Partying at the Royal Society in 1886

Recently, I’ve been dabbling in English scientific history.  A couple of nights ago, I read a fascinating essay by James Gleick titled “At the Beginning: More Things in the Heaven and Earth” found in Seeing Further: The Story of Science, Discovery, & The Genius of the Royal Society edited by the fabulous Bill Bryson. Gleick’s descriptions of the history of the Royal Society and their early scientific inquiries made me chuckle. Today, as I was searching for images in Cassell’s Family Magazine for another post on Victorian love letters, I ran across a description of a typical meeting and soiree of the Royal Society in 1886. I couldn’t resist posting it on my blog. Enjoy!

At A Soiree Of The Royal Society

rom its history and standing the Royal Society of London is unquestionably the chief scientific body in these islands. It has all the dignity of a State institution as well as the lustre of a famous past; and, in the minds of many, to have the privilege of writing ” F.R.S.” after one’s name is to have gained the blue ribbon of science. Like other great associations, it began in a very humble way.

During the year 1645—just two hundred and forty-one years ago—a small band of friends were wont to meet in Dr. Goddard’s lodgings, Wood Street, London, to talk over the various observations of natural things which had been made, in a curious and philosophical spirit. The notion of holding these meetings is said to have been suggested by one Theodore Haak; and Dr. Goddard’s lodgings were selected because he had an assistant working there who was skilled in grinding glasses. Subsequently the meeting-place was removed to Oxford, and after that to Gresham College, London, where after the Wednesday lecture of Mr. Christopher Wren, the celebrated architect, the colleagues met in the classroom to carry on their discussions, from which all political and theological topics were excluded. This was in the year 1659, the year of the troubles with King Charles II., and the philosophers, despite their harmless attitude in politics, were obliged to give up their meeting-place, which was turned into a soldiers’ barrack.

Next year, after the Restoration, the meetings were, however, resumed on November 28th, in Mr. Rooke’s room, Gresham College, and Mr. Ball’s room in the Temple. Forty members were enrolled, including the Hon. Robert Boyle (” the Father of Chemistry, and brother of the Earl of Cork”), Sir Kenelme Digby, Mr. Evelyn, of the ” Diary,” Mr. Christopher Wren, Dr. Cowley, and Dr. Wallis.

At the meeting on December 5th, Sir Robert Moray announced the welcome news that his Majesty King Charles II had been pleased to signify his approbation of the young society, and their objects. The king afterwards took further interest in their proceedings, and it is his Majesty’s picture which holds the place of honour in their meeting-hall at Burlington House to-day.

It is curious to read some of the minutes of the young society. Thus Mr. Pope was deputed to “procure the experiment of breaking pebbles with the hand ;” and later on Mr. Wilde agreed to “show the stone kindled by wetting.”

Again: “The Duke of Buckingham promised to bring to the society a piece of a unicorn’s horn.”

This remarkable substance was afterwards made the subject of an interesting experiment, for we read that (on July 24th) “A circle was made with powder of unicorn’s horn, and a spider set in the middle of it; but it immediately ran out.”

“Sir John Findis’ piece of an incombustible hatband was produced.”

“Mr. Croune was desired to inquire into the manufacture of hats.”

Also: “ Sir Kenelme Digby related that the calcinated powder of toads reverberated, being applied in bags upon the stomach of a pestiferate, cures it by several applications.”

On another occasion: “Sir Gilbert Talbot’s experiment of the sympathetic powder were ordered to be registered.”

Vegetable life also came in for its share of study. Among others, Dr. Clarke made some “observations on the humble and sensible plants, in Mr. Chiffin’s garden in St. James Park, made August 9th, 1661;” and Col. Tuke “brought in his history of the rained seeds, and some ivy berries, the kernels of which were the same that were reported to have fallen down from the sky in Warwickshire, Shropshire, etc.”

These examples serve to show how little true science, as we know it, was current in those days; and also the true inquiring spirit of the members, who took up any matter that seemed to call for explanation. Their earnestness is likes exemplified in Mr. Powle’s very liberal off to the Society, “to employ himself in the country about anything which they should direct him to.” Let us trust that Mr. Powle was duly dispatched, like Pickwick, to the country.

