o the Council as are most likely to attend the meetings and
business of the Council, and out of whom may be made the best choice of
a President and other officers." This is regularly done; and, in mockery
of the wisdom of our ancestors, the President has perhaps in his pocket
the list of the future Council he has already fixed upon.

In some other Societies, great advantage is found to arise from the
discussion of the proper persons to be recommended to the Society for
the Council of the next year. A list is prepared, by the Secretary, of
the old Council, and against each name is placed the number of times
he has attended the meetings of the Council. Those whose attendance has
been least frequent are presumed to be otherwise engaged, unless absence
from London, or engagement in some pursuit connected with the Society,
are known to have interfered. Those members who have been on the Council
the number of years which is usually allowed, added to those who go out
by their own wish, and by non-attendance, are, generally, more in number
than can be spared; and the question is never, who shall retire?--but,
who, out of the rest of the Society, is most likely to work, if placed
on the Council?

If any difference of opinion should exist in a society, it is always of
great importance to its prosperity to have both opinions represented
in the Council. In this age of discussion it is impossible to stifle
opinions; and if they are not represented in the Council, there is some
chance of their being brought before the general body, or, at last, even
before the public. It is certainly an advantage that questions should be
put, and even that debates should take place on the days appropriated
to the anniversaries of societies. This is the best check to the
commencement of irregularities; and a suspicion may reasonably be
entertained of those who endeavour to suppress inquiry.

On the other hand, debates respecting the affairs of the Society should
never be entered on at the ordinary meetings, as they interrupt its
business, and only a partial attendance can be expected. That the
conduct of those who have latterly managed the Royal Society has not
led to such discussions, is to be attributed more to the forbearance of
those who disapprove of the line of conduct they have pursued, than to
the discretion of the party in not giving them cause.

The public is the last tribunal; one to which nothing but strong
necessity should induce an ap