1894. NOTES AND COMMENTS. 3 



from this grant, despite the fact that they have since 1879 received 

 an independent annual subsidy from the Government of no less than 

 ;!f500. It is, however, a little rash of the critic to wish that the 

 distribution of this grant should be taken out of the hands of the 

 Council ; for if it were, as he suggests, divided among the various 

 seats of learning about the country, the same difficulty of cliquism 

 would, we fear, occur. No administrative body can wholly escape 

 this charge. 



There is another matter that might well have been touched on 

 by The Times denunciator. The methods of election pursued, not only 

 by the Royal but by many of our other learned societies, are 

 exceedingly open to criticism. The mystic letters placed at the head 

 of this article have too long imposed on the credulity of the public. 

 It is too commonly supposed that they are symbols of vast erudition 

 on the part of their happy possessors. Yet, with the exception of 

 " F.R.S.," all these titles are obtainable by little more than simple 

 purchase. The fellowship of the Royal Society comes, it is true, 

 partly as the reward of original work, but mainly by the backing of 

 influential friends. A glance at the list of that Society might possibly 

 dispel the illusion that all its fellows were men of great learning. As 

 for those who are really worthy of election, we do not deny that the 

 majority of them get into the Society in course of time ; but there are 

 many others whose social position or personal peculiarities are, 

 unjust as it may seem, allowed to tell against them. Indeed the 

 whole system of election into the Royal Society seems to be in need 

 of improvement. It may be legitimate, but it is hardly self-respecting 

 for a man to suggest his own name as a candidate and then to tout 

 round for support. So derogatory a proceeding should be impossible. 

 Why should not the Society, without regard for personal feeling, 

 select the twelve best men of the year, and let the election come as a 

 surprise to the candidate ? The distinction would at least be more 

 honourable. 



But it is possible that mere honour is not the only inducement to 

 candidates for the fellowship of the Royal Society. Not this alone 

 would cause a man to get his name put up year after year by some 

 obliging friend, until common-sense or pique urged him to withdraw 

 from the unsuccessful attempt. May not a deeper reason be some- 

 times found in the commercial value of the Fellowship, not only of 

 the Royal but of the other Societies? We all know that F.R.S. 

 means " Fees Raised Since," while not a few professional men could 

 tell us, if they chose, what pecuniary profit accrued to them from the 

 possession of any of the other magic letters. This is not just, either 

 to the Societies or the public. Election does not and should not 

 imply any professional ability on the part of the candidate. The 

 tailor's cutter, when asked for a reference, replied, " Bring me some 

 cloth and a pair of shears, and you'll want no reference." Such 



should be the attitude of self-respecting professional men ; such is 



B 2 



