THE LIFE AND LETTERS OF HERBERT SPENCER
THE
LIFE AND LETTERS
HERBERT SPENCER
DAVID VGA
THE
LIFE AND LETTERS
OF
HERBERT SPENCER
BY
DAVID DUNCAN, LL.D.
I. ATE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, MADRAS
WITH SEVENTEEN ILLUSTRATIONS
METHUEN & CO.
36 ESSEX STREET W.C.
LONDON
First Published in 1908
r:
*%
.* :•
[A/I Rights Res
TO MY WIFE
PREFACE.
A WORD or two seems necessary by way of explanation of the publication of a biography of Mr. Herbert Spencer, within a few years of the publication of his voluminous Autobiography. Twenty-eight years ago, while I was at home on furlough, Mr. Spencer obtained from me a promise to write his Life. In subsequent years, partly owing to his fears that his own life might not be prolonged, and partly because he thought that my absence in India would render it difficult, if not impossible, for me to fulfil my promise, he made other arrangements. These other arrangements, however, fell through. Hence the question, in a letter to me, dated 10 May, 1893 : " Does the assent which you gave years ago still hold, and is it likely to hold ?" On receiving an affirmative answer, Mr. Spencer had the following para- graph inserted in his Will : — " I request that the said David Duncan will write a Biography in one volume of moderate size, in which shall be incorporated such biographical materials as I have thought it best not to use myself, together with such selected correspondence and such un- published papers as may seem of value, and shall include the frontispiece portrait and the profile portraits, and shall add to it a brief account of the part of my life which has passed since the date at which the Autobiography concludes."
Mr. Spencer was impressed with the truth that one's estimate of one's self is sure to err on the side of excess or defect. To say nothing of the limitations of memory, the mere assumption of the attitude of narrator of one's own life is unfavourable to correct representation. Peculiarities of intellectual and moral character also interfere with the adjustments of lights and shades and colours. Vanity, in one case, self-depreciation, in another, will prevent a well-balanced estimate of one's self being arrived at. While not trying to hide his shortcomings, Mr. Spencer,
viii. Life of Herbert Spencer
like all the finer natures, shrank from parading the more attractive and lovable aspects of his character — thus per- mitting an apparent justification for the opinion that he was " all brains and no heart." This is one of the erroneous opinions which will, it is hoped, be removed by perusal of the following pages.
The existence of the AiTtobiogmpJiy, which covers sixty- two years of Mr. Spencer's life, has added to the diffi- culties of my task. The road traversed by him has had to be traversed by me ; but I have endeavoured to avoid needless repetition, while omitting nothing that has seemed necessary to form a continuous and complete narrative. Of the remaining twenty-one years, the volume now pub- lished constitutes the only authoritative record. To avoid multiplication of references, a note has been inserted at the beginning of each chapter — from chapter i. to chapter xvi. — to show the corresponding chapters in the Antobiogniphy.
I have not aimed at giving an exposition or criticism of the philosophy of Evolution. Even had such an aim been in accordance with Mr. Spencer's wishes, it would have been impossible, within the prescribed limits, to do justice either to the Life or to the Philosophy, had the attainment of both ends been attempted. Expositions and estimates of his Philosophy have been plentiful enough. The fact of the matter is that we stand as yet too near the stupendous edi- fice to form a correct idea of its proportions and grandeur. The letters, so freely quoted in the following pages, will, however, it is hoped, while indicating the growth of Mr. Spencer's striking and many-sided character, throw new light upon the development of his scheme of thought. Very important in this respect is the appendix on " The Filiation of Ideas," written by him in 1898-99, and left for publication in this volume. Being an intellectual history of himself, it elucidates the natural evolution of the Evolu- tion theory, besides serving as a sketch plan of the Synthetic Philosophy. In itself an exceedingly valuable document, its value is enhanced by the fact that it was his final con- tribution to the theory of evolution.
Mr. Spencer outlived most of his contemporaries and, as a consequence, my opportunities of direct consultation with literary and scientific friends, with whom he was on
Preface ix.
terms of friendship and intimacy, have been few. Even his correspondence with those who pre-deceased him has in several cases disappeared. To those, however, who have kindly placed his letters at my disposal, or given me per- mission to publish their letters to him, or favoured me with personal reminiscences, I have to express my grateful thanks. To my co-trustee, Dr. H. Charlton Bastian, and to Mr. Henry R. Tedder, Secretary and Librarian of the Athenaeum, both of whom have assisted me by reading proofs and by many valuable suggestions, I owe a special debt of gratitude. Mr. Walter Troughton, besides placing at my disposal his intimate knowledge of Mr. Spencer's life from 1889 to 1903, has been good enough to relieve me entirely of correspondence and arrangements connected with the preparation of the illustrations. Though his help has been rendered in great measure out of regard for Mr. Spencer's memory, he has at the same time earned my cordial thanks.
D. DUNCAN.
Office of Mr. Herbert Spencer's Trustees, \V1iitcouib House,
Whitcomb Street, W.C. 9 February, 1908.
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER I. PACE
FAMILY HISTORY AND PARENTAGE i
CHAPTER II. CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH (April, 1820— November, 1837) 7
CHAPTER III.
ENGINEERING (November, 1837 — April, 1841) 22
CHAPTER IV. LITERATURE WOOED, BUT NOT WON (April, 1841 — Dec., 1844)... 33
CHAPTER V. ENGINEERING ONCE MORE (January, 1845 — December, 1848) ... 50
CHAPTER VI. His FIRST BOOK (December, 1848— July, 1853) 57
CHAPTER VII. A NEW PSYCHOLOGY (July, 1853 — December, 1857) 71
CHAPTER VIII.
THE UNIFICATION OF KNOWLEDGE (January, 1858— May, 1860) 85
CHAPTER IX. FIRST PRINCIPLES (May, 1860 — February, 1863) 100
CHAPTER X. BIOLOGY (September, 1862— March, 1867) 108
CHAPTER XI.
SUNSHINE AND SHADOW (December, 1865— July, 1867) 126
xii. Life of Herbert Spencer
CHAPTER XII. «*•
PSYCHOLOGY AND DESCRIPTIVE SOCIOLOGY (July, 1867 — Oct., 1872) 137
CHAPTER XIII. THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY (December, 1869— January, 1874) ... 156
CHAPTER XIV.
DISTASTE FOR HONOURS AND CEREMONIAL (January, 1874 —
December, 1877) 168
CHAPTER XV. THE SECULARIZATION OF MORALS (Jan., 1878 — Oct., 1879) ... 192
CHAPTER XVI. EGYPT AND AMERICA (November, 1879 — December, 1882) ... 204
CHAPTER XVII.
A POLITICAL CREED FOR TRUE LIBERALISM (January, 1883 —
December, 1885) 227
CHAPTER XVIII.
RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION— A SUPPRESSED BOOK (March, 1883—
December, 1885) ... » 251
CHAPTER XIX. THE FACTORS OF ORGANIC EVOLUTION (Jan., 1886— Sept., 1889) 269
CHAPTER XX. IN DEFENCE OF FREEDOM AND JUSTICE (Sept., 1889 — Dec., 1891) 292
CHAPTER XXI.
ALTRUISM AS A FACTOR IN SOCIAL EVOLUTION (January, 1892
—June, 1893) 311
CHAPTER XXII. LATTER DAY CONTROVERSIES (November, 1889— October, 1895) 329
CHAPTER XXIII.
COMPLETING THE SYNTHETIC PHILOSOPHY (June, 1893— Novem- ber, 1896) 353
CHAPTER XXIV. CONGRATULATIONS (November, 1896 — January, 1901) 381
Contents xiii.
CHAPTER XXV. ™GE
REVISION OF BIOLOGY AND FIRST PRINCIPLES (October, 1895
— April, 1900) ... 395
CHAPTER XXVI. INORGANIC EVOLUTION 424
CHAPTER XXVII. His LAST BOOK (July, 1900 — April. 1902) 446
CHAPTER XXVIII. THE CLOSE OF LIFE (April, 1902 — December, 1903) 460
CHAPTER XXIX. CHARACTERISTICS AND PERSONAL REMINISCENCES 489
CHAPTER XXX. SPENCER'S PLACE IN THE HISTORY OF THOUGHT 512
APPENDICES
A "PHYSICAL TRAITS AND SOME SEQUENCES." By Herbert
Spencer ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 537
B. "THE FILIATION OF IDEAS." By Herbert Spencer 533
C. LIST OF HERBERT SPENCER'S WRITINGS 577
D. ACADEMIC AND OTHER HONOURS OFFERED TO HERBERT
SPENCER 588
E. UNPUBLISHED LETTER ON THE NEBULAR HYPOTHESIS ... 590
INDEX
593
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
Portrait, from a photograph taken when he was
73 years of age Frontispiece
27, Exeter Street, Derby, from a photograph by Richard
Keene, Ltd., Derby to face page 7
3 r, Wilmot Street, Derby, from a photograph by Richard
Keene, Ltd., Derby „ „ 9
Portrait, from a sketch taken by Mr. Field Talfourd
when Herbert Spencer was 19 years of age ... „ „ 26
Portrait of Mr. George Holme, from a sketch made by
Herbert Spencer between 1841 and 1844 ... ... „ „ 34
Facsimile of signature in 1842 ... ... ... page 37
Portrait of Mrs. Ordish, from a sketch made by
Herbert Spencer between 1841 and 1844 ... ... to face page 38
Portrait of Mr. Edward Lott, from a sketch made by
Herbert Spencer between 1841 and 1844 ... ... „ ,, 47
Portrait, from a photograph taken when he was writing
the Principles of Psychology in 1855 ... ... ,, ,, 77
Facsimile of proof of page 145 of the second volume
of the Principles of Biology ... ... ... ... ,, ,,123
Portrait, from a photograph taken when he was 46 years
of age ... ... ... ... ,, „ 127
Loch Aline, Argyllshire, from a photograph ,, „ 308
Ardtormsh House, Loch Aline, from a photograph ... ,, „ 309
Portrait, after the painting by Sir Hubert von
Herkomer ... ... ... ... ... ... ,, „ 392
Facsimile of handwriting on his 82nd birthday ^.. ... page 459
The study and bedroom at 5, Percival Terrace,
Brighton, from a photograph by Miss Killick ... to face page 469
Tomb in Highgate Cemetery, trom a photograph by
Mr. T. W. Hill „ page 482
LIFE AND LETTERS
OF
HERBERT SPENCER.
CHAPTER I.
FAMILY HISTORY AND PARENTAGE.
•
TOWARDS the end of the sixteenth century Thomas and Balthazar de Henzu or de Hennezel, with other Huguenots, driven by religious persecution from Lorraine, to which they seem to have migrated from Bohemia, took up their abode near Stourbridge. Other immigrants, apparently also of Bohemian origin and bearing the name afterwards known as Hemus, appeared on the scene about the same time. A century earlier, families of the name of Brettell, connected seemingly with the de Breteuils of Normandy, ;had settled in the same localty.
The neighbourhood of Stourbridge was a favourite resort bf foreign immigrants. Tradition has it that the famous y.lay was discovered in the sixteenth century by wandering
llass-makers from Lorraine, and that the manufacture of
llass, begun about 1556, was introduced by Hungarians.
Ihese traditions are in harmony with the supposition that tlie Henzeys, Hemuses, &c., migrated from Bohemia to
jorraine, and thence to England, taking with them their sldll in the manufacture of glass. They would naturally jbttie in a locality where they could carry on to advantage f.heir native industry, especially if it had the additional /attraction of being the adopted home of other exiles like themselves.
Marriages between families thus brought together would
NOTE. — Autobiography, i., chaps, i., ii., iii.
2 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. I.
be likely to take place. Unions of Brettells and Henzeys are, in fact, recorded in the sixteenth century, and the register of the parish of Oldswinford, within which Stour- bridge has grown up, shows how common these unions were in the two centuries following. One entry is of special interest. In June, 1740, Joseph Bret tell, a farmer of Wordsley, married Elizabeth Hemus. Joseph Brettell and Elizabeth Hemus were Spencer's great-grandparents on the mother's side. To him the chief interest in this genealogy lay in the evidence it furnished of descent from families who had resisted arbitrary authority. The non- conformity of the Brettells, Henzeys, and Hemuses in religious matters remained with them. Besides a daughter, Jane, Joseph and Elizabeth Brettell had two sons, Jeremiah and John, who became well-known Wesleyan ministers. One Joseph Brettell, a relative of Jane Bretteli's, was licensed as a local preacher by John Wesley. A copy of a letter, dated March 25, 1785, shows the founder of Wesleyanism to have been a strict disciplinarian, who took care that his adherents did not interpret non-conformity as liberty to do as they pleased.
You think it your duty to call sinners to repentance. Make full proof hereof and we shall rejoice to own you as a fellow labourer.
Observe. — You are not to ramble up and down, but to go where I direct and there only.
(signed) JOHN WESLEY.
Jane Brettell married John Holmes, a widower, whom Spencer remembered as a broken-down old man, whose "strong sense of responsibility and obligation remained dominant even when his faculties were failing." The verses referred to in the Autobiography (i., 15) as exhibiting "some small power of literary expression," caused John Holmes searchings of heart as to the consistency of verse-making with religious principles. "Some of the expressions, I know, are very lively," he writes to his daughter by way of apology, " though they may be over-looked, as poetry is confined to words." About Mrs. Holmes it may be said that, in judging of her character as portrayed by her grand-
CHAP, i.] Family History and Parentage 3
son one has to bear in mind that his estimate was derived mainly from his father, who was biassed, owing to her long opposition to her daughter's marriage.
