January 30, 1902] 



NA TURE 



291 



learning, but with particular grace we encourage philosophical 

 studies, especially those which by actual experiment attempt 

 either to shape out a new philosophy or to perfect the old. In 

 order, therefore, that such studies, which have not hitherto 

 been sufficiently brilliant in any part of the world, may shine 

 conspicuously amongst our people, and that at length the 

 whole world of letters may always recognise us not only as 

 the Defender of the Faith, but also as the universal lover and 

 patron of every kind of truth : Know ye, &c. 



Of the "Fellows" we read later on : — 



The more eminently they are distinguished for the study of 

 every kind of learning and good letters, the more ardently they 

 desire to promote the honour, studies, and advantage of this 

 Society . . . the more we wish them to be especially deemed 

 fitting and worthy of being admitted into the number of the 

 Fellows of the same Society. 



" Every kind of learning and good letters " seems to 

 me pretty general, and it does not seem improper to take 

 the words " philosophical studies," in connection with 

 Bacon's definition of philosophy, as dealing with a three- 

 fold division, of matters divine (supernatural), natural, 

 and human, which also, perhaps, explains the subsequent 

 insistence upon natural, as opposed to supernatural, 

 knowledge. 



But, without labouring this point further, I suggest 

 that subjects the study of which by scientific methods 

 increases the sum of natural knowledge must all stand 

 on the same footing. I use the word " scientific" in its 

 widest, which I believe to be the truest, sense, as in- 

 cluding all additions to natural knowledge got by investi- 

 gation. Human history and de\ elopment are as im- 

 portant to mankind as the history and development of 

 fishes. The Royal Society now practically neglects the 

 one and encourages the other. 



It is possible, then, to say the least, that the present 

 general action of the society, and I say general, because 

 the action changes from time to time, is really not in 

 accordance with its charters ; it certainly is not with its 

 first practice. The charters make the society the 

 head centre of the intellect of the kingdom engaged 

 in making new natural knowledge, and therefore 

 until these charters of King Charles II. are abrogated 

 or revised there is no place logically for a new charter 

 by King Edward VII. giving power to a new body 

 to deal with the subjects the duty of the organisation and 

 encouragement of which was previously committed to 

 the Royal .Society. 



There can be no question that the gradual departure of 

 the action of the Royal Society from the course laid down 

 in the charters, and actually followed for a time, has been 

 the gradual e.vpansion and increased importance of e.\- 

 perimental and observational methods of work, which of 

 themselves are sufficient to employ the existing adminis- 

 trative machinery. But, if the whole work cannot be 

 done inside the society as it exists at present, the question 

 arises. Cannot some be organised side by side with it ? 

 Here, again, there may be difficulties ; but, as the com- 

 mittee wisely say with regard to the first proposal : — 



We are far from intending to express an opinion that any 

 difficulties of detail ought to prevent the important issues 

 involved from being fully considered in their largest bearings, 

 having regard to the great benefits which might be expected to 

 result to the progress of the philosophico-historical studies, and 

 possibly 10 the Royal Society itself, from the inclusion of those 

 studies within the scope of the society's action. 



It is right that I should say that the Royal Society 

 Council, in the resolution from which I have already 

 quoted, expresses sympathy with the desire to secure a 

 proper representation of the subjects now in question, 

 and did not refuse to include them within itself, although 

 its action may give colour to the belief in such an 

 effect. 



At present the Royal Society is the unique recognised 

 centre of the general scientific activity in this country. 



NO. 1683, VOL. 65] 



Will it be conducive to the interests of science, or 

 even of the Royal Society itself, that in future there 

 should he two entirely separate centres ? 



But will not this state of things be brought about if, 

 without any general consideration, a charter is at once 

 granted to the new body ? 



The important thing to secure is that the two bodies 

 dealing with the two great groups of scientific subjects 

 shall form part of one organisation — some enlarged 

 Royal Society. What the iicxus shall be is a matter of 

 such subordinate importance that I do not propose now 

 to refer to it further. 



May not this present difficulty, Sir, be really a blessing 

 in disguise? Does it not merely emphasise the activity 

 of the scientific spirit and the employment of the scientific 

 method in new regions, and suggest that the time has 

 arrived, at the beginning of a new century and a new 

 reign, for doing for the science of to-day what Charles II. 

 did for the science of the seventeenth century — that is, 

 organising and coordinating it on a broad basis ? 



It is clear that the question so wisely referred by His 

 Majesty Edward \TI. to the Privy Council is no light 

 one, for the acts of a previous King of England and the 

 future development of British science are involved. The 

 present confusion is great and will become greater if a 

 new charter is granted without a comparison and possible 

 revision of the existing ones ; and, short of an inquiry, 

 by a Royal Commission or by some other means, to con- 

 sider the question, it is difficult to see how the proper 

 organisation of natural knowledge in the future can be 

 secured. 



It is fortunate that there is ample time for this important 

 matter to be considered carefully in all its bearings, for 

 not till 1904 can any British representation of the philo- 

 sophico-historical subjects be considered by the Inter- 

 national Association of Academies. 



May I finally be permitted to say, Sir, how entirely I 

 agree with the remarks in the leading article in the 

 Times of the i6th inst. concerning the importance of 

 organising literature as well as science ? Science has 

 undoubtedly gained by the charters of Charles II., and 

 on this ground alone it may be urged that literature will 

 be a gainer if it also is similarly organised. Certainly 

 the most impressive sight I saw in Paris last year, when 

 attending the first meeting of the International Associa- 

 tion of Academies as a Royal Society delegate, was the 

 reception of a new literary member of the Academie 

 Francjaise. The combination of troops representing the 

 Governmentandmembersof other academies representing 

 the Institute of France formed a picture which is not 

 easily forgotten ; it was one also to set one thinking. 

 I am, Sir, your obedient servant, 



Nor:\ian Lockyer. 



TBE EIFFEL TOWER. 

 La Tour Eiffel en igoo. Par M. G. Eiffel, Officier de la 

 Legion d'Honneur. Pp. 363. (Paris : Masson and 

 Co., 1902.) 



IN a handsome volume, profusely illustrated with en- 

 gravings and photographs, M. Eiffel has given an 

 elaborate account, from its earliest conception, of the lofty 

 structure that will always bear his name, and of the 

 mechanical devices which have secured its success, both 

 as a worthy monument of the art of construction and as 

 a source of delight to the millions who have ascended it. 

 We understand and regret that this monograph in some 

 measure owes its appearance to the attacks of detractors, 

 and it is intended to furnish a complete answer to those 

 who, disapproving of the structure, have commented on 

 its puerility and its uselessness. This ill will, well pro- 

 nounced in the early days of the structure, and to which 



