Engine had

rendered necessary. Under these circumstances I made drawings of an

entirely new Difference Engine. The drawings, both for the calculating

and the printing parts, amounting in number to twenty-four, are

completed. They are accompanied by the necessary mechanical notations,

and by an index of letters to the drawings; so that although there is as

yet no description in words, there is effectively such a description by

signs, that this new Difference Engine might be constructed from them.

Amongst the difficulties which surrounded the idea of the construction

of an Engine for developing Analytical formulæ, there were some which

seemed insuperable if not impossible, not merely to the common

understandings of well-informed persons, but even to the more practised

intellect of some of the greatest masters of that science which the

machine was intended to control. It still seemed, after much discussion,

at least highly doubtful whether such formulæ could ever be brought

within the grasp of mechanism.

I have met in the course of my inquiries with four cases of obstacles

presenting the appearance of impossibilities. As these form a very

interesting chapter in the history of the human mind, and are on the one

hand connected with some of the simplest elements of mechanism, and on

the other with some of the highest principles of philosophy, I shall

endeavour to explain them in a short, and, I hope, somewhat popular

manner, to those who have a very moderate share of mathematical

knowledge. Those of my readers to whom they may not be sufficiently

interesting, will, I hope, excuse the interruption, and pass on to the

succeeding chapters.

§ The first difficulty arose at an early stage of the Analytical Engine.

The mechanism necessary to add one number to another, if the carriage of

the tens be neglected, is very simple. Various modes had been devised

and drawings of about a dozen contrivances for carrying the tens had

been made. The same general principle pervaded all of them. Each figure

wheel when receiving addition, in the act of passing from nine to ten

caused a lever to be put aside. An axis with arms arranged spirally upon

it then revolved, and commencing with the lowest figure replaced

successively those levers which might have been put aside during the

addition. This replacing action upon the levers caused unity to be added

to the figure wheel next above. The numerical example below will

illustrate the process.

597,999 Numbers to be added.

201,001

-------

798,990 Sum without any carriage.

1 Puts aside lever acting on tens.

-------

798,900 First spiral arm adds tens and

1 puts aside the next lever.

-------

798,000 Second spiral arm adds hundreds, and

1 puts aside the next lever.

-------

799,000 Third spiral arm adds thousands.

Now there is in this mechanism a certain analogy with the act of memory.

The lever thrust aside by the passage of the tens, is the equivalent of

the note of an event made in the memory, whilst the spiral arm, acting

at an after time upon the lever put aside, in some measure resembles the

endeavours made to recollect a fact.

It will be observed that in these modes of _carrying_, the action must

be _successive_. Supposing a number to consist of thirty places of

figures, each of which is a nine, then if any other number of thirty

figures be added to it, since the addition of each figure to the

corresponding one takes place at the same time, the whole addition will

only occupy nine units of time. But since the number added may be unity,

the carriages may possibly amount to twenty-nine. Consequently the time

of making the carriages may be more than three times as long as that

required for addition.

The time thus occupied was, it is true, very considerably shortened in

the Difference Engine: but when the Analytical Engine was to be

contrived, it became essentially necessary to diminish it still further.

After much time fruitlessly expended in many contrivances and drawings,

a very different principle, which seemed indeed at first to be

impossible, suggested itself.

It is evident that whenever a carriage is conveyed to the figure above,

if that figure happen to be a nine, a new carriage must then take place,

and so on as far as the nines extend. Now the principle sought to be

expressed in mechanism amounted to this.

1st. That a lever should be put aside, as before, on the passage of a

figure-wheel from nine to ten.

2d. That the engine should then ascertain the position of all those

nines which by carriage would ultimately become zero, and give notice of

new carriages; that, foreseeing those events, it should anticipate the

result by making all the carriages simultaneously.

This was at last accomplished, and many different mechanical

contrivances fulfilling these conditions were drawn. The former part of

this mechanism bears an analogy to memory, the latter to foresight. The

apparatus remembers as it were, one set of events, the transits from

nine to ten: examines what nines are found in certain critical places:

then, in consequence of the concurrence of these events, acts at once so

as to anticipate other actions that would have happened at a more

distant period, had less artificial means been used.

§ The second apparent impossibility seemed to present far greater

difficulty. Fortunately it was not one of immediate _practical_

importance, although as a question of philosophical inquiry it possessed

the highest interest. I had frequently discussed with Mrs. Somerville

and my highly gifted friend the late Professor M‘Cullagh of Dublin, the

question whether it was possible that we should be able to treat

algebraic formulæ by means of machinery. The result of many inquiries

led to the conclusion, that if not really impossible, it was almost

hopeless. The first difficulty was that of representing an indefinite

number in a machine of finite size. It was readily admitted that if a

machine afforded means of operating on _all_ numbers under twenty places

of figures, then that any number, or _an indefinite_ number, of less

than twenty places or figures might be represented by it. But such

number will not be really indefinite. It would be possible to make a

machine capable of operating upon numbers of forty, sixty, or one

hundred places of figures: still, however, a limit must at last be

reached, and the numbers represented would not be really _indefinite_.

After lengthened consideration of this subject, the solution of the

difficulty was discovered; and it presented the appearance of reasoning

in a circle.

Algebraical operations in their most general form cannot be carried on

by machinery without the capability of expressing _indefinite_

constants. On the other hand, the only way of arriving at the expression

of an indefinite constant, was through the intervention of Algebra

itself.

This is not a fit place to enter into the detail of the means employed,

further than to observe, that it was found possible to evade the

difficulty, by connecting _indefinite_ number with the _infinite in

time_ instead of with the _infinite in space_.

