Reflections on the Decline of Science in England

Of Encouragement from Learned Societies.

There are several circumstances which concur in inducing persons pursuing science, to unite together, to form societies or academies.  In former times, when philosophical instruments were more rare, and the art of making experiments was less perfectly known, it was almost necessary.  More recently, whilst numerous additions are constantly making to science, it has been found that those who are most capable of extending human knowledge, are frequently least able to encounter the expense of printing their investigations.  It is therefore convenient, that some means should be devised for relieving them from this difficulty, and the volumes of the transactions of academies have accomplished the desired end.

There is, however, another purpose to which academies contribute.  When they consist of a limited number of persons, eminent for their knowledge, it becomes an object of ambition to be admitted on their list.  Thus a stimulus is applied to all those who cultivate science, which urges on their exertions, in order to acquire the wished-for distinction.  It is clear that this envied position will be valued in proportion to the difficulty of its attainment, and also to the celebrity of those who enjoy it; and whenever the standard of scientific knowledge which qualifies for its ranks is lowered, the value of the distinction itself will be diminished.  If, at any time, a multitude of persons having no sort of knowledge of science are admitted, it must cease to be sought after as an object of ambition by men of science, and the class of persons to whom it will become an object of desire will be less intellectual.

Let us now compare the numbers composing some of the various academies of Europe.-The Royal Society of London, the Institute of France, the Italian Academy of Forty, and the Royal Academy of Berlin, are amongst the most distinguished.

Name Number of Number
               Population.  Members of
Country. of its Foreign
                              Academy.  Members

1.  England.     22,299,000      685            50
2.  France .     32,058,000       76       8 Mem. 100 Corr.
8.  Prussia .    12,915,000       38            16
4.  Italy . .    12,000,000       40             8

It appears then, that in France, one person out of 427,000 is a member of the Institute.  That in Italy and Prussia, about one out of 300,000 persons is a member of their Academies.  That in England, every 32,000 inhabitants produces a Fellow of the Royal Society.  Looking merely at these proportions, the estimation of a seat in the Academy of Berlin, must be more than nine times as valuable as a similar situation in England; and a member of the Institute of France will be more than thirteen times more rare in his country than a Fellow of the Royal Society is in England.

Favourable as this view is to the dignity of such situations in other countries, their comparative rarity is by no means the most striking difference in the circumstances of men of science.  If we look at the station in society occupied by the savans of other countries, in several of them we shall find it high, and their situations profitable.  Perhaps, at the present moment, Prussia is, of all the countries in Europe, that which bestows the greatest attention, and most unwearied encouragement on science.  Great as are the merits of many of its philosophers, much of this support arises from the character of the reigning family, by whose enlightened policy even the most abstract sciences are fostered.

The maxim that “knowledge is power,” can be perfectly comprehended by those only who are themselves well versed in science; and to the circumstance of the younger branches of the royal family of Prussia having acquired considerable knowledge in such subjects, we may attribute the great force with which that maxim is appreciated.

In France, the situation of its savans is highly respectable, as well as profitable.  If we analyze the list of the Institute, we shall find few who do not possess titles or decorations; but as the value of such marks of royal favour must depend, in a great measure, on their frequency, I shall mention several particulars which are probably not familiar to the English reader. [This analysis was made by comparing the list of the Institute, printed for that body in 1827, with the ALMANACH ROYALE for 1823.]

Number of the Members of the Total Number of each Class Institute of France who belong of the Legion of Honour. to the Legion of Honour.

GrandCroix.........  3                    80
GrandOfficier .....  3                   160
Commandeur ........  4                   400
Officier .......... 17                 2,000
Chevalier ......... 40               Not limited.

Number of Members of the Institute      Total Number
decorated with                          of
the Order of St. Michel.                that Order.

Grand Croix .......  2
100
Chevalier ......... 27

Amongst the members of the Institute there
are,—­
Dukes …................ 2
Marquis ….............. 1
Counts …............... 4
Viscounts…............. 2
Barons …............... 14
                          —­
                          23

Of these there are
Peers of France .......... 5

We might, on turning over the list of the 685 members of the Royal Society, find a greater number of peers than there are in the Institute of France; but a fairer mode of instituting the comparison, is to inquire how many titled members there are amongst those who have contributed to its Transactions.  In 1827, there were one hundred and nine members who had contributed to the Transactions of the Royal Society; amongst these were found:-

Peer ........................ 1
Baronets .................... 5
Knights ..................... 5

It should be observed, that five of these titles were the rewards of members of the medical profession, and one only, that of Sir H. Davy, could be attributed exclusively to science.

