482 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



> 

 shall furnish the basis of an assured induction meeting all the require- 

 ments of the problem. 



Prof. Tyndall, however, is imjjatient of any contradiction. He ad- 

 mits that he has not verified the effect of wind-currents "by means of 

 a captive balloon rising high enough to catch the deflected wave," but 

 none the less he ventures to propound his hypothesis as the last word 

 of science in the premises. Indeed, he takes great credit to himself 

 for having been able to rise above "the authority " of Prof. Henry in 

 this investigation. He says that in one of his "phases of thought" 

 on the question he passed through the solution " which Prof. Henry 

 now oiFers for acceptation," " weighed it in the balance," and " found 

 it wanting." And, as if this language were not supercilious enough, 

 he proceeds to indulge in the following self-complacent reflections : 



" But though it [Prof. Henry's solution of ocean-echoes] thus deflected me 

 from the proper track, shall I say that authority in science is injurious'? Not 

 without some qualification. It is not only injurious, but deadly, when it cows 

 the intellect into fear of questioning it. But the authority which so merits our 

 respect as to compel us to test aiid overthroio all its supports, before accepting a 

 conclusion opposed to it, is not wholly noxious. On the contrary, the disci- 

 plines it imposes may be in the highest degree salutary, though they may end, as 

 in the present case, in the ruin of authority.'''' 



It is impossible to conceive of language more expressive of vanity, 

 conceit, and arrogance, than this ascription of intellectual superiority 

 to which Prof. Tyndall treats himself on the assumption that he has 

 laid " the authority " of Prof. Henry in " ruins " upon the question of 

 atmospheric sound. At no time and in no place has Prof. Henry as- 

 sumed to speak " by authority " on the subject. The man of straw 

 whom Tyndall sets up under cover of Henry's name, in order to ex- 

 hibit upon it the strength and prowess of his intellectual muscle, is a 

 cheap device of rhetoric which a much inferior man might have dis- 

 dained to employ in a case like this. The cause of science does not 

 profit by the self-laudation of its votaries, and Prof. Tyndall's i:)raises 

 are in the mouths of too many people to render it necessary for him to 

 praise himself at the expense of Prof. Henry or of anybody else. 



REPLY OF PROFESSOR TYNDALL.^ 



To the Editor of the Nation. 



Sir : I have been favored with a copy of the Nation of October 

 8th, and would ask permission to make a few remarks on the critique 

 of my work on " Sound " therein contained. 



With regard to Prof. Henry, I hope I am not presumptuous in 

 venturing the opinion, and expressing the belief, that his earlier scien- 

 tific labors were marked by rare power and originality, and that his 

 later years have been usefully and honorably employed in the service 

 'From the Nation of December 23, 1875. 