The Derbyshire Spencers with whom we are concerned had lived in the parish of Kirk Ireton for centuries. The earliest entry in the parish register is dated 1581, but Spencer's ancestry cannot, with certainty, be traced further back than to about the middle of the seventeenth century, at which time there lived two brothers, Thomas and William Spencer. From Thomas the lineage can be traced to 1762, when Spencer's grandfather, Matthew, was born. The family property at this time consisted of a few houses and two fields. Early in life Matthew Spencer settled in Derby, becoming assistant in St. Peter's parish school. In the Derby Mercury for December, 1790, Mr. Frear, the retiring head of the school, recommends as his successor Matthew Spencer, who had been his assistant for many years. Twelve months later Matthew Spencer advertises a school in the Green Lane, " where he instructs youths in Reading, Writing, Merchants' accounts, Mensuration (with Land Surveying), Algebra, &c. He can accommodate a few young gentlemen at his house. Terms : Entrance fee, £\ is. Board and Education, 13 guineas per annum." On his death in 1831 the Kirk Ireton property passed to his son George, in consideration of his long residence with his father and of his having rendered assistance in the school ; the Green Lane house was left to the youngest son, William.
Matthew Spencer's wife, Catherine Taylor, was the grand parent whom Spencer knew best, she having lived till he was 23 years of age. " She showed," says her grandson, " no marked intellectual superiority. Indeed, I remember my mother expressing her wonder that from her and from my grandfather there should have proceeded a number of sons who, on the whole, were decidedly marked in their abilities." But of the superiority of her moral nature, " the evidences are unquestionable. My own recollections verify the uni- form testimony of her sons that she had all the domestic virtues in high degrees." About the age of nineteen she came under the influence of John Wesley, whom she heard preach in the market-place of Derby amid much insult and
4 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. i.
persecution, and whose company and conversation she had afterwards frequent opportunities of enjoying.
The six children who grew up " formed a fine family in point of physique, all the sons but one ranging from
5 ft. 10 in. to 6 ft., well-looking in feature, and though not as a family very robust, still tolerably well-balanced." They were characterised by individuality almost amounting to eccentricity, by pugnacious tenacity in holding to their opinions, by self-assertiveness, and by disregard for autho- rity. In Henry the family traits were softened by the saving grace of humour ; in John they were intensified by over- weening egotism. Remembrance of the genial nature and kindly ways of the former was one of the motives that, in after life, prompted Spencer's generosity to the children and grandchildren ; whereas the unfavourable impression made on his youthful mind by what he knew and heard about the latter was never entirely effaced. Thomas, the best known of the family, was the uncle whose influence on the nephew was the most marked and abiding. William diverged the least from current opinions, and perhaps on that account made less impression on his nephew intellec- tually ; but the memory of his fine, generous character was cherished by Spencer to the last.
Spencer's father is described as a singularly handsome man. Although his constitution gave way a year or two after his marriage, and ill-health dogged his footsteps for the remainder of his days, he lived to the age of 76. Before he married he had saved enough to purchase several small houses, and to advance money to enable Thomas to go to Cambridge. By 1824, however, sickness and the failure of the lace-machine venture had told on his finances ; whereas Thomas had already entered on a career of moderate prosperity, leading George to say : " Now the scales are turned upon us; you the lender, the borrower I." With intellectual abilities in some respects remarkable there went a singular lack of well-balanced judgment in practical affairs. In some things absurdly economical, he was in others absurdly extravagant. He did not weigh the cost of means against the value of ends. " While always occupied, he was often occupied rather about trivialities than about large things : large things had a tendency to
CHAP, i.] Family History and Parentage 5
paralyze him." He himself confesses this : " I find that I have, and particularly since my illness, a constant propensity to neglect those things of the greatest consequence and am particularly punctual in attending to those of the least." His studies were mainly in science, natural causation being the ruling idea. Of ethical, political, and metaphysical questions, he never made a systematic study. As for literature, books were read less for their subject-matter than as a field for verbal criticism. His composition was appropriate, clear, and pure, though not forcible. Firmness, reaching almost to obstinacy, argumentativeness, disregard of authority, censoriousness — were his in high degree. Excessively conscientious himself, he was prone to be suspicious of others. Writing from Paris to his future wife he gives as a reason for addressing the letter to " H. Holmes" instead of "Miss Holmes," that the gentleman who was to convey the letter would "not be tempted to open it " ! "In public affairs especially, instead of taking some obvious cause for an act, he was habitually seeking for some secret, underhand intention as having prompted it." In dress and social intercourse, as well as in opinions, his independence showed itself. While frank and suave in manner, no man laid less store by the conventions of society. He took an active part in most of the great movements of his day. " His eyes were ever open to any evil to be rectified or good to be done."
In common with his brothers (writes Spencer), he was brought up under strong religious impressions ; and up to the age of 35 he was in the habit of going through the usual religious observances — not. however, domestically. But with the extension of his independent thinking in all directions he gradually became more and more alien in religious opinion from those he was brought up with ; and, giving up the worship of the Wesleyans, attended for a considerable number of years a chapel of the Quakers : not because he agreed with them in their peculiarities, but because it was a course which allowed of free scope to his own views. He had become very much opposed to all forms of priesthood, and among others to that of the Wesleyans ; and I doubt not that the Quakers com- mended themselves to him as not having any order of priests. In later life he separated himself still further from current opinions, ending, indeed, by agreeing in the religious views I
6 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. i.
had set forth. Not, indeed, that he ever distinctly said so ; but observations he made in his last years concerning the current creed implied that he had abandoned it. And this illustrates what was a speciality of his nature shown in an unusual degree ; namely, that he remained plastic in opinion to a very late period in life. Most men, and still more most women, early become fixed. He went on modifying, and continued his modifiability to the last.
Spencer's mother, Harriet Holmes, is described as of medium height, with a spare figure, and, when young, as decidedly good-looking. A journal she kept for. over a year when she was eighteen reveals an amiable character, strong on the moral side. This also comes out in a letter to her parents with reference to their opposition to her engagement with George Spencer : " Whatever it may cost me, it is, and ever has been my firm intention from the first not to act in opposition to your wishes upon the subject; and though we never shall be of one opinion respecting it, yet you may rest quite easy in the assurance that I have quite given up the thought of it." In several respects her character belied the Hussite and Huguenot extraction her son was at some pains to make out. She was always more ready to conform than to dissent. With the intellectual pursuits of her husband or her son she had little sympathy, and being absolutely sincere she could not pretend to an interest she did not feel. Though she cared little for literature, her style was clear and not wanting in felicities of expression. Evenness and sweetness of temper, conscientiousness in the discharge of duties, readiness to sacrifice herself for others, were life- long characteristics. In her journal, chapel news and preachers bulk largely. One of the entries would have held good for every Sunday in her grown up life : " I should not like to miss going to chapel, it would not seem at all like Sunday." Although her husband was not want- ing in tender solicitude for her, the advent of ill-health and straightened means tended to cloud their domestic happiness. The manifestations of affection were often obscured — on her side by want of sympathy with his intel- lectual pursuits, on his side by an exacting and censorious attitude.
No. 27 EXETER STREET, DERBY.
CHAPTER II.
CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH. (April, 1820— November, 1837.)
THE house in which George Spencer and his wife began their married life, and in which their son first saw the light on April 27, 1820, was 12, Exeter Row, now 27, Exeter Street, the fourth entry from the Exeter Arms. In the baptism and naming of the child his father was not a man to be led by custom. Yet he was alive to the bearing of his non-conforming attitude on the future of his son. When it was suggested by his brother Thomas that the baptism should take place in church, as it might be of importance to the boy hereafter to be in the Parish Register, he wrote : " I almost feel inclined to ask S — [the incum- bent of St. Peter's Church] if it would be allowed to register the birth of a child in the Parish Register, without having him baptized. And so to have him baptized at the chapel." The ceremony was performed on June 19 by John Kershaw, birth and baptism being registered at the Methodist Register Office, 66, Paternoster Row, London, on July i. The name "Herbert" had been suggested by lines written in a churchyard of Richmond, in Yorkshire, by Herbert Knowles, forming the conclusion of an article on "Cemeteries and Catacombs in Paris," in the Quarterly Review for April, 1819.
Of the early years of the boy's life little is known ; but one may infer that they were lacking in positive enjoy- ments. His parents were in ill-health and full of anxiety, nor was he himself robust. He was, moreover, without the companionship of brothers and sisters. For though four brothers and four sisters succeeded him, none of
NOTE — Autobiography, i., chaps, iv., v., vi., vii., viii.
8 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. n.
them lived more than a few days, except a sister, Louisa, a year younger than himself, who died at the age of 2 years and 9 months.1 How depressing the boy's sur- roundings were may be gathered from his father's letters.
This appears an important crisis in my life (he writes to his brother in 1823). I shall either from this time be tolerably comfortable in my circumstances and health, or else I shall soon be reduced by ill-health to a state of wretchedness bordering on insanity.
January, 1824. — I am still more convinced than ever that I shall never continue healthy with my present employment — the stooping, the confinement, the sameness, the trial of temper and patience that it constantly affords, have a bad effect. . . . Our children were well when we got home. Harriet appears much more happy now that I am better. She is very kind — too kind — and I don't sufficiently return it — it appears to be my temper to expect too much.
The choice of a new occupation, important as a means of livelihood, was even more important as giving him some- thing to think about other than his troubles. Among the employments suggested were land-surveying, tanning, and an agency in the South of France. Mrs. Mozley urged him to enter the Church. " She thinks I am the most adapted to that of anything." But what he was most inclined to was lace manufacture, for which there was at that time a mania, and which had the further attraction of calling his inven- tiveness into play. When in London in 1823 inspecting patents, he wrote to his wife : " I shall examine particularly whether there is any machine of the kind you and I are about to invent." What came of this invention does not appear ; but in the spring of next year he tells Thomas that he and the other brothers had purchased a machine. " At present we have it in contemplation to convert the schoolroom into a shop for lace frames and learn to work the frames ourselves. ... I do not intend to teach any more if I can obtain a living in any other way. . . .
1 In the Autobiography (i., 64, note t) he says there were five other children. This is a mistake. Five were born after Louisa's death and two while she was alive.
No. *i WILMOT STREET, DERBY.
1820-37] Childhood and Youth 9
I have several plans in my head that you may possibly think are visionary, but it is one way I take to keep up my spirits under my heavy trials."
This venture proving a failure, the family moved about the middle of 1824 to Nottingham, mainly on account of its advantages as a centre for the lace industry. Commercially the move was not a success ; but in other respects it was beneficial. His own health, as well as that of his wife, improved, and with better health his spirits rose. How it fared with their son the few letters that exist help one little to understand, but the passing references are such as to rouse one's sympathies for the fair-haired, lonely child. Nevertheless, he enjoyed more of a country life than he could have had in Derby, wandering, for the most part by himself, over the neighbouring common.1 Not being pressed by lessons, he was behind children of his age in book knowledge. At seven his writing and drawing are referred to approvingly by others as well as by his father, who kept his first drawing book, consisting "of drawings of his own choice and chiefly of his own imagination." But nowhere is there the smallest word of praise of his reading.
Early in 1827 the family returned to Derby, settling in the house No. 8 (afterwards 17, now 31) Wilmot Street. His father resumed teaching. For some three years Herbert attended Mr. Mather's school, afterwards going to one kept by his uncle William. Tangible evidences of his attain- ments are (i) a copybook written in 1828, of which a teacher, whose opinion was invited by the present writer, says, " we can get nothing like it even from boys several years older" ; (2) two books — Hymns for Infant Minds and Watts' Divine and Moral Songs. At the end of each hymn is written the date in 1828 or 1829 when it was committed to memory. From the number thus dated one may infer that his memory was not below the average. The tendency to set authority at nought was more than usually strong : the fitful nature of his father's discipline and the gentleness of his mother's sway exerting no efficient check on his self-will. Out of
'One of his memoranda says: "Spread Eagle, Aspley Terrace, Alfreton Road, Nottingham — the house (now changed into an inn) where we lived in mv childhood."
io Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. n.
doors he was allowed to follow his bent — a liberty which on one occasion would have cost him his life but for the presence of mind and courage of George Holme, then a lad some years his senior. Fishing was already a favourite pursuit, the Derwent as it flowed through the town being easy of access. One day, when fishing from the roadway that crossed the stream near the canal and weir, he lost his balance, fell into the stream just where the water rushed out with considerable force from beneath the roadway, and was carried rapidly down. Hearing a shout among the bystanders, George Holme, who was on the other side, looked up and saw a boy being swiftly carried away. Instantly he ran along the right bank, throwing off his jacket as he ran, plunged into the stream and swam across to intercept the struggling boy, whom he seized and with difficulty brought safely to the bank. Thus began an acquaintanceship which in due course ripened into a warm and life-long friendship. On a specially bound copy of his works presented to Mr. Holme in 1893 one may read on the fly-leaf of the first volume the grateful inscription :—
FROM
HERBERT SPENCER
TO HIS OLD FRIEND
GEORGE HOLME
WITHOUT WHOSE COURAGEOUS AID RENDERED IN BOYHOOD
NEITHER THIS WORK
NOR ANY OF THE ACCOMPANYING WORKS WOULD EVER HAVE EXISTED.