The solution of this difficulty being found, and the discovery of

another principle having been made, namely—that _the nature of a

function might be indicated by its position_—algebra, in all its most

abstract forms, was placed completely within the reach of mechanism.

§ The third difficulty that presented itself was one which I had long

before anticipated. It was proposed to me nearly at the same time by

three of the most eminent cultivators of analysis then existing, M.

Jacobi, M. Bessel, and Professor M‘Cullagh, who were examining the

drawings of the Analytical Engine. The question they proposed was

this:—How would the Analytical Engine be able to treat calculations in

which the use of tables of logarithms, sines, &c. or any other tabular

numbers should be required?

My reply was, that as at the time logarithms were invented, it became

necessary to remodel the whole of the formulæ of Trigonometry, in order

to adapt it to the new instrument of calculation: so when the Analytical

Engine is made, it will be desirable to transform all formulæ containing

tabular numbers into others better adapted to the use of such a machine.

This, I replied, is the answer I give to you as mathematicians; but I

added, that for others less skilled in our science, I had another

answer: namely—

That the engine might be so arranged that wherever tabular numbers of

any kind, occurred in a formula given it to compute, it would on

arriving at any required tabular number, as for instance, if it required

the logarithm of 1207, stop itself, and ring a bell to call the

attendant, who would find written at a certain part of the machine

“Wanted log. of 1207.” The attendant would then fetch from tables

previously computed by the engine, the logarithm it required, and

placing it in the proper place, would lift a detent, permitting the

engine to continue its work.

The next step of the engine, on receiving the tabular number (in this

case the logarithm of 1207) would be to _verify_ the fact of its being

really that logarithm. In case no mistake had been made by the

attendant, the engine would use the given tabular number, and go on with

its work until some other tabular number were required, when the same

process would be repeated. If, however, any mistake had been made by the

attendant, and a wrong logarithm had been accidentally given to the

engine, it would have discovered the mistake, and have rung a louder

bell to call the attention of its guide, who on looking at the proper

place, would see a plate above the logarithm he had just put in with the

word “_wrong_” engraven upon it.

By such means it would be perfectly possible to make all calculations

requiring tabular numbers, without the chance of error.

Although such a plan does not seem absolutely impossible, it has always

excited, in those informed of it for the first time, the greatest

surprise. How, it has been often asked, does it happen if the engine

knows when the _wrong_ logarithm is offered to it, that it does not also

know the right one; and if so, what is the necessity of having recourse

to the attendant to supply it? The solution of this difficulty is

accomplished by the very simplest means.

§ The fourth of the apparent impossibilities to which I have referred,

involves a condition of so extraordinary a nature that even the most

fastidious inquirer into the powers of the Analytical Engine could

scarcely require it to fulfil.

Knowing the kind of objections that my countrymen make to this

invention, I proposed to myself this inquiry:—

Is it possible so to construct the Analytical Engine, that after the

cards representing the formulæ and numbers are put into it, and the

handle is turned, the following condition shall be fulfilled?

The attendant shall stop the machine in the middle of its work, whenever

he chooses, and as often as he pleases. At each stoppage he shall

examine all the figure wheels, and if he can, without breaking the

machine, move any of them to other figures, he shall be at liberty to do

so. Thus he may from time to time, falsify as many numbers as he

pleases. Yet notwithstanding this, the final calculation and all the

intermediate steps shall be entirely free from error. I have succeeded

in fulfilling this condition by means of a principle in itself very

simple. It may add somewhat, though not very much, to the amount of

mechanism required; in many parts of the engine the principle has been

already carried out. I by no means think such a plan _necessary_,

although wherever it can be accomplished without expense it ought to be

adopted.

CHAPTER XIV.

POSITION OF SCIENCE.

Science in England is not a profession: its cultivators are scarcely

recognised even as a class. Our language itself contains no _single_

term by which their occupation can be expressed. We borrow a foreign

word [_Savant_] from another country whose high ambition it is to

advance science, and whose deeper policy, in accord with more generous

feelings, gives to the intellectual labourer reward and honour, in

return for services which crown the nation with imperishable renown, and

ultimately enrich the human race.

The first question which presents itself to a government desirous of

advancing science, is to consider what departments of knowledge it is

important that it should reward. This is a point upon which much

misunderstanding prevails, and with regard to which interested parties

have studiously endeavoured to delude the public.

As the fund which can be applied to this purpose even by a generous

nation, is moderate, the first limitation of its application ought

naturally to be,—to confine it to those discoveries which are from their

very nature not immediately capable of becoming a source of profit.

One of the most common errors, is to reward persons who have merely

acquired an extensive knowledge of various departments of science, but

who have neither extended its boundaries by new methods, nor added new

principles to its theories.

§ An analogous mistake often occurs to wealthy and benevolent persons

residing in the country, who, finding in the son of their village

blacksmith or other artificer, some great aptitude for figures,

immediately conclude that if properly trained and then sent to College,

he will turn out a great mathematician. Now although in very rare

instances such cases may have occurred, the general result is quite

different. The lad thus selected, if as is usually the case he is

somewhat above the average intellect, will under such favourable

circumstances probably acquire a considerable knowledge of science, and

become a very respectable member of society. But if the benevolent

person who thus totally changed the position in life of this young man,

had first made inquiries at our national schools, he would probably have

found several out of every hundred scholars, capable under similar

treatment of acquiring a still larger amount of that knowledge.

