J. LAWRENCE SMITH AND HIS METEORITE COLLECTIONS
Lee Anne Willson1, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University
Abstract: The National Academy of Sciences awards a J. Lawrence Smith medal every third year
for research in meteoritics. The medal, the man, and his travels are topics of this paper.
Dorrit Hoffleit’s interests include meteoritics, history of astronomy, and women in science. The
topic I have chosen connects to all three of these topics. In preparing this paper, I have consulted
one moderately rare resource, a collection of all J. Lawrence Smith’s publications with three
memorial essays, and one unique one, the journals of a young woman who accompanied her
“Uncle Lawrence” and aunt “Sister Jule” to Europe in 1873 and 1879.
Figure 1. J. Lawrence Smith (1818-1883) was a 19th century civil engineer, MD, toxicologist and
forensic scientist, chemist, inventor, minerologist, agricultural scientist, and meteorite collector.
He was a member of the US National Academy of Sciences, and was President of the American
Association for the Advancement of Science in 1872. He is described as having “chiseled features
of almost effeminate beauty, … light blue eyes and flaxen hair”by M. Michel (1884).
The J. Lawrence Smith fund and medal of the National Academy of Sciences
The National Academy of Science gives a J. Lawrence Smith medal every three years for work in
meteoritics. The fund that supports this can also support research in the field. It was established in
1883 with an $8000 donation from Sarah Julia Smith, his widow. This is the amount that she
received from Harvard for Smith’s meteorite collection. This gave Harvard the 3rd biggest
collection of meteorites at the time. Although mostly iron and stony-iron meteorites, it inspired at
least one modern researcher and Smith medalist (Wood, 2000). Table 1 lists recipients of the J.
Lawrence Smith medal to date. The medal was originally gold; now, the prize is a medal of less
valuable composition plus a check for $25,000.
1
Lee Anne Willson, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University,
Ames IA 50011, lwillson@iastate.edu
H. A. Newton (1888)
Edward Anders (1971)
Clair C. Patterson (1973)
John A. Wood (1976)
Ralph B. Baldwin (1979)
G. J. Wasserburg (1985)
A. G. W. Cameron (1988)
Robert M. Walker (1991)
Donald E. Brownlee (1994)
Ernst Zinner (1997)
George W. Wetherill (2000)
John T. Wasson (2003)
Klaus Keil (2006)
George P. Merrill (1922)
Stuart H. Perry (1945)
Fred L. Whipple (1949)
Peter M. Millman (1954)
Mark G. Inghram (1957)
Ernst J. Opik (1960)
Harold C. Urey (1962)
John H. Reynolds (1967)
Edward P. Henderson (1970)
Table 1: Recipients of the J. Lawrence Smith medal of the National Academy of Science. From
1883 until 1945 just two medals were awarded; since 1985 it has been awarded every 3 years.
Historian J. Lankford (1987) used the history of this fund, with statistics of publications in the
area of meteoritics, to see whether research support and/or prizes for work in a particular field
speed the development of this field measurably. Figure 2 shows the number of papers published
per year in this field by astronomers (mostly tracing orbital motions) and geoscientists (mostly
analyzing composition). From these statistics, plus memoranda indicating that some years no one
could be found to apply to the Smith fund, Lankford concluded that the fund’s effect on the study
of meteorites was minimal. Some acknowledgements to the fund, however, suggest that it had the
indirect effect of supporting collection of data that were useful later.
400
350
number of papers
Figure 2: From Table 1 of
Lankford 1987. Just two
medals were given between
1883 and 1940, on each in
astronomical and geochemical
research
on
meteorites. In the other
years, research funding was
available but often not
sought. The gentle increase
with episodic peaks differs
from the more nearly
exponential rise of a hot
area of research, according
to Lankford.
astro
geo
300
250
200
150
100
50
1880
1890
1900
1910
year
1920
1930
1940
The career of J. Lawrence Smith
J. Lawrence Smith was born near Charleston, S.C. December 17, 1818. “At an early age he
manifested great taste for mathematics; when four years old he could do sums in addition and
multiplication with great rapidity. This was some time before he could read” (Marvin, 1884). He
went to the University of Virginia where he studied math, physics, and chemistry, “the latter
rather as a recreation” (Marvin 1884). He also studied civil engineering and geology, and this led
to his first job, as civil engineer on an extension of the railroad between Cincinnati and
Charleston. Finding this not to his taste, he turned his effort to studying medicine, and obtained
an MD from Charleston Medical College, at the time a distinguished medical school.
