There are two great artificial divisions of scientific knowledge also, upon the development of which national progress largely depends, viz., knowledge of inanimate matter and knowledge of man; the latter we have largely cultivated but the former we have greatly neglected:--and even our study of man has been largely one-sided and literary. It is far less important to know what is man, than to know what are the great principles which underlie the actions of all living creatures, and in obedience to which man is compelled to work out his destiny in the Universe and the infinite future. { 169}
It is evident from this, that much of the mental activity around us is not progress, but rather a process of maintaining present state, a prevention of decline, a continually going round and round in conventional varied step, a kind of intellectual mill. Under these circumstances it is not the original discoverer, but he who in this occupation, can best express old ideas, in the most varied forms and choicest language, who is most generally considered to be the greatest intellectual chief.
Although originality even in literature and art is very imperfectly encouraged in this country, both art and literature are much more readily understood and appreciated than scientific research, and treated as if they were more important. Whilst most persons can understand and appreciate the gift of a work of art to a public art collection, few can understand or properly value the discovery and gift of a new scientific truth of far greater intrinsic value to the public stock of knowledge; the treatment received by Priestley and other discoverers in comparison with that of local donors, sufficiently illustrates this. Even publishers of lucrative newspapers prefer to give prizes and pay liberally for sensational tales, than to pay for articles on the public advantages of new scientific knowledge.
Nearly the whole of the most distinguished mathematicians, physicists, chemists, biologists, and physiologists of Great Britain, also the Earl of Derby, the Marquis of Salisbury, Sir Stafford Northcote and many other eminent men, have given evidence before the Royal Commissioners on "Scientific Instruction and the Advancement of Science"[23] to the following effect:--_1st._ That the promotion of original scientific research is neglected in this country. _2nd._ That such research is encouraged more by the State in Germany than here. And _3rd_. That much greater encouragement of it by our Government, by the Universities and the Public, is highly necessary to our commercial prosperity. They have also stated in evidence their opinions as to the best ways in which they consider it may be assisted. The additional fact that all the greatest scientific men who have ever existed have pursued research, and sacrificed much for it, is a practical proof that they also approved of its encouragement.