( ix ) 



Avas unfit to discharge the duty which it claimed as one of 

 its functions, to decide questions of a strictly scientific 

 character. It should have been borne in mind by this 

 -association that votes on questions in science should be 

 weighed^ not counted! Had the proposition of the motion 

 •of the earth been decided in the days of Galileo by the 

 popular voice, this philosopher and his friends would have 

 been vastly in the minority. The society to which I allude, 

 after achieving an unenviable notorietj'-, by assuming to be 

 the arbiter of the science of the country, gradually sunk 

 into oblivion, from which its memory should not be re- 

 called except as a warning to those who would adventure 

 in the same line. 



It is an essential feature of a scientific society that 

 every communication presented to it should be subject to 

 free critical discussion. Such discussion not only enlivens 

 the proceedings, but is, generally, instructive, frequently 

 ■eliciting facts which, though insignificant when isolated, 

 when brought together mutually illustrate each other, and 

 lead, ultimately, to important conclusions. The extent to 

 which discussions may be allowed evidently depends on 

 the candor and temper of those who engage in them. 

 Among the things to be avoided are, merely verbal criti- 

 <}isra, undue harshness on the one hand, and unmerited 

 praise on the other, regard being had to truth rather than 

 to victory or mutual adulation. There is nothing, perhaps, 

 which marks more distinctly one of the characteristics of a 

 true scientist than the manner in which he receives and ap- 

 propriates to his use the critical remarks that may be made 

 upon his communications. He can, in many cases, at least, 

 derive from them the indication that he has failed to pre- 

 sent on some points a clear statement of his investigations; 