For the years from seven to thirteen one is dependent mainly on the Autobiography and on memoranda by his father. Written late in life, the father's reminiscences could not fail to reflect in some measure the consciousness of the eminence the son had attained to, and Spencer's own recollections could not but be coloured by interpretations derived from subsequent experience. Little progress was made in routine school lessons, yet he acquired an un- usual amount of miscellaneous information. When barely eleven he attended Dr. Spurzheim's lectures on Phreno- logy. Before thirteen he assisted his father in preparing experiments in physics and chemistry for teaching purposes.
1820-37] Childhood and Youth 11
With insect and plant life he had an acquaintance far in advance of other boys, and was skilled in sketching from Nature. Works of fiction were perused with zest. Left much to himself, the tendency to dwell with his own thoughts was strengthened. On the intellectual side one of the chief results of his father's training was the habit it fostered of ever seeking an explanation of phenomena, instead of relying on authority — of regarding everything as naturally caused, and not as the result of supernatural agency. On the moral side its weakest feature was the encouragement it gave to the inherent tendency of a head- strong boy to set authority at defiance. When taking account of the formative agencies that shaped the boy's character one must bear in mind that he shared little in games with those of his own age, so that the influences which the young are usually subjected to by association with one another were in his case comparatively slight. He was much with grown-up people, most of them of marked individuality. From his reminiscences of his grandparents one may infer that, with one exception, they excited in him a feeling of awe, such as would be a barrier to close and affectionate intercourse. His grandfather Spencer was a " melancholy-looking old man." " I never saw him laugh." In an ordinary boy, the impression produced by the failing faculties or oddities of aged relatives is counteracted by the buoyant, objective spirits of youth. In the case of a thoughtful boy, living mostly with grown-up people, listen- ing to and taking part in their serious conversation, it is different. As regards the influence, both moral and intel- lectual, of his uncles and his father, it is hardly possible to overestimate it. Towards current opinions their attitude was invariably critical, their conclusions being reached by reference to underlying principles, not to authority. Rarely were their discussions enlivened by lighter touches of wit or humour. Terribly in earnest, they did not debate for debating's sake or for victory. Literature, history, and fine art concerned them less than scientific, religious, and social questions, which were discussed in the boy's hearing from day to day. Thus early were sown the seeds of that interest in social, political, and religious topics which he retained to the la«t.
1 2 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. n.
Meanwhile, his education in the scholastic sense was daily becoming a more pressing matter. He was now thirteen ; independent and self-willed ; with a decided predilection for certain subjects not included in the school curriculum of those days, and a still more decided aversion to certain other subjects then deemed important for every boy to know ; fonder of things than words ; more inclined to think for himself than to acquaint himself with the thoughts of others. How to deal with such a boy was calculated to rouse serious reflections in the father and the uncles. As Huxley said on reading the account of Spencer's boyhood and youth in the Autobiography: "Men of that force of character, if they had been less wise and less self-restrained, would have played the deuce with the abnormal chicken hatched among them."1
A letter from the parsonage of Hinton Charterhouse suggested a way out of the difficulty. Rev. Thomas Spencer and his wife had " several times wished to have one of our little nephews with us, and as we know you cannot spare Herbert, who is a great help to his mother and a comfort to you both, I have considered little Henry the next one we would like to fix upon." Herbert's parents at once proposed to send him, they taking Henry — ua nice arrangement for all parties " it was thought. The " nice arrangement" was soon to be disturbed. Nothing had been said about it to Herbert, who accompanied his parents on what he thought was a pleasant holiday. A few days after his arrival his uncle set him to learn Euclid. That was bad enough. But when, about a month later, he was told that he was not to return home with his parents, his feelings were very bitter. Accustomed as he had been to take part in the discussion of family affairs, here was a matter in which he had the best right to take part, settled two months ago without his knowledge ! Distaste for study and dislike to restraint, both pretty strong feelings, had a powerful ally in this sense of unfair treatment. The consequences were soon to appear. Early one morning, within two weeks of his parents' return, without a hint of his intention, he left the house and set out for Derby. Of his adventures on that
1 Life of Professor Huxley, ii., 146 ; Autobiography, i., 78-90.
1820-37] Childhood and Youth 13
and the two following days — graphically depicted by him- self in the Autobiography (i., 95-7) — many will share the opinion expressed by Mr. Francis Galton : " Great as is the wonder and admiration excited by your later achieve- ments, they hardly exceed that I felt at the account of the thirteen-year-old boy, when heart sick and starving, walking 48 miles on one day, 47 on the next, and the balance of the distance to be travelled on the third. It is marvellous."
No attempt was made by uncle or aunt to overtake the run-away — a neglect explained though not justified by the indignation felt at the insult he had heaped upon them. His mother was "ashamed and mortified at Herbert's mis- conduct," and his father passed " the whole of the night without sleep, ruminating on the character and prospects of my untoward son." Both tried to enlist the sympathies of the uncle and aunt on behalf of the boy, who " seemed almost distracted."
I asked him (wrote his father), how he could act so un- kindly to you. ... He replied " I know it is very wrong, but I felt as I could not help it " ; or else, " all the way that I was coming, I kept on crying and thinking what would become of me." " I am sure," says he, with much ' emphasis, u I don't know what will become of me. ... I know my uncle and aunt wish me well and I should have many advantages in my learning if I had stopped. But everything is so different. I can't bear it, and if you will but let me stop at home I mean to work harder than I ever did before." "But," said I, "you know your uncle understands Latin much better than I do, and that is very .desirable for you." " Aye, it was the Latin that made me think so of home, for I thought I should never be able to bear staying in my bedroom by myself all the winter studying my Latin Grammar. It was different with my Geometry, I was beginning to be very fond of Euclid. . . . Everything is so different, I never knew what home was till now, and if you will only try me I'll be a very different boy from what I was before I went."
Within a fortnight he was again at Hinton. " His manner ever since his arrival," his uncle wrote, " has been particularly pleasing. There is a quietness about him and an evident desire to be satisfied." About Latin he tells his father : " You will perhaps be surprised when I tell you that I begin to like it better." French was taken up with
14 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. n.
the New Year, and Greek in March. That he had no aptitude for the classics, but studied them from a sense of duty, is shown by a letter to his uncle during a visit home in the autumn. " As I now see that the dead languages are so useful in almost every science, I have made a determination to conquer them if possible." Notwithstand- ing this determination, the task was eventually given up as hopeless.
The importance of a correct, clear, and forcible style was frequently touched upon in letters from his father. Yet it is surprising how little stress was laid by either father or uncle on general reading. His letters, though not unfre- quently marred by mis-spelling, faulty grammar, and hasty composition, are, nevertheless, in both matter and form, remarkable productions for a boy of from thirteen to sixteen. "You said in your last letter you would have .sent me a list of the words I spelt wrong, only that you thought it would be unwelcome ; do not think so, as I am very desirous of improving in my spelling." Not that his father was remiss in fault-finding, for he was a constant and unsparing critic. Shortly after the run-away adventure, Algebra had been taken up with zest. Presently his uncle wrote : " His talents for Mathematics, I should say, are of a very high order." For Trigonometry he expressed " delight," " for that is my feeling towards it." The sixth book of Euclid he did not like so well as the first four books, " because I do not think the demonstrations are so palpable as in those books." As for arithmetic " I am principally deficient in the rudimental parts; and as it will be a great inconvenience to me if ever I become a teacher to be deficient in those parts, I intend to practise these when 1 have convenient opportunities." Under his father's guidance he began Perspective, and " was much surprised to find that the principle was so very simple, and the only difficulty that I have yet had is in the application of this principle, which requires to be different in almost every problem, which will be a very good thing to rouse the powers of invention, which in me are rather dormant." Early in May, 1835, he had said : " I am able to do problems much better than equations for two reasons : first, because I take a greater interest in problems as being
1820-37] Childhood and Youth 15
something that requires ingenuity and not merely mechanical exertion of the mind ; and secondly, because in problems there are seldom such complicated equations as those that are given as equations."
"Be sure to place the art of sketching from nature first " was his father's repeated advice. In 1834 he made a sketch of his uncle's house, in which he thought he had " suc- ceeded pretty well." A year later he sent home a plan of the parsonage and grounds, " as I think it may be pleasing to my grandmother and amusing to Henry [whom he was wont to call 'the usurper' for having taken his place], and perhaps improving to myself."
From home he wrote to his uncle in the autumn of 1835 :
Since I wrote you I have been chiefly studying chemistry. ... I found the subject of crystallization very interesting indeed. Since I have been at home I have had many inter- esting discussions with my father on natural and moral philosophy. On one occasion I asked him his opinion on that subject which we were discussing one day at Hinton, I mean the theory of friction in some instances being caused by attraction.
The time not given up to mental improvement was occupied by pursuits, few of which could be called recre- ations. Though not insensible to its value, his uncle's view of life was too serious to leave much room for play as now understood. The future preacher of the gospel of relaxation was brought up to seek relaxation in doing something useful. And, indeed, he was always ready to work in the garden or in the house. In painting the gates his " everyday clothes were so soiled that my uncle has purchased me another pair, the jacket and waistcoat of which are of middling priced blue cloth and the trousers of corduroy." Here was a chance for his father. "There was an expression in your letter 'a pair of clothes ' we thought remarkable. What should it have been ? " With the house- hold he identified himself. Certain alterations in the house " we >: found to be great improvements. " We have been very busy buying and distributing the clothes for the clothing club, so that I have hardly any time to myself." Opportunities for fishing or riding were seldom missed.
1 6 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. n.
" I have been learning to skait, and although I have not skaitecl more than seven hours I have made great progress and shall soon he able to skait well ; indeed, my uncle says I ought to do so as you were so good a skaiter." His uncle bought him a pair of quoits. "But I hope it will be, as I feel it ought to be, my great aim to sacrifice the pleasure of playing with them when I can be of any use to you."
His temperament brought him into frequent collision with those about him. His deep-seated disregard of au- thority was held in check by the strong rule of his uncle, who wrote towards the close of 1833: "His conduct the last few months is quite changed from what it was formerly ; he is quite tractable, and I have scarcely seen an instance of bad temper showing itself for a long time." Again : " My authority over him is great and I am quite satisfied with his obedience to me, but I fear he would not submit himself in like manner to any other person." During his uncle's frequent absences from home he was apt to become " very unmanagable." Just before he left Hinton his uncle wrote: "There is a more becoming deference to the opinions of others. ... A residence with his mother will soon bring back the self-will which marked his character so strongly when he came here. . . . He must part with some of his confidence in his own judgment."
Confidence in his own judgment — the other side of his disregard for authority — was apt to show itself in a dicta- torial tone towards other young people ; not accompanied, however, by any desire to tyrannize over them. Had he been sent to a large school, this feature would have been toned down ; the application of a wider standard to his own achievements would have diminished his super- abundant self-confidence. Satisfaction with himself is shown in the early stages of almost every new acquirement. He prided himself on his rapidly acquired proficiency in skating. As for chess, " I am become so skilful as to sometimes beat my uncle with an equal number of pieces." " I have now become acquainted with all the etiquette of dinner parties, having been at five or six large ones since I came here." Soon after taking up Trigonometry he wrote : " I believe I am now thoroughly master of it, and
1820-37] Childhood and Youth 17
I could do any question in it." He needed his father's reminder : " Your faults arise from too high an opinion of your own attainments." This self-confidence was the natural accompaniment of a powerful intellect working freely. When a mind of remarkable originality is set to acquire knowledge at fixed times and in accordance with prescribed methods, not only is the result often meagre and the exercise distasteful, but confidence in itself is liable to be shaken. And, indeed, now and again we do meet with a diffidence contrasting strangely with his wonted complacency.
I have been very much concerned lately at finding myself so liable to forget what I have learned, and have often tried to account for it, but have never been able. My father says it is because I do not sufficiently live in the subject, as he expresses it ; that is, that I do not continually employ my mind in think- ing upon what I have learnt ; and I begin to think that he is right.
Again : I intend to apply to my studies with greater vigour than I have yet done, and I hope my resolution will not fail me. I think that a great obstacle to my getting on fast is a want of a certain degree of energy in pursuing my studies, and I hope that when I have overcome my repugnance to hard study I shall be able to become in most respects what you and my father desire.
And in 1836 : I have not yet been able to overcome that feeling that I was mentioning in my last letter of an inability to apply myself diligently to any subject ; I do not seem to have strength of mind enough to overcome my idle inclinations, and I begin to be fearful that I shall forget a great part of what I have learned.
To this want of energy he often recurs, confessing him- self "at a loss to account for it." His good intentions are quaintly expressed in some of his letters during 1833 and 1834, in which he subscribes himself "Your intended obedient son," or "Your affectionate and improving son." Too much both morally and intellectually was expected of a boy of from thirteen to sixteen, and too little account was taken of his striking individuality, but for which he could not have held his own against the superabundance of exhortation and advice to which, in season and out of season, he was subjected.
1 8 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. n.
Writing about his own father Sir Leslie Stephen says1 : " My father's fine taste and his sensitive nature made him tremblingly alive to one risk. He shrunk from giving us any inducement to lay bare our own religious emotions. To him and to our mother the needless revelation of the deeper feelings seemed to be a kind of spiritual indelicacy." Not so Herbert Spencer's father. To earnest entreaties that he would lay bare his innermost feelings, Herbert was far from being responsive; but in one letter (October, 1833) he expresses gratitude for his father's solicitude. " I can only attribute it to his sincere desire for my welfare, of which I am convinced from the good advice given, and hope with the help of the Almighty to follow it." Such a response went to his mother's heart. His father wished to know "the reigning principle" that caused him to behave well during his uncle's absence at Christmas, of the same year. " I hope you will examine yourself closely and tell me without reserve what the motive was." Herbert's reply is not forthcoming, but in a letter from his father mention is made of it and of the pleasure it gave to his sick mother. In February, 1835, after insisting on "the great necessity of examining the nature and state of your own mind," his father appears to lose patience with his son's reticence. " Talk to me upon these subjects, either say that you can or you can not understand what I mean." To this he replies :
You ask me whether I can understand the feelings of returning life and apply them to my own case which you mention. I can, and I see that it applies very well to my case ; but, however, I must conclude, as I have not much more time, and I will tell you more about my feelings in my next.