These early members of the Royal Society were, indeed, as Newton afterwards described himself, like children picking up shells upon the great shore of Truth. Their observations spread over a wide field, however; in fact, the whole circle of the sciences; and if some of them appear to be trivial, others were of the first importance. For instance, experiments were instituted at Teneriffe to prove the weight of the atmosphere. Capillary attraction, the recoil of guns, chemical reactions, and astronomical effects were carefully discussed. As the members settled to their work, the subjects treated of became more serious and important, as the minutes of their meetings curiously show. The “sympathetic powders,” the crushed vipers, and divining rods of the earlier days were left behind for weightier matters ; and the proceedings of the Society assumed more and more that classic character which they have borne so long. At last the illustrious Newton, with his theory of universal gravitation, gave an enormous impetus to their researches.

Susanna’s note: Newton’s relationship with the society wasn’t as harmonious as you might be led to believe.  According to Gleick, Newton sent the society some letters describing how by using prisms he had split light into different colors. He further claimed that white light was produced by the combination of primary light colors. Fellow society member Robert Hooke sent back a hasty, cursory critique refuting Newton.  Pissed off at Hooke, Newton didn’t return to the Royal Society for a number of years.

Since Newton’s day, Michael Faraday, Davy, Thomson, and many others have added glory to the Royal Society; and at their ordinary meetings, or their annual soirees, some of the most eminent savants of the day are to be met. These meetings are held on Thursdays during the winter, in the Society’s rooms, Burlington House, at three in the afternoon; because it was found that wits were clearer then than after dinner in the evening. The after-dinner mind is not quite capable of grasping the lively molecule.

The visitor to one of these meetings is ushered into an ante-chamber where tea and coffee are provided for his refection, before the business of the day begins, as well as after it has ended. This is a custom which has been imitated by some other learned societies— notably the Linnean.

The meeting-hall is a large sombre chamber, hung with dark oil paintings of dead immortal worthies, such as Huyghens, Newton, and Priestley. At the farther end sits the President on an antique high-backed chair, with a secretary on either side, and the great mace of King Charles lying in state before his desk. The ordinary Fellows sit on benches across the body of the hall.

A grave and impressive dignity presides over the assembly. If it is trying for a new member of Parliament to address the House, it is almost equally trying for a young Fellow to take part in a discussion here. The papers are on subjects which would bea sealed book to the original members of the Society; their very names would sound like Cherokee to Evelyn and Mr. Powle, supposing the latter to have returned from the country. They are even unintelligible to all except those Fellows who are specialists in the particular science they belong to. For example, there may be a mathematical paper “On the Invariants and Covariants of Quantities,” or an electrical one “On the Determination of Magnetic Susceptivity.” A renowned palaeontologist (the very man who is popularly supposed to build the skeleton of an extinct animal from its tooth) will perhaps discourse on some new ” missing link,” to wit, the Thylacolea, or flesh-eating marsupial of New South Wales; or a well-known geologist will communicate a paper by somebody else “On the Occurrence of Pterygotis and a Limuloid in certain Flagstones.” If the lay visitor escapes the seductive subject of vortex-rings, and the dissipation of energy, he may consider himself lucky ; and will probably not regret the mysteries of “orthagonal and isothermal surfaces,” or the “forces experienced by inductively ferro-magnetised or dia-magnetised non-crystalline substances.” Science has taken such gigantic strides of late years that it has almost coined a language of its own.

There are two annual soirees, or conversaziones, of the Royal Society, one being known familiarly as the “ladies’ night.” These gatherings are attended by the Fellows and their friends, together with a sprinkling of distinguished guests, such as foreign savants—a Helmholtz or a Pasteur—ambassadors from other Powers, a few presidents of other societies, a famous general or two, and occasionally a royal personage.

The guests are received by the President, and disperse themselves about the halls of the Society, which are brilliantly illuminated for the occasion by some new system of electric lighting. Numerous tables are covered with scientific apparatus illustrating recent inventions, the telephone, the microphone, the photophone, or something newer still. Nor are the exhibits confined to physical instruments, but extend over the whole range of science. Novelty, of course, is a desideratum, and especially some novelty of the year which has just elapsed. Illuminated microscopes stand ready to reveal their splendid secrets; some rare orchid from the tropical forest hangs its alien blossoms in the heated air; meteoric stones from Russia, and even corroded jewels from the site of Troy, may perhaps be seen there, along with fossil scorpions from the Silurian rocks, or tiny crystals of a new element, and microbes from the snows of Norway.

