346 
NATURE 
[ FEBRUARY 7, 1907 
in appearance; both made their mark in the practical 
application of biology to the health of men and 
animals; both migrated from University College, 
London, Sanderson to Oxford, and Foster to Cam- 
bridge, in order to introduce the modern science of 
biology into the curriculum of the older universities. 
Sanderson died somewhat earlier; Foster has only 
just been removed. 
It is still too early to decide on the extent and per- 
manent value of Foster’s work, but some estimate of 
it may be attempted. 
His strongest point was force of character, energy. 
perseverance, thoroughness. He expected his pupils to 
work as hard as he did, and to regard scientific investi- 
gation as the most honourable and delightful pursuit. 
He had the rare faculty of discovering talent in pupils 
and giving it concentration and method. He set 
them problems to solve, and as soon as they had 
shown their capacity to work alone, he left them to 
plant the seed in another virgin soil. Foster’s success 
at Cambridge was remarkable, both in the number of 
those who took up serious study in the laboratory and 
in the great eminence achieved by very many. 
His greatest merit is that, like Ludwig, he created in 
his disciples the noble ambition to increase knowledge, 
and was content to see the result and to applaud. Some 
of his pupils have made themselves a European repu- 
tation, others have carried Foster’s methods and en- 
thusiasm into botany, pathology, public health, and 
medicine. 
Foster early acquired an excellent style for scien- 
tific writing. Probably Huxley’s lectures and writings 
pleased him first, but however Foster’s style was 
acquired, he at last attained the state which Hazlitt 
asserted (not without reason) he had reached when 
it was less trouble to write well than to write ill. 
The child’s ‘‘ lessons ’’ in physiology were as well 
composed and expressed as the famous ‘‘ text-book ”’ 
(1876) and the “ History of Physiology ” (1900).* 
He soon gathered together his first band of disciples, 
among them Francis Balfour, whose brilliant career 
was sadly ended by an accident on the Alps; Langley, 
who succeeded him at Cambridge; Gaskell, Sherring- 
ton, Adami, Sedgwick, L. E. Shore, F. G. Hopkins—- 
these are only some of the names of men who 
owed their first step in scientific investigation to 
Foster’s inspiration, and remained his cordial friends 
to the last. 
As soon as he had taught the elements of practical 
research in physiology, he encouraged his pupils to 
work out their own vein, whether the task first set 
them was completely finished or not. Whatever 
other academical differences he encountered, Foster 
never failed in the support of his old pupils. 
Apart from his lectures and his books, Foster 
threw himself heartily into the duties which his 
position as secretary of the Royal Society entailed. He 
held the office from 1881 to 1903 under the presidency 
of Spottiswoode, Huxley, Stokes, Kelvin, Lister, and 
Huggins. He did much to stimulate interest in the 
biological side of the society. 
Foster was a well-known official of the British 
Association, and was president at Dover in 1897, 
when he was made a K.C.B. He spoke only to begin 
or reinforce the discussion. On the council his in- 
fluence was powerful, and was never used for private 
ends. At the annual dinner of the society Foster 
only spoke at intervals, and the task was always 
well performed. But his oratory at its best was to 
be heard at less formal meetings where ready wit 
and good-natured sallies were appropriate. 
After his connection with Cambridge was severed, 
1 Even Foster's writings were not always free from oversights. In one 
passage he advises the reader to “get a firm hold of the most prominent 
feature of the subject”; in another he corrects a woodcut by explaining 
that the granules ‘‘ have been rendered too bold by the artist.” 
NO. 1945, VOL. 75 | 
Foster found fresh occasion for serving science by his 
election as representative of the University of London 
in Parliament in succession to Sir John Lubbock, now 
Lord Avebury. His speeches in the House were few, 
and chiefly confined to subjects on which he could 
speak with authority—education, public health, 
fisheries, scientific experiments on animals, and 
similar cases of applied knowledge. He spoke slowly 
and distinctly, with a quiet emphasis which secured 
attention from both sides of the Hceuse. He entered 
Parliament as a Unionist and a supporter of the 
Boer War; but he found himself out of sympathy 
with Mr. Balfour’s Government on financial policy 
and on popular education; he therefore sought first 
to resign, and afterwards to transfer his seat from 
the Unionist to the Liberal side. At the General 
Election he was defeated by a very small majority, and 
his seat is occupied by Sir Philip Magnus. In con- 
nection with his political career must be mentioned the 
important commissions on which Foster served—that 
on vaccination, of which the late Lord Herschell was 
chairman; that on the disposal of sewage; another on 
fisheries; and, perhaps the most important, one on 
tuberculosis in animals and man. ‘The final report 
of this committee was signed by Foster only a few 
days before his death. 
On the day before he was talsen ill, at the meeting 
of the British Science Guild at the Mansion House, 
he spoke as follows:—“This meeting shows how 
widely science is entering into our lives; it has inter- 
woven itself with our works, and is more and more 
guiding our ways. If we could imagine a world 
without science, we might address to that world the 
words which Dante addressed to Italy in the Middle 
Ages: ‘Nave senza nocchiero in gran tempesta.’ 
Nothing is more clear than that science is not for 
men of science alone. We, with our slight efforts, can 
lift great weights. We are a feeble folk, and if we 
can effect anything it is by pulling the long end of 
the lever, and it is because of the length of the lever 
that we are able to effect anything. Thus, with our 
slight efforts, we can lift great weights at present, and 
we shall lift heavier and heavier weights in the future 
if we have the support of the people, and the support 
of the Government bidden by the people. It is for the 
people to bid the Government, and the present Govern- 
ment perhaps above all other Governments, to help 
science; for they can give us the opportunities we are 
asking for to-day.”’ 
To Foster’s personal charm no description can do 
justice. To old friends like Prof. Carey Foster or 
Mr. Coots Trotter he was always the same. On a 
dredging expedition where he and his mate managed 
the tackle in the intervals of sea-sickness, in a crowded 
Italian railway carriage, or receiving polyglot pro- 
fessors, Foster’s voice always announced good humour, 
good temper, and good nature. ’ 
He delighted in his garden, and was said to cultivate 
physiology when not too busy with a new iris. Next 
to his own species he delighted in cats and dogs and 
flying birds. His early life between Huntingdon and 
Cambridge was one of struggle, and his later days, 
when he had lost his laboratory, were clouded by 
occasional ill-health; but, on the whole, his strenuous 
and active life was a happy one, for it exercised his 
great and varied abilities for worthy objects. He was 
a man greatly beloved, and he has left a deep 
memorial in the hearts of al! who knew him best. 
The funeral of Sir Michael Foster took place at 
Huntingdon on Saturday, among those present at the grave- 
side being Lady Foster, Dr. Michael G. Foster, Dr. R 
Bradford, Sir Thomas Barlow, Dr. Pye Smith, Mr. Horace 
Darwin, Dr. Gaskell, Prof. Langley, and Prof. Sherring- 
ton. A memorial service was held on Saturday after- 
noon at St. James’s Church, Piccadilly, and was attended 