He continued his study in Europe, where his teachers included Flourens, Longet, Orfila, and
Dumas in Paris and Leibig at Giessen. In Paris he also studied physics with Poulet, Desprez, and
Becquerel, and had time to fit in mineralogy and geology with Elie de Beaumont and Dufrenoy.
He carried out original research, too, on fatty bodies. While he was in Paris, the famous arsenic
poisoning case of Madame LaFarge was prosecuted. Smith turned his attention to what we now
call Forensic Science, publishing a paper “On the means of detecting arsenic in the animal body,
and of counter-reacting its effects”. A second paper followed; his research for this included
poisoning dogs, burying them, and digging them up after varying intervals of time.
Returning to Charleston in 1844, he lectured on toxicology at the Charleston Medical College and
established the Charleston Medical and Surgical Journal. He stayed there just two years, before
the US Government persuaded him to give up his position and take over as assayer of the bullion
that was then coming into circulation from the goldfields of Georgia and N. and S. Carolina.
While he was doing that, he looked carefully at the soil around Charleston and pointed out that its
high phosphate of lime was a key to its agricultural productivity. Continuing in that vein, he
studied the conditions that led to profitable cotton plantations – weather, soils, and economic
structure. All of this he accomplished by the age of 28.
As a result of his acquired expertise in the conditions for growing cotton, he was selected to go to
Turkey in 1846 in response to a request from the Sultan, who wanted to start growing cotton near
Constantinople. When Smith arrived, he soon determined that the conditions were not appropriate
for growing cotton – something later borne out in failed experiments. He was preparing to return
to America when the Turkish Government asked him to undertake a different task – that of
investigating their mineral resources more generally. This task he carried out with considerably
greater success. One particularly important discovery was reserves of emery; this discovery ended
a monopoly on emery until then held by Naxos in the Grecian Archipelago. He also found
chrome ores, coal and other resources.
In “Memoir On Emery”, 1850, Smith commented on the economic impact of the emery mines:
“The price of this substance at the end of the last century was from forty to fifty dollars per
ton, and between 1820 and 1835 it was at times even less. About this period the monopoly of
the Naxos emery was purchased from the Greek government by the English merchant, who so
regulated the quantity given to commerce that the price gradually rose from forty to one
hundred and forty dollars per ton, a price at which it was sold in 1846 and 1847. It was at this
time that I commenced examining and developing the emery formations of Asia Minor, until
then unknown. And after making a report to the Turkish Government the monopoly of the
emery of Turkey was sold to a mercantile house in Smyrna, and since then the price of this
article has diminished to fifty and seventy dollars per ton, according to the quality.”
The Turkish government continued his position for four years, giving him presents and honors
but restricted freedom to roam. By the end of his stay he was quite impatient, writing to Dr. B.
Silliman Jr. “I have been trying for some time past to conclude my arrangements with the Turks,
and have at last succeeded. …Could I travel about as I wish, I could remain here ten years.”
From Turkey he returned to Paris, in the spring of 1850, and stayed there until October,
continuing his research. He invented, and later perfected, an inverted microscope, where chemical
reactions on the slide being examined are kept well away from any sensitive optics. Returning to
the U. S. that autumn, he first took up a position in New Orleans, but was not feeling particularly
settled; he carried basic chemical reagents in his baggage as he traveled. “All my scientific labors
have as yet been carried on in the Gipsey style… In fact I have been literally a sort of peripatetic
philosopher, carrying my own hammer and anvil and doing a little wherever I could get a place to
work in.”
From 1852 to 1853, J. Lawrence Smith served as “chemical chair in the University of Virginia”.
This was “a year of great scientific activity” including “perfecting his new method of analyzing
the alkaline silicates” (Silliman). Indeed, his publication list shows a jump to 11 in this year
compared with an average of just over 2/year in the preceding decade and a half, and this in spite
of having lost a substantial portion of his notes and manuscripts to a fire in transit to U. Va.
