THE SUNDAY SOCIETY 6l 



debatable opinions which he supported as a private indi- 

 vidual. Thus, although he had " personally, politically, and 

 philosophically ' no liking for Charles Bradlaugh, he ob- 

 jected on general grounds to the exclusion of Mrs. Besant 

 and Miss Bradlaugh from the classes at University College, 

 and had signed a memorial in their favour. On the other 

 hand, he did not wish it to be asserted that the Royal Society, 

 through its President, had thrown its influence into what 

 was really a social and political, not a scientific question. 

 He writes to Sir M. Foster on July 18: 



It is very unlucky for me that I signed the memorial request- 

 ing the Council of University College to reconsider their de- 

 cision about Mrs. Besant and Miss Bradlaugh when I was quite 

 innocent of my possibility of holding the P.R.S. 



I must go to the meeting of members to-day and define my 

 position in the matter with more care, under the circumstances. 



Mrs. Besant was a student in my teacher's class here last 

 year, and a very well-conducted lady-like person ; but I have 

 never been able to get hold of the " Fruits of Philosophy," and 

 do not know to what doctrine she has committed herself. 



They seem to have excluded Miss Bradlaugh simply on the 

 noscitur a sociis principle. 



It will need all the dexterity I possess to stand up for the 

 principle of religious and philosophical freedom, without giving 

 other people a hold for saying that I have identified myself with 

 Bradlaugh. 



It was the same a little later with the Sunday Society, 

 which had offered him its presidency. He writes to the 

 Hon. Sec. on Feb. n, 1884: 



I regret that it is impossible for me to accept the office which 

 the Sunday Society honours me by offering. 



It is not merely a disinclination to add to the work which 

 already falls to my share which leads me to say this. So long 

 as I am President of the Royal Society, I shall feel bound to 

 abstain from taking any prominent part in public movements as 

 to the propriety of which the opinions of the Fellows of the 

 Society differ widely. 



My own opinions on the Sunday question are exactly what 

 they were five-and-twenty years ago. They had not been hid 

 under a bushel, and I should not have accepted my present office 



