The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-16 00:00:00

DR. LEE TO DR. ROGET.

4, Saville-row, 17th Nov., 1845.
My dear Sir,—Having been two years in the Council of
the Royal Society, I am aware that none but members
have a right to know what has taken place at the meet-
ings, before the decisions are publicly announced. I
cannot, therefore, with propriety, send any statement
to the Council, as you recommended me to do. Having
acquainted you, one of the principal office-bearers and
guardians of the honour of the Royal Society, with the
unprecedented and illegal proceedings in the physiolo-
gical committee, it is for you to determine whether the
Council, in ignorance of what has taken place, shall be
permitted to proceed in a course injurious to the moral
character of the Royal Society, and destructive of my
scientific reputation.
I remain, my dear Sir, very sincerely yours,
Dr. Roget. ROBERT LEE.
(A copy of this letter was sent to the Marquis of
Northampton.)
Not having received any answer from Dr. Roget,
Dr. Lee next addressed the following protest to the
Council :

LETTER FROM DR. LEE TO THE PRESIDENT AND MEM-
BERS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF

LONDON.

My Lords and Gentlemen,—l feel compelled to
protest against the Council's award of the royal medal,
from the conviction that by doing so I shall vindicate
' the truth, which is now assailed, and prevent the Council
from committing an error which will reflect signal dis-
credit on the Royal Society itself.
The first ground of this protest is, that not one mem-
ber of the physiological committee, except Mr. Law-
rence, has examined my two recent and most perfect dis-
sections of the nervous system of the uterus, which were
described by me in a paper read to the Royal Society at
the last meeting in the month of June, and which paper,
contrary to the recommendation of the referee, (Sir Ben-
jamin Brodie), has been refused a place in the "Philo-
sophical Transactions." Drs. Todd and Sharpey hav-
ing therefore never seen these dissections, nor
the dissection figured in the " Philosophical Transac-
tions" for 1842, though requested by me to do so, have
consequently framed their report with an imperfect
knowledge, or rather kin a state of total ignorance, of
what had previously been done by me on the subject;
which report has nevertheless been adopted by the phy-
siological committee, and made the ground of a recom•
emendation to, the Council for this award. The Council
cannot fail to perceive that an examination of all my
dissections ought to have been made by Drs. Todd and
Sharpey before any fair and just report could be drawn,
much less a recommendation to the Council for the award
of the Royal medal.*
The second reason for my protest is, that this award
casts a doubt on the accuracy of my descriptions and de-
lineations of the nerves of the uterus in the " Transac-
tions of the Royal Society." More than fifty distinguished
English and foreign anatomists have carefully exa-
mined my " Dissections," which first displayed
this great nervous system, and have borne testi-
mony, in writing, to the truth of my published statements.
Many of these anatomists are fellows of the Royal So-
ciety, and much superior in scientific reputation to the
individuals who, without examination, have urged the
physiological committee to recommend this award.
A third reason which I have to assign to the Council
for this protest is, that the recommendation of the phy-
siological committee was made in a hasty and irregular,
if not in a positively illegal manner—a manner calcu-
lated to excite suspicions respecting the motives of those
who have been most active in promoting this award.
A fourth ground for protesting against this adjudica-
tion, is the established practice of the Royal Society, in
which it has ever been the rule to abstain from giving
an opinion on any disputed point of fact, or deciding on
a subject which is still in controversy.

For these:reasons, I beseech the Council of the Royal
Society to suspend this award, until all the circumstances
detailed in this protest have undergone a rigid and im-
partial investigation. The interests of science, and the
honour of the Royal Society itself, render an inquiry im-
perative upon the Council.—l have the honour to re-
main, my Lords and Gentlemen, your faithful and obe-
dient servant, ROBERT LEE.

4,S;;iiie-iow, Dec. 1, 1845.
No notice was taken of this protest ; Dr. Lee, there-
fore, after the circulation of the annual address of the
President, sent in the subjoined statement to the Council.
This will be found to bear out, in every important point,
the facts we have already communicated.

A LETTER FROM DR. LEE TO THE PRESIDENT AND
COUNCIL oF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF LONDON.
My Lords and Gentlemen,—ln the printed address of
the President, delivered at the last anniversary meeting
of the Society (Dec. 1), it is stated that the royal medal
had been adjudged by the Council, " complying thereby
with the recommendation of the Committee of Phy-
siology."
It is proved, by the following statement of facts, that
no recommendation was made by the Committee of
Physiology to the Council for such an award, and that
the statutes of the Society, and regulations ordered by
the Crown for the award of royal medals, have been
violated by the late Council.
On the 28th of October last, the Committee of Phy-
siology met. Mr. Lawrence, who had been the referee on
all my papers on the nerves of the uterus, published in the
"Philosophical Transactions," was president of the com-
mittee on thit occasion. When the committee had recom-
mended the Council to award the Copley medal to Mr.
Owen, and transacted other business, the secretary in-
formed Mr. Lawrence that there was no further busi-
ness before the committee to transact, on receiving which
intimation, Mr. Lawrence dissolved the committee, and
left Somerset House.

No sooner had the president taken his departure, than
the remaining members of the dissolved committee re-
formed themselves. Dr. Todd took the chair, and the
meeting, thus re-constructed, proceeded to consider the
award of the royal medal in physiology. Fifteen papers
were named, or put in competition, for the medal. One
of these was my "supplement to a Paper on the Nervous
Ganglia of the Uterus," which had been read to the So-
ciety on the 19th of June, and which contained additional
and important evidence in confirmation of the accuracy
of my descriptions and delineations of the nerves of the
uterus, in the " Transactions of the Royal Society."
This paper had remained unreferred four months,
after having been read to the Society. Another paper,
put in competition for the medal, was one on the nerves
of the uterus, by Mr. Beck, which had never been read
to the Society, but had been referred, on the 3rd of July,
to Drs. Todd and Sharpey. Two separate reports from
Drs. Todd and Sharpey were produced and read,
and f
h en
this meeting resolved to recommend the council to award
the royal medal to Mr. Deck.
After this transaction, the neit act of. tho meeting
was, to refer my supplement to Sir B. Brodie,
l eBI Brodie re-
commended , to ascertain
i
whether it was worthy of publication:
the committee of physiology to
print the

•
* It appears from the Minutes that the Committee adopted
the Report, but wade no recommendation tO the Council on
the fivb4ect,