P.S. — Send me word how you like Dash, and whether you perceive the faculties in him that you expected.
His " next," (at any rate the next letter that has been preserved) not having given the promised account of his "feelings," his father expresses dissatisfaction. "I don't think so well of your letter-writing as I did. I hope in your next you will answer all the questions that you are behind.
1 Life of Sir James Fitz- James Stephen, p. 62.
1820-37] Childhood and Youth 19
You have now had abundance of time." His reluctance to unbosom himself on religious matters was not due to lack of affection for and confidence in his parents. Except religion, which few boys care to expatiate upon, there was no subject which he did not write about in the frankest manner. In the sayings and doings of his parents he ever took a lively interest. " I was very much pleased," he wrote to his father, " when I received your letter, and still more so when I read the news it contained, and I am very anxious to hear whether this little sister of mine is still alive and is likely to continue with us, and also to know how my mother is going on." When the baby died he expressed his sorrow, both on his parents' account and on his own. " I should be much delighted to have had a little sister to amuse when I came home. "
Towards the end of 1835 he made his earliest attempt to write for the press. His description of his feelings on first seeing himself in print may be compared with what he wrote sixty years later on completing the Synthetic Philosophy.1
To HIS FATHER.
January, 1836.
But now for the subject that has been so much engrossing my mind of late ; you must know that what with my uncle writing his pamphlet, and articles in the newspapers, &c., &c., I began to think of trying my hand at writing something. Just
at this juncture a new magazine2 was started After
some consideration I sent an article on those little boats which we discovered when I was trying to crystallize salt. I did not tell this to my uncle and aunt for fear that my article would not appear in the magazine, but now it is published, and after a little search as soon as I could get hold of the magazine, I found my article looking very pretty. You may imagine my delight when I first saw it. I began shouting and capering about the room until my uncle and aunt did not know what was amiss ; but they were very much surprised and pleased when I showed
them my article And now that I have started I intend
to go on writing things for this magazine now and then, and in the next number will be my second attempt. In this same number that mine was in there was a very ignorant and pre-
1 Principles of Sociology, iii., preface dated August, 1896.
1 The Bath and West of England Magazine, started in January, 1836,
2O Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. n.
judiced article on the Poor Laws, which I intend to reply to. I suppose I shall be getting quite proud very soon ; indeed upon reading the above over I find that it savours a good deal of it, but I must try to strive against it as well as I can.
In his letter on the Poor Laws, which appeared in the March number, he says of the " very ignorant and pre- judiced article " :
There are many assertions without a proof ; these I pass over ; but there are also assertions directly opposed to the truth of Scripture, and to these I shall briefly allude. . . . The whole system of Man's responsibility, and of his future reward or punishment, depending upon his being " diligent in business, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord," seems completely set aside by your reasoning.
He was getting anxious to return home and had written about it in a way his father did not like, as being dis- courteous to his uncle. " 1 think you must have misunder- stood my letter and have thought that I meant more than I did ; all I did mean in what I had written was that as I should have my time more at my own disposal, it would be better for me to be at home. I own that in some parts I said stronger things than I ought to have done, and that on the whole I made the thing appear more than it really was, and I am very sorry for it."
Reaching home about the middle of 1836, he lost no time in settling down to regular study, mainly in arithmetic, hand-writing, and composition. He was now between sixteen and seventeen, and the choice of a profession was becoming a matter of urgency. This had often been talked about during the preceding three years. As early as March, 1834, he had written to his father : " Aunt has been thinking that the medical profession would suit me as well as any- thing, and as to myself, either that or following in your steps would be what I should prefer. . . . Send me your opinion, which would be the best of the two, in your next letter." His uncle William strongly favoured teaching. His father's reply showed the characteristic want of decision when face to face with an important practical question. " After all it is a subject that more immediately concerns yourself than any one else. ... It is a difficult ques-
i82O-3/J Childhood and Youth 21
tion, and one which should not hastily be answered." It was not hastily answered — remained, in fact, unanswered when he left Hinton for good. Shortly after he went home a friend suggested engineering, about which he wrote to his father, then absent on holiday : " I had not thought of it before, but since I have thought of it [I] think it would be a very eligible profession for me . . . since it is just the kind of thing for which my past studies have fitted me." He had to wait sixteen months before the opportunity arose for giving effect to the suggestion. Meanwhile, in accordance with his father's wishes, he assisted in his uncle William's school, and afterwards in that of Mr. Mather. In the Autobiography (i., 122-4) ne discusses the probability of success or of failure had he taken to teaching. From the fact that he heads the chapter " A False Start " it may be gathered that he did not think success very probable.
22
CHAPTER III.
ENGINEERING.
(November \$37— April 1841.)
SPENCER had not been long on the staff of the London and Birmingham Railway, which he joined in November, 1837, before he showed that he was not to be an un- thinking follower of routine. "An improvement in the colouring of the drawings of cast-iron," is mentioned in an early letter home. Within a few months he was put in charge of the approaches to the Harrow Road bridge, with about eighty men under him. It is interesting to note how, after experience in the measurement of brickwork at this bridge, the future opponent of the metric system resolved " to have a foot-rule made divided into decimals instead of into inches." "I am trying to bring decimal arithmetic into use as much as possible." What spare time he had was not idled away. " I always find myself much more comfortable and my head much clearer when I have spent part of the day in studying mathematics, so that I have made it an invariable rule lately to employ part of my time each day in that way."
His ability and conscientiousness, joined to the long- standing friendship between the Fox and Spencer families, stood him in good stead when the construction staff came to be reduced. He was offered an appointment on the Gloucester and Birmingham Railway. "The advantages of my new situation would be increased salary, great chance of promotion, having a good master to serve, and, to crown all, Mr. Fox says, if I do not like it I may come back to him. I want to have your opinion and advice about it ; write as soon as possible." As usual, his father shirked the responsibility on the plea of being busy, leaving his uncle
NOTE. — Autobiography, i., chaps, ix., x., xi. xii.
1 8 3 7 - 4 x ] Enginee ring 2 3
William to send a reply, which was in favour of acceptance. When he entered upon his duties at Worcester in September, 1838, he was exercised about the wisdom of the step he had taken. " Do I stand the best chance with a downright clever man like Mr. Fox or with one more in the common way, as I understand Captain Moorsom to be ? " Though annoyed to find " that, if there is much work to be done in a short time, we are obliged to remain till late in the evening," yet " the more I see of engineering the more I like it ; no other profession would have suited me so well." His old drawings seemed "very rubbishing things now : I should be quite ashamed to show them as my drawings." " I believe I am considered the neatest draughtsman in the staff, though perhaps not the quickest." " We have had a controversy in the office of which I was the origin, about the proper form of a shadow," in a given case. Con- troversies were likely to arise among officers one of whom was so intellectually keen, so wanting in reticence, and so argumentative as Spencer. Mr. Mosse, perhaps in 1904 the only survivor of those who served with him at Worcester, writes to me : " For some eighteen months I worked with him .at the same table. . . . Spencer's office comrades found him an agreeable man, though we thought him a little bumptious, and we chaffed him somewhat on his forthcoming book." The world presented too many serious questions to his active mind to allow of interest being taken in the frivolities of his brother officers. Dis- cussions with his father were among his greatest pleasures, full advantage being taken of every opportunity. As if in revenge for the way he had been badgered in the Hinton days, he again and again calls his father to account for not answering his questions. His letters home were full of reflections on the problems of scientific, professional, or human interest that occupied his thoughts. " I do not know what my mother will say to such a mathematical letter as this," was a remark he might have made regarding more letters than one.
To His FATHER.
19 January, 1839.
I have found out the grand principle of the projection of shadows. I feel almost certain of its correctness. To
24 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. in.
make myself still more satisfied I have made a model in paste- board and I find that the real shadow is as exactly as possible what I had made it by projection.
18 November, 1839. — The last drawing I have made was one for a double swing bridge of about 50 feet span from centre to centre of turnplate. . . . You may imagine that I had some difficulty in constructing it in such a manner that the two sides should remain in equilibrium on their centres ; I discovered, however, a very simple and satisfactory mode of doing it which I will explain to you at Christmas. I am just about to com- mence another drawbridge, which is to be upon the lifting instead of the swinging plan.
4 March, 1840. — I am going on swimmingly with this affair of the Worcester bridge ; some time after I had finished the rough drawing from the measurements I took, I received Captain Moorsom's directions to get out drawings after a certain design of his own. I, not exactly liking this plan of his and thinking that a much stronger and more economical might be adopted, was so bold as to write to him and propose a plan of my own. I rather expected that he might be angry at my being so impertinent, but, however, he took it very kindly and seems almost to prefer my plan to his own ; at any rate he has desired me to get out drawings for both plans and leave it to be subsequently decided which is to be adopted.
Captain Moorsom had asked his opinion on a design for protecting the retaining wall of the old castle of Shrewsbury. This " I pretty much approved of, not seeing any better method with the same outlay of money. This evening, however, I was strolling along the banks of the Teme, making sundry observations on the effects of the stream under various circumstances, and, noting all the phenomena with the eye of an engineer, it struck me in connection with some of the results I then came to that a more efficient and I believe a more economical plan might be adopted in the case of Shrewsbury." Captain Moorsom, however, liked his own plan better and set Spencer to write a specification for it. " This was the first thing of the kind I had ever done, and I had no data to go by, so that I was left entirely to my own resources (just what 1 like)."
Towards official superiors, not less than towards fellow- officers, his critical attitude exhibited itself. Their pro- fessional ability " elicits but little praise from me or from
1 8 3 7 - 4 i ] Engineering 2 5
any one who is behind the scenes." On more than one occasion he mentions what he sarcastically calls, "a pretty bit of engineering," due, as he points out, to miscalculation or to ignorance of physical principles. His scrupulous conscientiousness made it impossible for him to take things easily. On being sent to complete sundry works that had been left undone, he tells his father : " I do not expect to have a very pleasant time of it ; taking up other people's jobs is not the pleasantest thing in the world. I hear that there is a great deal to do, and if I find that there is more than I can manage or that the confusion makes me over- anxious (as I think it very likely will) I shall give it up." His anxiety in connection with the rebuilding of the bridge carrying the railway over the river Avon at Defford gave rise to the nickname " Defford " being given him by his brother officers.
" My inventive faculties " he tells his father in May, 1840, " are considerably on the increase. I have two very nice little contrivances to explain to you." One of these was called the " Velocimeter," the other the "Dynamometer" — the former for measuring the velocity and the latter for measuring the tractive force of an engine. In November he writes: " I have just invented another little instrument. ... It is another application of that grand principle of similar triangles which I seem to be rather felicitous in making use of. The object is to reduce any quantities of one denomination to the equivalent values in another."1 Another matter to which his inventive powers were directed was an application of electro-magnetism his father had thought of. In May, 1840,116 writes: "If I have not a prospect of a good berth when my present engagement expires, I think it would be worth while to set about it in earnest." In sacrificing railway engineering fcr this he was of opinion that there was " very little to lose, and a great prospect of a great gain." Early in 1841 he busied himself with the apparatus for the experiment, his father urging secrecy.
For Art he had 'little time, but in October, 1840, he \vrites : " Do you know that I have been attempting to take
1 Autobiography, i., Appendix D, p. 525.
26 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. in.
profiles lately, and with much greater success than I expected." Again: "You may laugh at my taking pro- files, but I can assure you that I have had considerable success."
Writing for the press was" in abeyance. Soon after joining Mr. Fox's office, to an enquiry from his father whether he had sent anything to the Mechanic's Magazine he replied : " I have had my attention so much drawn off by other things that I had never thought of it until you mentioned it in your letter. Since then I have turned the thing over in my mind, and I think, with your approval I shall send an account of a little discovery I have made since I have been in London." The account of the " little discovery" was not sent, however; and, indeed, by 1840 he had come to think the pages of the Mechanic's Magazine hardly suitable for the contributions of a promising young engineer. " I do not half like the Mechanic's Magazine ; for although it may contain some good things it has also the universal character of publishing a considerable portion of trash, which practically deducts from the credit of the sensible articles.'' Besides an article on " Skew Arches " in the Civil Engineer and Architect's Journal for May, 1839, there was one on a "Geometrical Theorem," in the same journal for July, 1840.
His health, although occupying more of his thoughts than is usual with young men, was, on the whole, satis- factory. The interaction of body and mind is already a frequent topic. Thus, after a spell of hard work : "The effect of the over-exertion showed itself in depression of spirits and a constant feeling of dissatisfaction with myself, and a more than usual repetition of the fear (which I have occasionally felt tor the last four or five years) that my mind was not so vigorous and acute, nor my memory so retentive as it once was." Early in 1840 he is convinced that increase in weight "is the cause of my having been so stupid for the last half year."
This self-depreciation is difficult to reconcile with the self-confidence he usually showed. His Dynamometer "would leave Dr. Lardner and his experiments quite in the back ground." " I don't know what Carr's is, but 1 can back mine for accuracy and convenience." Of his essay
,\
H.S. when 19.
