Science and the Press 1 



EVER since I read the newspaper account of my first public 

 scientific lecture I have looked forward to an opportunity 

 of addressing journalists on the subject of science and the 

 Press. Now that the opportunity has come, I find that time 

 and experience have so mellowed my feelings as to rob the 

 occasion of the dramatic interest that it at one time seemed to 

 promise, and if I do not come to praise, I have at least no 

 longer a concealed desire to bury. 



I have certainly come to understand how exorbitant are the 

 claims which are made upon the journalist. He belongs to a 

 class of men who ought to know everything. Journalists are 

 something like architects or housewives. An architect should 

 be an artist ; a surveyor ; an engineer, civil, mechanical and 

 sanitary ; a man who knows all about wood, metal, brick and 

 stone ; a financier ; a manager of men ; and I know not what 

 beside. Well, you know an architect is never all this, and 

 rarely any part of it to perfection ; yet he is often a wonder- 

 fully good architect. I have not time to enumerate the quali- 

 fications of a good housewife. Perfection in them all is 

 unattainable, but Heaven be praised, there are still excellent 

 housewives. 



A journalist'sequipment would, I imagine, be even larger than 

 that of either of the two classes I have named, if he were to be 

 fully qualified to understand the things with which he has to 

 deal. I realize now, therefore, quite clearly, that if a journalist 

 were sufficiently scientific to be able to report my lectures with 

 the fullness and appreciation of which I at one time thought 



1 Address to the West Riding District of the Institute of Journalists, 

 delivered at Leeds February 9, 1910. 



