424 FOPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



study, was secured by Dr. Gundelsheim, who had gained the king's 

 confidence, and made the center of bitter opposition to the academy. 

 Although it contained the valuable cabinet of Spener, he alone of all 

 the members of the academy was permitted to examine it. The ob- 

 servatory was compelled to pay rent for rooms hitherto furnished 

 without cost, and subjected to the mortification of seeing rooms in 

 the building which had been erected for its sole use offered for rent. 

 Spener 's death in 1717, just when he had begun to gain the king's 

 respect and confidence, was another misfortune for the academy. Dr. 

 Gundelsheim had now no one to oppose him. It need not be said that 

 the academy soon suffered from his hostility. A full account of its 

 expenses was demanded. The back salary due Leibniz remained in 

 arrears, and after the king had looked over the balance sheet, he 

 reduced the salary which had been only $450 one half, and ordered 

 the $75 saved in this and other ways paid to Dr. Gundelsheim. The 

 reduction of the salary of the president seems to have caused little 

 sorrow in the academy. Indeed it has been said that its members 

 would willingly have cut it off altogether could the salary of the secre- 

 tary have been kept where it was. Dr. Gundelsheim died in June, 

 1715. Meanwhile Leibniz, notwithstanding the ill treatment he had 

 received, continued to exert himself on behalf of the institution he 

 loved. He urged its members to greater efforts and sought to secure 

 the publication of the second volume of miscellanies. But the death 

 of some of the most faithful members and the indifference which the 

 public felt toward it left its future doubtful. Jabloniski was easily 

 its most influential member, as Frisch continued to be its most in- 

 dustrious. 



Leibniz died on November 14, 1716. No settlement had been 

 made for his unpaid salary and none was ever made with his heirs. 

 He died in neglect. Hannover took no notice of his death, neither did 

 the academy in Berlin. Fontenelle, by order of the French Academy, 

 pronounced a worthy eulogy in his honor in Paris on November 13, 

 1717. This treatment of its founder will ever remain a blot on the 

 history of the academy, although its observance of Leibniz Day in 

 later years and at present indicates a better appreciation of his abilities 

 and his services for science and literature than the men of his own 

 generation seem to have had. 



The history of the academy from the death of Leibniz in 1716 to 

 the death of the king in 1740 has comparatively little significance. Its 

 life was monotonous, far from what it ought to have been. With it 

 the king could have little sympathy. His strength was in other 

 directions than as a patron of learning. He laid the foundations of 

 a prosperous state upon which his son wisely built. He impressed 

 the people with the need of industry and economy, but he cared nothing 