The marriage of J. Lawrence Smith in 1852 to Sarah Julia Guthrie influenced his career from that
point forward. His new father-in-law, James Guthrie, was appointed Secretary of the Treasury
under Franklin Pierce in 1853. As he was a widower, he asked two of his daughters, Sarah Julia
(the youngest, newly married to J. Lawrence Smith and unencumbered by children) and Mary
Elizabeth (the oldest and a widow with a young son) to maintain his house and serve as hostesses
for him in Washington. The middle daughter, Ann Augusta Guthrie Caldwell (the first of four
Augustas), stayed in Louisville raising children. In Washington, J. Lawrence Smith arranged to
space for his work at the Smithsonian institution. He also gave a series of lectures for the US
Department of Agriculture, but published almost nothing during those four years.
From 1854 to 1866 Smith was professor of medical chemistry and toxicology at the University of
Louisville, an institution his father-in-law had been instrumental in founding. The position was
vacated when B. Silliman Jr. resigned to take up the position vacated by his father at Yale. In
Louisville, he served in a number of roles, including president for the gas works in Louisville.
Smith resigned from the U. of Louisville in 1866, shortly after his father-in-law passed away.
Silliman (1884) describes this choice: “Possessed now of an ample fortune, and frequently called,
in the way of his profession, to visit Europe, he found the restraints of a professorship, in an
institution no longer prosperous, distasteful, and naturally preferred to devote himself to the more
congenial researches which he had recently commenced in the department of aërolites, to the
collection and study of which he gave great attention during the remainder of his life.”
Smith’s own professional income, plus their share of the Guthrie family fortune, allowed him to
collect meteorites with a fervor and generosity that few can match. He wrote to Maskelyne “The
fact is I do not believe that there is any one who has collected as many meteorites as myself &
have parted with them as freely and for so little consideration” (quoted by Burke, 1976). He built
a chemistry laboratory at his house that was “one of the most complete and best equipped
laboratories in this country” (Marvin, 1884).
In 1872 J. Lawrence Smith served as President of the American Association for the Advancement
of Science, presiding over a meeting in Dubuque, IA and presenting his address at the 1873
meeting in Portland, Maine. His name appears on the articles of incorporation, although the
society had already been meeting annually for more than two decades by then. His presidential
address (available from the AAAS archives) covered pure vs. applied science; he characterized
pure science as the fulcrum on which the lever of applied science rests. He discusses issues of
education in science, blaming impatience for poor quality of graduates (“We are in fact a fast
people … not content to devote patient and laborious study to pursuits that can be mastered only
in that way.”) and recommended building a few strong programs to train scientists, not many
weak ones. He also touched on the theory of evolution, as part of a discussion on the methods of
modern science, where his conclusion was that there was not yet enough evidence to judge this as
a scientific matter. He suggested that a consensus among scientists is one criterion for a solid
theory, and this was not yet the case for the theory of evolution.
The meteorite collections
Smith began collecting meteorites in the early 1850s, publishing his first major paper on the
subject in 1855, and by 1860 had a respectable collection. However, he lived in Louisville,
Kentucky, and this was a vulnerable spot in the Civil War, so he took his precious collection and
sold or gave away most of it (Burke, 1976). After the war he resumed collecting, and by 1880 had
again amassed a collection containing material from over 200 falls. When his health began to fail,
in the early 1880s, he sought to have the collection, by then containing 896,357 gm of irons and
86,398 gm of stones from over 250 falls, go to a good home. Harvard purchased it with funds
raised by a "subscription" to which Smith was also a subscriber. The proceeds of that sale were
donated, by his widow, to the National Academy of Science to fund the medal and/or research in
meteoritics. The original medals were of gold “of the value of $200” to be awarded no more often
than every two years “to the person, of whatever nationality, who within the previous two years
has made the most important advances in this line of investigation” or, at the Academy’s
discretion, instead to be awarded in support of research, but in this case, only to citizens of the
United States. A search of ADS for papers containing “J. Lawrence Smith” turns up about 70
papers, many containing acknowledgments of research support from the fund.
