STATE OF OUR LEARNED SOCIETIES. 299 
work; and no man, because he has contributed 
largely to a charitable institution, or is one of those 
who presides as director or trustee over its affairs, 
ever dreams of signifying that honour to the world, 
by affixing some of the letters of the alphabet after 
his name. 
(207.) But in our literary and scientific insti- 
tutions the case is different. These, with few ex- 
ceptions, have too much of an aristocratic character. 
We speak now of the leading societies of the metro- 
polis ; those from which, as chartered associations, 
we may gather the prevalent feeling. That love 
and respect for wealth, in the abstract, which forms 
so striking and so humiliating a blot on the national 
character, is no where more conspicuous than in 
one or two circumstances connected with these in- 
stitutions. This is the more remarkable, because 
the blame attaches to those who, from a superior 
taste for intellectual pursuits, might be supposed 
exempt from the national idolatry of the vulgar. 
It is customary, indeed, to call the world of science 
a republic,—meaning thereby, as we presume, that all 
adventitious superiority resulting alone from wealth 
or rank, gives place to mental acquirements. But 
is such really the case? or, at least, is the principle 
itself really acted upon? Noone can maintain that 
it is, when the fact is considered, that, with one 
solitary exception, all who wish to join these societies 
must contribute an annual payment. We can dis- 
pense with science in a candidate, but we must have 
his money. This is the plain, but the undeniable, fact. 
The exception above alluded to reflects the highest 
honour upon the oldest and the best of our societies, 
