1880.] The Martyrdom of Science . 163 
note that, unless we are misinformed, St. Augustine had 
warned the clergy against the attempt to exercise a jurisdic- 
tion over science. 
As we approach modern times a change becomes manifest. 
Ecclesiastical bodies in the more civilised parts of Europe 
were deprived of civil power, and could no longer imprison, 
torture, or burn inventors and discoverers. But the old 
spirit faded away very slowly, and even in our days it still 
occasionally comes to light. Men of science, scientific 
works, and learned societies were, and still are, traduced, 
denounced, and held up to public hatred. Scarcely a capital 
step has been taken in any branch of research but it has 
been branded as atheistic. Dean Wren, the father of the 
celebrated architect, upheld the geocentric theory of the 
universe and the immovability of the earth in a strain 
worthy of Caccini or Scioppius. It was objected against 
the Royal Society that its members neglected the wiser and 
more discerning ancients and sought the guidance of their 
own unassisted judgments, and that by admitting among 
them men of all countries and religions they endangered the 
stability of the English Church.” It was urged that 
experimental philosophy was likely to lead to the overthrow of 
Christianity and even to atheism. Among these writers a 
prominent place belongs to Henry Stubbs, of Warwick, and 
the Rev. Richard Cross, of Somerset, the latter of whom 
charged the Fellows of the Royal Society with “ under- 
mining the universities, destroying Protestantism, and 
introducing Popery !” 
It would have been fortunate for Bruno, Galileo, and not 
a few of their colleagues, if the Inquisition and the Order of 
Jesus had taken the same view of the tendency of their 
researches. The discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton excited an 
outburst of hostility very similar to that which has in our 
own times greeted the theory of organic evolution. Then 
geology became the great bugbear, then followed the 
nebular hypothesis, till, as we have just hinted, anti-scientific 
jealousy concentrated itself upon the views of Darwin, 
Wallace, and their followers. If we read the controversial 
literature which has issued from the English press within 
the last half century, and note the motives therein 
imputed to men of science, we can scarcely doubt what 
would have been the fate of Buckland, Lyell, Sedgwick, 
Oken, Carus, Richard Owen, Darwin, had their enemies 
possessed as much power as malice. It must also be 
remembered that the practical applications of science, and 
all attempts at its extension among the public, have been 
N 2 