There is a little licence as regards the range of exhibits; and perhaps it is as well, for some of the experiments might lack interest to other visitors than men of science. As it is, the soirees are in general most successful gatherings, and form a relaxation in the scientific year.

So, you’ve been invited to the Royal Society’s Soiree in 1886. What are you going to wear when you show off your brilliant invention that you would have described at a meeting had you been allowed to attend? Here are some ideas from The London and Paris Ladies’ Magazine of Fashion from 1881. (Okay, these fashions were five years old in 1886. But you’re a nerdy scientist. What do you care about fashion anyway?)

Not Getting Away With Murder in the 1840s — the Intrepid Victorian Coroner

Sorry for my absence. My husband was away on a business trip, and I was a single mother for two weeks. So my blog suffered. On a brighter note, I’ve been researching Victorian murder. Fun! Turns out if you’re writing a Victorian book with a murder in it, the coroner may need show up and investigate.  And he was a clever one. I found this lovely little resource A treatise on the law of coroner: with copious precedents of inquisitions, and practical forms of proceedings by Richard Clarke Sewell and published in 1843. It’s filled with all sorts of grizzly details. I’ve only excerpted the overview sections here, but for more detailed descriptions of what a Victorian coroner looked for in a drowning, hanging, shooting or poisoning victim, you should definitely read the book. 

I’ve pulled images from The chronicles of crime; or, The new Newgate calendar, a series of memoirs and anecdotes of notorious character  by Camden Pelham and published in 1841

Without further adieu, I give you A treatise on the law of coroner:

THE AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION OF CORONER.

The authority of the Coroner is twofold:

1. Judicial.

2. Ministerial.

In his judicial capacity he has to inquire when any one comes to his death suddenly or violently;  how and by what means such death was caused; to pronounce judgment upon outlawries; to inquire of lands and goods, and escapes of murderers, treasure trove, wreck of the sea, deodands, &c.

In his ministerial capacity he has to execute the Ministerial king’s writs, when the sheriff is a party to the suit, or kin to either of the parties, or on default of the sheriff.

Coroners are conservators of the king’s peace, and become magistrates by virtue of their election and appointment. This privilege, independently of magistrates their mere official duties, they are entitled at this day to exercise; and empowered to cause felons to be apprehended, as well those that have been found guilty after inquisition, as those suspected of guilt, or present at the death, and not guilty; as also burglars and robbers, in respect of whom no inquisition can be taken. And this, says Lord Hale, appears evidently by the statutes 3 Ed. 1. c. 9. and 4 Ed. 1., Officium Coronatoris; and with this agrees the common usage at this day; for many times the inquest are long in their inquiry, and the offender may escape, if the Coroner stay until the inquisition is delivered up.   And the Coroner may now bind any person to the peace who makes an affray in his presence.

DUTY OF CORONERS IN CASES OF PERSONS FOUND DEAD.

Whenever an unnatural and violent death happens, it is the duty of the township to give notice thereof to the Coroner; otherwise, if the body be interred in his absence, the township shall be amerced. And Coroner not need not go ex officio to take the inquest, but ought to be sent for.

When the Coroner receives notice of a violent death, casualty or misadventure, which regularly ought to be from the proper or peace officer of the parish, place, or precinct where the body lies dead, having satisfied himself that it is within his jurisdiction, he is then to issue his precept or warrant to summon a jury to appear at a particular time and place named, to inquire when, how, and by what means the deceased came by his death; which warrant is directed to the peace officers of the parish, place, or precinct “where the party lies dead,” and to others of the next adjoining parishes, &c. pursuant to the stat. 4 Ed. 1. st. ii., called the Statute de Officio Coronatoris, which enacts, that the Coroner, upon information, shall go to the place where any be slain, or suddenly dead or wounded; and shall forthwith command four of the next towns, or five or six, to appear before him in such a place; and when they are come thither the Coroner, upon the oath of them, shall inquire in this manner, that is, to wit, If they know where the person was slain; whether it were in any house, field, bed, tavern, or company; and who were there.

