The English had an Academy of Sciences many years before us,but then it is not under such prudent regulations as ours,the only reason of which very possibly is,because it was founded before the Academy of Paris;for had it been founded after,it would very probably have adopted some of the sage laws of the former and improved upon others.
Two things,and those the most essential to man,are wanting in the Royal Society of London,I mean rewards and laws.A seat in the Academy at Paris is a small but secure fortune to a geometrician or a chemist;but this is so far from being the case at London,that the several members of the Royal Society are at a continual,though indeed small expense.Any man in England who declares himself a lover of the mathematics and natural philosophy,and expresses an inclination to be a member of the Royal Society,is immediately elected into it.But in France it is not enough that a man who aspires to the honour of being a member of the Academy,and of receiving the royal stipend,has a love for the sciences;he must at the same time be deeply skilled in them;and is obliged to dispute the seat with competitors who are so much the more formidable as they are fired by a principle of glory,by interest,by the difficulty itself;and by that inflexibility of mind which is generally found in those who devote themselves to that pertinacious study,the mathematics.
The Academy of Sciences is prudently confined to the study of Nature,and,indeed,this is a field spacious enough for fifty or threescore persons to range in.That of London mixes indiscriminately literature with physics;but methinks the founding an academy merely for the polite arts is more judicious,as it prevents confusion,and the joining,in some measure,of heterogeneals,such as a dissertation on the head-dresses of the Roman ladies with a hundred or more new curves.