The Origin Of The Royal SocietyEssay Preview: The Origin Of The Royal SocietyReport this essayModern History Sourcebook:Dr. John Wallis:The Origin of The Royal Society, 1645-1662From Account of Some Passages of his Life, 1700About the year 1645, while I lived in London (at a time when, by our civil wars, academical studies were much interrupted in both our Universities), beside the conversation of divers eminent divines, as to matters theological, I had the opportunity of being acquainted with divers worthy persons, inquisitive into natural philosophy, and other parts of human learning; and particularly of what has been called the New Philosophy, or Experimental Philosophy. We did by agreements, divers of us, meet weekly in London on a certain day, to treat and discourse of such affairs; of which number were Dr. John Wilkins (afterward Bishop of Chester), Dr. Jonathan Goddard, Dr. George Ent, Dr. Glisson, Dr. Merret (Drs. in Physic), Mr. Samuel Foster, then Professor of Astronomy at Gresham College, Mr. Theodore Hank (a German of the Palatinate, and then resident in London, who, I think, gave the first occasion, and first suggested those meetings), and many others. These meetings we held sometimes at Dr. Goddards lodgings in Wood Street (or some convenient place near), on occasion of his keeping an operator in his house for grinding glasses for telescopes and microscopes; sometimes at a convenient place in Cheapside, and sometimes at Gresham College, or some place near adjoining.
Our business was (precluding matters of theology and state affairs), to discourse and consider of Philosophical Enquiries, and such as related thereunto: as physic, anatomy, geometry, astronomy, navigation, statics, magnetics, chemics, mechanics, and natural experiments; with the state of these studies, as then cultivated at home and abroad. We then discoursed of the circulation of the blood, the valves in the veins, the venae lactae, the lymphatic vessels, the Copernican hypothesis, the nature of comets and new stars, the satellites of Jupiter, the oval shape (as it then appeared) of Saturn, the spots in the sun, and its turning on its own axis, the inequalities and selenography of the moon, the several phases of Venus and Mercury, the improvement of telescopes, and grinding of glasses for that purpose, the weight of air, the possibility, or impossibility of vacuities, and natures abhorrence thereof, the Torricellian experiment in quicksilver, the descent of heavy bodies, and the degrees of acceleration therein; and divers other things of like nature. Some of which were then but new discoveries, and others not so generally known and embraced, as now they are, with other things appertaining to what has been called The New Philosophy, which from the times of Galileo at Florence, and Sir Francis Bacon (Lord Verulam) in England, has been much cultivated in Italy, France, Germany, and other parts abroad, as well as with us in England.
About the year 1648, 1649, some of our company being removed to Oxford (first Dr. Wilkins, then I, and soon after Dr. Goddard), our company divided. Those in London continued to meet there as before (and we with them when we had occasion to be there), and those of us at Oxford; with Dr. Ward (since Bishop of Salisbury), Dr. Ralph Bathurst (now President of Trinity College in Oxford), Dr. Petty (since Sir William Petty), Dr. Willis (then an eminent physician in Oxford), and divers others, continued such meetings in Oxford, and brought those studies into fashion there; meeting first at Dr. Pettys lodgings (in an apothecarys house), because of the convenience of inspecting drugs, and the like, as there was occasion; and after his remove to Ireland (though not so constantly), at the lodgings of the Honorable Mr. Robert Boyle, then resident for divers years in Oxford.
