414 STUDY OF NATURAL HISTORY. 
right honourable member in question, in reply to 
the foregoing speech, is reported to have said, 
“ that there were some men to whom honours 
were unnecessary, and which could not confer 
higher dignity than their genius and their talent 
had invested them with. What, he would ask, 
could a blue riband or a collar do for a Newton? 
Would they make his name more hallowed,—his 
family more endurable? No, certainly not. There 
should be a line of distinction drawn, for, if not, 
many would be seeking them. He would not mix 
up scientific ingenuity with military favour; he 
would leave it to the possession of its own ennobling 
honours.” 
(284.) Had the honourable member who spoke 
next in the debate, — himself a man of science, and 
a vice-president of the Royal Society, — whose 
sentiments are known to be in unison with those 
expressed in these pages—had he replied, and 
combated what may well be deemed the unsound- 
ness of these doctrines, he could at once have 
exposed their fallacy, and have spared us the un- 
gracious task cf animadverting upon one whose 
talents we admire, and whose eloquence can give 
to any cause he espouses almost the force of 
demonstrative conviction. It is seldom that an 
opening occurs, in parliamentary debate, for the dis- 
cussion of matters affecting the interests of science ; 
and when so few of our representatives are qualified 
to speak on such things, it is doubly disheartening 
to witness such opportunities for vindicating her 
rights neglected. Perhaps, however, the forms of 
debate might have prevented our vice-president 