§ With the increasing extension of science the labour of some of its

details becomes excessive, and those who are able to afford the expense,

gladly employ computers to relieve them from the more irksome portions

of their toil. The reduction of astronomical and meteorological

observations are of this kind. When once the formulæ to be used are

decided upon, and a skeleton form is ruled or printed and a system of

checks is devised, the remaining work may be executed by persons of very

moderate attainments. This may be extended to the computation of the

orbits of planets, of comets, and of double stars, and such assistance

may usually be had on very moderate terms. In more extensive operations,

the liability to error from the want of sufficient checks, and the great

tediousness and even uncertainty of the result must remain, until

mechanism shall entirely relieve the mind from these difficulties.

§ Let us now consider what is the present situation of men of science in

England.

The estimate which is formed of the social position of any class of

society, depends mainly upon the answer to these two questions:—

What are the salaries of the highest offices to which the most

successful may aspire?

What are the honorary distinctions which the most eminent can attain?

Offices of a strictly scientific nature are few, and their salaries are

generally of small amount: amongst these there are—

A few of the professorships at our universities.

The Astronomer Royal.

The Astronomers of some of our Colonial Observatories.

The Master of Mechanics to the Queen.

The Conductor of the Nautical Almanac.

The Director of the Museum of Economical Geology and of the Geological

Survey.

Various officers of the same institution.

Some of the officers in the Natural History department of the British

Museum.

The most valuable of these, that of Astronomer Royal, receives about

1,300_l._ a-year, including a pension of 300_l._

Thus there is amongst this class one solitary prize of at the utmost

1,300_l._ a-year, and that is confined to one department of science.

Offices for which men of science are at least as fit as any other

persons, are numerous, though they are very rarely attained by those who

pursue it.

It may, perhaps, have been expected that the recent appointment of Sir

John Herschel to the Mastership of the Mint, should have been noticed in

the previous list. But until the motives which dictated it are known, I

have no observation to make, except that it is gratifying to me to find

that the great principle of the “claims of science,” for which I have

all my life been contending, has been thus as it were, unconsciously

admitted by the minister: and had the accident of birth placed me in his

position, the appointment would have been the same, although the motives

for it might have been different.

Let us now turn to the _honorary distinctions_ which await science.

During the eleven years of the present reign, one solitary instance is

to be found of a baronetcy given for science, and that too occurred only

at a festival (the coronation) at which baronetages and peerages were

showered upon those whose sole claim was founded on the mere support of

party.

During the same interval, about half a dozen of those who cultivate

science, have been knighted.

It appears then that the highest position a man of science can attain,

and that but very rarely, is a baronetcy; that the highest salary is

about 1,000_l._ a-year. When this is compared with the most successful

prizes in the army, the navy, the church, or the bar, it shows at once

the inferior position occupied by science.

Connected with the navy is an office which ought to be held by a person

eminently uniting science with practical skill. The Surveyor-General of

the Navy has to decide upon questions of the greatest difficulty. The

mathematical theories and inquiries on which the various qualities of

sailing vessels and steamers depend, are of the most complicated kind,

and are not even yet sufficiently advanced to serve as secure and

absolute guides. Yet without a knowledge of their present state, and a

power of advancing those theories, it is hopeless to expect the greatest

and most valuable additions to the science of naval architecture. This

can only be accomplished by one who combines a great facility in

applying such portions of them as admit of it, to the practical facts

which experience is continually bringing to light.

The talent for commanding a fleet is by no means rare: the most

successful in that line may attain fortune, the peerage, and a large

pension. The talent for investigating the laws regulating the forms of

ships, is of the very rarest order. Even if its possessor should happen

to be of the naval profession, his greatest reward could only extend to

knighthood, and a thousand a-year during the tenure of an office of

great labour. Of course, naval men having the requisite talents, would

never turn them into so unprofitable a direction: yet it would be

difficult to say how many millions of money have been, and continue to

be, uselessly expended for want of that knowledge.

Amongst those situations in the appointment of the government, there are

many in which a knowledge of various branches of science is highly

useful. A considerable number of these are filled by officers of

engineers, artillery, and other corps of the army and of the navy. Thus

those whose service is already paid for by the country, are excused from

doing their ordinary duty, and are paid again for doing another and

perhaps a more agreeable duty.

Under the delusive plea that _military_ and _civil_ engineering are the

same science, military engineers have been placed in situations for

which they were unfit, and civil engineers have been excluded, to the

injury of that profession, and to the much greater damage of the

country. The Ordnance Magnetical Observatories will furnish an example

of the _economy_ which, it is pretended, results from such arrangements.

Some ten or twelve years ago, it was proposed by Humboldt that various

governments should establish magnetical observatories at different

points on the earth’s surface, so chosen that by the united information

thus obtained, we might arrive at more accurate and correct ideas of the

state of the earth’s magnetism. That plan has been pursued with great

advantage to science. A magnetical observatory was built at Greenwich,

and continuous observations were made which have been reduced and

published annually under the direction of the Astronomer Royal. The

expense[23] of the Magnetic and Meteoric Observatory, excluding that

portion of the Astronomer Royal’s salary which may be considered due to

his services in the direction of this department, but _including the

whole of the making and recording the observations themselves_, is

720_l._ annually.

There are other magnetical observatories in several of our colonies in

which observations are made. These observations appear to be sent for

reduction to an establishment at Woolwich, under the superintendence of

Colonel Sabine.

Now the first and most obvious course would have been to have employed

an additional number of computers at Greenwich, who should use the same

formulæ and methods of reduction. This would ensure perfect uniformity,

and would apparently be the most economical plan.

