OF THE 



UNIVERSITY 



OF 



ii BIOLOGY AND THE STATE 71 



have laboured simply to extend our knowledge of the 

 structure and properties of living things, in the faith 

 that every increase of knowledge will ultimately bring 

 its blessing to humanity, have in fact led with astonish- 

 ing rapidity to conclusions affecting most profoundly 

 both the bodily and the mental welfare of the com- 

 munity. 



We who know the beneficent results which must 

 flow more and more from the labours of those who 

 are able to create new knowledge of living things, or, 

 in other words, are able to aid in the growth of bio- 

 logical science, must feel something more than regret 

 even indignation that England should do so small 

 a proportion of the laborious investigation which is 

 necessary, and is being carried on for our profit by 

 other nationalities. It must not be supposed, because 

 we have had our Harvey and our Darwin, our Hunter 

 and our Lister, that therefore we have done and are 

 doing all that is needful in the increase of biological 

 science. The position of this country in relation to 

 the progress of science is not to be decided by the 

 citation of great names. 



We require to look more fully into the matter 

 than this. The question is not whether England has 

 produced some great discoverers, or as many as any 

 other nationality, but whether we might not, with 

 advantage to our own community and that of the 

 civilised world generally, do far more in the field of 

 scientific investigation than we do. 



It may be laid down as a general proposition, to 

 which I know of no important exception, that scientific 



