Psychic force and modern spiritualism : a reply to the "Quarterly review" and other critics / by William Crookes.
- William Crookes
- Date:
- 1871
Licence: Public Domain Mark
Credit: Psychic force and modern spiritualism : a reply to the "Quarterly review" and other critics / by William Crookes. Source: Wellcome Collection.
14/26 page 12
![The third charge in which the reviewer speaks “advisedly” runs thus “For this discovery [Thallium] he was rewarded by the Fellowship of the Royal Society ; but we speak advisedly when we say that this distinction was conferred on him with considerable hesitation.” In January, 1863, whilst the interest attaching to the discovery of the element Thallium was fresh in the minds of scientific men, I was both surprised and gratified at receiving the following r.ote from Professor Williamson :— “ University of London, Burlington House, W., 16th Jan., 1863. “ My dear Sir,—I should be glad to see your name on the list of Fellows of the Royal Society, and if you have no objection to my doing so, would do myself the honour of proposing you for election into the Society. Could you spare a quarter of an hour on Monday afternoon to talk the matter over with me at University College, and oblige “ Yours very truly, “ Alex. W. Williamson.” This kindness being entirely unsought was the more pleasing to me. At the interview, my certificate was partially filled up and left in Professor Williamson’s hands for the purpose of obtaining the necessary signatures. After this meeting with Professor Williamson I took no further steps in the matter, and spoke to no one on the subject; but in due time Professor Williamson wrote that my certificate was duly received at the Royal Society and read at the meeting, adding— “ There is on the part of the chemists now on the Council a sincere appreciation of your high claims.” Subsequently, the same kind friend wrote — “ I have much pleasure in congratulating you and ourselves on your being one of the fifteen selected by the Council of the Royal Society for election.” I was formally elected on the 4th of June, 1863. That discussion ensued when my name was brought before the Council follows as a matter of course. When fifteen only are to be eleCted from about fifty candidates, it is to be expected that the claims of each should be rigidly scrutinised; but whatever my anonymous reviewer may say “ advisedly” on the subject, the fact remains that I was elected on the first application, an almost unheard-of honour for so young a man. Considering the large majority of eminent candidates whose election is postponed from year to year (sometimes even to ten years), there is no reason why my election should not have been postponed for at least one year, had there been truth in the statement that “ considerable hesitation ” was evinced in confer¬ ring this distinction upon me. The grossness of the imputation, that the Royal Society admitted me although my investigations had only a merit purely technical, is astounding when the merits of the members generally are considered. I should consider them nearly all as purely technical workers in science, when they have done any work at all; but the curiosity is great when we find that the inquiry in question is purely technical. Professedly, it is a question of apparatus.](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b3057075x_0014.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
