30 GRAHAM LUSK 



affairs, a noble of high social position, in receipt of huge personal revenues. 

 What is it, then, that makes for greatness in science *. Would Lavoisier 

 have accomplished more had he been on a "full-time" basis with a 

 restricted income? It is a question of individual opinion, but to most 

 people it would appear that scientific greatness depends primarily upon 

 the quality of the intellectual protoplasm of the brain, upon the advantages 

 offered to the functioning of that brain by a favoring mental environment, 

 and on the possession of a good conscience. 



One may well understand that the clarification of the work of Black, 

 Rutherford, Cavendish, Priestley and Scheele by the brilliant mind of 

 Lavoisier might lead others than they to the expression of national 

 scientific self-consciousness. Thus, Wurtz's "Histoire des doctrines 

 chimiques," published in Paris in 1861, begins with the proud statement, 

 "La chimie est une science franchise; elle fut constitute par Lavoisier." 

 It is needless to state that this caused reverberations of disapproval from 

 England. The personal opinion of national worth finds still more intense 

 modern expression in the Manifesto of the Intellectuals (1915), "The 

 German Mind is, in our opinion, beyond all doubt our one supremely 

 valuable asset. It is the one priceless possession amongst all our posses- 

 sions. It alone justifies our people's existence and their impulse to main- 

 tain and assert themselves in the world ; and to it they owe their superiority 

 over a41 other peoples." 



A historic case in which a generous attitude was taken occurred when 

 the French Academy in 1806, just prior to a declaration of .war between 

 France and England, conferred its newly established Volta medal upon 

 Humphrey Davy. A French delegation went to London to deliver the 

 medal while the war was in progress and Davy, in acknowledging it, said, 

 "Science knows no country. If the two countries or governments are at 

 war, the men of science are not. That would, indeed, be a civil war of the 

 worst description. We should rather through the instrumentality of men 

 of science soften the asperities of national hostility." 



Perhaps this "old-fashioned" courtesy was a relic of the days of a 

 bygone chivalry. At any rate, it affords a delightful example of human 

 behavior. 



Science after the French Revolution 



Napoleon, during the winter of 1797-1798, attended the regular course 

 of chemical lectures delivered by Berthollet, who had been an associate 

 of Lavoisier. At a later date Berthollet and Monge, the mathematician, 

 organized a company of one hundred scientists to accompany Napoleon to 

 Egypt. At least the scientific men of France had no cause to complain of 

 lack of recognition. And perhaps partly in consequence of this one finds 

 living in Paris in 1823, the year Liebig studied there, such men as La 



