124 Analysis of Scientific Books. 



can do, and to mere mathematicians, chemistry at present, 

 and probably for some time to come, is forbidden ground*." 

 How does this ridiculous interdiction against mere experimenters 

 tally with his panegyrics on Mr. Donovan's merely experimental 

 results, on the oxides of mercury, which are incompatible with 

 the atomic theory, as taught by Dr. Thomson? " The methods 

 followed by Dr. Wollaston," adds he, in the same paper, " Pro- 

 fessor Berzelins, Mr. Dalton, and indeed, every person who has 

 hitherto turned his attention to the Atomic theory, are obviously 

 not susceptible of any great degree of precision. They have 

 been guided entirely by the analytical researches, without any 

 general principle to direct their choicef ." Or, in other words, 

 Dr. Thomson is the only chemist whose methods are susceptible 

 of any great degree of precision. All the rest " may relinquish 

 the field." These interdicted chemists are much obliged to him 

 for the information, that " their analytical researches have been 

 guided entirely without any general principle." The world 

 happens to be of a different opinion with regard, at least, to the 

 celebrated author of the equivalent scale. 



Having depreciated most of his eminent cotemporaries in 

 detail, the next step was to attack tl.'em en masse. Accordingly, 

 he drew up an analysis of a book J, which he evidently did not un- 

 derstand, that he might have an opportunity of attacking the 

 most illustrious scientific association in Europe, the Royal 

 Society of London. The accusation of haughtiness, as made 

 by Dr. Thomson, is quite comical, as well as his code of in- 

 structions to the Council of that Society. " The committee of 

 the Royal Society ought to bear in mind, that the harsh rejec- 

 tion of the lucubrations of a young experimenter has a tendency 

 to damp his ardour in the cause of science, and may possibly 

 even drive him into idleness. It is this haughtiness on the part 

 of those, who have set themselves up as judges of philosophical 

 merit, which has diminished, to so great a degree, the number 

 of experimenters in this country. Whether our reviews, and 

 our Royal Societies, have not of late years been more injurious 

 than favourable to the interests of science, is with me no longer 

 a question. When I compare M. Deluc's paper on the electric 

 column, Mr. Donovan's paper on the oxides of mercury, and 

 Mr. Barlow's paper on magnetism, all of which have been re- 

 jected by the Royal Society, within these few years, with many 

 papers published by that learned body, I cannot avoid feeling 

 a good deal of surprise, mixed with regret. The Committee of 

 the Royal Societrj ought to be impartial. But when we find such 

 curious facts as are contained in the three papers above-men- 



* Annals of Pliilosophti, Sept. 1820. p. lb"7 

 t Ibid. Sept. 1820. pp.* 176. 177. 

 X Barlow's Essuy on MagJictism. 



