4*20 Life ami Letters of Francis GaUon 



who are become the great men of science. Now theilitUculty in social Httttistic« is of exactly the 

 •ante kind, but greater. Therefore by no stniightforwuixl and expeditious method can the problems 

 in which you — and I may be permitteil to luld myself — are so much int<Test<><l, l)e solved. Each 

 ia a seiMkrate and difficult undertaking requiring a vast deal of thought and planning, just like 

 pUnning a campaign, (juetelet's own history is an example of this. His promises and hope^j 

 and hia achievements in 1835-6 remained tu gMu quo up to the last edition of his work 

 lPky$%qvs SociaU) in 1869. He achieved nothing Imrdly of real value in all tho.se 33 years'. 

 So again Buckle, who starttnl with a flourish of trumi)ct,s in the first chiipter of his lUnUiry of 

 Civilitatioti, did next to nothing Ijeyond o few flashy applications that have nircly sUxkI aft^-r- 

 ontMSim. 



The way in which your object might best be attained requires, I think: 



(1) A man (or men) conversant with the methods, and especially the higher method*, of 

 ■tatuUcs. 



(2) Conversant with the existing statistical data. 



(3) With his heart directed towards the solution, one by one, of such parts of such of your 

 problems as he can, after much thought, see his way to attack successfully. 



(4) Proportioning his lalwur so as to stop short when he has reached a fairly near approxi- 

 mative result, and not to waste himself in tigure.s in order t<} procure a slightly closer approxi- 

 mation. In short he must be the master and not the slave of his statistics. The waste of efibrt 

 by statisticians seems appalling. (I know it is so in meteorological statistics.) 



How to get all this? I gather that you have in view the establishment of a Profcs.soi"shi|i 

 or Readership at Oxford. Before youjuc your mind in that direction or in that of Cambridge, 

 I should like to tell you by way of warning the experience our Geographical Society has hiuJ 

 in doing the same for Geography in the two Universities. I happen to have l)een closely con- 

 nected with the movement and am indeed going down to Cambridge next week to see if the 

 dismal want of success of our Reader there can be obviated. The result of very much inquiry 

 has been, that unless the subject on which a Professor lectures has a place in the examinations 

 he will get no class at all. His position will be that of a salaried sinecurist, which is proverbially 

 not conducive to activity. Still, he would have leisure and personally would have interest in 

 his work, and if only a Reader, is removable after 5 years. A professor is permanent. He would 

 live in much isolation at Oxford as far as his own subject is concerned, for all the main interests 

 of the place are scholastic, and many of them are rather petty. It occurs to me that perhaps as 

 good a way as any might be to found a profes-sorship at the Koyal Institution in London, and 

 to require a yearly course of lectures. The Royal Institution audienct^ is just the sort to stimu- 

 late on the one hand and to curb the vagaries of the inquirer on the other. It is a mixture of 

 some of the ablest philosophers, of many persons of wide social interests and of the general public. 

 The existing professors are all men of the highest ability in their .several lines : Lord Uaylcigh 

 in Physics, Dewar in Chemistry, Victor Horsley in Biology. If a Professorship in Social 

 Statistics could be established there on the same basis as those mentioned, it would have to be 

 nominally renewed each year up to five years' (I think) tenure. Then the re-election is for 

 another (practically) .5 years. The cost is, / think, alwut £300 to jCiOO a year, not more. 

 I'ray excuse my impertinence if you think it such, in venturing to suggest, but my only object 

 is to show what s«'ems to me to be the best direction of action. I think Ijondon would lie by 

 far the best residence for an inquirer into social statistics. Believe me, Very faithfully yours, 

 Francis Galtom. 



Looking back after tliiity years one is comjielled to think that Florence 

 Nightingale's scheme, if it could have been carried out, was essentially better 

 than F'rancis Galton's. How could a school of trained applied statisticians have 

 been crejited by six lectures a year at the Royal Institution ; that institute has 

 a most valuable platform for announcing in a jwpular way the results of recent 

 research, but it is not an academic centre for training enthusiastic young 



' I venture to think that this is far too sweeping, it overlooks not only what Quetelct 

 achieved in organising otiicial statistics in Belgium, but his great work in unifying international 

 statistics. 



