724 
chemist that nature teaches the alphabet of 
human knowledge. In this sense the chem- 
ist comes nearer than any other to first 
principles. As we grow in knowledge, we 
sometimes forget our small beginnings. And 
so it sometimes seems to me that our pro- 
fessional brethren of other schools are prone 
to despise the day of little things. Atoms 
and molecules are too small to cut much of 
a figure in the economy of nature, think 
some. But it is no true mark of greatness 
for the macrocosm to forget the microcosm. 
A megatherium is not the ‘whole show.’ 
It is true that in some respects chemical 
achievements appeal least of all scientific 
accomplishments to the popular attention. 
The isolation of krypton does not have 
half the interest for the public that attaches 
to the discovery of a new bug, especially 
if it have domestic tastes. In fact all the 
biological sciences, with the possible excep- 
tion of physics, find a readier and more ap- 
preciative public than those which deal with 
things lifeless and for the most part incom- 
prehensibie to the layman, This truth is 
uttered in no complaining mood, but only 
to explain why Davy is not as well known 
as Darwin, nor Hoffmann as Haeckel. It 
is when chemical studies and discoveries 
come directly into contact with life that 
they lead to recognition, as in the case of 
Pasteur, whose great genius is recognized 
the world over, perhaps more generally 
than that of any other scientific man has 
ever been. But it is not alone for public 
applause that life is worth living, and the 
dignity of our science suffers no deprecia- 
tion because of its apparent remoteness 
from human interest. I say apparent, be- 
cause I do not believe that any other 
science has in reality any nearer bearing on 
human welfare than chemistry. ‘Think for 
a moment how many of our industries that 
lie at the foundation of wealth and progress 
are based directly on chemistry. Think of 
the many others that are intimately re- 
SCIENCE. 
[N. 8. Vou. XIII: No. 332. 
lated to it indirectly. If the clock of politi- 
cal progress and liberty were turned back 50 
years by the battle of Waterloo, think of 
the loss to humanity should such a disaster 
befall the hosts of chemistry. Bourbonism 
is the natural foe of human progress, and 
unhappily the world is still full of anti- 
scientific Bourbons. 
Whatever may be the branch of the pro- 
fession which the chemist may pursue, he 
should not be indifferent to feelings of 
justifiable pride which come to him when 
he realizes all that our science has done for 
humanity. The disciples of evolution may 
have attached some opprobrium to the 
epithet, but the chemist is the ‘ connecting 
link’ between the world of matter and 
mankind. We stand the nearest of all our 
brethren to the ultimate constitution of 
things, so near, in fact, that we almost 
tremble at the thought that by some sub- 
tile synthesis we may yet strike the spark 
of organic life. Of one thing at least we 
may feel sure. We know best of all our 
brethren the environment of development 
and growth. We may never create an en- 
vironment which will make autogenesis 
possible, but we surely can soften some of 
the harder conditions of existence. To be 
so near the first forms of life, to be so 
nearly in touch with the ultimate secrets 
of nature, are facts which show some of 
the principal elements of the dignity of 
chemistry. 
No man can lay claim to the term scien- 
tific who does not reverence the truth. 
That is the first element of a scientific 
mind. The truest proof of a reverence for 
the truth is a willingness to be convinced. 
In the times of Cromwell, the truth was 
supposed to be simply the dogmas of the 
creed, which led Hudibras to say : 
“‘Convince a man against his will, 
He’ll hold the same opinion still, 
And prove his doctrine orthodox 
By apostolic blows and knocks.” 
