its Fellows, gifted with adequate talents, who have not yet laboured for science, some proofs of their zeal in promoting its progress; and it will always consider the success of those who have already been contributors to our volumes, as a pledge of future labours.

For myself, I can only say, that I shall be most happy to give, in any way, assistance, either by advice or experiments, in promoting the progress of discovery. And though your good opinion has, as it were, honoured me with a rank similar to that of general, I shall be always happy to act as a private soldier in the ranks of science.

Let us, then, labour together, and steadily endeavour to gain what are, perhaps, the noblest objects of ambition-acquisitions which may be useful to our fellow-creatures. Let it not be said, that, at a period when our empire was at its highest pitch of greatness, the sciences began to decline; let us rather hope that posterity will find, in the Philosophical Transactions of our days, proofs that we were not unworthy of the times in which we lived.'-pp. 14, 15.

The second discourse of the president is chiefly occupied with the award of the Copley medals to Mr. Herschel and Captain Sabine to the former, for various papers on mathematical and physico-mathematical subjects; to the latter, for his account of experiments and observations, made during the voyage and expedition in the Arctic regions. In eulogising the labours of Mr. Herschel, the president is pleased (p. 22), to consider mathematics not only as strengthening the reasoning faculties, but as enabling us to solve the physical phenomena of the universe, and 'to modify the properties of matter.' Surely he here speaks as a chemist, and not as a mathematician: for mathematics do not, and cannot, modify the properties of bodies; they simply express and solve the laws of the action of bodies or particles on each other. Of the two papers by Mr. Herschel on physico-mathematical subjects, the president afterwards observes:

All the Fellows must be acquainted with the beautiful discoveries of Malus, of that peculiar modification given to rays, or particles of light, by their passage through certain transparent bodies, or by their reflection from certain surfaces, which has been called polarization; and the ingenious and elaborate researches of Biot, Arago, and Brewster, in consequence of the discovery, have been illustrated from this chair by your venerable and illustrious deceased president. But, notwithstanding the talents and industry of these distinguished philosophers, Mr. Herschel has been able to add to the subject some novel investigations; and, in reasoning upon the tints developed by polarized light, has reduced the explanation of the phenomena to one general fact, namely-that the axes of double refraction differ in their position in the same crystal, for the different coloured rays of the spectrum, and that this element must enter into all rigorous formulæ of double refraction; and, consequently, that the idea of the colours of thin plates being correspondent with the tints developed by polarized light, is not conformable to the facts.

Though it appears that some similar observations were made by one of the philosophers just mentioned, without the knowledge of what Mr. Herschel had done, yet the latter has, unquestionably, the priority: and it

is agreeable to find a harmonious coincidence between two accurate reasoners and acute observers.

In this paper Mr. Herschel has extended or modified the discoveries of others; the second is more original, and on a subject highly important in practical optics.

With the view of enabling artists to substitute, in working their glasses, certain mathematical rules for empirical methods, Mr. Herschel has presented, under a general and uniform analysis, the whole theory of the aberration of spherica Isurfaces; and has furnished simple tabular rules, by which the workmen may adapt their tools to the object required, in forming glasses for the telescope: thus adding to the immense obligations owing to the name of Herschel, in every thing connected with the progress of modern astronomy, and the knowledge of celestial phenomena.'-pp. 23, 24.

Yet this paper of Mr. Herschel's, on the aberration of light at spherical surfaces, however ingenious, has, we happen to know, less practical merit than the president supposes. The experience of every artist will declare the impossibility of employing mathematical formulæ for constructing the tools by which lenses are shaped. Some effects take place in the operation, which cause different lenses, formed by the same machine, to have different degrees of sphericity. The practice is, to form many, and to select from among them such as best suit the purpose.

The third discourse is occupied with the award to the Rev. Professor Buckland, of the Copley medal, for his celebrated paper on the bones of hyænas and other articles found in the Kirkdale cave; and in connection with this award, we are presented with some general views on the progress and prospects of Geology,' the sum of which is confined to a few remarks on the animal remains found in diluvian strata: while no notice whatever is taken of the nature and disposition of the materials of which the earth is composed.

