edge indeed is not more in danger than capital of throwing off social restraint is quite an open question.
Prof. Mendenhall touches a very im- portant point when he speaks of the unfortunate absence of the scientific ele- ment from our political life. There may be, doubtless there are, causes for this for which men of science are not to be blamed ; but still it is a fact that a man of science is commonly looked upon as a man inapt for affairs. In the British Parliament science is represented by such men as Sir Henry Koscoe, Sir John Lubbock, Sir Lyon Playfair ; literature and philosophy by Mr. John Morley, Mr. Balfour, and Mr. Gladstone, to mention but a few names out of many ; and no one will question that the presence of such men raises the intellectual tone of any assembly in which they sit. In this country we seem to have no use for men of science and not much even for litte- rateurs. The consequence is that with us political discussion shows a total lack of breadth and an almost total lack of conviction. A tariff bill is the occasion for a simple tug-of-war, not for discus- sion in the true sense. Time was, as Prof. Mendenhall points out, when our politics could show such names as Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, and Hamil- ton men strongly tinctured w T ith phi- losophy and at the same time of high practical intelligence. Why should the Republic not have to-day the services of its most thoughtful sons ? While the thought of the age is rising why should our politics grovel? When so many practical problems of the gravest mo- ment are pressing for settlement, why should the very men whose habits of mind best fit them for social service re- tire, as it were, to a Sacred Mountain of their own and leave the field of civic activity to sentimentalists and adven- turers? To answer these questions or to attempt to answer them would re- quire more space than we command. Suffice it to say that these things should not be, and that much harm will result
��if they should remain as characteristic features of our civilization. Our chief hope lies in the adoption by the scien- tific class of that new and better view of their duties and functions indicated by Prof. Mendenhall. There is not much use in preaching to large masses, but small bodies may be more easily in- fluenced; and it hardly seems an im- possible thing that the corps of scien- tific workers should be penetrated by a new sense of social duty and should re- solve to keep in closer touch with the people than heretofore. What gives the clergy of the several churches their undoubted influence ? It is that they are with the people and of them. If they deal in mysteries, those mysteries are not their private property : what- ever benefit or grace they yield is avail- able for all. The mysteries of some of our scientists, on the pontrary, far from being for all, are prized in direct propor- tion to the fewness of those who can take any part in them. The soaring specialist is never satisfied till he stands on a pinnacle so small that no one can get footing beside him.
We need hardly say that we find in the address of Prof. Mendenhall an abundant justification of the work in which we have been engaged now for a long term of years the work of bringing home the best and surest results of sci- ence to a popular circle of readers and of keeping up as active a connection as possible between true scientific workers and the public. To this work we shall apply ourselves in future with increased courage and determination increased courage from the hope that the stirring words of the retiring President of the American Association will bring us new allies and helpers ; increased determina- tion from a quickened sense of the need of just such work. It is no new dogmatism that the times call for, but a new spirit of helpfulness and hopefulness guided by sci- ence. By this means, and this only, will the world solve its problems and outride the storms that threaten its civilization.