RECEPTION OF THE UNDULATORY THEORY. 469 



self in severe and sarcastic expressions. In January, 

 1803, was published 2 his critique on Dr. Young's 

 Bakerian Lecture, On the Theory of Light and 

 Colours, in which lecture the doctrine of undula- 

 tions and the law of interferences was maintained. 

 This critique was an uninterrupted strain of blame 

 and rebuke. "This paper," the reviewer said, "con- 

 tains nothing which deserves the name either of 

 experiment or discovery." He charged the writer 

 with "dangerous relaxations of the principles of 

 physical logic." "We wish," he cried, "to recall 

 philosophers to the strict and severe methods of 

 investigation," describing them as those pointed out 

 by Bacon, Newton, and the like. Finally, Dr. 

 Young's speculations were spoken of as a hypo- 

 thesis, which is a mere work of fancy; and the critic 

 added, "we cannot conclude our review without 

 entreating the attention of the Royal Society, which 

 has admitted of late so many hasty and unsub- 

 stantial papers into its Transactions ;" which habit 

 he urged them to reform. The same aversion to 

 the undulatory theory appears soon after in another 

 article by the same reviewer, on the subject of Wol- 

 laston's measures of the refraction of Iceland spar ; 

 he says, "We are much disappointed to find that 

 so acute and ingenious an experimentalist should 

 have adopted the wild optical theory of vibrations." 

 The reviewer showed ignorance as well as prejudice 

 in the course of his remarks ; and Young drew up 

 3 Edln. Rev. vol. i. p. 450. 