1 8 3 7 -4 1 ] Engineering 2 7
on the setting out of curves, read to the Engineers' Club, he flattered himself that " it was one of the most complete papers that has been read since the institution has been originated."1 Again: "I believe that had I a little more knowledge of the general routine of business, I should be able to manage the resident engineership quite as efficiently as is done in either of the divisions of this line."
To HIS FATHER.
11 March, 1839.
Do you know I have lately observed that in many of those things in which you always said I was deficient I am rather superior to others ; for instance, you always thought I explained my ideas badly, but whenever any in the office want to have anything made clear to them they come to me because they say they can understand me best.
15 April, 1840. — Notwithstanding I am progressing on the whole pretty prosperously, I do not feel entirely satisfied with myself. I know that I might have made better use of my time in the way of study and that there have been many opportunities of improvement or of gaining information that I have let slip ; and the worst part of it is that this feeling of dissatisfaction that I allude to does not seem to produce any beneficial effect.
18 January, 1841. — How often I wish now that I had made more diligent use of my former opportunities of acquiring infor- mation. Comparatively little is to be done after once entering into active life. The fatigue of body and mind and want of energy generally unfit for study even [in] the leisure moments. It is a great pity that a just estimate of the value of knowledge is only made after the means of gaining it are lost. I have about come to the conclusion that it is better that studies should be completed before entering the world, and let such entrance be made later, rather than leave much to be learned afterwards.
5 April, 1841. — My mind has been for some time past in a torpid condition, and I am looking forward to the time when I shall shake off the feeling by a vigorous course of study.
This self-depreciation does not reflect the estimate in which he was held by those with whom he worked. Cap- tain Moorsom's opinion was given in a letter to his father,
1 Compare Autobiography, i., 153.
28 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. in.
dated 3ist May, 1840, across a copy of which Spencer has pencilled : " I have sought in vain for the original of this letter among my father's papers."1
Your son Herbert has .... been well brought up, which which he owes, I presume, to you, and he seems likely to make proper use of the advantage and to carry it on by carefully improving himself as he proceeds in life. He has a quick but clear and decided way of grappling with his subject so as to get the precise points carefully, and then he does not lack ability or energy to carry this subject out to its result. . . . I trust you will write to him to keep him in mind that all these matters are but secondary to the great object here, namely the provision for an endless life. . . . Herbert's domestic and gentlemanly habits appear to remove him from many temp- tations, and I hope the temptation of a mind trusting on its own strength will not be allowed to assail him.
In his father's letters during this period religious exhorta- tion does not bulk so largely as during the Hinton period. Ready to discuss religion as a general question, Spencer continued to be proof against appeals to write about his own spiritual condition. And while there is no lack of evidence that he was inspired by a high moral ideal and endeavoured to realise the serious purport of life, there is nothing to indicate that he looked to any of the creeds for his moral standard, or to the religious emotions for the moral sanction. During his first year at Worcester he also eschewed political discussion, partly because it interfered with his work and partly because he was " quite satisfied that whatever temporary stoppages there may be in the progress of Reform, we shall continually advance towards a better state." That there were natural processes of rectifi- cation in society, was already an idea familiar to him. When, at about the age of twenty, he did take up religion and politics, his treatment of them was marked by the same disregard of convention and the same desire to get at fundamental principles as was his treatment of scientific and professional matters. His opinions are to be gathered only indirectly — from letters written by his friends, in reply to letters of his. \vhich, unfortunately, were not preserved.
Autobiography, i., 162.
I -8 3 7 - 4 i ] Engineering 1 9
His views about an over-ruling Providence may be inferred
from the letter from Miss printed in the Autobiography
(i., 169). E. A. B chaffs him as to the failure of his
theories of life to help him to face with equanimity the worries incident to his profession. " I am, however, very glad to find that you are not yet become quite a misanthrope in addition to your turn for hypocondriacism."
How he came to interest himself in political, social, and religious questions in 1840 can only be conjectured. In some respects it may be called a revival of an interest awakened during his boyhood at home, and kept alive at Hinton. As his prospects in engineering declined, the hereditary interest in man and society re-asserted itself ; and during the last year on the railway, he was constantly discussing these questions with his brother officers and friends. It was in vain that Captain Moorsom hoped that a troublesome bit of work he had set him would do him good " by taking some of the philosophy out of him." The social and political state of the country afforded ample food for reflection. The "few remarks on education," which he wished to make public, referred, probably, to the scope and aim of education rather than to its machinery ; but the increase in the Education grant and the formation of the Committee of the Privy Council, turned his attention to the relation of education to the State. In ecclesiastical matters his Nonconformist instincts and training led him to watch, here with sympathy and there with disapproval, the movements which were convulsing the Church of England and the Church of Scotland, as well as the measures proposed for dealing with ecclesiastical affairs in Ireland.
Conscious of the family failing, his father was ever warning him against outspoken opinionativeness. When the three months' notice of the termination of his engage- ment was received in January, 1841, it was entered in his diary: "Got the sack — very glad." In such a mood he curtly declined an offer of a permanent appointment in the locomotive service. " I refused it ... without asking what it was" — a remark which called forth reproof from his father for his want of good manners. In these later months a change had come over his feelings towards his
30 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. in.
chief, from whom he had received much kindness, and with whom he had been on excellent terms. This was a matter of much concern to his parents, and Spencer himself in after life regretted it.1 The fact was that the set-back in railway enterprise injuriously affected the whole staff, and it was characteristic that he should espouse the cause of his brother officers as eagerly as if the evil had befallen himself. That he personally had little or no ground for complaint is clear from the following extract from a letter asking for a testimonial :—
To CAPTAIN MOORSOM.
WORCESTER, 24 April, 1841.
I beg to express my sincere thanks for the uniform kindness, and consideration for my "welfare, with which you have always treated me — and if at any time I have not appeared sufficiently sensible of your good wishes, I hope you will ascribe it [rather] to the want of facility of expression than to the absence of the proper feeling. I shall consider myself very fortunate if in after life I meet with so much disinterested attention to my prosperity and happiness as I have experienced during my service under you.
His circle of acquaintances was small, hardly going beyond his brother officers, with only three or four of whom he formed a friendship. Of lady friends he may be said to have had none until he met Mrs. Moorsom. He has told us in the Autobiography (i., 167-70) how, with the advent of a niece of Captain Moorsom's there came "an experience which was quite new to " him. Writing to her after his return to Derby, he says : —
Accept my thanks for the great kindness and good will that you have shown me during the term of our acquaintance, and believe me when I say that I shall always continue to look back upon the friendship you have shown to me as an honour, and upon' the time that I have spent in your society with a mixture of pleasure and regret.
In spite of his argumentativeness, his unsparing criticisms, and the unpalatable nature of some of his opinions, his "domestic and gentlemanly habits" — to use an expression
1 Autobiography, i., 157, 161, 183-5.
T 8 3 7 -4 1 ] Engineering 3 T
of Captain Moorsom's— secured him the esteem of those who knew him intimately. If not very ready to make new friends, he did not for light reasons cast off the old. He was not made to be alone. Left to himself at Harrow in 1838 he came to the conclusion that he would " never do for a hermit." At Worcester his spirits were " apt to get low for want of society," and he often felt " a longing for a little stirring life." While he lived at Powick it was different. With Captain and Mrs. Moorsom's children he was a great favourite. " Since I have been at Powick I have proved the truth of that maxim ' the way to the mother's heart is through her children ' ; for, in consequence, I believe, of my being a favourite with the Captain's little ones, I have become so with Mrs. Moorsom." At no previous period had there been any opportunity of revealing that fondness for children which remained with him through life. Like the author of Alice in Wonderland, he was fonder of girls than of boys.
He returned home in time for his 2ist birthday. Since he left it three and a half years before he had gone through a variety of experiences, which had not been lost upon him. His character had developed in numerous ways. He had secured a grasp of mathematical and physical prin- ciples, his inventive powers had enjoyed scope for exercise, he had gained a fair knowledge of certain branches of engineering and an acquaintance with the routine of im- portant undertakings, had become accustomed to the man- agement of men, and learnt business habits which could not fail to be useful. His official duties had cultivated his power of consecutive thinking and given him fluency and directness of composition. While affording him oppor- tunities for theoretical speculation, his work did not divorce him from practical interests. On the contrary, it fostered that power of uniting abstract thought with con- crete exemplification and illustration so noticeable in his books. Several stages of mental growth had yet to be gone through before he would be qualified to enter upon his life's work ; but already the main features of his intellectual and moral character had begun to develop and the faint out- lines of a few of his most pregnant ideas had appeared amid much that was yet in a chaotic condition. How the change
32 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAT. ill.
came about from his lack of interest in social, political and religious questions in 1839 to his absorption in them in the latter part of 1840 and the spring of 1841, does not appear. It may be that, like Cobden, his character widened and ripened quickly. Perhaps it would be too much to say that "we pass at a single step from the natural and wholesome egotism of the young man who has his bread to win, to the wide interests and generous public spirit of the good citizen";1 but it is clear that a change did take place which was to alter the whole course of his life.
Morley's Life of Cobden, i., 25.
CHAPTER IV.
LITERATURE WOOED BUT NOT WON.
(April, 1841— December, 1844.)
WHEN he left Worcester in the spring of 1841, Spencer had no fixed intention of giving up engineering. His immediate purpose was to assist his father in the electro- magnetic invention which was to pave the way to fortune, but which had presently to be abandoned as unworkable. To literature he was not drawn by its inherent attractive- ness. Rather he was urged towards it by the need of finding utterance for a ferment of ideas "upon the state of the world and religion," his interest in which, favoured by leisure and congenial surroundings, gathered strength after his return home. His uncle Thomas was in the full tide of his reforming propaganda ; and whatever energy his father could spare was devoted to work of public moment. The economical condition of the coun-try was deplorable, and the ecclesiastical atmosphere was charged with the elements of violent disturbance. And all the time that influences were thus drawing him aside from engineering, the check to railway enterprise was rendering that pro- fession less and less attractive.
For guidance in his studies he had drawn up a "daily appropriation of time." " Rise at 5 ; out taking exercise from 6 to 8 ; sketching or any like occupation till breakfast ; mathematics from 9 to i ; electro-magnetic experiments, 2 to 3 ; geometrical drawing, 3 to 4 ; French, 4 to 6 ; walking out, 6 to 7 ; tea and conversation on some fixed subject ; reading history or natural philosophy, 8 to 9 ; writing out diary, 9 to 10.30." This was an ideal scheme, rarely, if ever, carried out in full. The electro-magnetic experiments,
No'i K. — Autobiography, i., chaps, xiii., xiv., xv., xvi., xvii., xviii. 3
34 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. iv.
for example, almost ceased on the failure of the machine which was to work such wonders. Experiments in electro- typing and electro-chemistry were continued into the following year. At first promising, they led to nothing. Besides mathematics, geology and natural science were studied more or less fitfully. Neatly executed pen and ink drawings of some fifty different forms of leaves bear witness to his interest in botany. Carpentry, French, sketching (mostly portraiture), glee-singing, boating (generally in company with his newly-acquired friend, Mr. Lott), and fishing, were among his lighter pursuits. The portraits of Mr. Holme, Mrs. Ordish, and Mr. Lott bear witness to his skill with the pencil. His design for an economical bridge was elaborated into an article " On a new form of Viaduct." Of the article "On the Transverse Strain of Beams," his friend Jackson said : '•' I confess that your paper, with ' Herbert Spencer, C.E.' at the head of it, almost paralyzed me with emotion ; your strides are so gigantic that they leave me far behind." As to the letters "C.E.," which do not appear in Spencer's manuscript but were inserted by
the editor, E. A. B wrote : " I was very glad to get your
explanation of the ' C.E.' in the Engineer's Journal, for on reading it I remarked, ' What a fool Spencer has grown ' ! " To guard against a repetition of the mistake Spencer told the editor : " I should prefer my name appearing in future without any professional distinction, although I have perhaps much better claim to the title of civil engineer than many who make use of it." Ambitious attempts were made in architectural design, displaying in Mr .Jackson's opinion "inventive genius rather than judicious, well-formed taste." In a paper on " Architectural Precedent," in the Civil Engineer and Architect's Journal, for January, 1842, "Veneration for antiquity," is described as " one of the greatest obstacles, not only to the advancement of architecture, but to the progress of every species of improvement." The cause " exists in the present system of classical education." In the July issue of the same journal appeared his paper on the " Velocimeter." l
Into the social, political and religious discussions of the
1 ^ Autobiography, i., 522, Appendix C.
GEORGE HOLME, from a Sketch made by Herbert Spenc* between 1841 and 1844.
1841-44] Literature Wooed biit not Won 35
day he threw himself with a fearless courage and a radical thoroughness characteristic of a powerful theorizing intellect untrammelled by considerations of expediency. From the
letters of his friends Jackson and E. A. B one gathers
that he was in favour " of abolishing the forms of baptism, the sacrament, ordination, &c., &c., as being unsuited to the times we live in now, and as having been only intended for the people to whom they were immediately addressed." One learns also that he was dissatisfied with the political situation — the interests of the monarch being " not those of the people," and the aristocracy being able to " frustrate all the attempts of the people to administer justice." A com- munication criticizing the clergy of the Church of England
draws from E. A. B the retort : " I never in all my life
read such a tirade of scurrilous abuse." Spencer had been roused to anger by the unscrupulous attacks on his uncle Thomas, some of the calumnies having been retailed in a
letter from E. A. B . He was accustomed to plain
speaking from his two friends, and their criticisms never offended him, however unpalatable " You talk," wrote
E. A. B, " of your power of writing a long letter with
very little material ; but that is a mere trifle to your facility for building up a formidable theory on precious slight foundations." Their verdict on the phrenological examina- tion of his head was probably what he looked for ; and if not then, yet later, he would have admitted that " the 5s. might have been better spent." E. A. B 's characteriza- tion of him as "radical all over" was no exaggeration. His non-conformity in dress comes out in a letter to Miss (January, 1842).
