352 Decline of Science in England. 



Berthollet, and Cuvier, among the philosophers, " all of whom,'' 

 he says, " bartered their conscience for wealth and influence.'" 

 He afterwards adds, with additional bitterness, " Such men 

 as Laplace, Lagrange, Lacepede, Cuvier, and Fontanes, en- 

 " joyed certainly a high income ; the former were senators, 

 " whose salary was 556,000 francs, or L. 1500; but it is a glar- 

 " ing error to call this salary an emolument of science. It was 

 " the price of the shame and degradation incurred by these 

 " men for giving their silent vote and sanction to any of Napo- 

 " Icon's decrees, however oppressive ; it was the price for which 

 " the silence and connivance was bought of these mock commis- 

 " sions for the liberty of the .subject and the liberty of the 

 " press, which subsisted as sinecures during Napoleon's reign. 

 " Supposing the English ministry thought it their interest to 

 " bring scientific members into Parliament, would Mr Babbagc 

 " consent to sell his vote and his conscience for a pension of 

 " L. 1200 or 1500 ? Still this was what La Place, La Grange, 

 " Lacepede, Monge, Berthollet, &c. constantly did, and we must 

 " not expect to buy at a cheaper rate the honour and reputation 

 " of men of such distinction." 



Human nature shudders at such imputations upon men whose 

 names and characters have become the property of mankind ; 

 and while we express our firm belief that they are false, we must 

 add also our regret that they should have received currency in 

 a pamphlet published in England, and edited by an English 

 chemist, who, honoured with a seat in the Institute of France, 

 owed to that distinguished body at least the homage of his 

 silence. This is doubtless the time when every patriot would 

 wish to draw closer the ties which are beginning to unite two 

 mighty nations, and we earnestly hope that every other feeling 

 will be extinguished but those which spring from an honourable 

 rivalry in promoting the best interests of our species. 



Before quitting this branch of the subject, we must notice two 

 extraordinary mistakes of our author. He supposes that the 

 contribution of L. 2740 annually, by 685 members of the Royal 

 Society, is a subscription Jbr the encouragement and benefit of 

 science, and that it is a greater honour to be a member of the 

 Royal Society than a member of the Institute of France. 



" A very material difference," says he, " between the Royal 

 " Society and the Institute, consists in this, that the fellows of 