As for his scientific contributions in this area: He published over 35 papers, or about 240 journal
pages, analyzing meteorites he acquired or borrowed. Most of the papers are details of weight,
size, appearance, and chemical analysis carefully and lovingly described. In his first paper,
published 1855, a long review of several stones, he also gave his arguments for favoring the idea
that meteorites come from lunar volcanoes. Since we do not agree with his conclusions, it is
perhaps interesting to look at the arguments he made. His opponents held that detailed analysis of
meteor showers showed their origin to be from celestial bodies orbiting the Sun, and extended
that argument to the meteorites. Smith argued that since there are NOT more meteorites falling
during meteor showers, therefore the analogy was false; no reliable estimate of the true speed of
an incoming meteorite had yet been made. He cited Laplace as an authority on the plausibility of
a body being ejected from the Moon with enough speed to travel to the Earth, and that the large
size of lunar craters suggests a high speed of ejection of material from them. The observation that
the Moon’s presumed volcanoes do not appear to be active now he dealt with by supposing that
the ejected bodies could enter into orbits in the Earth Moon system where they might reside for a
very long time before falling to Earth. Most of the rest of the arguments for a lunar origin were
based on chemical analysis and similarities to other bodies. A key point is the similar specific
gravity of the Moon and most meteorites. In his conclusion, he states “…the moon is the only
large body in space of which we have any knowledge possessing the requisite conditions
demanded by the physical and chemical properties of meteorites…”.
Figure 3. From their tomb at Cave Hill
National Cemetery in Louisville, KY, J.
Lawrence Smith and his wife, née Sarah
Julia Guthrie, are shown in profile.
According to B. Silliman, she was “…a wise
and devoted wife, who took an intelligent
interest in his pursuits, and was his constant
companion during his frequent journeys at
home and abroad…” Photo by the author.
Travels in Europe, 1873 and 1879
J. Lawrence Smith and Sarah Julia (Guthrie) Smith (known to all as "Sister Jule"), had no
children but took a great interest in their nieces and nephews, particularly the Caldwell children
whose mother Ann Augusta (the first Augusta) died in January of 1872. In particular, niece
Augusta G. Caldwell traveled with her aunt and uncle to Europe twice, in 1873 at age 13-14
accompanied by her oldest brother Willie, and again in 1878-9 accompanied by brother
Lawrence. They visited Paris, London, Vienna, and toured Italy, Norway, and Sweden; July 4
1879 found them at the North Cape celebrating under the midnight Sun with a quickly improvised
American flag. Augusta kept a journal through both trips.
From Augusta’s 1873 journal, it becomes clear that Sister Jule was very interested in the subjects
that interested J. Lawrence, as was also suggested in the memorial essays. A series of entries
describe how they – Augusta, her older brother Willie, Sister Jule and Uncle Lawrence – attended
a 5-day meeting of the British Association in Bradford in September, 1873. Sister Jule and
Augusta attended lectures together every day, mostly independent of the two men; they heard
lectures on chemistry, physics, mathematics, statistics, economics, and practical subjects. Topics
she mentions include sand blasting, the derivation of codeine and morphine, coal and coal plants,
fuel, endowments for science, and confederate homes and cooperative housekeeping. She also
says “Professor Maxwell delivered a lecture on Molecules”; the text of this lecture was published
(Nature, Sept. 1873, pp. 437-441) and is available on internet sites for Victorian science.
On this trip, one of Smith’s commitments was to serve as a commissioner at the Vienna
Exposition, as he had earlier done for the Paris Exposition of 1867. They spent nearly two months
in Vienna; the journal does not include much information about Smith’s activities, and only a few
entries concern the exposition itself. In 1879 they similarly spent months in Paris where he had
responsibilities associated with the Paris international exposition of that year, and she reports a
number of visits but with a considerably more domestic focus (cooking, needlework and other
appropriate pursuits) with no reports of lectures on physics, math, or engineering.
The journal from the 1873 trip has many entries that give the impression young Augusta was
enjoying the adventure, learning and experiencing new things, and making her own observations
perhaps prompted by an uncle’s guidance: “from under these glaciers we could see little streams
of water running but on top you could see no signs of melting” On the trip across the Atlantic she
kept a careful log of each day’s progress: “Sunday, May 18th 1873 Latitude 40° 29’ N. Longitude
69° 52’W. Distance traveled in 26 hours 310 miles.” and there are other patches of mildly
scientific recording throughout this journal.
The journal for the 1879 trip is considerably less effusive and more formal. There is almost
nothing that ties in with Uncle Lawrence’s business, apart from a description of a social evening
with the family of fellow meteorite enthusiast Daubrée. Augusta still waxed poetic about natural
views, but the exuberance that peeks out in the first journal is otherwise largely missing in the
second. If she had an interest in science, it did not have a chance to be expressed as she went on
to live the life of a well-bred Victorian woman, marrying and producing a daughter (the third
Augusta). Her last years as a widow she spent with her daughter’s family, one of whom
remembers her as “an old woman in black who was always sad”. She died in 1930.
