10 
Sir  Humphry  Davy,  Bart.,  P.R.S. 
Professor  Warington,  while  somewhat  critical  of  the  book 
as  a whole,  says  that  “ there  are  some  paragraphs  that  read 
like  the  inspirations  of  genius,  though  it  is  now,  of  course, 
difficult  to  tell  to  what  extent  his  statements  and  opinions 
were  warranted  by  the  facts  then  known.  He  gives  a wonder- 
fully correct  idea  of  the  action  of  peas  or  beans  in  rotation, 
even  including  the  statement  that  they  obtain  their  nitrogen 
from  the  atmosphere.”' 
The  book  has  now  become  an  historical  landmark,  chiefly 
of  interest  as  showing  what  were  the  beginnings  of  the  science. 
The  breadth  of  the  author’s  views,  his  close  reasoning,  and  his 
insistence  on  the  value  of  the  scientific  method  will  ever  be  of 
interest  to  the  student.  But  science  does  not  stand  still,  and  it 
is  therefore  difficult  to  estimate  the  knowledge  of  a former  age 
and  easy  to  forget  that  the  commonplace  of  to-day  was 
originally  a discovery:  consecjuently  Davy’s  work  has  naturally 
ceased  to  be  a ])ractical  guide.  Davy  himself,  however,  was 
the  father  of  the  science  and  the  first  to  claim  that  agricultural 
chemistry  was  a distinct  branch  of  science,  a position  which  he 
(lid  so  much  to  win  for  it. 
It  has  been  said  that  the  simplicity  of  the  style  of  Davy's 
agricultural  lectures  was  in  marked  contrast  to  that  which  he 
adopted  at  the  Royal  Institution,  for  he  adapted  himself  to 
his  audience.  At  the  same  time  it  must  be  remembered  that 
he  held  strong  opinions  as  to  the  introduction  of  a figurative 
and  ornamental  style  into  memoirs  purely  scientific.  In  his 
Consolation.^  hi  Travel,  he  wrote:  “In  detailing  the  results  of 
ex])eriments,  and  in  giving  them  to  the  world,  the  chemical 
philosopher  should  ado]>t  the  sim])lest  style  and  manner  ; he 
will  avoid  all  ornament  as  something  injurious  to  his  subject, 
and  should  bear  in  mind  the  saying  of  the  first  king  of  Great 
Britain,  respecting  a sermon  which  w'as  excellent  in  doctrine, 
but  over-charged  with  poetical  allusions  and  figurative  lan- 
guage, ‘that  the  tropc's  and  metaphors  of  the  s]>eaker  were  like 
the  brilliant  wild  flowers  in  a field  of  corn,  very  pretty,  but 
which  did  very  much  hurt  to  the  corn.’ 
When,  however,  he  left  details  and  summed  up  the  broad 
generalities  of  his  subject,  his  })oetical  spirit  asserted  itself. 
What  more  unpoetical  a subject  can  be  imagined  than  manure? 
And  yet  he  concluded  his  sixth  lecture  thus  : “The  doctrine  of 
the  proper  aj)plication  of  manures  from  organised  substances 
' Thorpe’s  Tluinfihrij  Dary,  1896,  page  99. 
“ Paris’s  Life,  Vol.  1,  page  149. 
