4o HUMPHRY DAVY
persons were upset by Rumford's autocratic management.
In 1803 Rumford left the Institution, He settled in Paris
and married Lavoisier's widow. The marriage proved
unhappy. Rumford's departure did not completely destroy
the Institution's interest in technological research. Davy
was instructed to investigate the technique of tanning, in
order to improve the tanning industry. He was requested
to investigate the chemistry of mineralogy and metallurgy.
He studied all of these subjects with great energy and good
will. Unlike many young intellectuals, he did not resent
receiving instructions concerning the subjects of his
researches. He was always glad to exhibit the versatility
of his genius on any material, as his raiding intellectual
temperament was adapted to making sudden attacks on new
fields, or fields new to him. The products of his investiga-
tions of these technological subjects proved not to be very
important.
The Board of Agriculture, under the inspiration of
Arthur Young, invited him to give a course of lectures on
the chemistry of agriculture. These attracted much atten-
tion and were profitable to Davy. He was asked to repeat
them in Dublin. He was paid five hundred guineas for the
course. In the next year the invitation was repeated, for
a fee of seven hundred and fifty guineas. The tickets for
these courses cost two guineas, and the applications greatly
exceeded the seating accommodation in the lecture hall*
The University of Dublin awarded him an honorary doctor-
ate of laws; the only distinction conferred on him by any
university,
Davy published his lectures as a treatise on agricultural
chemistry. While he made no discovery of funda-
mental importance, he gave the science of agriculture
dignity. He established its sociological prestige. He
created the atmosphere in which Lawes and Gilbert could
develop their great researches. Davy's services to culture
are seen particularly clearly in his work for agricultural
chemistry, for the spectator's attention is not distracted by
brilliant discoveries. In considering his chief researches
the spectator cannot always separate the sociological