Nothing is more difficult and requires more caution than philosophical deduction, nor is there anything more adverse to its accuracy than fixity of opinion.

Faraday.

It will be of interest to examine the writings of certain astronomers, and writers on astronomy, to appreciate the unreasonable conservatism, not to say narrow-mindedness, which color their opinions. It ill becomes students of science to ridicule the honest and persistent labors of such men as Schiaparelli, Lowell, Perrotin, and others, unless they can show an equal devotion to the work. They do not recall the deluge of essays, reviews, and sober treatises which followed Darwin's great work, viewing the evidences of Darwin not thoughtfully, nor based upon any knowledge of the subject, but with contempt, and, in many instances, with vituperation. So rapid, however, was the recognition of Darwin's interpretation of Nature's facts that most of these writers lived long enough to see their protests entirely discredited, or to become enthusiastic advocates of the theory.

In their own domain of astronomy these writers are equally forgetful of the earnest and even bitter controversies regarding the demonstration by Chandler of the oscillation of the poles, and consequent variation of latitude, and the final establishment of Chandler's views, in the teeth of opposition, by the greatest astronomers.

The character of this irrelevant and adverse criticism may be appreciated by subjoining a few examples. The most amazing of all these expressions is to be found in the report of the British Astronomical Association, for 1892. It seems that a committee had been appointed by the Association to report on the surface features of Mars. E. Walter Maunder was made Director of the Committee. Twenty-six observers, of whom twenty-one were inhabitants of Great Britain, sent in the result of their work accompanied by drawings. A summary of this work was published in the form of memoranda accompanied by a Mercator projection map of Mars, individual planisphere drawings, as well as colored plates; these together represented twenty-eight single canals, five double canals, nine oases, as well as the dark regions so long familiar to astronomers. This was a somewhat remarkable contribution considering the complaints from the different observers in regard to the weather, and the prejudiced, and negligent part played by the man at the helm. That I am not unjust in these statements may be understood by quoting from the report showing the conditions under which the English observers labored, the delinquent part which Mr. Maunder, the Director, played in the matter, and the conclusions which Mr. Maunder arrived at after this unsatisfactory performance. He says: "The opposition of 1892 proved on the whole a very disappointing one. Although Mars at opposition was almost at its nearest approach to the Earth, it was far from being well placed for observation by European astronomers owing to its great southerly declination, and consequent low altitude.7 The weather during the autumn of 1892 was for the most part very unfavorable for observation of so difficult an object, and several members who joined the section at the beginning were unable to contribute either drawings or report."

Now I beg the reader to carefully note the part the Director played in this important work. Here are his words; there is no need of italicizing them. "None of the few evenings which the Director was able to give to the examination of the planet was really suitable for the purpose, and as the pressure of other duties rendered it impossible for him to supply any detailed help to the members, the section was at a very serious disadvantage." He certainly is frank enough to state the disadvantages the section was under with such a man at the head. Realizing the conditions of seeing in the fog and soot-begrimed atmosphere of England, the low altitude of Mars, and the loss to the committee of the assistance which a Director might have given to the work had he been able to approach the subject in a broad and unprejudiced manner, one is naturally led to ask what this committee would have accomplished if each member in turn had had an opportunity of observing Mars at a high altitude with a twenty-four inch refractor of remarkable definition, at an elevation of 7,000 feet above the sea-level, in an atmosphere so clear and steady that stars of the third and fourth magnitude may be seen to set at the horizon line.

