← Table of contents
Woman in Science

Note 163 — Chapter VI

Reading edition

A few days before Mme. Curie's name was to come before the Academy of Sciences as a candidate for membership, the French Institute in its quarterly plenary meeting of the five academies, of which the Institute is composed, decided by a vote of ninety to fifty-two against the eligibility of women to membership, and put itself on record in favor of the "immutable tradition against the election of women, which it seemed eminently wise to respect."

Commenting on this decision of The Immortals, a writer in the well-known English magazine, Nature, under date of January 12, 1911, penned the following pertinent paragraph:

"It remains to be seen what the Academy of Sciences will do in the face of such an expression of opinion. Mme. Curie is deservedly popular in French scientific circles. It is everywhere recognized that her work is of transcendent merit, and that it has contributed enormously to the prestige of France as a home of experimental inquiry. Indeed, it is not too much to say that the discovery and isolation of the radio-active elements are among the most striking and fruitful results of a field of investigation preëminently French. If any prophet is to have honour in his own country—even if the country be only the land of his adoption—surely, that honour ought to belong to Mme. Curie. At this moment, Mme. Curie is without doubt, in the eyes of the world, the dominant figure in French chemistry. There is no question that any man who had contributed to the sum of human knowledge what she has made known, would years ago have gained that recognition at the hands of his colleagues, which Mme. Curie's friends are now desirous of securing for her. It is incomprehensible, therefore, on any ethical principles of right and justice that, because she happens to be a woman, she should be denied the laurels which her preëminent scientific achievement has earned for her."

Compare this frank and honest statement with that of a contributor, about the same date, to La Revue du Monde, of Paris. Guided by his myopic vision and diseased imagination, this writer discerns in the admittance of women into the grand old institution of Richelieu and Napoleon the imminent triumph of what Prudhon called pornocracy and the eventual opening of the portals of the Palais Mazarin to representatives of the type of Lais and Phryne, on the Hellenic pretext that "Beauty is the supreme merit."

It is gratifying, however, to the friends of woman's cause to learn that Mme. Curie's candidacy was defeated by only two votes. Her competitor, M. Branly, received thirty votes against the Polish woman's twenty-eight. She thus fared far better than did Mme. Pauline Savari, who aspired to the fauteuil made vacant by the death of Renan, regarding whose candidature the Academy curtly declared, "Considering that its traditions do not permit it to examine this question, the Academy passes to the order of the day." Thus, it will be seen that, in spite of the long-continued opposition to women members, the French Academy is more than likely to offer its next vacant chair to the pride and glory of Poland,—the immortal discoverer of radium and polonium.

Explore with AITake your curiosity a little further.

Reading settings