Great Astronomers, Robert Stawell Ball [fox in socks read aloud txt] 📗

nebula was

initially endowed with a movement of rotation, the central mass

into which it had chiefly condensed would also revolve, and the

subsidiary bodies would be animated by movements of revolution

around the central body. These movements would be all pursued in

one common direction, and it follows, from well-known mechanical

principles, that each of the subsidiary masses, besides

participating in the general revolution around the central body,

would also possess a rotation around its axis, which must likewise

be performed in the same direction. Around the subsidiary bodies

other objects still smaller would be formed, just as they

themselves were formed relatively to the great central mass.

 

As the ages sped by, and the heat of these bodies became

gradually dissipated, the various objects would coalesce,

first into molten liquid masses, and thence, at a further

stage of cooling, they would assume the appearance of solid

masses, thus producing the planetary bodies such as we now

know them. The great central mass, on account of its

preponderating dimensions, would still retain, for further

uncounted ages, a large quantity of its primeval heat, and

would thus display the splendours of a glowing sun. In this way

Laplace was able to account for the remarkable phenomena presented

in the movements of the bodies of the solar system. There are

many other points also in which the nebular theory is known

to tally with the facts of observation. In fact, each advance in

science only seems to make it more certain that the Nebular

Hypothesis substantially represents the way in which our solar

system has grown to its present form.

 

Not satisfied with a career which should be merely scientific,

Laplace sought to connect himself with public affairs. Napoleon

appreciated his genius, and desired to enlist him in the service

of the State. Accordingly he appointed Laplace to be Minister of

the Interior. The experiment was not successful, for he was not

by nature a statesman. Napoleon was much disappointed at the

ineptitude which the great mathematician showed for official life,

and, in despair of Laplace’s capacity as an administrator,

declared that he carried the spirit of his infinitesimal

calculus into the management of business. Indeed, Laplace’s

political conduct hardly admits of much defence. While he

accepted the honours which Napoleon showered on him in the time of

his prosperity, he seems to have forgotten all this when Napoleon

could no longer render him service. Laplace was made a Marquis by

Louis XVIII., a rank which he transmitted to his son, who was

born in 1789. During the latter part of his life the philosopher

lived in a retired country place at Arcueile. Here he pursued his

studies, and by strict abstemiousness, preserved himself from many

of the infirmities of old age. He died on March the 5th, 1827,

in his seventy-eighth year, his last words being, “What we know is

but little, what we do not know is immense.”

 

BRINKLEY.

 

Provost Baldwin held absolute sway in the University of Dublin for

forty-one years. His memory is well preserved there. The Bursar

still dispenses the satisfactory revenues which Baldwin left to

the College. None of us ever can forget the marble angels round

the figure of the dying Provost on which we used to gaze during

the pangs of the Examination Hall.

 

Baldwin died in 1785, and was succeeded by Francis Andrews, a

Fellow of seventeen years’ standing. As to the scholastic

acquirements of Andrews, all I can find is a statement that he was

complimented by the polite Professors of Padua on the elegance and

purity with which he discoursed to them in Latin. Andrews was

also reputed to be a skilful lawyer. He was certainly a Privy

Councillor and a prominent member of the Irish House of Commons,

and his social qualities were excellent. Perhaps it was Baldwin’s

example that stimulated a desire in Andrews to become a

benefactor to his college. He accordingly bequeathed a sum of

3,000 pounds and an annual income of 250 pounds wherewith to build

and endow an astronomical Observatory in the University. The

figures just stated ought to be qualified by the words of cautious

Ussher (afterwards the first Professor of Astronomy), that “this

money was to arise from an accumulation of a part of his property,

to commence upon a particular contingency happening to his

family.” The astronomical endowment was soon in jeopardy by

litigation. Andrews thought he had provided for his relations by

leaving to them certain leasehold interests connected with the

Provost’s estate. The law courts, however, held that these

interests were not at the disposal of the testator, and handed

them over to Hely Hutchinson, the next Provost. The disappointed

relations then petitioned the Irish Parliament to redress this

grievance by transferring to them the moneys designed by Andrews

for the Observatory. It would not be right, they contended, that

the kindly intentions of the late Provost towards his kindred

should be frustrated for the sake of maintaining what they

described as “a purely ornamental institution.” The authorities

of the College protested against this claim. Counsel were heard,

and a Committee of the House made a report declaring the situation

of the relations to be a hard one. Accordingly, a compromise was

made, and the dispute terminated.

 

The selection of a site for the new astronomical Observatory was

made by the Board of Trinity College. The beautiful neighbourhood

of Dublin offered a choice of excellent localities. On the north

side of the Liffey an Observatory could have been admirably

placed, either on the remarkable promontory of Howth or on the

elevation of which Dunsink is the summit. On the south side of

Dublin there are several eminences that would have been suitable:

the breezy heaths at Foxrock combine all necessary conditions; the

obelisk hill at Killiney would have given one of the most

picturesque sites for an Observatory in the world; while near

Delgany two or three other good situations could be mentioned.

