By far the greater part of the expense of an investigation in physics or chemistry is the exceedingly large { 209} amount of time it occupies. Many necessary preliminary experiments have to be made, which yield either negative, unsuccessful, or incomplete results, and make the undertaking expensive. A good investigation in chemistry also not unfrequently costs the investigator a sovereign a day if he is wholly employed upon it. In some cases, for each £100 received as a grant, at least a £1,000, was directly and indirectly expended. Any person therefore who undertook a research became a loser, and aid from the Government Grant fund did not entirely cover his loss. Only scientific men who had other sources of income were able to avail themselves of the grants. The existence of the grants also was not widely known. The advantages of the plan were, it diminished the loss to the investigator, and the fact of being allotted a sum from the fund was considered highly creditable to the recipient.
In consequence largely of the evidence collected from eminent men of science from all parts of Great Britain, and the recommendations based upon it, by the Royal Commission for the Advancement of Science, the Grant system has been extended; our Government recently placed an additional amount of £4,000 a year, for five years, to be distributed in sums at the recommendation of the Royal Society to suitable applicants, and the five years have now elapsed.
This extension of the Grant system has been an { 210} improvement. It has resulted both in a large increase in the number of applicants and of researches; and has shown that there exists in this country a large amount of scientific ability in need of encouragement. The amounts granted were increased in magnitude so as to cover in some cases payments made to assistants and the entire outlay made for experiments, also a small payment for a portion of the time occupied in actual research. The plan of awarding the grants has been for work proposed by the applicants to be done, and not for that already performed. How far a retrospective method might be worthy of trial, is difficult to decide. It has been objected to it that the claims of scientific investigators for researches already made, would be so great and so convincing that it would be impossible to resist them, and the funds required to satisfy those claims would be so large as to render the plan quite impracticable; if however the retrospective period was limited to a short time, a year for example, the difficulty would be lessened. There would still however remain the great difficulty of valuing the results. This might probably be overcome by regulating the money payment according to the time, labour, pecuniary expenditure, and scientific status of the particular investigator, and leaving genius to be rewarded by the fame and honour of the results.