724 THE CENTENNIAL OF THE INSTITUTE OF FRANCE. 



men of the first merit could be elected, whether they resided in Paris 

 or elsewhere. ~No, it seemed to be more radical to divide by halves. 

 This even ceased to be just, because Paris had a population of only 

 500,000 inhabitants and the provinces counted 25,000,000, and this was 

 not reasonable, since a man of eminence might desire to live in Paris 

 because of the libraries, the museum, the amphitheaters, and all the 

 other means of study there. A section of the dramatic art had been 

 admitted; three Parisian actors, three provincial actors. Everyone is 

 aware that, although great actors may have their beginning in the 

 provinces, they can not remain there where they have neither tradi- 

 tions, nor schools, nor the auxiliaries, nor the public which they need, 

 nor material resources. As much may be said of scholars and of 

 artists. The residence rule was very strict then, much more so than it 

 has been since. A member nominated to represent Paris, and who 

 took up his residence definitely in the provinces, was forced to send in 

 his resignation. Destrutt de Tracy, who lived at Auteuil, was nomi- 

 nated a nonresident member. The greatest error committed perhaps 

 is the inside regulation of work, which was imposed by organic decree. 

 The Government claimed in this regulation the right to request the 

 opinion of the classes of the institute. It was especially to the Academy 

 of Sciences that it addressed these demands. It consulted it on the 

 subject of covered conveyances destined for the removal of the sick, on 

 the improvements to be made in hospital regulations, on the monetary 

 system, on a way of reconciling the era of the Republic with the com- 

 mon era, on a new kind of cannon ball, on an oiled taffeta suitable 

 for making cloaks for the troops, on the idea of placing several rows 

 of guns on a common frame, on the preservation of drinking water 

 on board ship, on the preservation of biscuits and of vegetables at sea. 

 There were also questions for the other classes, even philosophical 

 questions, which tended to make a state doctrine. Nothing is more 

 hostile to philosophy and to true policy, and nothing can impede more 

 seriously the progress of science and the splendor of academies. In a 

 well organized literary body, the authority of each member grows with 

 that of the association, but on condition that there shall result from it 

 no intermeddling by the Government, nor by the academy, with the 

 individual labor. When General Oavaignac, to refute the socialists of 

 1848, asked the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences to write 

 some popular pamphlets on the subject, the academy failed to do it — 

 we must frankly confess it — although it had appealed to the greatest 

 men of science. A great mind is not found in work done on demand. 

 Genius must breathe the air of liberty. 



This right of requisition did not appertain to the Government alone; 

 it belonged also to the public. Every author could demand an analysis 

 of his book, every inventor an examination of his discovery. Thus, the 

 academicians were no longer masters of their own time. I am no longer 

 astonished at their being assigned two costumes, one for ceremonious 