Figure 4: Three Augustas
in 1923 in Seattle. The
widow is the Augusta who
traveled with her uncle
Lawrence, the mother is
Augusta 3, and the older
child is the last Augusta.
The toddler is Brooke,
mother of the author of this
paper. The gentleman is the
husband of Augusta 3.
Photograph from the family
archives.
Sister Jule, childless and married to an older and already well-established J. Lawrence Smith, had
more opportunity to develop an interest in science, although still far from being educated in it or
able to contribute directly. Smith’s papers do not contain acknowledgements as papers do today,
so we do not know whether she assisted him directly in any way. When Augusta’s granddaughter
Brooke, my mother, born in 1921, expressed an interest in astronomy, she was told by her
teachers “that is not a suitable subject for girls”. In contrast, when I was 9 Augusta 3, my
grandmother, gave me a book on astronomy, encouraging that interest. So an interest in science,
muffled by convention during the Victorian era and early 20th century, may have found its way
from Sister Jule and Augusta to the author of this paper.
Dr. Smith died on Friday, October 12th, 1883 of a liver ailment that had afflicted him for several
years. The welcome news that the sale of his meteorites to Harvard had gone through apparently
reached him on October 11th. He is interred at the Cave Hill Cemetery in Louisville, Kentucky in
a family plot surrounding the impressive marble monolith raised by James Guthrie’s daughters in
Guthrie’s memory. The top of the Smith monument reads: “J. Lawrence Smith, member of the U.
S. National Academy of Science, corr. member of the French Institute, Etc. Born Dec. 17th, 1818;
Died Oct. 12, 1883.” and “Sarah Julia Smith, née Sarah Julia Guthrie {Sister Jule} Born March
4th, 1827; died July 24, 1901. United in life and in death”. On the front is a lovely cameo portrait
of the two of them in profile, J. Lawrence behind Sister Jule (Figure 3). The effect of partnership
is somewhat spoiled, however, by the inscription on the back of the monument, which simply
reads: “J. Lawrence Smith and wife”.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Amy Crumpton at the American Association for the Advancement of
Science for providing a copy of Smith’s Presidential Address from 1873. I also acknowledge with
gratitude Augustas 2 and 3, my great-grandmother and grandmother, for keeping and passing
down to me the journals by Augusta and copies of the collected works of J. Lawrence Smith,
essential resources for writing this paper. The staff of the Filson Historical Society in Louisville,
KY were most helpful during my brief visit to examine papers from the Guthrie-Caperton family
archive, including some letters to and from Smith on family matters.
Bibliography
Burke, John G. 1976 Cosmic Debris, Meteorites in History, University of California Press.
Caldwell, Augusta G. 1873 and 1879, journals kept during two trips to Europe, family archives.
Guthrie-Caperton family papers, 1780-1939. Filson Historical Society, Louisville KY.
Lankford, J. 1987, “Private Patronage and the Growth of Knowledge: The J. Lawrence Smith
Fund of the National Academy of Sciences, 1884-1940“, Minerva, Vol. 25, pages 269-281.
Marvin, J. B. “A Biographical Sketch of Professor J. Lawrence Smith, prepared by request for the
American Academy of Arts and Sciences of Boston, Feb. 1884”. Printed by John P. Morton &
Co, Louisville, Ky. 1884.
Michel, Middleton. “In memory of J. Lawrence Smith, M. D.” from Year Book, City of
Charleston S. C. 1883: The News and Courier Book Presses. 1884.
Silliman, Benjamin Jr. “Sketch of the Life and Scientific Work of Dr. J. Lawrence Smith,
prepared by appointment of the National Academy of Sciences”, April 1884.
Smith, J. Lawrence, in Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
Twenty-Second Meeting, held at Portland, Maine, August 1873. Published by the permanent
secretary, 1874.
Smith, J. L. Original Researches in Minerology and Chemistry, edited by J. B. Marvin, B. S.,
M.D., printed by John P. Morton and Company, Louisville Ky, 1884.
Wood, John A. 2000 Masursky Lecture given at the 31st Lunar and Planetary Science Conference,
available at http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/~jwood/Masursky.html