Dec. 3, 1 885 J 



NA TURE 



friend, with whom it had been my privilege to be associated for 

 a time in his well-directed and successful efforts to improve the 

 ,anii;iry condition of our cities. The elder generation of English 

 ^L<>l.iL;ists will remember the keen interest which the Earl of 

 SL-ll;iilc took in their pursuits. The death of Lord Houghton 

 robs us of a connecting link with all the world. 



Three very distinguished names have disappeared from the 

 ranks of our Foreign Members : that of Henle, of Gbttingen, 

 among whose many merits must stand that of ranking next after 

 Schwann among the founders of histology ; that of the venerable 

 Henry Milne-Edwards, of Paris, one of the most distinguished 

 members of the school of Cuvier, and admirable no less for his 

 contributions to zoological philosophy than for the extent and the 

 precision of his additions to our knowledge of facts ; and lastly, 

 that of \ox\ Siebold, of Miinich, whose remarkable investigations 

 into the phenomena of parasitism and of sexless reproduction 

 brought about the solution of some of the most diiificult problems 

 of zoology, while it would be difficult to exaggerate the influence 

 of his wonderfully accurate and comprehensive '' Handbook" on 

 the progress of invertebrate zoology forty years ago. 



On the 1st of December last year the total number of Fellows 

 |of the Royal Society amounted to 519 ; of these 473 were on 

 the home and 46 on the foreign list. Deducting Her Majesty, 

 our Patron, and four other Royal personages, the number on the 

 home list was 468. At the present moment, we have 49 foreign 

 members, or within one of our full complement ; while the 

 total strength of the home list (deducting Royal personages) is 

 466, or two fewer than twelve months ago. The number of 

 deaths in the home list during the past year is 20. This is a 

 larger mortality than that of last year ; and it still exceeds the 

 number of Fellows added to the Society by election, which 

 during the last part of the year was 16 : namely, the statutory 

 15 P'ellows elected in the ordinary way and i Privy Coun- 

 cillor. 



As the Treasurer observed in his address on the last 

 Anniversary, it is obvious that we are rapidly approaching a 

 state of equilibrium between our losses and our gains ; and, 

 under the present conditions of election, the strength of the home 

 list may be expected to remain somewhere between 460 

 and 470. 



While our number thus tends to remain stationary, the list 

 of candidates for the Fellowship, though it has fluctuated a good 

 deal from year to year, has on the whole become longer, until, 

 at present, the candidates are more than four times as numerous 

 as the annual elections sanctioned by our rules. This state of 

 things has given rise to comment, both within and without the 

 [Society, on more than one occasion. It has been said that any 

 Irestriction upon the number of our Fellows is unwise, inasmuch 

 as we narrow our influence and diminish our revenues thereby ; 

 and, by way of a still more implea-ant suggestion, it is hinted 

 that, by such limitations, we lay ourselves open to the charge of 

 a desire to arrogate to ourselves tlie position of the elect 

 of science. 



With respect to the first objection, I venture to point out 

 that the influence of the Society upon the advancement of science 

 is not by any means measured either by its numerical strength 

 or by the amount of the funds at its disposal. 



And, as to the second charge or insinuation, if it is worth 

 while to meet it at all (which may be doubtful), I am disposed 

 to think that, in another than the invidious sense of the words, 

 it is highly desirable that the Fellows of the Royal Society 

 should regard themselves, and be regarded by others, as the 

 elect of science. An organisation which was the direct product 

 of the new birth of science in the days of Gilbert, of Galileo, 

 and of Harvey ; which was one of the earliest of the associations 

 founded for the sole purpose of promoting natural knowledge ; 

 and which has so faithfully performed its functions that it is 

 inseparably associated with all the great strides which science 

 has made for two centuries, has insensibly and without effort 

 become a recognised representative of men of science in these 

 islands : as such, on the one hand, it is consulted by the 

 Government on scientific questions ; and, on the other hand, it 

 [claims tlie right to be Iieard by the Government on all questions 

 nf scientific interest. I believe it to be impossible that the 

 [Society should discharge the functions which it has not sought, 

 out which have thus devolved upon it, satisfactorily, unless it 

 really does consist, in one sense, of the elect of science ; that is 

 to say, unless every care is taken to keep its scientific character 

 at the level of its scientific reputation, and to ensure that it shall 

 be not the mere figure-head of the scientific body, but a living 



association of representative men engaged in all branches of 

 scientific activity. 



