722 THE CENTENNIAL OF THE INSTITUTE OF FRANCE. 



which lie had given life, it is sufficient for scientists and poets to exist 

 and to be known. Their works produce the movement, and at the 

 same time they regulate it by the admiration which they inspire. 

 Dannou, speaking in the name of the convention, said: "We have 

 borrowed from Talleyrand and from Condorcet the plan of a national 

 institute, a grand and majestic idea, the execution of which is to sur- 

 pass in splendor all the academies of the Kings. - - - . This will 

 be, in a way, the abridgment of the scientific world, the representative 

 body of the republic of letters, a national temple, the doors of which, 

 closed forever to intrigue, will open only at the arrival of genuine 

 renown." 



This union, sublime and productive of all that is eternal in sentiment 

 and thought, is not the only grand feature of the new institution. The 

 academies so far have been purely local. They recruited themselves 

 from a single city and represented the scientific or literary movement 

 of the city where they were born. But tbe institute, created in 1795 

 to replace the academies, is not a Parisian institute; it is a national 

 institute, it is the Institute of France. The constitution of the year 3, 

 the formula of which is faithfully reproduced by the constitution of the 

 year 8, declares it in these solemn words: "There is for the whole 

 Eepublic one single national institute, charged with collecting discov- 

 eries and with perfecting the arts and the sciences." Could I forget, in 

 the sight of this assembly, that the national convention opened the 

 doors of the institute, not only to all men of French nationality, but to 

 all great men, whatsoever be their origin ? Just as Louis XIV rewarded 

 genius, no matter to what nation it belonged, the convention also created 

 within the institute the order of Foreign Associates, which permits us 

 to inscribe on our lists of honor Huyghens, Newton, Leibnitz, and, 

 nearer home, Eossini and Meyerbeer. 



The work of the convention is, therefore, not the re-creation of the 

 former academies, disguised under new names and modified in second- 

 ary details of their organization. It is in fact a new work. It is a 

 creation, a powerful creation. It is the Academy of France, represent- 

 ing at the same time sciences, letters, and arts. It contains the former 

 academies, but inclosing them in a new and strong synthesis. It is our 

 right and our duty on this day of rejoicing to offer onr homage alike to 

 the old academies which jnepared the institute and to the institute 

 which contains and completes the former academies. The work of 

 the convention is grand enough to enable us to acknowledge that the 

 Assembly had been less happy in the details of execution than in 

 the first conception. It had exaggerated everything; its own authority 

 over the institute, and the authority of the institute over the members 

 who compose it. It did not know what liberty meant. It said, as 

 Louis XIV did : L'etat c'est moi ! aud when it had usurped all power 

 it said : " Xow we are free ! " 



The first fault of the convention, in this as in many other things, was 



