14 PRESIDENT S ADDRESS. 



generally realised that it now is. Meanwhile one may rejoice 

 that even applied science has received an amount of recognition 

 formerly denied to it, or at best grudgingly conceded. In this 

 connection a most unfortunate fact is that almost everyone who 

 has had a general education imagines himself in the possession 

 of sufficient knowledge of scientic subjects to be able to decide 

 what kind of research should be undertaken in each branch. 

 Here such a science as astronomy has an advantage : the average 

 educated man is so ignorant of astronomy that the astronomer 

 is usually left to pursue his investigations unmolested, and it 

 is only when persons who themselves carry on these pursuits 

 prostitute science to personal ends that the astronomer finds him- 

 self obstructed by lay intervention. An instance of this kind 

 seems to have occurred when Sir David Gill had served the 

 Admiralty for as long a period as 15 years. In a letter to Prof. 

 Kapteyn. Sir David wrote : 



A deliberate attempt was made to hand over the Observatory to the 

 Cape Government — which would have been equivalent ro its extinction — 

 and the appointment of a successor to George Maclear (one of my assist- 

 ants) was refused — in consequence of statements made to the Treasury 

 that I had been neglecting my proper duties and been observing mmor 

 planets and other pursuits on my own account. Fortunately Newcomb 

 wrote me a letter, acknowledging in strong terms the value of the Cape 

 work to the American Ephemeris, which gave the lie direct to my false 

 accusers, and ended in my getting a warm official letter of thanks from 

 the Admiralty for these very services.* 



Another instance of workers in science endeavouring to 

 thwart research may be quoted from the same book (p. 175) : 



It would be laughable [says Prof. Forbes], if it were not almost tragic. 

 to record the fact that Gill's work was opposed because, at a Royal Society 

 Conversazione in 1886, his photographs, showing so few stars, were placed 

 beside the long-exposure photographs of the Milky Way. showing thou- 

 sands of stars. Gill wrote to Newcomb: "I told them that I had heard 

 of babies crying for the moon, but I had never dreamt of anything so 

 funny as a row of Fellows of the Royal Society insisting on having more 

 g^ magnitude stars in the heavens, else they would stop supplies." 



Unfortunately astronomy is not the only branch of science 

 in regard to which such episodes as the above have occurred, 

 but there is surely nothing more reprehensible in the history of 

 scientific investigation than opposition to the inception or con- 

 tinuance of necessary work, engineered by those who should 

 be aware of the value of that work, but who labour to oppose 

 it in order to serve personal ends. Proceedings like these would 

 be less likely to occur if there were a Department of Science as 

 suggested by Sir William Crookes and Prof. Fraser Harris, for 

 such a Department would be less liable to be misled by the un- 

 scrupulous, and better able to gauge the capabilities of its workers 

 and the value of their work. 



After four years of war we are looking forward to a time 

 when accounts shall be ruled off, and a balance-sheet drawn up. 

 Each country, each State, will be estimating its assets and Ha- 



* George Forbes, F.R.S., "David Gill: Man and Astronomer.'' pp. 



.V)0-I. 