The course that is actually pursued is to have a separate establishment

at Woolwich, with an officer, and several non-commissioned officers on

extra pay, so that the account stands thus:—[24]

£ s. d.

One officer, extra pay 182 10 0

One non-commissioned officer, ditto 27 7 6

Three non-commissioned officers, ditto 68 8 9

Contingent, not exceeding 200 0 0

------------

Apparent expense £478 6 3

But to this must be added—

The full pay of Lieut.-Colonel 300 0 5

His extra pay 273 15 0

Full pay of one officer, if a Captain 192 16 3

Ditto one non-commissioned ditto[25] 20 0 0

Ditto three ditto ditto 50 0 0

-------------

Real expense £1,314 17 11

In the estimate for civil service for 1850[26] the following items

occur:—

£ s. d.

Extra pay to Colonel Sabine, Royal Artillery, for

services in connexion with the Magnetic and

Meteorological Observations, for ten years, from

7th May, 1839, to 7th May, 1849, at 15s. a-day 2,739 15 0

Deduct 3s. 4d. per day granted him from 1st June,

1841, to 7th May, 1848, as compensation for loss

of command pay 434 8 0

--------------

£2,305 7 0

This certainly requires an explanation. Here is an officer not doing the

services of his profession, who it seems has been allowed a compensation

for what he _might_ have received if he _had_ rendered those services:

notwithstanding which, at the end of ten years, he claims and is allowed

the above sum of £2,305 7_s._ for services the payment of which it would

seem by this account was never contemplated during those ten years.

It is also to be remarked that Colonel Sabine does not reside at

Woolwich, where the only effective portion of the work is carried on.

§ But to return to our argument: it is singular that even the principles

on which science ought to be rewarded, are not entirely settled.

Should all equally great discoveries be rewarded in the same way,

without regard to the different positions in society which the

discoverers occupy? If this principle were admitted, the rewards must be

very large, or there would be none for the higher classes of society.

Of all steps in the social scale, that which first elevates a man into

the class of Gentlemen is by far the greatest. In this country, where

the differences of rank are great, there is fortunately, until we

approach royalty, no absolute line of demarcation between any classes,

except the one alluded to; even the peerage to a private gentleman is

not so great an advance.

It is without doubt very desirable that all classes should contribute to

the intellectual advancement of the country. But unless different

advantages are proposed to different classes, it is not possible to

apply any general stimulus to all.

§ Those who maintain that science is its own reward, cannot have

remarked the vicious circle in which they reason. The delight derived

from discovery is indeed a high intellectual reward, but the force of

this maxim is only known practically to those who have already advanced

in the career of discovery: it can, therefore, never direct the inquirer

into that line. All men are subject to the same feelings and passions.

It is assuredly true that men of wealth and rank will be happier if they

cultivate their faculties, and add to the amount of human knowledge: but

they cannot be aware of this truth until they are considerably advanced,

consequently it cannot have induced them to commence this cultivation.

§ But it is for the interest of those who are the consumers of

knowledge, that all other minds should be induced to advance it:

therefore it is our interest to place even before the highest classes,

at the commencement of their career, motives for its pursuit. Having

raised such expectations, justice requires us to fulfil them; nor can we

regret that the advantages derived from the course into which we have

invited them, should have proved beneficial to them beyond even the

limits of our prediction.

It is of the very nature of knowledge that the recondite and apparently

useless acquisition of to-day, becomes part of the popular food of a

succeeding generation. Thus the nobleman who spends his wealth in

constructing unrivalled instruments, and his nights in scrutinizing with

them the remotest boundaries of space into which human vision has yet

penetrated, is preparing a source of pleasure and happiness for the

descendants of those very peasants whom his practical skill in

engineering has raised by his own instructions above the ranks in which

he originally found them.

§ Another question has been raised, but not yet answered, respecting

those pensions which have been awarded for scientific discoveries. A

certain definite limit has been fixed by practice, which has never yet

been exceeded in pensions assigned to science. The sum of three hundred

a-year, the maximum of reward to science, is almost the minimum of

reward for other services.

The most important question is, Whether these pensions are given as the

reward of scientific services rendered to the country, or as charity to

enlightened and studious persons who happen to be poor? In the one case,

they are an honour which a philosopher may be proud of receiving from

his country: in the other, they are no more than a higher order of

pauper relief, which an independent gentleman can scarcely condescend to

accept.

Another important question, though of a different nature, also arises

here. Are these pensions, thus small in amount, fit to be offered to

those who, in order to arrive at their discoveries, have themselves in

some cases spent out of their own private fortune, sums far larger than

the fee simple of the rewards thus offered to them.

Is it just that the _same rewards_ should be given to persons filling

well-endowed scientific offices, supplied with all the means of

discovery which the most perfect art can produce, as to other

philosophers, who, at the expense of their own personal comfort and

perhaps of the interests of their family, have purchased the costly

means by which they have succeeded in _equally_ improving their several

departments of science?

For the honour and the advancement of science, it is necessary that

these questions should be distinctly answered. It is to be hoped that

some independent member of parliament will at last press them in a

manner which no ministerial shuffling can evade.

[23] See App. to Rept. of Select Com. on Misc. Expenditure, p. 222.

[24] See p. 221 App. to Rept. on Misc. Expenditure, p. 848 (543) II.

[25] The pay of the non-commissioned officers has been assumed as

somewhat less by ten per cent. than their extra pay.

[26] See p. 41, App. to Rept. on Misc. Expenditure, p. 848, (268) IV.

CHAPTER XV.

THE PRESS.

