OBJECTIONS ANSWERED. 415 
from following up the subject; a duty, however, 
which is imperatively imposed upon any one who 
complains of the “ decline of science.” 
(285.) The speech last quoted contains three 
assigned reasons for showing the impropriety of 
conferring titles of honour upon scientific men : — 
1. Because their highest dignity being the possession 
of genius and talent, therefore, national honours were 
unnecessary ; 2. Because, if such honours were con- 
ferred “ many would be seeking them;” and 3. Be- 
cause scientific merit “ should be its own reward.” 
(286.) There are some questions so long set at 
rest by the general voice of mankind, that to enter 
elaborately into their defence, on ordinary occasions, 
is not only superfluous, but may become nearly as 
ridiculous as to fight with our own shadow. Yet if 
these very opinions, long explored by the reflecting, 
are taken up for some particular purpose, clothed 
with eloquence, and delivered with grace, by an 
accomplished orator, they are listened and assented 
to by the assembly, who applaud that which, if 
spoken by a common person, would immediately pro- 
duce ridicule. Of this character is the opinion that 
where great merit exists, no outward sign or symbal 
— by which its possession is to be made known to 
the world—is at all necessary. Or, if necessary in 
one class of excellence, it is not so in another. An 
ordinary person who would thus argue, must either 
be very little acquainted with human nature — 
with the general sense of mankind on this subject — 
or he must imagine that the feelings of philosophers 
are totally different from those of other men. He 
must suppose that men of science are wholly exempt 
