The Sun.
London, England, 1846-05-11 00:00:00

DR. LEE TO DR. ROCET.

4, Saville-row, lith Nov., 1845.
My dear Sir,—Having been two years in the Council of
the E'yal Society, lam aware that none but members
have a right t) know wh2t has klirn pace at the meet-
ings, before the decisions are publicly announced. I
cannot, then fore, with propriety, send any statement
to the Cutincii, as you recommended me to do. IL:ling
acquainted you, one of the principal office-bearers anti
guardians of the honour of the Royal Society, with the
unpricedenttd and illegal proceedings in the physiolo-
gical eorami:tee, it is for you to determine whether the
Council, in ignorance of n hat 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 your=,
Dr. Roget.
ROBERT LE E.
(A copy of this letter WAS sent to the Marquis of
Northampton.)
Not having received any answer from Dr. Rogvt,
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 !effect signal dis-
credit on the Royal Society itself.
The first ground of th:s 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
deicinal 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 Brod e), Las been reused a place in the "Philo-
sophical Transactions." Drs. 11(dd and Shary-y hav-
ing therefore never seen these dissections, nor
the dissection figured in the "Philosophical Traneac-
, tions " for 1842, though requested by ma to do so, have
consevently framed their report with an imperfect
knowledge, or rather in a state of total ignorawv, of
what had previously been done by me on the subject;
which report 11.,is nevertheless b; en adopted by the p'iy-
siological committee, and made the ground of a recom•
mendation to' the Council for this award. The Council
cannot fail to perceive that an examination of all my
dissections cur;ht to have been made by I)rs. Todd and
Slicrpey before any fair and just report could be drawn,
muc.l le s z recomn:endstion to he C quell for the award
of the Royal medal.*
The cone' reason for my pretest is, that this award
casts a cl,uht 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 ha,e borne testi-
mony, in writing, to the truth of tny published statements.
Many of these anatomists are fellows of the Ro) al S
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 C,:uceil
for this protest is, that the recommendation of the phy-
siolo;ical committee was made in a hasty and irregular,
if not in a pcsitively 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 be3eech the Council of the Royal
Society to suspend this award, until all the circutnstancer
detailed in this protest have undergone a rigid and im-
partial investigation. The interests of science-, and the
honour of the Royal Society itself, ri nder an inquiry im-
perative upon the Council.—l have the honour to re-
main, my Lords and Gentlemen, your faithful and &•e-
-client servant, ROBEicr LEE.

4, Saville row, Dec. 1, 1845.
No no:ice 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.hsve already communicated.

A LETTER FROM DR. LEE TO TIIE 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-
sioiogy."

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 Bth of October fast, the Committee of Phy-
Biology 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 coin-
mace on t: a, occasion. When the committee had recom-
mended the Council to award the Copley medal to .31r.
Owen, and transacted other business, the secretaryin-
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
awardm(e ; in g
of,
theth u s
royalre - re-constructed, on str
medalu cti en. d , proceeded
physiology. to
Fifteenconsideri
papers
urthes
of
these
ens
ea mweads,
mo ryp,u,
supplement
ui
pnplcompetition,to
forie theon medal.the
Nervous
v onues
Ganglia of the Uterus," which had r
been read to the So-
ciety on the 19th of June, and which contained additional
and important evidence in confirmation of the weer icy
of my descriptions and deliaeations of the nerves of .th-o
uterus, in the " Transactions of the -Royal Society."
This paper had remained unreferred four monthe,
after having been read to the Society. Another paper,
put in competition for the medal, was one on the nerves
of the uteru', by Mr. Beck, which had never been read
to the Society, but had been referred, on the 3rd of July,
to Dm Todd and Sharpey. Two separate reports from
Drs. Todd at d Sharpy were produced and read, and then
this meeting resolved to recommend the council to award
the ro) al medal to Mr. Beck.
After this transaction, the next act of the meeting
was, tee refer my supplement to Sir B. Brodie, to ascertain
uhether it was worthy of publication. Sir B. Brcilie re-
commended the committee of physiology to print the
paper, but the committee, on the 6th of November, re-
solved, " that Dr. Lee's appendix be not recommeeded
to be printed."
On the 30th of attober, the Council of the Royal So-
ciety met, and on the recommendation of the re-con-
structed meeting, held two days before, resolved, " that
one of the royal medals in physiology be awarded to T.
S. Beck, &q., for his paper entitled On the Nerves of
the Uterus."'
The council then resolved itself into a committee of
papers, to determine whether the paper to which the
royal medal had just been awarded, was fit to be printed.
The medal was awarded toa paper which had never
been read to the Society, and had not been ordered to
be printed.
On the 7th of November, in an interview which I had
with the president, I stated to his Lordship that the
award had been made without investigation, aid that
the recommendation to the council had not proceeded
from the committee of physiology, but from anillegall y
been
constituted meeting, after the committee had
councildis-
solvedby
had theawcahrde
chairman. a
theil; II is La
loorndsihtsirorlevpnlied,thatth
responsibi-
lity; that it was at perfect liberty
.to decide indepen-
dently of the co Inhie mi
nda
u trteeceo, anden that
it 0
n
r t
camewasto the of noccoonusne
(pence whether
from the committee regularly, constituted, or the
minutes of the meeting had been confirmed. The medal
has been awarded, added the president, the thing is
done, and it is too late to say anything more about it.