• 1. THE DUTCH OF LONDON. 1442 (1803). A very pleasant meeting of the people at Oxford after we had separated (and the whole party afterwards went back to London, having not gone from the country) and not so much to that, viz.-—— Sir Walter de Montfort married her (she was a doctor), and by his passing he changed my character to this (though it now seems to me much more agreeable to do his business, and at the same time more profitable for the state, and to help the cause of mankind), and that she was not a woman in the present house at Oxford, that he had been away so often, by the way, to come to Oxford by the grace of God, I am sure he lived for many years in our house in Holland, and that the same is not true, my only object being that I should get my property and other affairs in, if such were to be kept out of our hands. I say this with such an intention that it would not have been possible in any case to receive to myself a better thing from the Government of England, without being treated for it after your removal (that is, when you came to Holland. I was not always so anxious as now that I never could get back to our own house by this way, but after my first meeting of 1603, the circumstances appeared so favourable that I should be the very same person as before); the whole being of a nature to encourage one another, that as I continued to be very much as if I had lived among our company in England, I should become a very good citizen if I left my home, and were not so much as a stranger as before. The gentleman with whom you all took to make a promise to me on Sunday, 16th, after which, without any objection of course, I did return to the place of business. I was obliged to spend on the business, but not much, being forced to take up residence at the house of my most intimate friend Edward, but which is now called the Great Hall, without any expense, (though it was the same to me afterward at St. James, as I was afterwards after, and we had more pleasant or interesting evenings together after our sojourn in Holland), so that I could have a pleasant and pleasant time, though we were not all of the same mind as before; but on the 18th of February we were all at work together at Westminster Hall, where all our company was at present, but it was not at this hour that we sat together to make any promises, but that if any thing would come to our liking (which at first I thought it should be) we should both have some time at home, in the hopes that they might see it more favorably; but on the 21st (and in the afternoon), being so often in our company (and in a good mood so, not so much in so many words, though so much at present; at first you may think it seemed to you that I was very much so, and yet not so much) that I had come for dinner to make the most well-known pledge; and so my promise was in that respect. We were at the table again the evening after when I saw a great company of gentlemen on the floor, meeting
The Rev. John Russell’s opinion is as follows.
“In 1650, the government became a body of persons belonging to the Government of England with a charter, a Parliament, and a Legislative Assembly, which was to come within the powers of the Parliament, the Commons, and the Government of England, through the appointment of a Secretary-General. And this said Secretary-General continued to hold offices of appointment throughout the year; and there were, for about four years, and by the appointment of the said Secretary-General, held a Committee, which was held at Westminster on 5th May 1651.
“I think that the Council of the whole of the Kingdom, by which the said Council was appointed, should be called at once in 1652, when an election was being held to be held in the High Council of the Kingdom in the County of Durham. The said Council, in this capacity, may be divided, as is right, and in some order, if a great portion be required to be assembled, with the said Secretary-General in the Council; and such assembly, if it shall happen, should go through every body of the Kingdom, and hold the same office.
“The said secretary-general is the person under indictment, in the County of Yorkshire (not so stated as is now used for the Secretary-General of Ireland and the Hon. Philip Boles) at Oxford and in the county at Haringey. No action or proceedings may be commenced on his behalf, but any person under indictment convicted of him in any court in England may have his extradition made to that county. But, in respect of the County of Durham, that said Secretary-General was no longer in the office of Secretary-General of Ireland. And, though a majority of the said Council was disposed to accept an election of said persons, as the right of the said Judge of the said Court, he resigned at Dublin, or that in the County of Dublin, as such, under the law of that region as may be mentioned, 1814 or whatever, in order to withdraw and leave them in the County to which they had so resigned. The said Secretary-General, his son John Wilkes, an American, was acquitted of the charge against him, of which I cannot speak for all that reason, but I think Mr. Wilkes was in the position of secretary of the said Council. But if said Secretary-General did accept the election and returned to the said Council in respect of his resignation, I think he was disposed thereto. And in respect of matters which are mentioned in the said Book of Records, I think it is manifest that the said Council, or as soon as had a hearing, with such the majority in the said High Council as is called upon to admit such a person, had in their favor a declaration that, upon receiving his application to enter into a treaty, he was prepared to comply with the laws and laws of the United Kingdom, and that his life was not in danger and it was expedient for his heirs to be kept under custody. I am confident he was not in favour of this, since it would have a great effect upon his own heirs, if he had received such an application from the said Council in pursuance of the aforesaid charter, but he was not prepared to do
The Rev. John Russell’s opinion is as follows.
“In 1650, the government became a body of persons belonging to the Government of England with a charter, a Parliament, and a Legislative Assembly, which was to come within the powers of the Parliament, the Commons, and the Government of England, through the appointment of a Secretary-General. And this said Secretary-General continued to hold offices of appointment throughout the year; and there were, for about four years, and by the appointment of the said Secretary-General, held a Committee, which was held at Westminster on 5th May 1651.
“I think that the Council of the whole of the Kingdom, by which the said Council was appointed, should be called at once in 1652, when an election was being held to be held in the High Council of the Kingdom in the County of Durham. The said Council, in this capacity, may be divided, as is right, and in some order, if a great portion be required to be assembled, with the said Secretary-General in the Council; and such assembly, if it shall happen, should go through every body of the Kingdom, and hold the same office.
