ADAMS AND LEVERRIER. 129 



which, six months ago, they would have been the first to have 1846. 

 laughed at them for doing. 1 ... The planet 



That M. Leverrier is to all intents and purposes the dis- 

 coverer of the new planet is beyond a doubt. No evidence in 

 his favour could be stronger than that of Messrs. Adams, Challts, 

 and Airy. It is quite within probability that it might have been 

 discovered in November 1845, from the true elements given by 

 Mr. Adams in October, as stated by Mr. Airy. That it was on Mr. 

 Challis's papers before it had been seen abroad is certain. Why, 

 then, is this remarkable discovery French, and not English? 

 Simply because there is not sufficient faith in Mathematics 

 among the Mathematicians of this country. I should not say 

 this upon one instance involving only three men ; I know it 

 otherwise. Our men of science too often think it wise and 

 practical to doubt results of pure Mathematics, and the French 

 who run into the other extreme have a decided triumph in this 

 instance. The results will do much good among us. Few of 

 our philosophers are deep Mathematicians, and those who aspire 

 to the character without laying the foundations of exact science, 

 are apt to take a tone with respect to it to which its culti- 

 vators have deferred until their deference has acted on their own 

 minds, and affected the rising generation. In one sense, we may 

 rejoice at the check which this spirit has received. For a long 

 time to come, in every instance in which it shall show itself, it 

 will be put down by the magic word Leverrier. 



Sir John Herschel, who declared at the British Association 

 that the movement of the planet had been felt (on paper, mind) 

 with a certainty hardly inferior to ocular demonstration, is 

 precisely the person who thirteen years ago (Cabinet Cyclo- 

 pcedia, 'Astronomy,' p. 5) published what there can be no doubt 

 was meant for a rebuke to this want of faith, and also to the con- 

 fidence of those who made themselves judges of what they could 

 not possibly understand. 



The history of this discovery, and of the way in which 

 it was received, is a notable illustration of national cha- 

 racter. 



At first, on hearing how nearly Mr. Adams had anti- 

 cipated him, M. Leverrier felt some apprehension that his 



1 Athenaeum. I have changed the editorial we in one or two places; 

 he never allowed these articles to be altered by the editor. 



K 



