172 THE AYRTON EPISODE 



we believe could only arise from lack of information — did 

 the thought of interference in this controversy occur to us. 

 Knowing how difficult it must be for one engrossed in the 

 duties of your high position to learn the real merits of a 

 conflict like that originated by the First Commissioner of 

 Works, we venture to hope that you will not look with 

 disfavour on an attempt to place a clear and succinct state- 

 ment of the case before you. 



That statement invites you, respectfully, to decide 

 whether Kew Gardens are, or are not, to lose the supervision 

 of a man of whose scientific labours any nation might be 

 proud ; in whom natural capacity for the post he occupies 

 has been developed by a culture unexampled in variety and 

 extent ; a man honoured for his integrity, beloved for his 

 courtesy and kindliness of heart ; and who has spent in the 

 public service, not only a stainless, but an illustrious life. 

 The resignation of Dr. Hooker under the circumstances here 

 set forth would, we declare, be a calamity to English science 

 and a scandal to the English Government. With the power 

 to avert this in your hands, we appeal to your justice to 

 do so. The difficulty of removing the Directorship of Kew 

 from the Department of Works cannot surely be insuperable ; 

 or, if it be, it must be possible to give such a position to the 

 Director and such definition to his duties, as shall in future 

 shield him from the exercise of authority which has been so 

 wantonly abused. 



Little as the Government desired to give battle on behalf 

 of so unpopular a representative, in a cause which could not 

 possibly do them any good, conflict became inevitable when, 

 early in July, the question began to be discussed in the public 

 press. The Spectator of July 13 had a strong article, based 

 on the memorial of the men of science, declaring that if by such 

 treatment Hooker were compelled to resign, it would be a 

 great and very real calamity to the nation. An article in the 

 Daily Telegraph of the 15th suggested the line that would be 

 taken up by the First Commissioner. The trouble, it was 

 alleged, arose from his zeal for retrenchment, cutting down the 

 tropical exuberance of the Kew estimates. The plain fact 

 was precisely opposite to this. The economies effected were 