Some of the principles for the discovery of truth, professed and acted

upon by those who administer the laws of England, and by those who

practice in its courts, are certainly repugnant to the first impressions

and feelings of honest men, if not also to common sense. It is,

therefore, absolutely necessary, in order to remove these impressions,

to state the ground on which those principles are defended. That ground

may be shortly expressed thus—

It has been found by long experience that it is more for the advantage

of truth and justice that professional men should be stimulated by fees

and the hope of advancement, to put forward or conceal every fact, to

advance, withhold, or oppose every inference and argument, _solely_ as

it may be of advantage to the party by whom they are employed.

It is also stated that the public are aware of this convention, and,

therefore, are not deceived by the speeches of the advocate.

Without asking whether the long experience alluded to has ever been

fortified by the trial and the failure of an opposite course, it may be

at once stated that this mode of arriving at truth is contrary to the

result of long experience in matters of science. In all discussions on

those subjects, it is found far more conducive to truth, if either party

in discussing a mooted point discover in his own argument a flaw,

unobserved by his opponent, that he should immediately point it out, and

that they should both apply their minds to repair it, and if

unsuccessful, admit it. The same course is pursued with regard to facts;

every circumstance, however apparently remote, is contributed by both

inquirers to the common stock, without the slightest care as to its

bearings on one or the other side of the question. Facts thus conveyed

for the first time to the mind of one of the parties, often recall to

his memory analogous facts, and thus the materials of reasoning or of

induction become largely increased.

§ To this supposed legal principle, it may be fairly objected that it is

entirely a theoretical view. To be convinced of this it is enough to

appeal to every man who has ever sat on a jury or heard one addressed by

counsel. He well knows that the very first effort of the learned

advocate is to attempt to persuade the jury that he is no advocate at

all. This line is sustained throughout his address, and his great object

is to convince them that he himself personally believes both the facts

to which his witnesses testify, and the inferences he adduces from their

evidence. The more skilful the advocate, the more he endeavours to

persuade the jury that he is merely an impartial observer, assisting

them in arriving at a just conclusion.

The effects of long habit in thus mystifying less practised reasoners,

cannot fail to be injurious to the moral character of the man. Take a

case of title to property, on which a barrister is consulted. Suppose

the holder has no right whatever to it, yet will the barrister by every

means his knowledge and ingenuity can suggest, help his client to rob

some other person of his property. It is useless to say that in such

circumstances the attorney conceals certain facts of his case, and does

not put the facts to the counsel in this plain way. On such occasions

the most skilful counsel are always employed, and they are certainly

competent, _if they choose it_, to ascertain the real state of the case.

In criminal cases such attempts to mislead juries are still more

reprehensible.

§ If the principle now discussed is sound, it is capable of application

to another subject—the press. But strangely enough, lawyers, more than

any other class, abuse the press because it treats its subject

commercially, and refuse to admit that rule in the case of editors of

newspapers, which they claim as a sanction for themselves. A little

examination, however, will show that the conduct of the press is much

more defensible than that of the bar.

The public require a daily account of all facts connected with politics

and the institutions of the country; it also demands analyses,

discussions, and opinions on the bearings of all such facts upon its

interests. As opinions amongst the public are often much opposed to, or

widely different from each other, it is clear that this demand cannot be

satisfied without many newspapers. Now, looking solely to the commercial

profit arising from its sale, it is tolerably certain that some one

paper supported by greater capital, and conducted with greater skill,

will endeavour to represent the opinions of the largest class of those

who purchase these sheets of diurnal information. The first place being

thus occupied, other journals will arise to represent the opinions of

smaller, yet, perhaps, of powerful classes. Thus the opinions of all

parties, and, in some measure, their relative strength, become known to

each other. This is an end much to be desired.

If the opinions of the public change, those of the leading journal must

of course follow, even though they are directly opposed to those

advocated by it a few days before. Such a change undoubtedly shocks the

feelings of many who remain constant to their own views, and cases often

occur in which these latter give up their usual paper. It must, however,

be admitted that there are few political or economical questions on

which one side is morally right, the other morally wrong. That a given

man has or has not got possession of another man’s estate, that a man

has or has not committed a murder or other crime, must, in most cases,

be well known to his counsel; if in either case the wrong-doer escapes

punishment, an injury is done to society. But whether a given line of

policy or a given law, is more or less beneficial or even injurious to

the State, is generally dependent on so many causes that very few are

able to foresee their consequences with tolerable certainty.

The most general and unsophisticated opinion is, that no man is

justified in advocating, even when unpaid, doctrines in which he does

not himself believe. With respect to the press, it is possible that the

writer of the second article may be a different individual from the

person who wrote the first article; but even were he the same person,

the bar at least have no right to find fault with him.

§ The press then may advantageously be considered as expressing the

opinions of classes, not of individuals. It has greatly improved in the

last quarter of a century, in consequence of the general improvement of

all classes.

There is now also fortunately established a certain professional feeling

amongst its members that reports of speeches, or of facts, ought to be

_rigidly exact_. Abstracts of speeches will occasionally be coloured not

by additions, but by selections or omissions, according to the side of

the question advocated by the writer. Yet even here the more popular

papers are careful to do justice to all parties. It is the more

important that this latter rule should be admitted as a principle,

because, from the great length of the debates themselves, they are

rarely read by persons much occupied, except when questions of great

interest occur.

To such persons an _impartial_ abstract is invaluable.

