Decline of Science in England. 357 



" nour of knighthood or of the baronetcy, as his late royal 

 " brother has done upon Sir Humphry Davy, and as he him- 

 " self very justly did, upon Sir James South. There can be 

 " little doubt, if once the calculating engine is brought to perfec- 

 " tion but that we are going to have a Sir Charles Babbage ; 

 " and we must seriously lament, not for the sake of the men, 

 " or of that of science, but for the honour of government, that 

 " we never had a Sir William Wollaston, a Sir Thomas Young, 

 " and a Sir James Watt." 



In this passage our author completely misrepresents Mr Bab- 

 bage's views. Mr Babbage does not propose an order of merit. 

 He merely says, that it has been proposed, and he even states, 

 almost in the words of his opponent, that if such an order ex- 

 isted, government would not be able to fill it properly in the 

 present state of public opinion respecting science, as it might be 

 Jilled up through the channels of patronage, and by the mere job- 

 bers in science. When an order of merit has been mentioned 

 it does not mean that there are to be ribbons and gewgaws 

 dangling at button holes. It is meant merely to say, that an 

 honorary title should be created for civil merit. Our author 

 is mistaken, however, if he thinks, as he seems to do, that Mr 

 Babbage and others have any desire for such titles. Respected 

 as they know they are by the great and good men of every na- 

 tion, they are satisfied that this respect cannot be increased by 

 an empty and tinkling syllabic prefixed to their names. They 

 have spoken of the subject solely as an instrument for promot- 

 ing science ; and though they themselves, already in the meri- 

 dian of their career, ask no reward for what they have done, 

 and seek no stimulus to do more, they are yet sensible that 

 such titles and rewards are powerful excitements to the young, 

 and that philosophers as well as heroes may be formed by the 

 ambition of honours that are within their grasp. 



It has been more than once stated by our author, and we 

 fear it is an argument addressed to vulgar apprehension, that 

 science cannot decline in a country which is still adorned by 

 many great names. We admit, and we do it with true pride, 

 that the temple of British science still possesses sonic of its 

 most ornamental pillars, but we look in vain for the massive gra 

 nite which should lill up its oobli outline. The ruins ofmati 

 rial grandeur read to US tin lesson of our intellectual decline. 