Likewise it is to be inquired who were culpable, either of the act or of the force; and who were present, either men or women, and of what age soever they be (if they can speak, or have any discretion).

And how many soever be found culpable by inquisition, in any the manners aforesaid, they shall be taken and delivered to the Sheriff, and shall be committed to the gaol; and such as be founden, and be not culpable, shall be attached until the coming of the justices, and their names shall be written in the and written Coroner’s rolls.

In pursuing these inquiries there are many minute circumstances to which the attention of the Coroner and Jury should be directed. Sudden death may often occur from causes pre-existing, and sometimes of long standing, of which the deceased himself was unaware. Of this nature are internal organic diseases, the breathing of noxious gases, the use of improper aliments, or of unhealthy water. The passions ailments also, if highly excited, or a purely accidental cause, may respectively have occasioned the sudden death. Again, the violent destruction of life may have caused by the person himself. In all cases therefore of sudden death, before it is referred to a criminal tribunal, the Coroner ought to feel perfectly convinced that death has not originated from one of the three following causes : — 1. Some internal cause. 2. Some external accidental cause; and, 3. Suicide. On each of these a few observations will be necessary.

PERSONS FOUND DEAD WITH WOUNDS OR BRUISES.

It will be readily understood that every case of violent death requires an investigation peculiar to itself; and, for the purpose of rendering such investigation more easy and satisfactory, it is proposed to consider the principal causes and phenomena of sudden unnatural death, separately; and, first, of persons found dead with wounds or bruises.

Definition In Legal Medicine, the word “Wound” is used in a much comprehensive sense than in Surgery. In the latter it means a solution of continuity; in the former, injuries of every kind that affect either the hard or the soft parts: and accordingly, under it are comprehended bruises, contusions, fractures, luxations. In order to be a wound in Law, the continuity of the skin must be broken, or, in other words, the external surface of the body. But if the skin be broken, the nature of the instrument is immaterial.

On the other hand, it is necessary, in order to the whole constitute a wound, that there should be a separation of the whole skin; and a separation of the cuticle or upper skin only is not sufficient.

The first inquiry will be, whether or no the wounds which appear have been the cause of death were inflicted on a living subject.

In ascertaining whether the wounds or violence was inflicted on a living subject, much information may  be derived from the appearances on the body, and it is most important to know whether they belong to Haemorrhage, Ecchymosis, or Sugillation.

But it must be always borne in mind, that there certain phenomena observed on the bodies of the dead which may be mistaken for the effects of violence, and yet are only the consequence of previous maladies; while others are by the ignorant deemed  proofs of murder, which are the natural results of the extinction of life.

“Hemorrhage” is supposed by many to indicate an existence of the circulation when it commenced, and accordingly is generally held to be prima facie evidence that life was present when the supposed violence was offered. This, though true to a certain extent, is not universally so. It is frequently observed by anatomists, on opening the bodies of those malignant dead from apoplexy or malignant fever, that blood flows from the mouth, nose, or ears. The blood in these instances is of a black colour, and apparently more fluid than in its natural state. Hemorrhage then of itself is no proof that a lesion was inflicted on the living one; and in order to warrant an opinion of this kind, the large vessels should be found empty, and the blood of a florid red colour.

“Ecchymosis ” is a Greek term, and is equivalent to effusion or spreading of blood into the cellular tissue. It is present whenever a contusion is sufficiently violent to produce the rupture of a blood vessel, and it communicates a colour more or less livid to the skin. Ecchymosis is a subcutaneous haemorrhage, the consequence of Contusion, and generally, but not always, originates from external causes.

“Sugillation” is applied to those livid spots of various sizes, which are noticed on the bodies of the dead generally after they are become stiff and cold. They are of a uniform colour, and, according to Chaussier and Renard, consist in a congestion of blood in the capillary tissue alone, and notextending to the subcutaneous; and the appearance described under this name is to be ascribed to the laws of gravitation.