In the leading articles greater latitude is allowable. These, if the

theory which has been explained is admitted, are avowedly the

expressions of the opinion of its customers. The power of the press is

undoubtedly great, yet it is bound by the strongest ties of interest not

to abuse that power. It is clearly its interest to seem consistent, and

consequently to employ, at almost any expense, the best means of

ascertaining the opinions of the country _before_ they are publicly

expressed. Having attained this knowledge, it will get the credit of

appearing to lead public opinion.

Its powers of doing good when honestly conducted, are yet larger than

its powers of mischief. Yet even here its power is of necessity limited.

It cannot advocate even the _best_ course of policy on any important

subject unless it is tolerably certain that it will succeed in

convincing its customers that it is _really_ the best. It _ought_ not to

advocate that best course, because the falling off of its subscribers

might then disable it from as effectually assisting the _second best_.

It, however, neither ought, nor is it ultimately its interest, to

conceal those opinions from its subscribers.

The power it possesses, of exposing knaves and swindlers, by means of

its correspondents, and of sending highly intelligent commissioners from

time to time to inquire personally into the situation of various classes

of the population, are of great value, and could only be exercised by a

wealthy as well as by a powerful press.

CHAPTER XVI.

PARTY.

“Of all the tyrannies that molest this terrestrial scene perhaps there

is none so arbitrary, so extravagant, or so grotesque as the tyranny

of party. There is none that so frequently subjects the wise to the

caprices of the fool, and the good to the designs of the knave.”—_The

Times, Dec. 1850._

There are two great principles of government which divide the opinions

of mankind.

1st. Unchangeableness; or, “Let things alone:”—the law of the Medes and

Persians.

2d. Progress; or, the continual advancement of mankind in the

improvement of their Institutions.

No number of persons sufficiently extensive to deserve the name of a

class, have ever advocated the principle of _Retrocession_. Some few

enthusiasts have indeed believed in a golden age, and have advocated the

pastoral, or even the hunting life. These, however, were not persons

capable of collecting, examining, and weighing the evidence on which

alone an opinion on the comparative happiness of people existing in a

savage or in a civilized state of life can justly be formed.

A larger number exist, the admirers of the past, each perhaps the

worshipper of his own peculiar age. Had he lived in those times,

enjoying only the ordinary capacity he now possesses, but endowed with

all the increased knowledge of the present day, he might then have

attained a position more commensurate with his wishes, though quite

disproportioned to the industry of his exertions or the calibre of his

intellect.

§ In our own country, “the wisdom of our ancestors” is with some the

hackneyed theme of unbounded admiration.

Our ancestors were generally wise and sagacious men: they applied their

energies and their knowledge, as far as it went, to their _existing_

wants and necessities. Those amongst them who deserved that character,

would, if questioned, have expressed in language the precept to which

their deeds conformed. Availing themselves gratefully of all the

knowledge bequeathed to them by their predecessors, they struggled to

advance it for their own and their children’s benefit, and thus they

might have counselled every generation to their latest posterity:—

“You have received from us, tested by many trials, the treasured

knowledge, gathered under difficulty and danger, of our country’s

experience.

“Let the great object of each generation be to purify that body of

knowledge from its partial errors, to add to it the greatest amount of

new truths.

“Remember that accumulated knowledge, like accumulated capital,

increases at compound interest: but it differs from the accumulation of

capital in this; that the increase of knowledge produces a more rapid

rate of progress, whilst the accumulation of capital leads to a lower

rate of interest. Capital thus checks its own accumulation: knowledge

thus accelerates it own advance. Each generation, therefore, to deserve

comparison with its predecessor, is bound to add much more largely to

the common stock than that which it immediately succeeds.”

§ A question has not unfrequently been proposed by those who apply their

foresight to remote rather than to immediate objects—

“What will become of our posterity when our coal-fields are exhausted?”

The best answer to this question is, that when that distant day arrives,

if our posterity, with the accumulated knowledge of centuries, shall

have failed to find any substitute for coal in the many other sources of

heat which nature supplies, they will then deserve to be frost-bitten.

§ It is remarkable that the great parties adopt opposite principles in

pursuance of the same line of reasoning.

The advocates of things as they are, wish to stop all change, in order

to _prevent revolution_. Those who inculcate continual progress, support

it, because it makes all changes gradual, and thus, in their opinion, it

_prevents revolution_.

It is by sudden changes in laws and institutions that the greatest

misery is inflicted on mankind. Those gradual changes which are spread

over a considerable period are foreseen, and men make preparation

beforehand to accommodate themselves to the new but expected

circumstances.

If the changes effected by the Reform Bill, had been spread over the ten

preceding and ten subsequent years, few will deny that it would have

been a better measure, and more effective for its purpose. The

experience derived from its earlier changes would then have been

available for its later uses. The pertinacity, however, with which all

reform was resisted, led to such a state of affairs, that after the

refusal to transfer the franchise from East Retford, revolution was

averted only by vast and _immediate_ concession.

§ The terms Tory and Whig had been the watchwords of these two parties,

until, at last, the public lost all confidence in either. With the

increasing wealth of the country, and with the greater application of

observation, of reasoning, and of science, to its many arts and

manufactures, a vast increase has been produced in the numbers, the

power, and the influence of the middle classes. Many individuals who

have raised themselves by their intellect and industry into this class,

have been so fully impressed with the advantages of previous training,

that they have made efforts to give their children an education more

extensive and more liberal than any which, until lately, our

universities had attempted to supply.

It is to the growth of this class, which includes men possessing from

500_l._ to 5,000_l._ a-year, that we are indebted for much of the

strength which public opinion now exerts upon the ministry of the day.

