210 



♦ KNO^ATLEDGE ♦ 



[July 1, 1887. 



advancement of astronomy is inquired into, neither lie nor 

 anyone else ain give any satisfactory answer ; while, for my 

 own part, I say very confidently, " These things you should 

 have done " — they have a sort of value —but " you should 

 not have left the others undone." And when 1 am gravely 

 told that, while as yet the spectroscopic analysis of solar 

 phenomena was new, everything of real interest was done 

 with the small telescopes which Young and Huggins then 

 used, and that in siich work their large telescopes could 

 make no effective advances, I have no answer but a smile — 

 which is not altogether one of amusement. Mr. Huggins, 

 indeed, lias done other and good work, tliough unfortunately 

 led off on a false scent by the hope of photographing the 

 corona. 



Next, Professor Asaph Hall writes to me that a friend 

 of his at Washington told him my article denounced him in 

 " scathing " terms, so that he " was quite surprised to find 

 on reading it that, on the whole, it was fair." Yet, none 

 the less, he writes me a letter worded precisely as though, 

 instead of speaking of him in terms of high compliment, I 

 had indeed denounced him. And after entirely mis-reading 

 the article — as if I wrote expecting the discovery of other 

 bodies like the satellites of Jupiter and other planets like 

 Uranus — he asks me why, if the discovery of the satellites 

 of Mars with the large telescope at Washington were so 

 easy, "your friend Holden, who made drawings" — and very 

 bad ones they were — " of Mars all through the opposition 

 of 1875, failed to discover them ? " — which will be seen, on a 

 reading of what I say, to be niliU ad rem. 

 + * * 

 Lastly, though I might mention a number of other 

 American astronomers who have kicked at my well-meant 

 flicking — being indeed more sensitive than our stolid English 

 workers could well conceive — does not " my friend Holden," 

 as Professor Hall very naturally calls him (for when he 

 introduced Hall and myself to each other at Washington 

 he professed suspiciously warm friendship) renew the 

 friendly ways of 1874 by carefully explaining at San 

 Francisco just what my article itself states about the real 

 supjriority of large telescopes, and going on to say that only 

 for a few " cranks " like the Wigginses and Vernors can 

 there be any doubt on such points 1 In other words, with 

 characteristic " candour," he conveys to his audience, as well 

 as he knows how, that I am utterly ignorant of that which 

 I have myself stated in the clearest terms. 

 * * * 

 The " friendliness of 1874 " to which I refer, consisted in 

 the deliberate but anonymous .statement in the xiflantic 

 Montlilij, that my first book, " Satui'n and its System " (by 

 which I lost what the profane would call "a pot of 

 money," as Messrs. Longmans know) was so profitable, and 

 " deservedly," he was good enough to say, that I was 

 tempted to write a number of other books in order to make 

 a large sum of money; and he went on to denounce among 

 other books, by name, a book which he could not possibly 

 have read, since it was at tliat time (though announced for 

 completion earlier) lying half written only in my desk. 

 Quite unaware of the authorship of this stuiiendously un- 

 veracious critique, I denounced the unknown writer in veiy 

 plain terms in a letter which I sent to the chief American 

 newspapers, several of which scathingly denounced his con- 

 duct in articles bearing such headings as " Di.shonest Criti- 

 cism," " Spiteful Reviewing," and .so forth. The unknown 

 critic replied, admitting his wrongdoing, but defending it in 

 terms suggesting that he really was not aware of its iniquity. 

 And then, still unaware of his identity, J. simply dechned 

 to accept the apology, just as any good citizen would decline 



to accept the apology of a pickpocket, who, caught in the 

 act of abstracting a purse, explained that he ideally had 

 mistaken that purse for some one else's, and begged to 

 a])ologise, &c., &c. The letter will be found in the English 

 Mechanic for Deceml)er (11th, I think), 1874. 

 4>= * * 

 Alas 1 what was I to do, when I found, in 1876, who 

 the offender really was 1 I know what I did. I remained 

 silent, deadly ashamed and sorry for many a long year. But 

 Professor Holden has Ijrought the matter back to my recol- 

 lection by virtually i-enewing his offence. Nay, he has 

 deliberately repeated the untruth about my " Saturn," in 

 company with several other new untruths, which it were 

 wearine.'^s to specify. 



* * * 



He pretends to believe that I am angry with him because 

 he does not approve so much of my popular writing, which 

 has brought me a maintenance, as he pretends to approve 

 of my scientific writing, which might almost be said to have 

 cost me one. His criticism could not hurt my feelings, 

 since it applies to readei's and buyers of my books rather 

 than to me. If the public is interested by sound but simple 

 exposition of scientific truths, and declines to be interested 

 in such matter as I dealt with in " Saturn," the first edition 

 of " The Moon," my " Geometry of the Cycloids," and the 

 like, the fault is not mine, if fault there is at all. If I 

 have made a decent and, I think, an honest livelihood by 

 the explanation of scientific matters for unscientific folk, I 

 have had this to justify me, that in no other way could 

 I have continued my scientific work. I had the choice be- 

 tween professional but altogether unscientific work, official 

 scientific work (wanting in independence — and perhaps 

 lequiring a little jobbery — and not leaving me free for 

 original research), and just such work — explanation of mat- 

 ters scientific in lectures and books — as I have actually 

 done, not wholly without success. By selecting the last 

 course I have been able to carry on my original work, as 

 I hope shortly to show in a treatise on Genei'al Asti-onomy, 

 which will appear (in its first monthly part) next October. 

 Most certainly I find nothing to be concerned at, when a 

 man who has received large annual salaries at Washington 

 and elsewhere for failing to do satisfxctory work with mag- 

 nificent opportunities, chooses to complain that my explana- 

 tory books have not been so unprofitable in the pecuniary 

 sense as the more difficult treatises have invariably been. 

 * * * 



What has really concerned Professor Holden has been 

 my being selected by the editor of the " American Cyclo- 

 paedia " in 1871 -75 to write the astronomy and meteoi-ology 

 for that book — work which he probably thought would have 

 better suited him. 



Map VI. of the " One-Scale Atlas " will appear in the 

 August number, being crowded out by other maps this 

 month. 



PalcvoUfhic Man in N.-W. Middlesex. By John Allen 

 Brown. (Macmillan & Co.) — From the standpoint of pre- 

 histoi'ic arclia'ology there is very little, if anything, new to 

 be added to our knowledge of man of the Drift period in 

 Britain. Nevertheless, every item of corroborative evidence 

 is welcome, and Mr. Allen Brown has done useful work in 

 exploiting the gravels and brick-earths of the Ealing district 

 in search of the stone implements which are the universal 

 witnesses to man's presence and primitive low culture. 



