Meeting of Naturalists at Hamburgh. 277 



What regards " the fear of arbitrary power," I may be per- 

 mitted to observe, that the republic of letters does not know of 

 any such fear ; and I do not hesitate to say, that learned men 

 are generally and highly esteemed, as they show themselves 

 zealous in the performance of their duty — the cultivation of 

 the extensive field of science. If they deviate from that path, 

 wandering into politics, opposing established order, and become 

 factious partizans, then it is no more science which has to com- 

 plain or to fear arbitrary power. That the meetings were not 

 before frequented by scientific men from the Austrian domi- 

 nions, with the exception of Count Sternberg, was merely to be 

 attributed to the great distance from the former places of meet- 

 ing, and the prejudice prevailing at their origin, that the ad- 

 vantageous results were not adequate to the loss of time and ex- 

 pence. It was not till the king of Saxony had received the as- 

 sembly of naturalists in his capital, whose curiosities were most 

 liberally and readily laid open to them, and afterwards at Ber- 

 lin, when Alexander de Humboldt did not refuse the office of 

 president, that the meetings were visited by the most distin- 

 guished learned men, and from that period their established 

 scientific character may be dated. The association then at- 

 tracted the attention of the members of the imperial family of 

 Austria, who are not only distinguished as patrons of the arts 

 and sciences, but many of them also by profundity of learning, 

 and H. I. Majesty's permission, or rather the invitation to fix 

 the next meeting at Vienna, might be acknowledged as a sin- 

 cere estimation of science. Should Mr Johnston, or those who 

 know that beautiful metropolis only from stories of young men, 

 happen to join the next meeting, they will then find that it ex- 

 ceeds in treasures for natural history many other towns, and is not 

 behind any in point of liberality and hospitality towards strangers. 



It is much to be regretted that Mr Johnston, who is not 

 void of acuteness of observation, had not been more cautious in 

 collecting his information, which ought to be the first duty of 

 a faithful reporter, as it is also his best policy, in as much as he 

 exposes the credit of the correct part of his account by the hear- 

 say and deformed information, picked up without discernment, 

 and introduced without discretion. 



I cannot close these remarks without uttering my earnest 

 wish, that the meeting! of the Naturalists and Physicians of 



