soning; and was also frequented by some gentlemen of
philosophical minds, whom the misfortunes of the kingdom, and the
security and ease of a retirement among Gownsmen had drawn thither.
Their first purpose was no more than only the satisfaction of breathing
a freer air, and of conversing in quiet one with another, without being
engaged in the passions and madness of that dismal Age. And from the
Institution of that Assembly, it had been enough if no other advantage
had come but this: that by this means there was a race of young men
provided, against the next Age, whose minds, receiving from them their
first impressions of sober and general knowledge, were invincibly armed
against the enchantments of Enthusiasm. But what is more, I may venture
to affirm that it was in good measure by the influence which these
Gentlemen had over the rest, that the University itself, or at least any
part of its Discipline or Order was saved from ruine. For such a candid
and impassionate company as that was, and for such a gloomy season, what
could have been a fitter subject to pitch upon than Natural Philosophy?
To have been always tossing about some Theological question would have
been to have made that their private diversion the excess of which they
themselves disliked in the public. To have been eternally musing on
Civil business and distresses of their Country was too melancholy a
reflection. It was Nature alone which could pleasantly entertain them in
that estate."

It would be superfluous to praise this noble and pathetic passage. It
shows the weariness of political and religious controversy which
oppressed men's minds; the discouragement, almost hopelessness, which
made the Restoration welcome, and Puritanism odious, for a time at
least, to the majority of Englishmen. The word Enthusiasm is of strange
significance; then and for more than a hundred years later it connoted
extravagance and fanaticism. Worthy of notice also are Sprat's words to
the effect that the influence of Wilkins and his friends was on the side
of discipline and order in the University, and saved it from "ruine."
They ought to please and encourage, perhaps instruct, the modern
apostles of science who are with us now.

From a comparison of Wallis' and Sprat's accounts, it is clear that the
dispute, if dispute there be, whether Wadham or London was the cradle of
the Royal Society, can be settled more easily than most contested claims
of this kind. The facts are a