Mr. Maunder in speaking of the nomenclature used in his report says, "The term 'canal' has also been retained, though 'canals' in the sense of being artificial productions, the markings of Mars which bear that name, are certainly not. It is difficult, indeed, to understand how so preposterous an idea obtained currency for a moment even by the most ignorant." It is impossible to repress one's amazement at these expressions after the confessions he makes as to his official functions on the committee, and I appeal to any honest and unprejudiced mind if a more incompetent person of the class to which he belongs could have been found in England for the Directorship of such a body. In this connection we cannot refrain from giving a few paragraphs from a paper entitled "Can Organic Life Exist in the Planetary System?" by C.A. Stetefeldt. The author says: "We must, however, acknowledge that if other suns in the universe have planets?—?and there is no reason why they should not?—?many of them may present physical conditions identical with, or similar to, those existing on the Earth, and that therefore their organic life may be similar to our own. Further, I am far from denying that, under favorable circumstances, creatures may be evolved upon planets which revolve around other suns, whose mental capacity is as much superior to man's as that of the latter is to the lowest form of vertebrates." Having made these liberal admissions in regard to the universe at large he attempts to show that none of the planets outside the Earth could sustain life, and finally closes in this extraordinary manner: "In concluding this investigation we cannot help admiring the inductive acumen of the theologians who considered the Earth the most important of the planets, and the centre of creation. Although their opinions were not based upon scientific facts, they arrived at the truth nevertheless." (Italics ours.) Familiar as every one is with the attitude of theologians for the last several centuries concerning astronomical discovery I think it may be safely said that this is the first instance on record where they have been credited with an induction not based on observed facts worth quoting in an astronomical paper. And this contribution also appeared in the publications of the "Astronomical Society of the Pacific," Volume VI, No. 25, without a word of comment! How different was the behavior of the "Journal" when a report of Percival Lowell's lecture on Mars, written by Dr. Edward Everett Hale, was reproduced in its pages. The following comments were made by Edward S. Holden, then Director of the Lick Observatory: "Something is seen, no doubt, but I may add that nothing has been observed at the Lick Observatory during the years 1888–1895, so far as I know, which goes to confirm the very striking conclusions here described." It may be added that during the years 1888–1892 nothing was seen of the fifth moon of Jupiter. The discovery of this satellite with the Lick telescope was not due to any special efforts on the part of the Director.

The Rev. E. Ledger, "Nineteenth Century Magazine," Volume LIII, 1903, p. 773, in an article entitled "The Canals of Mars?—?Are they Real?" presents an excellent account of the successive observers of Mars, and the results of their work, and the objections of those who could not see the canals, or saw them imperfectly. He recalls Maunder's childish experiments, and is greatly impressed by them. He then says: "Astronomers are no doubt very well acquainted with the laws of optics as applied to the eye. They have made, and may yet make, many experiments connected with their action. They are accustomed to allow for individual peculiarities in observation, as, for instance, when what is termed personal equation affects the rapidity with which different observers touch a key to record what they see. They may therefore skilfully judge of the effect produced in observations of Mars by such processes of the eye, or of the brain, or nervous system as I have referred to." He strongly thinks it would be well "if some skilful nerve specialist and oculist could work in conjunction with some of these practised observers who have seen the canals. They might both assist in observing, and at the same time carry out careful researches into the optical delusions which brain or eye may experience in connection with telescopic observation." This is certainly a happy thought of the reverend author, only it would seem in this case that a larger and more diversified corps of specialists, including alienists, is needed to attend to that class of astronomers who are suffering with mental strabismus. It might be advisable to call in the services of a bacteriologist to make cultures of new forms of microbes which may be involved in rendering a man incapable of estimating the value of evidence.

It is the exception rather than the rule in astronomical science that one finds such unfounded and prejudiced utterances as those above commented upon. The glamour of astrology still lingers, in the public eye in its respect and awe for the astronomer's work. Every eclipse seems in the nature of a prophecy. The public contributes liberally for the support of eclipse expeditions, observatories, and the like, and these contributions would be still more liberal if the public could realize the profound significance of the researches now being carried on by Director Pickering at Harvard, Director Campbell at Lick, Director Hale at the Solar Observatory, Mount Wilson, and many others. Their observations are received without question. The thoughtful man would only ask that like credence should be given to the work of every earnest student unless disproved, even though the field of investigation covers regions hitherto but little explored, and yet of the very greatest interest to the human race.