BREWSTER ON POSITION OF SCIENCE 5 



have been his services, who bears the lowest title that 

 is given to the lowest benefactor of the nation, or 

 to the humblest servant of the Crown ! ' This, it 

 might be said, was an accident almost of the moment, 

 although it was so far true that such names as James 

 Watt, who died in 1819, were allowed to go down 

 to posterity without the adornment of a title. And 

 it might have been supposed that an unaffected 

 demand for such recognition was probably not one 

 which would highly commend itself, then or at 

 any time, to those qualified to bestow it ; but the 

 position criticised by Brewster was notably remedied 

 within the one or two decades following the 

 foundation of the Association. Our body in later 

 years directly contributed to this state of affairs : 

 thus Fairbairn, in 1861, was offered, but declined, 

 the honour of knighthood in consideration not only 

 of his work as an engineer, but also of his ' able 

 presidency of the British Association.' This instance 

 is by no means isolated. 



' There is not a single philosopher '- -thus 

 Brewster continues ' who enjoys a pension, or an 

 allowance, or a sinecure, capable of supporting him 

 and his family in the humblest circumstances ! 

 There is not a single philosopher who enjoys the 

 favour of his sovereign or the friendship of his 

 ministers ! ' And thus in a peroration, Brewster sums 

 up the main points of his argument : ' Enough, 

 we trust, has been said to satisfy every lover 

 of his country that the sciences and the arts 

 of England are in a wretched state of depression, 

 and their decline is mainly owing to the ignor- 

 ance and supineness of the Government ; to the 

 injudicious organisation of our scientific boards 