Having patiently persisted in patronizing the practice of cap- wearing, notwithstanding the surprise exhibited by the good people of Derby at such an outrageous piece of independence and the danger of being mistaken for a Chartist leader, as I have frequently been, I have at last had the gratification of witnessing the result of my good example in the adoption of the cap as a head-dress by a good number of the young men of Derby. So that it appears that I may actually claim the high honour of setting the fashion.
During a visit to Hinton in May and June, 1842, he began the series of letters to the Nonconformist " On the
36 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. iv.
Proper Sphere of Government." However significant these letters may be in relation to his future work — however true it may be that the reception accorded them strengthened the pre-existing inclination to abandon engineering for litera- ture— they did not in the smallest degree help to answer the question of how to make a living. A momentary gleam of hope came from a proposal to enlarge the Nonconformist, as well as to bring out a new periodical under the auspices of the Complete Suffrage Union, of which Mr. Joseph Sturge was at that time one of the leading spirits. The starting of a periodical on his own account was also thought of, but Mr. Sturge urged caution. Encouraged by his uncle Thomas and his father he identified himself with most of the reform movements of the day. One of these was the abolition of bribery at elections. Among his con- tributions there is an u Address to the Magistrates of Derby," also two drafts of an " Anti-bribery Declaration," both dated September 24, 1843. The one is put into the mouth of the Aldermen and Town Councillors of the Borough of Derby ; the other is a declaration of the individual voter in parliamentary, municipal or other elections. Another product of his pen was " An Address from the Municipal Electors of the Borough of Derby to the Authorities of the Town," signed by 600 electors, protesting against the alleged interference of the magistrates in preventing a meeting advertised to be held in the theatre to hear a lecture by Mr. Henry Vincent.1 His father was one of the deputation which presented the address, and he himself afterwards drew up a letter signed " By authority of the Committee," justifying the action of the deputation. A little later, over the name " Common Sense " he wrote a letter headed " Magisterial Interference," animadverting on the action of the magistrates with reference to a meeting to be held by Mr. Sturge in the Assembly Rooms. There is also in his handwriting copy of a Memorial from the Electors and Non-Electors of Derby, to Edward Strutt, Esq., M.P., and the Hon. J. G. B. Ponsonby, M.P., requesting them "as representatives of the Electors of this Borough in Parlia- ment to survey the condition and prospects of our country
1 Autobiography, i., 218.
1841-44] Literature Wooed but not Won 37
with the seriousness befitting men who necessarily contri- bute by their position to influence its weal or woe." For a time he was secretary of the Derby branch of the Com- plete Suffrage Union, being also sent as a delegate to the Birmingham Conference of December, 1842. On a Draft Bill, drawn up by the Union, he has written : " I preserve this draft copy partly because of my name written on it. It was written in a state of high excitement, and is, I think, the boldest I ever wrote."1 Here is the signature.
His mental activity may be gathered from memoranda on education, morals, politics, religion, &c., some of which were probably intended to be expanded into articles or tracts. The formation of a natural alphabet and a duo- decimal system of numeration was also thought of.2 A series of papers on "the machinery outcry" was projected, a draft of part of the introductory article being extant.
There is perhaps nothing that has been the origin of so many theories and conjectures as the question — What is the cause of our national distress ? . . . We are perhaps the more inclined to judge thus leniently [of the many theories] because we too have our particular notions respecting this same national distress, and probably also our favourite crotchet for its removal. We conceive that the great family of ills that have been for so long preying upon the national prosperity, wasting the resources and paralyzing the energies of the people, are all the offspring of the one primary and hitherto almost unsus- pected evil — over-legislation. . . . We can discover no radical remedy for our social maladies but a stringent regulation which shall confine our governors to the performance of their primi- tive duty — the protection of person and property. [By way of clearing the ground, he would start] by pointing out what are not the causes of distress. And first we propose to combat the popular notion that machinery is the main cause of our national evils.
1 Aufobtograhy, i., 219-21.
- Ibid., i., 215, and p. 528, Appendix E.
3 8 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. iv.
Early in May, 1843, he entered on what he calls "a campaign in London," resolved to give literature a fair trial, and " not without good hopes of success," as he wrote to his mother soon after arriving in town. "You are pro- bably aware," he writes to Miss , " that I have pretty
nearly decided to cut engineering, because, as the saying is, it has cut me — that I am directing my attention to another profession, namely, the literary, and am in a fair way of becoming one of that class eloquently termed 'the press gang.' ' His first task was the publication as a pamphlet of the letters " On the Proper Sphere of Government." Towards the end of June he says : " I have been this evening ' traipsing ' (as my mother would say) about London, leaving copies at the offices of the weekly Liberal papers. I also called at the publisher's and found that they were going off pretty fairly." What a serious under- taking the publication was, with his slender resources, may be inferred from the fact that the printer's account was finally settled only in April, 1845.
Within a few days of his arrixral he had called on Mr. Miall.
To HIS FATHER.
14 May, 1843.
He entered into my views with a very friendly interest, and expressed himself as desirous of doing all that he could to forward my wishes. He even went so far as to say that if the Nonconformist had had a more extensive circulation he should have been happy to have offered me a share in the editorship. . . . He wrote me a letter of introduction to Dr. Price, the editor of the Eclectic Review, telling him my views and pro- posing me to him as a contributor to his magazine. ... In answer to Mr. Miall's question what subject I was thinking of taking for my first article, I told him — Education.
2 June. — I do not know exactly what to think of it [the Education article] myself. It is, I think, pretty completely original, but whether it will suit the readers of the Eclectic, I hardly know.
28 July. — I am somewhat disheartened at the aspect which my affairs have at the present time. I see by the advertisement in the papers that my article will not appear in the Eclectic Review this month.
1
MRS. ORDISH,
from a Sketch made by Herbert Spencer, between 1841 and 1844.
1841-44] Literature Wooed but not Won 39
30 October. — I have never had any decisive answer from Dr. Price, and I must say that he has treated me rather shab- bily ; for of two notes I have written to him ... he has never taken any notice of either. I intend to call, in a day or two to request the return of my MS. It may after all be the best as it is, for there are ideas in it which, if I write this essay, will be of great advantage to me, and if they had been previously published it would not have been so well. ... [A prize had been offered for an essay on Education, the judges being Dr. Venn and several Wesleyan ministers. Of the latter he was doubtful.] If they have the usual character of Wesleyan ministers, I expect that my style of treating the subject would find little favour with them. If they are men of philosophical minds I think I should stand a very fair chance, for I think there are but few that have taken the same broad views of the question, . . . many of which are new even to you.
31 October. — I found, much to my chagrin, that I had quite mistaken the character of the work, for instead of its making the question of State education the main object of the essay, it puts it in a comparatively secondary position, and directs the attention chiefly to the investigation of the American and Con- tinental systems and other like matters of detail. I had for- gotten this and had imagined that it would afford scope for a philosophical examination of the great principles of education.
His experiences with Tail's Magazine were not more encouraging. " I am about to commence my article for Tait's Magazine," he told his father (2 June) : "The title is to be 'The Free-Trade Movement and what we may learn from it.' " In the course of writing he changed the title into "Honesty is the;Best Policy." "The object of the essay is to show that this is equally true of nations as of individuals. There is, I believe, a better selection of illus- tration, figures, and simile in it than in anything I have yet written."1
The article was not accepted, but one with the same title appeared in the Birmingham Pilot, during his brief sub- editorship of that paper.
His inexperience of the world comes out in a letter to his mother written soon after reaching London. "I can't
' In the Autobiography (i., 225) he says the article for Tait was afterwards developed into the article on " The Philosophy of Style." Perhaps he wrote a second article for Tait, but it is not mentioned in the correspondence.
4O Life of Herbert Spencer [CITAP. iv.
get on in engineering without patronage. In literature talent only is required." He was soon to learn that this dictum regarding literature was by no means true.
To HIS FATHER.
7 July, 1843.
I have had a letter from Tail, acknowledging receipt of my paper, but wishing to know zvho I am. I gave him some account of my circumstances and mentioned my relationship to Mr. Spencer of Hinton. I was very near saying amongst other things that I was myself in the habit of judging of things by their intrinsic merit without regarding the name of the party by whom they were written, and that I wished other persons would do the same ; but I thought it might unnecessarily offend, and so I refrained.1
His letters show that he approached the study of mental functions through the avenue of phrenology, his conclusions being reached, as he more than once is careful to mention, not theoretically only, but by observation. While writing an article for the Phrenological Journal on his "New Theory of Benevolence and Imitation" he began " another article in conjunction with it " on Wonder. The Phrenological Journal, like the Eclectic and Tait, declined his contributions. Probably he was now convinced that talent without patronage was no more powerful in literature than in engineering.
Occasionally he wrote for the Nonconformist. The Rebecca riots furnished the text for an article entitled " Effervescence — Rebecca and her Daughters." The in- cendiaries in the eastern counties suggested one on " Local Inflammations and their Causes." In "The Non-Intrusion Riots" he deals with the disturbances in Scotland, arising from "the determined opposition given by the State party to the erection of edifices for the Free Church." In an article on " Mr. Hume and National Education " he opposed the doctrine " that it is the duty of the State to educate the people."
1 This reminds one of the "pungent little note" Carlyle thought of writing to Jeffrey on hearing nothing about his first contribution to the Edinburgh Review.
1841-44] Literature Wooed but not Won 41
The pamphlet " On the Proper Sphere of Government " he describes to Mr. Lott as "political pills," or " Spencer's National Specific." " They are very good remedies for Tyranny and Toryism, and when duly digested are cal- culated to drive away crude notions and brace the system. So at least pretends the inventor." Replying to words of caution from his friend, he writes (14 October) : —
Your remarks in reference to the inexpediency of adminis- tering " my specific " to the nation at the present time are derived from a code of moral conduct which I do not recognize. I think you have heard me say that whenever we believe a given line of conduct to be a right one, it is our duty to follow it without confusing our fallible minds respecting the probable result, of which we are rarely capable of judging. The fact that it is right should be sufficient guarantee that it is ex- pedient ; and believing this, I argue that if any proposed course of national conduct is just, it is our duty to adopt it, however imprudent it may appear. No doubt many will consider this a very silly doctrine, and perhaps yourself among the rest. When, however, you consider the changes that must take place before the general reception of such principles as those advocated in the u Proper Sphere of Government," and the length of time that must elapse before they can be put into practice, I think you will see that your objection respecting the unfitness of the nation will vanish. Such principles, it must be remembered, are to be carried out by moral agency. . . . Such being the case they can never be acted upon until the majority of the people are convinced of their truth ; and when the people are convinced of their truth, then will the nation be fitted for them. ... It is in this light also that I viewed the question of complete suffrage. I admit that were the people placed by some external power in possession of the franchise at the present moment, it would be deleterious. Not that I believe it would be followed by any of the national convulsions that are prophesied by some ; but because it would put a stop to that development of the higher sentiments of humanity which are necessary to produce permanent stability in a democratic form of government. I look upon despotisms, aristocracies, priest- crafts, and all the other evils that afflict humanity, as the necessary agents for the training of the human mind, and I believe that every people must pass through the various phases between absolutism and democracy before they are fitted to become permanently free, and if a nation liberates itself by physical force, and attains the goal without passing through these moral ordeals, I do not think its freedom will be lasting.
42 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. iv.
Although taking an active part in the Anti-Corn Law, Anti-Slavery, and the Anti-Church and State agitations, he seldom spoke at meetings. Writing was more in his line.
To HIS FATHER.
11 October, 1843.
The address which I have written for the Anti-State Church Association is now printing. The reason that it has been so long about is that although asked along with the other members of the committee to write one I could not, although I tried several times, make anything to please myself, so I left it to rest. None of those that were brought forward were liked, however, and the end of the matter was that the committee put them all into my hands, and asked me to make one from them. When I came to set about this I found, however, that this plan would not do, and so I was obliged to write an entirely new one, which was unanimously adopted. I am not by any means satisfied with it myself, however, and in fact I am getting so fastidious in matters of that kind that I hardly ever feel satisfied with what I write.
This address to the Nonconformists of England, dated October, 1843, is signed by the Honorary Secretaries, George Simmons and Charles S. Miall. Spencer's name does not appear ; but on a printed copy he has pencilled : " Written by myself during my indignation phase."1 Re- garding facility in composition he tells his father : " If I improve in composition at the rate I have done I shall soon make something out. I have lately got in my head a theory of composition by the aid of which I expect to be able to write more effectually than I could [formerly do.]" This was probably the germ of the essay on " The Philosophy of Style."
His hope of succeeding in literature enabled him to bear up for a time against discouragement. At the end of the second month, though he had not made a farthing by his pen, he felt " but little doubt about succeeding in some way or other. At any rate I shall not give it up without a good struggle." Meanwhile, he accepted an engagement with Mr. W. B. Prichard to make drawings of a design for a dock at Southampton. This was finished early in October ; and while waiting for the directors to decide
1 Autobiography, i., 237.
1841-44] Literature Wooed but not Won 43
about the dock, he worked on a " design for a landing pier at Dover. ... I had a good share in the design myself, and my arrangements were in every case adopted." The temporary nature of this engagement did not disquiet him. " I have myself no desire for its continuance further than may be necessary to occupy my time until I get launched in the literary world."