The fourth, fifth, and part of the seventh discourses, being principally engrossed with the subject of astronomy, we may briefly notice them together. Here we have successive eulogies of Mr. Pond, the astronomer-royal, Dr. Brinkley, bishop of Cloyne, and Mr. South; to all of whom medals had been decreed. The cases of the two first of these learned gentlemen exhibit an amusing example of those revolutions of compliment, which mark the anniversaries of this venerable and erudite body, and the discourses of their president. Mr. Pond is first honoured for having ascertained a change in the declination of certain stars, which Dr. Brinkley considers as resulting only from errors in the royal astronomers' observations or instruments; and Dr. Brinkley is next honoured for having detected the sensible parallax of the fixed stars, which Mr. Pond denies to exist!! But to Mr. South the medal was assigned for observations on the proper motions of sundry double and triple stars, consisting of the revolutions of one about another, like planets about a sun.

Upon the nice contradictions between Mr. Pond and the Bishop of Cloyne, it is not our province to enter: but it is, we confess, not a subject of wonder that the Royal Society does not decide on questions relative to the parallax of stars since, while Mr. Pond allows that it may amount for a Lyrae to a fraction of a second, the bishop makes it a little more than 1 second. Now, these numbers are not the result of direct observations; but are the mean of many observations, differing considerably from each other, and all affected by numerous errors, which are supposed to be compensated when the mean is taken. But a mean of many terms differing much from each other, is always very uncertain. And however curious may be the questions of annual parallax, and the proper motion of (what is called), the fixed stars, they can never lead to any other result than that of exhibiting modifications of the law of general attraction; since they are too remote to produce any sensible effect upon the bodies of the solar system. The same observation may be made respecting any comets or new planets that may hereafter be discovered. The president's attention in his three discourses which relate to astronomy has, therefore, been confined to as many points of little practical importance in that sublime science.

Of the seventh and last discourse, the chief business is the adjudication of two royal medals to Messrs Dalton and Ivory; to the first gentleman, for his 'Development of the Atomic Theory of Chemistry;' and to the other, for various mathematical papers. Some importance has attached to these presentations, as having been made under a recent royal foundation. Two annual prizes of the value of fifty guineas each, had, in the preceding year, been instituted by his majesty, and placed at the disposal of the president and council of the Royal Society, for promoting the objects and progress of science by awakening honorable competition among philosophers. These prizes had been established in the form of silver and gold medals, to be given for important discoveries or useful labours in any department of science;' and this delivery of the medals to Messrs. Dalton and Ivory was the first appropriation of the new honours.

The occasion was therefore in itself one of some note; but it has been further attended with circumstances which will render it altogether a little memorable in the annals of the Royal Society. For both awards of the medals have excited a large share of dissatisfaction in the world of science; and to the discussions among the fellows, which have grown out of the subject, is (it is said) Sir Humphry Davy's late retirement from their chair to be attributed. Into the merits of the whole question we have neither time, space, nor inclination to enter at length; nor are we disposed in any respect to adopt ex parte views of the controversy. But certainly we are compelled to declare that a very strong case has been made out against the claims of Mr. Dalton at least, to the honour which he has received; and we refer such of our readers as may feel desirous of perusing it, to the very sensible and apparently candid letter on