Notwithstanding the vast influence of wealth and of rank throughout the

country, there are still amongst these middle classes, thousands whose

moderation renders them rich; who, therefore, can afford to be honest,

and whose approbation is neither to be purchased by wealth, nor won by

the seductions of rank and of fashionable life.

Such men, on all public questions, influence widely and justly the

opinions of those around them. There are such in the House of Commons;

and, with the extension of knowledge, many more will be added to their

number.

Thus the very weakness of an administration may possibly become an

advantage, since it thus becomes impossible for government to carry any

measure entirely opposed to the calm good sense of the people. This,

however, admits of one excepted case. If a party to advance its own

interests will pander to some strong passion, to some prejudice of

ignorance or of bigotry, it may for a time succeed, though it will

ultimately lose in character.

In the meantime, the people have found out that Party is made use of

only for the aggrandizement of a few families; that it has degenerated

into a clique, banded together for mercenary purposes, without

enthusiasm or genius to compensate for its meanness, and with little of

talent to palliate its want of integrity.

The reign of party, however, verges towards its end; the supplies on

which it feeds are sapped by economical reform. That almost all places

under Government are greatly overpaid admits of no denial. The demand

for them is notoriously great, and it is equally notorious that nothing

but the strongest political interest has any chance in the contest for

them.

The government of England is nominally a limited monarchy, but

practically almost an oligarchy. A large number of its appointments are

shared by a few families, into which some daring and unscrupulous

intruders occasionally force their way, by opposition which it is easier

to quell by place than to answer by argument: or into which less gifted

and more cunning supporters sometimes obtain an entrance by a judicious

alliance.

§ It is strongly asserted that government cannot go on without party.

That those who maintain this opinion are incapable of so conducting it,

must be at once admitted.

Without, however, entering into the debateable question of the _limits_

of party, it is sufficient to state another principle, which no honest

man will deny, and then to leave to the advocates of party to reconcile

it with their doctrine.

_It is morally wrong to endeavour to convince any one of the truth of an

opinion in which the advocate himself does not believe._

If this principle were practically acted upon, how much of the valuable

time of both Houses of Parliament would be saved! In looking over a

debate, or still better, a _division_, the private opinions of many of

the speakers are often well known by their friends to be quite at

variance with the doctrines they advocated in their speeches. The

quasi-honesty of those who admit the truth in private, is however

venial, when compared with the hypocrisy of those who are equally false

on both occasions.

Party, then, as it practically exists, is one of the evils of the

political state of England.

The remedy must come partly from the reduction of temptation, by

diminishing the salaries of all those places and appointments for which

there is such immense competition; partly from the effect of public

opinion; and ultimately, to a far greater extent, when any sincere

desire exists to restrain it, from improved methods of distributing

patronage.

But one defect seems almost always to accompany a high state of

civilization, namely,—a great deficiency of moral courage in large

classes of persons, who from knowledge and position ought rightly to

contribute their share to the formation and expression of public

opinion. The first evil which this produces, is an excessive zeal and

energy in a few of those who are most strongly convinced. These bear the

brunt of the attacks of all who are interested in the support of abuses.

If, unhappily, they are not independent in fortune as well as in spirit,

these, the forlorn hope of reform, are sure ultimately to be trampled

upon and destroyed by the jobbers—they die with ruined fortunes and

broken hearts.

Many of those who shared their opinions, and urged on their enthusiasm,

but who warily abstained from expressing their own thoughts _in public_,

now venture to avow those principles, to which opinion has at length

advanced: these reap the rewards won by the energies and sacrifices of

their martyred friends. For such, the epithet the poet applied to Bacon

is not unfit:

—“the wisest—meanest of mankind.”—POPE.

A very serious evil arises from this timidity in expressing opinions.

The whole state of society presents a counterfeit surface,—no man knows

how many or how few really share his opinions: its whole fabric is in a

state of unstable equilibrium; it is liable at every moment to most

unlooked-for changes, from accidents apparently trivial.

The following is one amongst many examples which might have been

selected of the different standard with which Party measures services

rendered to the public by those within and those without its own limits.

In the year 1847, when some millions of English money were sent over to

save the people of Ireland from perishing by famine, it became necessary

to organize a system of accounts and of regulations, for the direction

of those officers who were sent over for the purpose of personally

superintending the distribution of this relief.

These arrangements were made by the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury,

Sir C. T----, K.C.B., at extra hours; but it does not appear how many

months he was so employed.

The office at that time held by this gentleman, was one for which he

received a salary of £2,500 per annum; and certainly this liberal salary

ought to have commanded the devotion of his whole time, if necessary, to

the public service. It would seem that some application was made from

the Treasury, and that Lord John Russell acceded to it with unwonted

liberality. He gave the remuneration in a manner thought

unconstitutional by several eminent members of the House of Commons, and

to an extent justly considered extravagant by the public.

The following extracts from Hansard will explain the matter.

“The Chancellor of the Exchequer.—With regard to Sir C. T----, the

case was an exceptional one; but his services on the extraordinary

emergency alluded to were so very great that it had been thought right

to make a Treasury minute, awarding him £2,500. The item would be

found in the ‘Civil Contingencies’ laid before the House.

“Mr. Disraeli,—while readily acknowledging the great services rendered

by this gentleman, could not forget that the Order of the Bath had

been conferred upon him—a reward bestowed upon him as for services

which could not be paid by a pecuniary grant. The vote of £2,500 was

surely conceived in rather bad taste; and a _preux chevalier_ like Sir

C. T----, bearing his blushing honours, might well be supposed to

recoil from receiving an extra year’s salary.