He had little time for lighter pursuits or general reading. " Do you get to see Punch ?" he asks his father. " It is a most capital publication, and I have no doubt is doing a great deal of good, seeing that it disseminates right senti- ments amongst those who would never obtain them from any other source. It has lately concluded a series of most excellent articles entitled, ' The Labours of Hercules,' embodying very moral views."1 Again : " I have been lately reading Pope's Homer. . . . To my taste there is but little real poetry in it ... it is not to be compared to Milton." He himself suffered about this time from a short attack of "the verse-making disorder, which seems to be escaped by but few of those who have any intellectual vivacity." About fifty lines of a poem on "The Cloud Spirits" are probably among the verses referred to in the Autobiography (i., 226).
His circumstances were unfavourable to mechanical inventiveness; but in preparing his pamphlet he "intro- duced a new plan of stitching." A design for an improved goods wagon was not registered because, he says, " I saw Charles Fox the last time I called, and he told me that my invention was not new." As to the success of his plan of using a steel plate for the soles of boots and shoes he had "very strong hopes."
It is pathetic to trace the disillusioning process which changed the fair picture of literary success into a dull canvas unrelieved by light or colour. A day or two after his arrival in London he wrote : " Altogether I feel very much inclined to be hopeful, and believe there is but little question as to my ultimate success." When he wrote two months later, " I feel well convinced that if I can only stand my ground for a short time I shall do," there was
Punch, May to August, 1843.
44 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. iv.
implied a vague consciousness that standing his ground was a longer affair than he had counted upon. By the end of the first week in August his funds were exhausted. " I am afraid I must get you to pay the postage on this, for I am down to my last penny." Two days later, acknow- ledging the first half of a note his father had sent him, he says : " I am still without a penny in my pocket, and as I shall not get your letter containing the other half of the note until after post time to-morrow. ... I must send off this letter in the same predicament as its pre- decessor." The offer of a tutorship had been declined, the temporary engineering engagement being more remunera- tive and more likely " to lead to something else, if it should turn out that I am not able to get any literary employ- ment by the time that it has expired. . . . The fact is that I have made up my mind to continue, if possible, my exertions to make my way in the literary world, and it will be nothing but real necessity that will induce me to make another change."
To HIS FATHER.
28 October, 1843.
I am somewhat in a predicament. At the time that I formed the engagement with Mr. Prichard I was beginning to get rather awkwardly situated with regard to my wardrobe ; so much so that my only coat was too shabby to serve decently for Sundays. Under the impression that the employment then commenced would be of some duration I had a new coat made, believing that I should very shortly be able to pay for it. In consequence, however, of the engagement terminating sooner than I had anticipated I was not able to do so, and the little money that I had saved during its continuance is now about exhausted ; and just at this juncture I have received the enclosed letter from the tailor's solicitor requesting to know why I do not discharge the bill. [As for re-employment in connexion with the Southampton docks] I find that the matter is likely to be so long delayed that there is no likelihood of my being able to wait for it. I have been waiting, too, in the fond hope that I might receive a remittance from Tail, but- have been disap- pointed. So that I am rather in a fix. I am even now some- what put to it in the article of clothes, and have been obliged to remain at home for the last four or five Sundays in con- sequence of my not having a pair of trousers fit to go out in. I do not see that I can for the present do anything else than
1841-44] Literature Wooed but not Won 45
return home. It is impossible for me to remain here doing nothing. I do not see any likelihood of my getting anything to do in the literary way immediately, although there might be an opening by and by. I am still as confident as ever that I could make my way as a literary character if I could once get a start, and I think you will agree with me in that belief.
These extracts tell their own tale as to the extreme poverty to which he was reduced. To enable him to reach home his father sent him £$, on receipt of which he writes : —
I am exceedingly sorry that I should put you to any inconvenience in consequence of my want of success. I had quite hoped to have been by this time able to have refunded you what you have already kindly advanced. To be obliged to again draw upon you, and that, too, when you are yourself somewhat short, I feel extremely annoyed. I wish I could have avoided it, and am sure you will give me credit for the will to do so had I had the means. ... I have never received anything from Mr. Miall for my articles, nor did I ever expect to do so, for I always felt that he had acted kindly towards me, and I was desirous to do what I could to oblige him. . . . The only remuneration I have yet received for my literary endeavours has been the 7s. 6d. that was paid me by Mr. Prichard for correcting his MS. . . . The printer's account must stand over for the present.
Early in. November he returned home. He immediately set about the publication of the article on Imitation and Benevolence which had been declined by the Phrenological Journal. A place was found for it in the Zoist of January, 1844. Another on Amativeness appeared in July, and a third on Wonder in October.1 An article on Reciprocal Dependence in the Animal and Vegetable Creations appeared in the Philosophical Magazine for February.2
Before he left London he had promised to make his father's Shorthand ready for publication. For this he was not ill-prepared, having sedulously practised it : only one letter to his father from London having been written in long hand. He drew up an exposition of the system, hoping that
1 Autobiograhpy, i., 246.
- Ibid., i., 245 and 533, Appendix F.
46 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. iv.
the book would be issued in 1844. But his father's lack of decision when a final step had to be taken could not be overcome. Fifty years had to run their course before the booklet appeared.
A periodical to be called Tlie Philosopher was projected, January 3, 1844, being fixed for the first issue. What looks like a statement of " Our Objects " runs as follows : —
The signs of the times are indicating the near approach of that era of civilization when men shall have shaken off the soul-debasing shackles of prejudice. The human race is not for ever to be misruled by the random dictates of unbridled passion. The long acknowledged rationality of man and the obvious corollary that he is to be guided by his reason rather than by his feelings, is at length obtaining a practical recog- nition. On every hand and from every rank is springing up that healthful spirit of enquiry which brooks not the control of mere antiquated authority, and something more than the absolute dicta of the learned will henceforth be required to satisfy the minds of the people. Respect for precedent is on the wane, and that veneration heretofore bestowed upon unmeaning custom is now being rapidly transferred to objects more worthy its regard — here manifesting itself in an in- creased zeal for the discovery of TRUTH, and there in that deep appreciation of PRINCIPLES which characterizes the real reformers of the day.
The buoyant hopefulness of these utterances have their pathetic contrast in his description, half a century later, of the moral and intellectual progress achieved, and in his outlook on the social and political horizon at the time when his labours and his life were drawing towards their close.
The idea of starting such a periodical shows how7 much the young man was influenced by the desire to possess a medium for the dissemination of his ideas. For a living, his hopes were centred on a type-founding invention which was expected to realize a fortune, if only he could find the necessary capital, estimated at from .£5,000 to .£7,000. On the advice of his uncle Thomas, he wrote to Mr. Lawrence Heyvvorth "to enquire whether, amongst your mercantile friends, there are any of enterprizing char- acters who are seeking investments for their capital." The correspondence with Mr. Heyvvorth which ensued led
EDWARD LOTT,
from a Sketch made by Herbert Spencer, between 1841 and 1844.
1841-44] Literature Wooed but not Won 47
to nothing from a financial point of view. In another respect it led to something he valued more than money — the friendship of Mr. and Mrs. Potter and their children and grandchildren, which brightened the whole of his future life.
Teaching, never lost sight of altogether, was again forcing itself upon his attention. His uncle's suggestion that he should take pupils independently of his father he thought " a very hazardous experiment," and a private tutor- ship would lead to nothing permanent. His own plan was that his father should continue as at present, he himself taking pupils who would board with his parents. If this succeeded, his father could, after a time, " relinquish private tuition and devote all his attention to his boarders." A draft prospectus was drawn up and sent to Hinton, where it was objected to as being " too ambitious."
An offer of more congenial employment put a stop to the carrying out of these plans.1 Through the instru- mentality of Mr. Sturge he received the offer of the sub- editorship of a paper it was proposed to start in Birmingham. He joined the Pilot, as the new venture was called, early in September, but the first number did not appear till the end of the month, by which date his position seemed so insecure that his father, as well as Mr. Sturge, advised him to accept a tutorship. As was his wont when in the early stages of a new enterprise, he himself was full of confidence. "Wilson and I are at present engaged in coming to a definite arrangement." His uncle Thomas was extremely dis- satisfied with the unbusinesslike way in which the duties had been undertaken. " Surely Herbert has managed more wisely than to enter upon a matter first and make his terms afterwards. . . . This I know, that I gave my plain advice to Herbert by letter not to engage in such an offer except with a fixed salary." Mr. Sturge made clear how far he had been a party to the arrangement. " I have no interest in the paper in the common acceptation of the term, and it has no connexion with the Complete Suffrage Union, but I am one of the contributors to a fund for starting it, with the understanding that it advocates certain principles."
1 Autobiography, i., 247-55.
48 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. iv.
To EDWARD LOTT.
1 October, 1844.
You ask how I like Wilson.1 . . . We agree tolerably — I may say very well in our political principles, and he is more liberal than most on religious questions. I cannot say, however, that there is that thorough cordiality of feeling between us that constitutes the basis of close friendship. We do not sympathize with each other. ' . . . Simple and ordinary matters he manages with great success. He composes rapidly. . . . But where, as in the business of getting out our first number, a matter of considerable magnitude and complication has to be transacted and a great amount of management and direction is required, he appears to become comparatively powerless, paralyzed and confused. . . . Having the larger head of the two I seem tacitly to take the lead.
Fortunately for Spencer in his precarious position, an offer of temporary railway work came in his way, and for some weeks he divided his time between that and his sub- editorial duties. The articles he wrote bear evidence that the "indignation phase" had not yet been outlived. Here are a few samples.
Good government can only be secured by basing our politi- cal institutions on principle. The party distinctions of Whig and Tory must perish. Radicalism will have done its work when it has uprooted the deadly upas tree, when it has razed to the foundation the great citadel of legislative corruption in which our rulers now dwell ; and when a superstructure of truth and righteousness shall have been erected in its stead.
The day is fast coming when mankind shall no longer blunder on in the darkness of expediency — when they shall cease to walk in the ways of their own fallibility, and shall follow those which the Creator says are best ; when they shall bow down the stiff neck of their worldly wisdom to the prac- tical embodiment of divine laws ; when they shall rind that the sense of right which God has implanted in man is meant to be obeyed — that it is the only true guide to general happiness, and that our disobedience to it ever has brought and ever will bring its own punishment.
Englishmen have long ceased to venerate their system of government — it is some time since they left off admiring it—- they have now given up respecting it — and it seems that they will by and by despise it. Ere long, then, the existing order of things must pass away.
1 Rev. Dr. James Wilson. To be distinguished from Mr. James Wilson, proprietor and editor of the Economist. See Autobiography, i., 255. 329» 334-
1841-44] Literature Wooed but not Won 49
In these articles unfailing optimism concerning the future goes hand in hand with unqualified denunciation of the past and the present. Small wonder is there that Mr. Lott should remonstrate : " Though by your title you ought to be able to steer clear of all rocks and dangers, yet there is one which I will tell you of. ... Do not use such terms as 'swindling aristocracy.' They do no good, but only serve to enflame the passions of one class of men against the other."
CHAPTER V.
ENGINEERING ONCE MORE.
January, 1845 — December, 1848.
NEARLY four years had elapsed since he gave up his profession, strong in the hope that by the exercise of his inventive faculties he would realise such a competence as would afford him the leisure and the means of developing and giving to the world the ideas which had been fermenting in his mind. During those years he had courted literature to little or no purpose. And now, at the opening of 1845, a settled career seemed -as far off as ever. Had he been able to lift the veil that hid the future and look through the vista extending over four more years of fruitless endeavour — of trial and failure, of hope deferred and anticipations un- fulfilled— he might have lost heart and given up the contest. For that indomitable will, which, in after years even unto the end, kept him true to the great aim of his life, had not yet acquired its matured strength. He was now to revert for a time to engineering without getting any nearer success than when he left the profession in 1841. His inventiveness, whatever gratification it might bring as an exercise of power, was not to add much to his material resources. Behind these, in moments when the outlook was most obscured, there always loomed teaching, "the ancestral profession."
The survey of the proposed branch line to Wolver- hampton, which was expected to take him away from the Pilot for about a month, was prolonged to several months, his sub-editorial engagement coming to an end without formal notice. April found him in London, sauntering about the lobbies of the House of Commons and tasting
NOTE. — Autobiography, i., chaps, xix., xx., xxi., xxii., xxiii.
1845-48] Engineering Once More 51
some of the pleasures of London life. The withdrawal of the Bill left him about the middle of May again out of employment. At this juncture Mr. Fox offered him a post. " This work," he tells his father, " will involve an agreeable mixture of in-door and out-of-door work — will give occasion to expeditions into various parts of the kingdom, and will afford plenty of scope for the exercise of my inventive faculty. . . .-I am to begin at a salary of £130 per annum, which, Mr. Fox says, I may increase to almost any extent if I manage the work well." The engagement lasted only a few weeks, owing to his refusal to perform duties not included in the agreement. One would have thought that repeated failures to find remunerative work would have inclined him to act less upon the strict interpretation of his rights and to follow the rule of give and take. Writing about this in after life he says that the result " was one which naturally grew out of my tendency to rebel against any- thing like injustice, at whatever risks." Very opportunely Mr. Prichard offered him work on a projected line between Aberystwith and Crewe. Presently he was put in charge of the office " and all the draughtsmen employed in it until the 3oth November at the rate of £^ per day." " Here I am in a new position and have the opportunity of trying my hand at the management of considerable undertakings. So far I have done very well. The office was in a state of utter confusion when I came to it, without the remotest sign of organisation, and I have now put it in order, and made all the necessary arrangements, and all goes on smoothly." During 1846 he was taken up with lawsuits arising out of Mr. Prichard's operations — disputes which were continued into the latter half of 1847.
