340 THOMAS YOUNG. 



I have not dwelt too long on the task imposed on me, 

 if I have brought out, as I wished to do, the importance 



That Board, as already observed, was divided against itself, and it 

 therefore fell. It was never upheld on the only right ground. Neither 

 the Board nor the friends of science sufficiently m-ged the strong and 

 irresistible claims which they might have preferred to the government 

 of the country, that " a council of science," with extended powers, 

 properly selected and adequately remunerated, would be the appro- 

 priate adjunct of the government of a country all whose resources are 

 so powerfully developed in exclusive dependence on the applications 

 of science. 



The government would thus have had the means of sound scientific 

 advice constantly at hand, of which experience proves they are in 

 daily want on every emergency ; and which they obtain by asking 

 the gratuitous services of men of science, and the crown would have 

 possessed the means of making a graceful acknowledgment of the 

 services, and paying a just tribute to the genius, of men devoted to 

 the higher branches of the abstract sciences, which are of a nature 

 incapable in themselves of affording any kind of remuneration, or in 

 the ordinary course leading to any of those honours or preferments 

 which await eminence in other professions. Translator. 



The reader may be referred for details of the questions here consid- 

 ered to the following documents : 



1. " Astronomical Tables and Kemarks for 1822, published Decem- 

 ber, 1821," by F. Baily, Esq., with " Remarks on the present 

 defective state of the Nautical Almanac ." 



2. A Reply to these Remarks appeared in Mr. Brande's Quarterly 

 Journal of Science, April, 1822. (Attributed to Dr. Young.) 



3. Practical Observations on the Nautical Almanac, &c., by Jas. 

 South, F. R. S. 1822. 



4. Reply to a Letter in the Morning Chronicle relative to the Gov- 

 ernment and Astronomical Science, &c. by the same. 1829. 



5. Refutation of Misstateinents, &c., in a paper presented to the 

 Admiralty by Dr. T. Young, and printed by order of the House 

 of Commons, by the same. 1829. 



6. Further Remarks on the present defective state of the Nautical 

 Almanac, &c., by F. Baily, Esq., F. R. S., &c. 1829. 



7. Report of the Committee of the Astronomical Society relative to 

 the improvement of the Nautical Almanac, adopted by the Coun- 

 cil of the Society and approved and ordered to be carried into 

 effect by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, 1830. Me- 

 moirs of Astronomical Society, vol. iv. p. 447, 



