Decline of Science in England [22]
rests are not difficult to verify by members of the Royal Society. I have examined them, and shall state them before I enter on the reasoning which may be founded upon them. In the minutes of the Council, 26th November, 1829, we find--
"Resolved, that the following gentlemen be recommended to be put upon the Council for the ensuing year." [Here follows a list of persons, amongst whom the name of Sir John Franklin occurs [Sir John Franklin was absent from London, and altogether unacquainted with this transaction, until he saw it stated in the newspapers some months after it had taken place. That his name was the one substituted for that of Captain Beaufort I know, from other evidence which need not be produced here, as the omission of the latter name is the charge that has been made.], and that of Captain Beaufort is not found. [Any gentleman may satisfy himself that this is not a mistake of the Assistant Secretary's, in copying, by consulting the rough minutes of that meeting of the Council, which it might perhaps be as well to write in a rough minute-book, instead of upon loose sheets of paper; nor can it be attributed to any error arising from accidentally mislaying the real minutes, for in that case the error would have been rectified immediately it was detected; and this has remained uncorrected, although publicly spoken of for months. As there is no erasure in the list, one is reluctantly compelled to conjecture that the real minutes of that meeting have been destroyed.]]
Now this could not be the list actually recommended by the Council on the morning of the 26th of November, because the President himself, on the evening of that day, informed Capt. Beaufort that he was placed on the house list; and that officer, with the characteristic openness of his profession, wrote on the next or the following day to the President, declining that situation, and stating his reasons for the step.
Upon the fact, therefore, of the suppression of part of a resolution of the Council, on the 26th of November, there can be no doubt; but in order to understand the whole nature of the transaction, other information is necessary. It has been the wish of many members of the Society, that the President should not absolutely name his own Council, but that the subject should be discussed fairly at the meeting previous to the Anniversary-- this has always been opposed by Mr. Gilbert, and those who support him. Now, it has been stated, that, at the meeting of the Council on the 26th of November, the President took out of his pocket a bit of paper, from which he read the names of several persons as fit to be on the Council for the ensuing year;--that it was not understood that any motion was made, and it is certain that none was seconded, nor was any ballot taken on such an important question; and it was a matter of considerable surprise to some of those present, to discover afterwards that it was entered on the minutes as a resolution. This statement I have endeavoured to verify, and I believe it to be substantially correct; if it was a resolution, it was dictated, not discussed. It is also important to observe, that no similar resolution stands on the council-books for any previous year.
On examining the minutes of the succeeding Council, no notice of the letter of Captain Beaufort to the President is found. Why was it omitted? If the first entry had been truly made, there would have been no necessity for the omission; and after the insertion of that letter, a resolution would naturally have followed, recommending another name instead of the one withdrawn. Such was the natural and open course; but this would have exposed to the Society the weakness of those who manage it. If the rough minutes of each meeting of the Council were read over before it separated, and were copied previously to the next meeting, such a substitution could hardly have occurred; but, unfortunately, this is not the case, and the delay is in some cases considerable. Thus, the minutes of the three Councils, held on February 4, on February 11, and on
"Resolved, that the following gentlemen be recommended to be put upon the Council for the ensuing year." [Here follows a list of persons, amongst whom the name of Sir John Franklin occurs [Sir John Franklin was absent from London, and altogether unacquainted with this transaction, until he saw it stated in the newspapers some months after it had taken place. That his name was the one substituted for that of Captain Beaufort I know, from other evidence which need not be produced here, as the omission of the latter name is the charge that has been made.], and that of Captain Beaufort is not found. [Any gentleman may satisfy himself that this is not a mistake of the Assistant Secretary's, in copying, by consulting the rough minutes of that meeting of the Council, which it might perhaps be as well to write in a rough minute-book, instead of upon loose sheets of paper; nor can it be attributed to any error arising from accidentally mislaying the real minutes, for in that case the error would have been rectified immediately it was detected; and this has remained uncorrected, although publicly spoken of for months. As there is no erasure in the list, one is reluctantly compelled to conjecture that the real minutes of that meeting have been destroyed.]]
Now this could not be the list actually recommended by the Council on the morning of the 26th of November, because the President himself, on the evening of that day, informed Capt. Beaufort that he was placed on the house list; and that officer, with the characteristic openness of his profession, wrote on the next or the following day to the President, declining that situation, and stating his reasons for the step.
Upon the fact, therefore, of the suppression of part of a resolution of the Council, on the 26th of November, there can be no doubt; but in order to understand the whole nature of the transaction, other information is necessary. It has been the wish of many members of the Society, that the President should not absolutely name his own Council, but that the subject should be discussed fairly at the meeting previous to the Anniversary-- this has always been opposed by Mr. Gilbert, and those who support him. Now, it has been stated, that, at the meeting of the Council on the 26th of November, the President took out of his pocket a bit of paper, from which he read the names of several persons as fit to be on the Council for the ensuing year;--that it was not understood that any motion was made, and it is certain that none was seconded, nor was any ballot taken on such an important question; and it was a matter of considerable surprise to some of those present, to discover afterwards that it was entered on the minutes as a resolution. This statement I have endeavoured to verify, and I believe it to be substantially correct; if it was a resolution, it was dictated, not discussed. It is also important to observe, that no similar resolution stands on the council-books for any previous year.
On examining the minutes of the succeeding Council, no notice of the letter of Captain Beaufort to the President is found. Why was it omitted? If the first entry had been truly made, there would have been no necessity for the omission; and after the insertion of that letter, a resolution would naturally have followed, recommending another name instead of the one withdrawn. Such was the natural and open course; but this would have exposed to the Society the weakness of those who manage it. If the rough minutes of each meeting of the Council were read over before it separated, and were copied previously to the next meeting, such a substitution could hardly have occurred; but, unfortunately, this is not the case, and the delay is in some cases considerable. Thus, the minutes of the three Councils, held on February 4, on February 11, and on