* It appears from the Minutes that the eommittee udopted
the Report, but made no recommene,ation to the Council on
the oubject,

About the middle of November, the PresidelA sent a
requisition to the Committee of Physiology, ordering
them to state the grounds upon which thy had recom-
mended the award of the royal medal in physiol-,gy.
On the 20th of November the committee mtt;:and re-
solved, " that Dr. Todd and Dr. Sharrey be requested
to draw up a report on the claims of Mr. Beck s paper
to the award of the royal medal, and that Mr. Peck's
paper be sent in succession to the several members of
the Committee of Physiology resident in London."
At this meeting Mr. Lrlwrence requested the secre-
tary to show him Mr. Beck's paper, but it was not forth-
coming ; and the secretary stated that it was icy the
author's possession, contrary to a statute of the Society
enacted expressly for the purpose of preventing the per-
petration of literary and scientific frauds.
On the 27th of November, the committee met, when
the report of Drs. Sharptv and Todd was lead and
adop:ed. (in the Ist of liecember, this report came
before the council, and it has been printed in the pro-
ceedings of the society, and in the address of the
president at the anniversary meeting, as if it had been
the true retort of the committee of physiology on the
claims of Mr. Beck's paper to the award of the medal.
That such is not the fact can readily be proved, for the
medal was awarded by the council a month before, and
on the recommendation of the re-constructed meeting
on the 28th of October, when two ether reports were
produced and read by Drs. Todd end Sharpey, which
reports, Dr. lt:)get states., "are cola:cation" and have
not yet seen the light.

The following notice is affixed to the first part of the
"Philosophical TrAnsactions" for 1545, and the same
notice has been affixed to every volume of the " Philoso-
phical Transactions," published since 1837:
" Her Iluisty Queen Victoria, in restoring the royal
medals, has Leen graciously ph.ased to approve the fol-
lowing regulations for the awtrd of them:—That the
royal medals be givLD for such papers only rte have been
presented to the Royal Society, nut! ins:.rted in their
" Ttanzactions."

The medal in physiology was awarded by the late
Council to a paper which h,a nt-iver been read to the
Socitty, and has not been inserted in thu " Philusolhical
Transactions."
I can now (!emonstrate that. the highest honours of the
Itiyal Society have been conferred for destroying, and
not for displayirig, the, nerves of the uterus. If the
Counc:l i, jII appoznt a e7npetent tribunal to investigate
the subject, the truth of what), is now affir:ncd will
sp.edily be
,discovered, and the njury inflicted on ana•
tomical and physio!ogieal science by these irregular,
Unjust, and most unphilosophical proceedings, he re-
paired. The moral character of the Royal ;.!,,oeiety re-
quires that a rigorous examination be mtoe, without
delay, into the whole of there extraordinary trmisections.
I am, my Lords and Gentlemen, very faith fel !3, Tours,
ROBERT •LEE.
4, Saville-row, Burlington gardens, 2nd, 1846.