But the Board of those pre-railway days was naturally guided by

the question of proximity. Dunsink was accordingly chosen as the

most suitable site within the distance of a reasonable walk from

Trinity College.

 

The northern boundary of the Phoenix Park approaches the little

river Tolka, which winds through a succession of delightful bits

of sylvan scenery, such as may be found in the wide demesne of

Abbotstown and the classic shades of Glasnevin. From the

banks of the Tolka, on the opposite side of the park, the pastures

ascend in a gentle slope to culminate at Dunsink, where at a

distance of half a mile from the stream, of four miles from

Dublin, and at a height of 300 feet above the sea, now stands the

Observatory. From the commanding position of Dunsink a

magnificent view is obtained. To the east the sea is visible,

while the southern prospect over the valley of the Liffey is

bounded by a range of hills and mountains extending from Killiney

to Bray Head, thence to the little Sugar Loaf, the Two Rock and

the Three Rock Mountains, over the flank of which the summit of

the Great Sugar Loaf is just perceptible. Directly in front opens

the fine valley of Glenasmole, with Kippure Mountain, while the

range can be followed to its western extremity at Lyons. The

climate of Dunsink is well suited for astronomical observation.

No doubt here, as elsewhere in Ireland, clouds are abundant, but

mists or haze are comparatively unusual, and fogs are almost

unknown.

 

The legal formalities to be observed in assuming occupation

exacted a delay of many months; accordingly, it was not until the

10th December, 1782, that a contract could be made with Mr. Graham

Moyers for the erection of a meridian-room and a dome for an

equatorial, in conjunction with a becoming residence for the

astronomer. Before the work was commenced at Dunsink, the Board

thought it expedient to appoint the first Professor of Astronomy.

They met for this purpose on the 22nd January, 1783, and chose the

Rev. Henry Ussher, a Senior Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin.

The wisdom of the appointment was immediately shown by the

assiduity with which Ussher engaged in founding the observatory.

In three years he had erected the buildings and equipped them with

instruments, several of which were of his own invention. On the

19th of February, 1785, a special grant of 200 pounds was made by

the Board to Dr. Ussher as some recompense for his labours. It

happened that the observatory was not the only scientific

institution which came into being in Ireland at this period; the

newly-kindled ardour for the pursuit of knowledge led, at the same

time, to the foundation of the Royal Irish Academy. By a fitting

coincidence, the first memoir published in the “Transactions Of The

Royal Irish Academy,” was by the first Andrews, Professor of

Astronomy. It was read on the 13th of June, 1785, and bore the

title, “Account of the Observatory belonging to Trinity College,”

by the Rev. H. Ussher, D.D., M.R.I.A., F.R.S. This communication

shows the extensive design that had been originally intended for

Dunsink, only a part of which was, however, carried out. For

instance, two long corridors, running north and south from the

central edifice, which are figured in the paper, never developed

into bricks and mortar. We are not told why the original scheme

had to be contracted; but perhaps the reason may be not

unconnected with a remark of Ussher’s, that the College had

already advanced from its own funds a sum considerably exceeding

the original bequest. The picture of the building shows also the

dome for the South equatorial, which was erected many years later.

 

Ussher died in 1790. During his brief career at the observatory,

he observed eclipses, and is stated to have done other scientific

work. The minutes of the Board declare that the infant

institution had already obtained celebrity by his labours, and

they urge the claims of his widow to a pension, on the ground that

the disease from which he died had been contracted by his nightly

vigils. The Board also promised a grant of fifty guineas as a

help to bring out Dr. Ussher’s sermons. They advanced twenty

guineas to his widow towards the publication of his astronomical

papers. They ordered his bust to be executed for the observatory,

and offered “The Death of Ussher” as the subject of a prize essay;

but, so far as I can find, neither the sermons nor the papers,

neither the bust nor the prize essay, ever came into being.

 

There was keen competition for the chair of Astronomy which the

death of Ussher vacated. The two candidates were Rev. John

Brinkley, of Caius College, Cambridge, a Senior Wrangler (born at

Woodbridge, Suffolk, in 1763), and Mr. Stack, Fellow of Trinity

College, Dublin, and author of a book on Optics. A majority of

the Board at first supported Stack, while Provost Hely Hutchinson

and one or two others supported Brinkley. In those days the

Provost had a veto at elections, so that ultimately Stack was

withdrawn and Brinkley was elected. This took place on the 11th

December, 1790. The national press of the day commented on the

preference shown to the young Englishman, Brinkley, over his Irish

rival. An animated controversy ensued. The Provost himself

condescended to enter the lists and to vindicate his policy by a

long letter in the “Public Register” or “Freeman’s Journal,” of

21st December, 1790. This letter was anonymous, but its

authorship is obvious. It gives the correspondence with Maskelyne

and other eminent astronomers, whose advice and guidance had been

sought by the Provost. It also contends that “the transactions of

the Board ought not to be canvassed in the newspapers.” For this

reference, as well as for much other information, I am indebted

to my friend, the Rev. John Stubbs, D.D.

 

[PLATE: THE OBSERVATORY, DUNSINK.

From a Photograph by W. Lawrence,