It may be fairly asked, whether a philosopher actively engaged in the pursuit of any branch of science, is so well adapted for the performance of such varied duties, as the person who possesses a general acquaintance with every department, but is not exclusively devoted to the investigation of any one branch; for, however correct may be his decisions, or unbiassed his judgment, the conduct of the former will ever be open to the charge of partiality, and the bare existence of such a suspicion, though it may be wholly groundless, will carry with it a train of evils. It is not in human nature to believe that the looker-on, and he who plays the game, are alike indifferent to the cards.[65] [65] I state this opinion with the greater confidence, from a conviction that it is not singular. On conversing lately upon the subject with a gentleman to whom the Royal Society is deeply indebted for the sound judgment and discretion he displayed on occasions greatly affecting its interests, he replied, "Sir, we require not an Achilles to fight our battles, but an Agamemnon to command the Greeks." On the other hand, it may be urged with some force, that the Presidency of the Royal Society should be reserved as the fair reward of scientific labours, and not as an appendage to rank or to wealth:--that in England, we may in vain search amongst the aristocracy for one who feels a dignified respect for the sciences, and who is willing to afford that time which the faithful discharge of its duties would require. To assert that Davy retained his popularity, or to deny that he retired from the office under the frown of a considerable party, would be dishonest. I would willingly dismiss this part of his life without too nice an examination; but I am writing a history, not an eloge.