his snuff-box, and presented it to his neighbour without a word; the
traveller signed with his hand that he did not take snuff. The dumb
interview was then prolonged during a whole hour. Bailly finally rose.
Then Franklin, as if delighted to have found a Frenchman who could
remain silent, extended his hand to him, pressed his visitor's
affectionately, exclaiming: "Very well, Monsr. Bailly, very well!"

After having recounted the anecdote as our academician used amusingly to
relate it, I really fear being asked how I look upon it. Well,
Gentlemen, whenever this question may be put to me, I shall answer that
Bailly and Franklin discussing together some scientific question from
the moment of their meeting, would have appeared to me much more worthy
of each other, than the two actors of the scene at Chaillot. I will,
moreover, grant that we may draw the following inference,--that even men
of genius are liable to cross humours; but I must at the same time add
that the example is not dangerous, dumbness not being an efficacious
method of making one's self valued, or of distinguishing ourselves to
advantage.

Bailly was nominated member of the French Academy in the place of M. de
Tressan, in November, 1783. The same day, M. de Choiseul Gouffier
succeeded to D'Alembert. Thanks to the coincidence of the two
nominations, Bailly escaped the sarcasms which the expectant
academicians never fail to pour out, with or without reason, against
those who have obtained a double crown. This time they vented their
spleen exclusively on the great man, thus enabling the astronomer to
take possession of his new dignity without raising the usual storm. Let
us carefully collect, Gentlemen, from the early years of our
academician's life, all that may appear an anticipated compensation for
the cruel trials that we shall have to relate in the sequel.

The admission of the eloquent author of the _History of Astronomy_ into
the Academy, was more difficult than could be supposed by those who have
remarked to what slight works certain early and recent writers have owed
the same favour. Bailly failed three times. Fontenelle had before him
unsuccessfully presented himself once oftener; but Fontenelle underwent
these successive checks without ill-humour, and without being
discouraged. Bailly, on the contrary, with or without reason, seeing in
these unfavourable results of the elections the immediate effect of
D'Alembert's enmity, showed himself much mo