“Mr. Gladstone—condemned the conduct of Government in this matter. It

was their duty to have submitted a vote to the House, not to have

taken on themselves to reward a public servant. If there was one rule

connected with the public service which more than any other ought to

be scrupulously observed, it was this, that the salary of a public

officer, more especially if he were of high rank, ought to cover all

the services he might be called upon to render. Any departure from

this rule must be dangerous.

“Lord John Russell said, that the Government thought the services of

Sir C. T---- were deserving of reward.

“Mr. Goulburn.—According to all precedent, the House of Commons ought

to have fixed the amount of Sir C. T.’s remuneration.

“Lord John Russell.—Sir C. T---- stated in his evidence that he worked

three hours before breakfast; that he then went to the Treasury, where

he worked all day; and that the pressure upon him was such that he

wondered that he had been able to get through it alive.”—_Hansard_,

Vol. 101, p. 138, 1848. Supply, 14th Aug. 1848.

There appears to be some indistinctness as to the fund out of which this

2,500_l._ was taken. Compare Hansard with Questions 1693 and 1696 of the

Report on Miscellaneous Expenditure.

No mode of keeping accounts, however, will alter the fact; that if the

famine had not occurred, neither would the 2,500_l._ have been required;

consequently, that sum was part of the whole amount our humanity cost

us.

The liberality of the Minister to the Assistant Secretary of the

Treasury, may be explained by stating that he was the _brother-in-law_

of a Cabinet Minister.

There was another gentleman at least equal in talent to the Assistant

Secretary, whose services were gratuitous, who, at the risk of his

health, was actively engaged on the spot in superintending the

distribution of the relief. To him the Government thought it sufficient

to give the Companionship of the Bath, whilst the Assistant Secretary

was made a Commander of that Order.

CHAPTER XVII.

REWARDS OF MERIT.

The personal distinctions in the gift of the Government of this country

consist of the following five orders of knighthood:—

NAME. NO. OF MEMBERS.

GRAND KNIGHT COMP.

CROSS. COM.

The Garter 25

The Thistle 16

St. Patrick 16

The Bath Military 50 102 525

The Bath Civil 25 50 200

St. George and St. Michael 15 20 25

---------------------

147 172 750

Of these, the first three are restricted, with few and rare exceptions,

to persons of a certain rank—including earls, and those above them. The

number of these, with the addition of three sons for each duke, and of

the eldest sons of marquesses, amounts to about four hundred and fifty.

Amongst this favoured class fifty-seven ribbons may be conferred; so

that about one-eighth of the class enjoy the decoration.

These ribbons, although much sought after by the class amongst which

they are distributed, are more correctly appreciated by the public at

large.

With some illustrious and honourable exceptions, they are usually given

by those in power to their party supporters. They have also occasionally

been employed by the minister of the day, as inducements to persuade his

friends to postpone inconvenient questions, to the agitation of which

they had been publicly pledged.

An amusing and characteristic anecdote respecting one of these Orders,

the Garter, is related of a late Premier. At a time when several of

these “baubles” had fallen vacant, and been judiciously given away by

the discreet minister, a friend asked him, why he had not retained a

Garter for himself? to which he wittily replied, “Why, the fact is, I

don’t see the use of a man’s bribing himself.”

The order of St. Michael and St. George was instituted for the Ionian

Islands, and is usually given, after a certain time of service, to the

Lord High Commissioner, to the Commanders-in-Chief of the Mediterranean

fleet, and to other persons connected with the public service in those

quarters.

Thus England has, practically, only one order of merit; and, singularly

enough, with the exception of a few civil crosses of the first-class

almost invariably given for diplomatic service, until lately, that order

was not accessible to any other than military merit.

§ In countries, however, which we fondly flattered ourselves were less

advanced in civilization than our own, the vulgar notion of paying

homage to brute force has long been superseded by a more just

appreciation of the elements of military glory. Nations even the most

ambitious of this species of renown, have admitted that physical

prowess, that recklessness of personal danger, form but the smallest

amongst those qualities which contribute to military success.

It is now felt and admitted, that it is the civil capacity of the great

commander which prepares the way for his military triumphs; that his

knowledge of human nature enables him to select the fittest agents, and

to place them in the situations best adapted to their powers; that his

intimate acquaintance with all the accessaries which contribute to the

health and comfort of his troops, enables him to sustain their moral and

physical energy. It has been seen that he must have studied and properly

estimated the character of his foes as well as of his allies, and have

made himself acquainted with the personal character of the chiefs of

both; and still further, that he must have scrutinized the secret

motives which regulated their respective governments.

When directly engaged in the operations of contending armies occupying a

wide extent of country, he must be able, with rapid glance, to ascertain

the force it is possible to concentrate upon each of many points in any

given time, and the greater or less chance of failing in the attempt. He

must also be able to foresee, with something more than conjecture, what

amount of the enemy’s force can be brought to the same spot in the same

and in different times. With these elements he must undertake one of the

most difficult of mental tasks, that of classifying and grouping the

innumerable combinations to which either party may have recourse for

purposes of attack or defence. Out of the multitude of such

combinations, which might baffle by their simple enumeration the

strongest memory, throwing aside the less important, he must be able to

discover, to fix his attention, and to act upon the most favourable.

Finally, when the course thus selected having been pursued, and perhaps

partially carried out, is found to be entirely deranged by one of those

many chances inseparable from such operations, then, in the midst of

action, he must be able suddenly to organise a different system of

operations, new to all other minds, yet possibly although unconsciously,

anticipated by his own.

The genius that can meet and overcome such difficulties _must_ be

intellectual, and would, under different circumstances, have been

distinguished in many a different career.