i'llJcfcilDKNTIAL ADDREfef. 'Ml 



what I hope to find,' replies M. de Bort. ' Tes, but surely you have formulated 

 some law you wish to test?' pursues the invigilator. 'How am I to give you 

 proper scientific rank unless you can produce at least a tentative law?' 'On 

 the other hand I wish to keep a perfectly open mind,' maintains M. de Bott. 

 'Then I fear I cannot admit you to our class at present; you must join the 

 infants' class, and I can only give you my best wishes that you may reach maturity 

 some day.' Unperturbed, M. de Bort continues to send up his balloons, and 

 almost immediately discovers the great fact about the isothermal region whioh 

 will be a permanent factor in the meteorology of the future. The mathematician 

 is now ready to admit him, as a worthy person who has found a law about the 

 constitution of the atmosphere. But was not the merit in sending up the balloors 

 whatever came of it ? Is it not sometimes more courageous to take risks c f 

 failure? The mathematician, safe in his stronghold which possesses 'probably 

 in the highest degree attainable by the human intellect the characteristics of 

 perfect and necessary science' is like a man who has inherited a good old-estab- 

 lished business, and he has a distaste for the methods of those who have to try 

 new ventures. No doubt many who make such trials fail; but, on the other 

 hand, great fortunes have been made in that way. 



It may seem, however, that too much is being deduced from a single quoted 

 opinion, which may easily have been personal and not representative. Let me, 

 therefore, take another which presents a different aspect of the same matter. I 

 take the opening words of Sir George Darwin's Address to this Section at 

 Birmingham in 1886 : — 



A mere catalogue of facts, however well arranged, has never led to any 

 important scientific generalisation. For in any subjects the facts are so 

 numerous and many-sided that they only lead us to a conclusion when they 

 are marshalled by the light of some leading idea. A theory is then a neces- 

 sity for the advance of science, and we may regard it as the branch of a 

 living tree, of which facts are the nourishment. 



Those who have read the letters of Charles Darwin l will recognite that this 

 opinion was also held by the father, and may have been adopted by the son. It 

 is no part of my purpose to raise any question of originality : I mention the 

 point merely to take the opportunity it gives me of showing that I do net 

 approach lightly an opinion held by two such men. With the utmost respect I 

 wish to question whether the criterion indicated goes deep enough'. Often have 

 we had ocular demonstration of the value of a theory in stimulating the advance 

 of science, but is advance wholly dependent on the existence of a theory? I have 

 tried to indicate already a deeper motive power by such instances as the work 

 of Tycho, who had no theory, but who perceived the need of observation. And I 

 will now definitely formulate the view that the perception of the need for obser- 

 vations, the faith that something will come of them, and the skill and energy to 

 act on that faith — that these qualities, all of which are possessed by any observer 

 worthy the name, have at least as much to do with the advance of Science as the 

 formulation of a theory, even of a correct theory. The work of the observer is 

 often forgotten — it lies at the root of the plant ; it is easier to notice the theories 

 which blossom and ultimately produce the fruit. But without the patient work 

 of the observer underground there would be neither blossom nor fruit. It is also 

 easy to fix attention on the mechanical nature of much observation; but this is 

 not the principal feature of observing any more than is numerical computation of 

 mathematics. There are men like Adams who perform gigantic numerical com- 

 putations faultlessly, but there are others who would take equal rank as mathe- 

 maticians who cannot do three additions correctly; and again others v, ho could 

 compute well and quickly but prefer to hand over that part of then- work to 

 someone else. Similarly some great observers themselves look through the tele- 

 scope, and some merely direct others how to do so ; the spark of divine fire is not 



1 Since the Address was delivered and reports of it appeared in the press, 

 two correspondents have independently called attention to the fact that Charles 

 Darwin's attitude is not correctly represented, quoting his own words, 'I 

 worked on true Baconian principles and without any theory collected facts on a 

 wholesale scale' (Life, i., 83). I wish to acknowledge the correction wkcle- 

 heartedly .— H.H.T. 



x 2 