Those among my hearers whose memories go back forty years 

 will remember that, at that time, the Society was in great 

 danger of losing its scientific character, though it would 

 doubtless have taken it a long time, and a good deal of 

 perversity, to get rid of its scientific reputation. It had become 

 the fashion to append F.R.S. to a name, and the scientific 

 members where in danger of being swamped by the invasion of 

 dilettanti. The aim of our eminent colleague. Sir William 

 Grove, and his friends, who fought the battle of 1S47, and 

 thereby, to my mind, earned the undying gratitude of all who 

 have the interests of science at heart, was not to create an 

 academy of immortals, but to save the Fellowship of the Society 

 from becoming a sham and an imposture. And they succeeded 

 in their object by carrying a measure of reform which embodied 

 two principles — the first, that of the practical responsibility of 

 the Council for the elections, the second, that of the limitation of 

 the number of candidates annually elected. The result of the 

 steady adherence of the Society to these principles for thirty- 

 eight years is that, year by year, the Society has approached 

 more and more closely to that representative character which, I 

 cannot but think, it is eminently desirable it should possess. 



During a great part of this time I have enjoyed more and 

 closer opportunities than most people of watching the working 

 of our system. Mistakes have been made now and then, no 

 doubt, for even members of Council are fallible ; but it is more 

 than thirty years since the propriety of the selections made by 

 the Council has been challenged at a general meeting ; and I 

 have never heard a question raised as to the conscientiousness 

 with which the work is done, or as to the desire of the Council 

 to mete out even-handed justice to the devotees of all branches 

 of science. I am very strongly of opinion that if the Royal 

 Society were a "Chamber of Science," subject to dissolution, 

 and that alter such dissolution a general election, by universal 

 suffrage of the members of all scientific bodies in the kingdom, 

 took place, an overwhelming majority of the present Fellows 

 would be re-elected. 



Such being my conviction, it is natural that I should express 

 a fervent hope that the Society will never be tempted to depart 

 from the principles of the method by which, at present, it 

 recruits its strength. It is quite another question, however, 

 whether it is desirable to retain the present limit to our annual 

 addition or to increase it. 



There is assuredly nothing sacred in the number 15 ; nor 

 any good reason that I know of for restricting the total strength 

 of our home list to 460 or 470 ; so long as our recruits approve 

 themselves good soldiers of science the more we enrol the 

 better. And if I may pursue the metaphor, I will add that I 

 do not think it desirable that our corps should consist altogether 

 of general officers. Any such exclusiveness would deprive us of 

 much useful service, and seriously interfere with the representa- 

 tive character in which our strengtli lies. I think we ought to 

 be in touch with the whole world of science in the country, and 

 constitute a microcosm answering to that macrocosm. Those 

 who are in favour of making a change observe that the limit of 

 fifteen was fixed nearly forty years ago ; that the number of 

 those who occupy themselves seriously with science and attain a 

 position which would undoubtedly have brought them into the 

 Society at that time, has increased and is constantly increasing ; 

 and that it is undesirable that we should be compelled to leave 

 out of our body, year after year, persons whom we should be 

 very glad to see in it. On the other hand, it is to be recollected 

 that a change once made can hardly be revoked, and that, in 

 view of the importance of such a step, the Society will do well 

 to make sure of the consequences before taking it. 



I have thought it desirAble to raise the question, not for the 

 purpose of suggesting any immediate action — for my personal 

 opinion is that, at present, no change is desirable — but in order 

 that the attention of the Fellows may be directed to a matter 

 which I think is sure to come before them in a practical shape 

 before many anniversaries go by. And, whenever that time 

 arrives, I think another problem may possibly offer itself for 

 solution. Since this Society was founded, English-speaking 

 communities have been planted and are increasing and multi- 

 plying in all quarters of the globe— to use a naturalist's phrase, 

 their geographical distribution is "world wide." Wherever 

 these communities have had time to develop, the instinct which 

 led our forefathers to come together for the promotion of natural 

 knowledge has worked in them and produced most notable 



