324 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



of Sirius, the brightest star in the heavens, was revealed, and the 

 mathematical prediction of the cause of his perturbations verified ? 

 Was it not by a Yale College professor that the showers of shooting- 

 stars were first scientifically discussed, on the occasion of the grand 

 American display of that meteoric phenomenon in 1833 ? Did we not 

 join in the investigations respecting terrestrial magnetism instituted 

 by European governments at the suggestion of Humboldt, and con- 

 tribute our quota to the results obtained? Did not the Congress of 

 the United States vote a money-grant to carry into effect the inven- 

 tion of the electric telegraph ? Does not the published flora of the 

 United States show that something has been done in botany ? Have 

 not very important investigations been made here on the induction of 

 magnetism in iron, the effect of magnetic currents on one another, the 

 translation of quantity into intensity, and the converse? Was it not 

 here that the radiations of incandescence were first investigated, the 

 connection of increasing temperature with increasing refrangibility 

 shown, the distribution of light, heat, and chemical activity in the so- 

 lar spectrum ascertained, and some of the fundamental facts in spec- 

 trum analysis developed long before general attention was given to 

 that subject in Europe? Here the first photograph of the moon was 

 taken, here the first of the diffraction spectrums was produced, here 

 the first portraits of the human face were made an experiment that 

 has given rise to an important industrial art ! 



Of our own special science, chemistry, it may truly be affirmed that 

 nowhere are its most advanced ideas, its new conceptions, better under- 

 stood or more eagerly received. But how useless would it be for me 

 to attempt a description in these few moments of what Prof. Silliman, 

 in the work to which I have already referred, found that he could not 

 include on more than 100 closely-printed pages, though he proposed 

 merely to give the names of American chemists and the titles of their 

 works! It would be equally useless and indeed an invidious task to 

 offer a selection ; but this may be said, that among the more promi- 

 nent memoirs there are many not inferior to the foremost that the 

 chemical literature of Europe can present. How unsatisfactory, then, 

 is this brief statement I have made of what might be justly claimed 

 for American science ! Had it been ten times as long, and far more 

 forcibly offered, it would still have fallen short of completeness. I 

 still should have been open to the accusation of not having done jus- 

 tice to the subject. 



Have those who gloat over the shortcomings of American science 

 ever examined the Coast Survey reports, those of the Naval Observa- 

 tory, the Smithsonian contributions, those of the American Association 

 for the Advancement of Science, the proceedings of the American 

 Academy of Arts and Science, those of the American Philosophical 

 Society, the Lyceum of Natural History, and our leading scientific 

 periodicals ? Have they ever looked at the numerous reports pub- 



