THE PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS 



71 



reliance can possibly be placed on the evidence adduced by such 

 an authority, and yet he has claimed to have demonstrated 

 scientific facts by experiment — solely on the faith of his own word 

 — on which evidence he seeks to establish a controverted 

 hypothesis. 



In this example there is the basis of fact — or assumed fact — 

 seeing potatoes on the table after being peeled, and cooked, for 30 

 years. Then this fact is distorted and exaggerated by being made 

 to appear that which it was not, viz., a deliberate scientific experi- 

 ment, made daily for a set purpose. Finally, this " intensified' 1 

 narrative, which we have characterized as exaggeration, is 

 deliberately published in a controversy, in a sensational manner, as 

 scientific evidence. 



I think, when such things are done, it is not a moment too 

 early to warn you against sensationalism in science, to put you on 

 your guard against that "paltering in a double sense ' : to which 

 some are tempted to backslide, in order to achieve a paltry 

 polemical victory, instead of being: content to establish the truth, 

 for the sake of truth, and that alone. 



May I not suggest, without offence, that the tendencies towards 

 exaggeration are very manifest in many directions, whereas yet 

 they only exhibit promonitory symptoms? 



Can we really say that there is no danger with the Bacilli? Is 

 it not possible to take too much for granted, and exaggerate the 

 relations of these minutest of organisms with zymotic disease ? Is 

 it not well to be particularly guarded in such cases lest zeal should 

 outrun discretion ? The danger is all the greater since the subject 

 would accommodate itself so readily to sensationalism. 



Foreign as the subject may be to our own pursuits, it may, 

 nevertheless, be alluded to in illustration. Are we not in great 

 danger of exaggeration in the direction of popular education ? 

 Not the less so because it has a sentimental side, and may be 

 made to conform to sensationalism. 



I think I am justified in saying that we should be cautious lest 

 we exaggerate too much our instrument and its powers. If we 

 fancy that the microscope is to do everything for us, without the 

 exercise of application and judgment, and sound discretion, we shall 

 exaggerate to our own final discomfort. 



If we rely too confidently on what we suppose that we see, under 

 high powers, without concerning ourselves with verifying it in all 



