JAMES SMITHSON AND HIS BEQUEST. 175 



have clone and what I would have done to accomplish the great design 

 if executed well." 



At the beginning of the Twenty-sixth Congress, December, 1839, Mr. 

 Adams again brought up the subject of the Smithson bequest and had 

 it referred to a committee of nine, consisting of Messrs. Adams, Ogle, 

 Shepard, Garland of Virginia, Lewis, Albert Smith, Barnard, Corwiu, 

 and Campbell of South Carolina. 



A memorial was presented to Congress from the Corporation of the 

 city of Washington, expressing great anxiety " to see the instructions of 

 Smithson carried into effect, believing it impossible to calculate the 

 good which an institution properly founded is susceptible of promoting 

 in the improvement of the intellect, taste, and morals of the country." 

 It was deemed presumptuous, however, to express an opinion as to what 

 should be the character of the institution. 



Mr. Hassler, then in charge of the Coast Survey, urged on Mr. Adams 

 the establishment of an astronomical school. 



On the 5th of March, 1840, Mr. Adams presented an elaborate and 

 extended report to the House of Representatives, reviewing all that had 

 been done relative to the bequest, and presenting the establishment of 

 an astronomical observatory as the best means of carrying out the pur- 

 poses of Smithson. He gave in detail the arguments in favor of this 

 plan, with estimates for carrying it into effect, and an interesting letter 

 from Mr. Airy, the Astronomer Royal of England, relative to the origin, 

 history, uses, and expenses of the famous Greenwich Observatory. Mr. 

 Adams also gave a masterly summary of the progress of astronomical 

 discovery, painted in the most brilliant colors the achievements of men 

 of science, and portrayed in glowing language the future glory and 

 renown of our country to be derived from the application of the Smith- 

 son fund in the manner he proposed. 



The impropriety of devoting any portion of the fund to establish a 

 school or college was strongly urged, and he said, "We should in no 

 case avail ourselves of a stranger's munificence to rear our children." 

 It is not clear how the learned and distinguished gentleman reconciled 

 his apparent inconsistency in advocating the use of the fund for the 

 establishment of "a national observatory to be superior to any other 

 devoted to the same science in any part of the world," and which would 

 '• in, ike an impression upon the reputation of the United States through- 

 out the leaned and scientific world." The desire of increasing the 

 brightness of our name in the eves of other nations, and of effacing a 

 stain lie detected upon the national escutcheon on account of our lack 

 of an observatory, rendered him insensible or indifferent to the merits 

 of any other plan for the increase and diffusion of knowledge. He 

 seems to have been wedded to his favorite scheme, and his whole course 

 in Congress in relation to the bequest was governed by it. After 

 provision had been made for astronomical observations by the general 

 government he still advocated no other plan, and even went so far as to 