It must not be inferred that the titles of nobility in the French list, were all of them the rewards of scientific eminence; many are known to have been such; but it would be quite sufficient for the argument to mention the names of Lagrange, Laplace, Berthollet, and Chaptal.

The estimation in which the public hold literary claims in France and England, was curiously illustrated by an incidental expression in the translation of the debates in the House of Lords, on the occasion of His Majesty’s speech at the commencement of the session of 1830.  The Gazette de France stated, that the address was moved by the Duc de Buccleugh, “CHEF de LA MAISON de WALTER Scott.”  Had an English editor wished to particularize that nobleman, he would undoubtedly have employed the term wealthy, or some other of the epithets characteristic of that quality most esteemed amongst his countrymen.

If we turn, on the other hand, to the emoluments of science in France, we shall find them far exceed those in our own country.  I regret much that I have mislaid a most interesting memorandum on this subject, which I made several years since:  but I believe my memory on the point will not be found widely incorrect.  A foreign gentleman, himself possessing no inconsiderable acquaintance with science, called on me a few years since, to present a letter of introduction.  He had been but a short time in London; and, in the course of our conversation, it appeared to me that he had imbibed very inaccurate ideas respecting our encouragement of science.

Thinking this a good opportunity of instituting a fair comparison between the emoluments of science in the two countries, I placed a sheet of paper before him, and requested him to write down the names of six Englishmen, in his opinion, best known in France for their scientific reputation.  Taking another sheet of paper, I wrote upon it the names of six Frenchmen, best known in England for their scientific discoveries.  We exchanged these lists, and I then requested him to place against each name (as far as he knew) the annual income of the different appointments held by that person.  In the mean time, I performed the same operation on his list, against some names of which I was obliged to place a ZERO.  The result of the comparison was an average of nearly 1200L. per annum for the six French savans whom I had named.  Of the average amount of the sums received by the English, I only remember that it was very much smaller.  When we consider what a command over the necessaries and luxuries of life 1200L. will give in France, it is underrating it to say it is equal to 2000L. in this country.

Let us now look at the prospects of a young man at his entrance into life, who, impelled by an almost irresistible desire to devote himself to the abstruser sciences, or who, confident in the energy of youthful power, feels that the career of science is that in which his mental faculties are most fitted to achieve the reputation for which he pants.  What are his prospects?  Can even the glowing pencil of enthusiasm add colour to the blank before him?  There are no situations in the state; there is no position in society to which hope can point, to cheer him in his laborious path.  If, indeed, he belong to one of our universities, there are some few chairs in his own Alma Mater to which he may at some distant day pretend; but these are not numerous; and whilst the salaries attached are seldom sufficient for the sole support of the individual, they are very rarely enough for that of a family.  What then can he reply to the entreaties of his friends, to betake himself to some business in which perhaps they have power to assist him, or to choose some profession in which his talents may produce for him their fair reward?  If he have no fortune, the choice is taken away:  he must give up that line of life in which his habits of thought and his ambition qualify him to succeed eminently, and he must choose the bar, or some other profession, in which, amongst so many competitors, in spite of his great talents, he can be but moderately successful.  The loss to him is great, but to the country it is greater.  We thus, by a destructive misapplication of talent which our institutions create, exchange a profound philosopher for but a tolerable lawyer.

If, on the other hand, he possess some moderate fortune of his own; and, intent on the glory of an immortal name, yet not blindly ignorant of the state of science in this country, he resolve to make for that aspiration a sacrifice the greater, because he is fully aware of its extent;—­if, so circumstanced, he give up a business or a profession on which he might have entered with advantage, with the hope that, when he shall have won a station high in the ranks of European science, he may a little augment his resources by some of those few employments to which science leads;—­if he hope to obtain some situation, (at the Board of Longitude, for example,) [This body is now dissolved] where he may be permitted to exercise the talents of a philosopher for the paltry remuneration of a clerk, he will find that other qualifications than knowledge and a love of science are necessary for its attainment.  He will also find that the high and independent spirit, which usually dwells in the breast of those who are deeply versed in these pursuits, is ill adapted for such appointments; and that even if successful, he must hear many things he disapproves, and raise no voice against them.

Thus, then, it appears that scarcely any man can be expected to pursue abstract science unless he possess a private fortune, and unless he can resolve to give up all intention of improving it.  Yet, how few thus situated are likely to undergo the labour of the acquisition; and if they do from some irresistible impulse, what inducement is there for them to deviate one step from those inquiries in which they find the greatest delight, into those which might be more immediately useful to the public?