the subject, which was printed in the last number of the "Quarterly Journal of the Royal Institution." The anonymous writer of that letter-who fairly avows himself one of the fellows dissentient from the justice of the award-examines Mr. Dalton's pretensions relative to the atomic theory in chemistry, in three questions,-whether he was its inventor--whether he has essentially contributed to its development-whether he has disclosed any new views connected with its application to the more abstract and refined branches of chemical science. The writer seems not to have been present at the delivery of the discourse before us; for he might, we think, have swept away two out of the three points with which his inquiry is encumbered, and reduced it to the simple resolution of his second question -whether Mr. Dalton has essentially contributed to the development of the Atomic Theory. For we do not find his merit pretended, or at least confidently asserted, in the president's discourse, to have amounted to more than this. But the writer of the letter is determined to leave the partisans of Mr. Dalton's claims not a single plea to rest upon; and we think that—primâ facie at least-he triumphantly redeems his pledge. On the first point, that Mr. Dalton has no right to claim the invention of the Atomic Theory, or the discovery of those laws of multiple proportions on which it immediately depends, we have never ourselves entertained a shadow of a doubt: holding, that the late Mr. Higgins's title is as superior as nearly twenty years priority of publication can render it. Nor can we understand how any title to an invention or discovery is to be safe, if this shall be disturbed, because, after a long interval from its publicity, another individual shall have come forward and proclaimed the same as an unborrowed and original conception of his own. On the second question, the writer in the letter to which we have referred, appears with equal success to prove that the praise of the development and extended application of the atomic theory is due, not to Mr. Dalton, but to Dr. Wollaston; whose logometric scale of chemical equivalents, it undoubtedly was, which first reduced the theory to practical utility. And on the third query, the adaptation of this theory to abstract and refined departments of chemical science is also denied to Mr. Dalton, and ascribed to the superior merits of Prout, Gay-Lussac and Richter.

Upon these grounds, it is concluded that Mr. Dalton has been unfairly selected to receive one of the highest honours which the Royal Society had to bestow; and it is insinuated that, in forming this decision, the council of that body have submitted "obsequiously to adopt the biassed suggestions of some one or two prejudiced individuals." We profess no acquaintance with any of these petty politics and intrigues of parties, which may exist in the society; though we are convinced that, from such heart-burnings and internal rivalries, learned corporations will never be exempt; and the perpetual influence of unworthy feelings and partialities, in the distribution of their rewards is, as we had lately occasion to

observe, one of the strongest objections against all oligarchical institutions of the kind, in the commonwealth either of letters or science. In the present instance, it would be ridiculous to affect not to see, that the covert charge of partiality is directed most immediately against the president, and the undue influence which he is assumed to have exerted. In the earlier distributions of prizes over which he presided, Sir Humphry seems to have been laboriously careful to proclaim the unblemished character which the society had maintained for the pure justice of its decrees. In one place (p. 53), he informs his auditors, that the Royal Society is a body very impartial in its decisions;' and in another (p. 117), he repeats, that its awards have never been made, except after dispassionate and candid discussion, and never to gratify private feelings.' If these boasts were well founded, we can only say, that it has been by a peculiar infelicity, that the close of his own administration should be marked by charges of favouritism, to which the society, according to his declaration, had never before been obnoxious.

Altogether, we fear it must be admitted by the best friends of Sir Humphry Davy, and the warmest admirers of his great talents, that, whether calumniated or not in this case of Mr. Dalton, he is very far from having reaped an increase of happiness or fame, through his elevation to the chair of the Royal Society. As a chemist, he had attained, by universal acknowledgment, the highest station in his peculiar department of science; and those persons rendered him, therefore, little service who, in the inconsiderateness of their zeal, attempted to raise him to an office which demanded an acquaintance with all the departments of natural philosophy, incompatible with the exclusive direction of his previous pursuits. And still less has he reason to feel indebted to those Fellows of the Society, in compliance with whose wishes,' by whatever motives dictated, he has been induced to publish the present Discourses. If his advisers were not unwilling to witness the shipwreck of a splendid reputation, it ought to have been foreseen by them that, in such vague and superficial treatment of subjects relating to general science, there was, at best, nothing which could possibly do honour to a name, already immortalized in the records of chemical discovery.

ART. II. Historical Inquiries respecting the Character of Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon and Chancellor of England. By the Hon. George Agar Ellis. pp. 182. 8vo. London: Murray, 1827.

THE author of the work introduces it with the following observation :

There is no character to which history has been more indulgent than to that of Edward Earl of Clarendon, Lord Chancellor of England. Annalists and writers of memoirs, following one another implicitly, have