In order to arrive at an accurate distinction between Ecchymosis and Sugillation, the celebrated Zacchias has suggested the following test: — “When the discoloration is the consequence of external violence,  a congestion of thick concrete blood will be found; but in the spontaneous spot, (or Sugillation,) the blood on incision will be seen fluid. There is probably, according to Dr. Beck, considerable truth in this, but he adds, “I should not recommend an implicit dependence on the test of Zacchias, though it certainly deserves attention. When Sugillation is supposed to be present, it should be particularly noticed whether it appears in a depending part. The time that has elapsed since the death of the subject, and the pre valence or absence of putrid epidemics, also require consideration. On one point, however, we should place a strong reliance, and that is, where marks of this kind have a distinct impression of the instrument of murder. Thus on a person hung, an Ecchymosis marking the course of the rope is a certain proof and again, similar marks of cords on the extremities indicate that these injuries have not been inflicted on a dead body.”

Wounds received before death are marked by red, signs of bloody, and separated edges. Those inflicted afterwards are livid, and their edges close to each other. Similar appearances characterise contusions or blows in which there has been no solution of continuity; on dissection, they are, if inflicted on the living, found to be subcutaneous wounds: vessels are seen torn and fluids extravasated, and the whole exhibits the marks of tumour in its elasticity and circumscribed shape. Violence to the dead body can only produce livid flaccid spots, unattended with engorgement or tumour.  Gangrene also is marked by its being surrounded with a red edge: putrefaction is not, and the spots caused by the latter are of various colours. Dry gangrene cannot take place on the dead body, since there is no heat or action of vessels to produce it, but the disorganisation observed is of a humid nature.

On the other hand, a man may die of a wound before inflammation commences; and according to Orfila a wound inflicted with a cutting instrument immediately after death is with difficulty discriminated from one during life. Others are so debilitated, that wounds on them have livid and dry edges, and, after death, can scarcely be distinguished from those inflicted on the dead. These circumstances should be kept in mind.

The signs which seem to indicate pain, or spasms, should be observed, but never greatly depended upon, since a natural death is often preceded by them.

Dr. Beck gives the following rides as to the primary examination of the body and before proceeding to dissection: Before proceeding to the dissection, it is proper first to examine the external situation and appearance of the body;  death be apparently caused by a wound, the body should be first viewed, if possible, exactly in the position in which it was found. By moving it, the attitude of the extremities may be altered, or the state of a fracture or a luxation changed, since the internal parts vary in their position with one another, according to the general position of the body. If it is absolutely necessary to remove it, it should be done with great caution. 2. The clothes should clothes to be removed, as far as is necessary, and it should be noted what compresses or bandages (if any) are applied to particular parts. 3. After these preliminaries, we must examine the colour of the skin, the temperature of the body, the rigidity or flexibility of the extremities, the state of the eyes and of the sphincter muscles, noting at the same time whatever swelling, ecchymosis, wound, ulcer, contusion, fracture, or luxation, may be present; also, any fluid flowing from the nose, mouth, ears, sexual organs, &c, and indeed everything varying from the natural state. The above cavities should be inspected, and particular attention must be paid to the state of the skin, so as not to mistake that bluish-brown tinge which indicates the commencement of putrefaction, for ecchymosis.

The next inquiry will be whether the wounds arc Points of the result of suicide, of accident, or homicide. The following circumstances demand great attention, and are of great importance with this view : —

1. The situation in which the wounded body is found.

2. The position of its members, state of its dress.

3. The expression of countenance.

4. The redness or suffusion of the face, (o)

5. The marks of violence, if any, on the body.

6. The quantity of blood, if any, on the ground or on the clothes should be noticed.

7. The nature, depth, and direction of the wound.

8. In case of supposed suicide by means of a knife or pistol, the course of the wound should be examined, whether it be upwards or downwardsand the length of the arm should be compared with the direction of the injury.

9. Ascertain whether the right or left arm has been used, and whether the direction of the wound corresponds with the arm used.

10. In cases of death by fire-arms, the direction of the wound is of great importance. It may be taken for granted, says Dr. Smith, that if the weapon has been introduced into the deceased’s mouth, and there discharged, it has not been done by another.

11. Authors have also mentioned the discoloration of the fingers, from the combustion of the powder in the pan, as a mark of suicide in cases of death by fire-arms. A variety of circumstances, however, occur, which render this a very unsatisfactory test.

12. In suspected cases it is highly necessary to ascertain the previous history of the deceased—his state of mind and worldly situation.