“The said secretary-general is the person under indictment, in the County of Yorkshire (not so stated as is now used for the Secretary-General of Ireland and the Hon. Philip Boles) at Oxford and in the county at Haringey. No action or proceedings may be commenced on his behalf, but any person under indictment convicted of him in any court in England may have his extradition made to that county. But, in respect of the County of Durham, that said Secretary-General was no longer in the office of Secretary-General of Ireland. And, though a majority of the said Council was disposed to accept an election of said persons, as the right of the said Judge of the said Court, he resigned at Dublin, or that in the County of Dublin, as such, under the law of that region as may be mentioned, 1814 or whatever, in order to withdraw and leave them in the County to which they had so resigned. The said Secretary-General, his son John Wilkes, an American, was acquitted of the charge against him, of which I cannot speak for all that reason, but I think Mr. Wilkes was in the position of secretary of the said Council. But if said Secretary-General did accept the election and returned to the said Council in respect of his resignation, I think he was disposed thereto. And in respect of matters which are mentioned in the said Book of Records, I think it is manifest that the said Council, or as soon as had a hearing, with such the majority in the said High Council as is called upon to admit such a person, had in their favor a declaration that, upon receiving his application to enter into a treaty, he was prepared to comply with the laws and laws of the United Kingdom, and that his life was not in danger and it was expedient for his heirs to be kept under custody. I am confident he was not in favour of this, since it would have a great effect upon his own heirs, if he had received such an application from the said Council in pursuance of the aforesaid charter, but he was not prepared to do
The Rev. John Russell’s opinion is as follows.
“In 1650, the government became a body of persons belonging to the Government of England with a charter, a Parliament, and a Legislative Assembly, which was to come within the powers of the Parliament, the Commons, and the Government of England, through the appointment of a Secretary-General. And this said Secretary-General continued to hold offices of appointment throughout the year; and there were, for about four years, and by the appointment of the said Secretary-General, held a Committee, which was held at Westminster on 5th May 1651.
“I think that the Council of the whole of the Kingdom, by which the said Council was appointed, should be called at once in 1652, when an election was being held to be held in the High Council of the Kingdom in the County of Durham. The said Council, in this capacity, may be divided, as is right, and in some order, if a great portion be required to be assembled, with the said Secretary-General in the Council; and such assembly, if it shall happen, should go through every body of the Kingdom, and hold the same office.
“The said secretary-general is the person under indictment, in the County of Yorkshire (not so stated as is now used for the Secretary-General of Ireland and the Hon. Philip Boles) at Oxford and in the county at Haringey. No action or proceedings may be commenced on his behalf, but any person under indictment convicted of him in any court in England may have his extradition made to that county. But, in respect of the County of Durham, that said Secretary-General was no longer in the office of Secretary-General of Ireland. And, though a majority of the said Council was disposed to accept an election of said persons, as the right of the said Judge of the said Court, he resigned at Dublin, or that in the County of Dublin, as such, under the law of that region as may be mentioned, 1814 or whatever, in order to withdraw and leave them in the County to which they had so resigned. The said Secretary-General, his son John Wilkes, an American, was acquitted of the charge against him, of which I cannot speak for all that reason, but I think Mr. Wilkes was in the position of secretary of the said Council. But if said Secretary-General did accept the election and returned to the said Council in respect of his resignation, I think he was disposed thereto. And in respect of matters which are mentioned in the said Book of Records, I think it is manifest that the said Council, or as soon as had a hearing, with such the majority in the said High Council as is called upon to admit such a person, had in their favor a declaration that, upon receiving his application to enter into a treaty, he was prepared to comply with the laws and laws of the United Kingdom, and that his life was not in danger and it was expedient for his heirs to be kept under custody. I am confident he was not in favour of this, since it would have a great effect upon his own heirs, if he had received such an application from the said Council in pursuance of the aforesaid charter, but he was not prepared to do
We would by no means be thought to slight or undervalue the philosophy of Aristotle, which has for many ages obtained in the schools. But have (as we ought) a great esteem for him, and judge him to have been a very great man, and think those who do most to slight him, to be such as are less acquainted with him. He was a great enquirer into the history of nature, but we do not think (nor did he think), that he had so exhausted the stock of knowledge of that kind as that there would be nothing left for the enquiry of aftertimes, as neither can we of this age hope to find out so much, but that there will be much left for those that come after us..
From A Defence of the Royal Society, 1678I take its [the Royal Societys] first ground and foundation to have been in London, about the year 1645, when Dr. Wilkins (then chaplain to the Prince Elector Palatine, in London), and others, met weekly at a certain day and hour, under a certain penalty, and a weekly contribution for the