five votes would have given him the victory over the savant who had just discovered the phenomenon of polarization by reflection, over the savant whom Europe would have named by acclamation?  The same remarks are applicable to the nomination of Poisson, who would have failed against this same M. Girard if four votes had been otherwise given.  Does not this suffice to justify the unusual ardour of my conduct?  Although in a third trial the majority of the Academy was decided in favour of the same engineer, I cannot regret that I supported up to the last moment with conviction and warmth the election of his competitor, M. Dulong.

I do not suppose that, in the scientific world, any one will he disposed to blame me for having preferred M. Liouville to M. de Pontecoulant.

Sometimes it happened that the Government wished to influence the choice of the Academy; with a strong sense of my rights I invariably resisted all dictation.  Once this resistance acted unfortunately on one of my friends—­the venerable Legendre; as to myself, I had prepared myself beforehand for all the persecutions of which I could be made the object.  Having received from the Minister of the Interior an invitation to vote for M. Binet against M. Navier on the occurrence of a vacant place in the section of mechanics, Legendre nobly answered that he would vote according to his soul and his conscience.  He was immediately deprived of a pension which his great age and his long services rendered due to him.  The protege of the authorities failed; and, at the time, this result was attributed to the activity with which I enlightened the members of the Academy as to the impropriety of the Minister’s proceedings.

On another occasion the King wished the Academy to name Dupuytren, the eminent surgeon, but whose character at the time lay under grave imputations.  Dupuytren was nominated, but several blanks protested against the interference of the authorities in academic elections.

I said above that I had saved the Academy from some deplorable choices; I will only cite a single instance, on which occasion I had the sorrow of finding myself in opposition to M. de Laplace.  The illustrious geometer wished a vacant place in the astronomical section to be granted to M. Nicollet,—­a man without talent, and, moreover, suspected of misdeeds which reflected on his honour in the most serious degree.  At the close of a contest, which I maintained undisguisedly, notwithstanding the danger which might follow from thus braving the powerful protectors of M. Nicollet, the Academy proceeded to the ballot; the respected M. Damoiseau, whose election I had supported, obtained forty-five votes out of forty-eight.  Thus M. Nicollet had collected but three.

“I see,” said M. de Laplace to me, “that it is useless to struggle against young people; I acknowledge that the man who is called the great elector of the Academy is more powerful than I am.”