What leisure he had was spent in "inventing and castle- building." He " devised a pair of skates made wholly of steel and iron in such a manner that there was nothing beyond the depth of the skate blade between the ice and the sole of the boot, the result being to give a greater power over the edge of the skate." Another invention was a means of locomotion "uniting terrestrial traction with aerial suspension," which, however, came to nothing. But he continued to be " very sanguine " as to his invention in the manufacture of boots and shoes.
52 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. v.
To HIS FATHER.
DAVEXTRY, 16 September, 1845.
I expect to make as much money this autumn as will serve to take out a patent, and if I can do this, and if, as I have heard, you can put as many inventions into one patent as you like, I think I am safe to make something out [of them] ; for I am pretty certain that all my inventions will not fail. By the way, I have made several new inventions since I saw you, two of which (a new kind of division for levelling staves and a new off-set scale apparatus) I have put in practice and they are highly approved of by all who have seen them. Another is a new hand-printing press, which is both simpler and more powerful than the old kind.
18 September, 1846. — I find I am a day after the fair in my invention for raising water. It has just been patented.
23 October. — Upon a close search into the late patents I find that there is nothing approaching to my roofing invention, so that in that case I think I am safe in point of priority.
He was more successful with a binding pin,1 which was in the market in April, 1847, and by May 8 his profits were ^"45. But about the beginning of the following year the sales fell off, and soon ceased. A more important invention was a machine for planing wood by the substitution " of a circular revolving cutting blade for the straight fixed cutting blade now used in such machines." In this enter- prise his friend Jackson joined him. During the whole of 1847 it occupied more of his attention than anything else. The model was tried " and considering everything, the result is very satisfactory." "The only serious im- pediment is the formation of circular marks across the wood. In other respects there is no doubt about success." Experiments were carried on in Derby, alterations from time to time being made to meet unexpected difficulties. His partner was beginning to have doubts. " If you do not see any improvement, I would rather wind up the business and pay you my share of expenses and understand the matter settled, than leave it open without any hope." Spencer's remonstrances against this decision were unavail- ing, and, soon after, Mr. Jackson went to India. Thus
1 Autobiography, i., 544.
1845-48] Engineering Once More 53
ended the enterprise. Mention is also made of a "type- composing engine, on which I think of trying some experiments when I get to Derby."
From incidental remarks one gains some idea of his miscellaneous reading and literary tastes. Shelley was his favourite poet.
To EDWARD LOTT.
LONDON, 1 August, 1845.
They [Shelley's essays and letters] do not give any indication of the genius that shines through his poetry. Of this last I have become a more and more devoted admirer. I cannot but think his " Prometheus Unbound " the finest composition in the language.1
30 October. — I have just been reading Goethe's Wilhclin Meisler, with which I cannot say I am much pleased. It is in some respects natural, and pourtrays with considerable skill the changeable conditions of a mind in process of develop- ment, but it is extremely defective in point of plot, and anything but profound in much of its philosophy.
10 March, 1846.— [Of Carlyle's Cromwell he had a poor opinion.] The "showman," as you call him, I think some- what impertinent upon occasion. The editorial remarks and exclamations with which he interpolates the letters are not at all in good taste, and / think anything but respectful to his hero.
The dying moments of 1846. — Have you seen Dickens's Christmas tale yet ? ... It is a poor affair, and the moral is so extra-philanthropic as to be absurd. It goes to the extent of not only loving your neighbour as yourself — but even loving him better than yourself.
In a letter to his father in March, 1845, the Vestiges of I lie Natural History of Creation is mentioned as a book just out, but not yet read. In January of the following year he is about to read Humboldt's Kosinos.
1 Autobiography, i., 261, 295. His youthful enthusiasm for Shelley must have been brought back to him in 1888 on receipt of a copy of Mr. Kineton Parkes' Shelley 's Revolt of Islam and Mr. Herbert Spencer's Ecclesiastical Institutions. In this paper it is contended that the "Revolt of Islam" is a vehement protest, "Ecclesiastical Institutions" a calm, logical statement. Though differing in form, the fundamental idea is ihe same.
54 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. v.
The want of society was frequently deplored. But in 1846 or 1847 he became acquainted with Mr. Chapman, the publisher, and through him with others of note. About this he says : —
A generation ago the only liberal publisher in London was Green, the Unitarian publisher who had a shop in Newgate Street. My uncle published sundry of his pamphlets with Green. I fancy it was to fulfil some commission from him concerning them that about 1846 I called at the shop, and instead of finding the name Green, found it changed to Chapman. Green had retired, and Chapman had bought his business. ... I continued still in those days to have no circle of London friends, and hence remember the more vividly any exception to my usual solitary life. Such an exception resulted from this interview. Chapman lived out at Clapton, and in 1846, or possibly it may have been 1847, I went out to an evening party there. I am led to recall the fact because among other guests there was Miss Eliza Lynn, who afterwards became well known as Mrs. Lynn Linton, the novelist. . . . Another of those present was Miss Sara Hennel. . . . William and Mary Howitt, too, whose names were at that day familiar to the reading public, were among the guests either then or on a subsequent occasion.
Only occasionally do we meet \vith indications of an interest in current politics. Measures, not parties, were what he cared for. To forward Mr. Heyworth's candidature for the representation of Derby in Parliament he wrote a skit headed — "Why you should vote for Freshfield and Lord — ," in which he ironically advises the electors to vote for lawyers. Passive resisters may quote him as on their side. He would like to see " some vigorous resistance to the proposed Militia. ... I for one have made up my mind neither to serve nor to find a substitute."
To HIS FATHER.
3 September, 1846.
I have no objection to a whole host of Churchmen and Protectionists getting into the next Parliament — in fact, I rather wish they may. The great thing to be wished is the crippling of Lord John Russell to disable him from carrying his educa- tional and endowment measures. ... It will do him and the Whigs generally good to be made to feel the determination of the Nonconformists.
1845-48] Engineering Once More 55
In the many arguments he had on religious questions he usually stood alone, his heterodoxy being so pronounced. He has told us in the Autobiography (i., 275) how this cost him the loss of one friendship. But with most of his friends it led to no estrangement, nor to any weakening of sympathy with him in his intellectual an8 social aims. The unpal- atableness of many of his opinions was counter-balanced by the attractiveness of his character, in which absolute straightforwardness shone conspicuously. To " the open sincerity that is to me the best part of you," Mr. Lott traced the liking women had for him.
Beyond an article for the Nonconformist in December, 1846, on " Justice before Generosity," he does not appear to have published anything. During this year he entered upon a course of reading in preparation for the book he had long wished to write, and by April he had collected "a large mass of matter." He had for some time been dissatisfied with the want of depth and precision in the general argument of the letters " On the Proper Sphere of Government." Hence his desire to write a book in which the views set forth in the pamphlet should be affiliated to general moral principles. Here is a letter which throws unexpected light upon the method by which he sought to form his style.
To HIS FATHER.
16 June, 1847.
I am prosecuting my studies on style (which I am doing with the intention of shortly commencing my " Moral Philosophy "), and am adopting the plan of copying out specimen sentences. Whenever I meet with any that are peculiar either by their clearness, harmony, force, brevity, novelty, or distinguished by any peculiarity, I copy it out. I wish to collect samples of all possible arrangements and effects that have anything good in them.
If you meet with any particularly worthy of note, perhaps you will be good enough to copy them out for me.
30 September. — For the purpose of getting information re- quisite for my book, I have obtained access to the library of the British Museum. I did this by writing to Mr. Bright, M.P., for a recommendation.
The writing of a book went, however, but a little way towards answering the persistent question about a livelihood,
56 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. v.
which seemed no nearer solution in 1848 than it was in 1841. Migration to New Zealand was thought of, and teaching came up once more, and, as it proved, for the last time, as a possible way of meeting sordid cares.
• To HIS UNCLE THOMAS.
DERBY, 10 April, 1848.
Were there any likelihood of its answering I should be inclined to join my father in his teaching, but as he has not a sufficiency of engagements to occupy his own time, there is no inducement to take such a step. Do you think there is room for a mathematical teacher in Bath ? and would there be any- thing objectionable in my taking such a position ? Perhaps by giving lessons in Perspective, Mechanical Drawing, and Natural Philosophy, in addition to Mathematics, I might be able to make it answer, . . . and with a fair start I do not much doubt my ultimate success.
A few weeks at Bath, whither he went to consult with his uncle and spy out the land, convinced him that nothing was to be found in that direction.
To HIS FATHER.
LONDON, 22 May, 1848.
Perhaps you have before this heard from Bath that I had left them for London to take another look round and see whether anything was to be done. ... I have good hope of getting something to do here in the literary way.
10 June. — I am likely to make an engagement to write leading articles for this new paper, The Standard of Freedom, and if the negociation ends as it appears likely to do I am to furnish an article weekly at a guinea each.1
Engagements merely pending could not support him in London, so he returned home, though not without hope, arising from a conversation with Mr. Wilson of the Economist. It was not till November, however, that he received the offer of the post of sub-editor of the Economist. "Thus an end was at last put to the seemingly futile part" of his life, which had lasted for over seven and a half years.
Autobiography, i., 329, 331.
57
CHAPTER VI.
HIS FIRST BOOK.
(December, 1848, to July, 1853).
SOON after taking up his sub-editorial duties in the Strand he tells his mother : " I manage my work very well so far, and have given satisfaction to Mr. Wilson — indeed, I have been complimented by him upon the improvement the paper has undergone, more particularly in the news department, under my administration." The situation left him with considerable leisure to get on with the book which was to embody the leading ideas that had been taking shape since the time he lived at Powick. But he complained of making slow progress. " Moreover, what I have written I have not written to my satisfaction, at which I am even more annoyed than at having made but little progress."
To HIS FATHER.
1 April, 1849.
I have now entered upon . . . the political part of the work and am executing it to my satisfaction so far. The chapter that has least pleased me is the one I have lately finished on the Rights of Children. It is mannered in style. I shall have to remodel it when I make my final revision. . . . I do not think there will be any need to fear taking upon myself the responsibility of publication, seeing that the work is so popular in its aspirations, so well fitted to the time, and written in a style that is likely to commend it to the general reader.
24 August. — I am still not satisfied with the style, though I am with the matter.
With a view to suggestions, the manuscript was being sent to his father, who wrote : " The chapter on National
NOTE. — Autobiography, i., chaps, xxiv., xxv., xxvi., xxvii., xxviii.
58 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vi.
Education pleased me trie most, and that on Sanitary Regulation the next. There are some points in the chapter on established religions that I don't think you have proved, but assumed. . . . Then there appears in other places an unnecessary amount of bitterness." Again : " Your mother says she fears you make by your style unnecessary enemies. That you should not have introduced the name of Voltaire into your work at all." On this he remarks : " I had suppressed Voltaire's name on a previous occasion, and I will do it on this."
The question of a title, which had been held in abey- ance till the spring of 1850, could no longer be put off. For some six months the point was discussed with relatives and literary friends, first one and then another title being suggested before he finally made up his mind to adopt " Social Statics," notwithstanding the objection raised by his uncle Thomas and Mr. Chapman to the word "Statics."1
When he wrote chapter xxv. of the Autobiography he could not recall the feelings with which he looked for reviews of the book, nor could he remember whether he was disappointed with their superficial character when they did appear. The correspondence helps to make up for the failure of memory. One of the earliest notices was in his own paper (8 February, 1851). "I am quite satisfied with it ; for though the high praise is qualified with some blame, there is not more of this than is needful to prevent the suspicion that I had written the review myself." Several of the notices elicit the remark that " the reviewer has not read the book." The review in the Nonconformist (March 12) "was not so well written as it might have been. The reviewer apologized on the score of having a bad head- ache ; so Charles Miall told me." The Leader, from which he had expected " flaming reviews," devoted three articles to it.2 The title, it was remarked, had " led some persons to suppose it to be a work on Socialism" ; but as regards property, the author " separates himself from Proudhon and the Communists whom he seemed to be upholding." The chapter on the " Right Use of the Earth " is described as
' Autobiography, i., 358.
- Leader, 15 and 22 March, and 12 April, 1851.
1848-53] His First Book 59
a " terrible chapter," which " places landlords in an un- happy predicament." He was prepared for adverse criti- cism. " I am rather surprised that I do not get some virulent attacks from the expediency school. Perhaps I may get them in the Spectator or Examiner. I have written to remind them that the book has been sent ; and if they do not now review it I shall assume that, not liking it, and yet not knowing how to pull it to pieces, they think best to let it alone." Of articles in the North British and the British Quarterly he says : " On the whole, I am as well treated in these two Reviews as I could expect, considering the official character of them — indeed, I may say better than I could expect. For, though both criticize unfairly and distort my views, they do not do this so much as party bias frequently leads men to do." In December Mr. Richard Hutton intimated that he was preparing an article on Social Statics. " I shall do my best to demolish what I think, in hands so able as yours, may prove to be very misleading errors, but I fear, with far less success in exposition of my own views than you have shown." This article (Prospective Review for January, 1852), under the title " Ethics of the Voluntary System," embodied a criticism which Spencer had again and again to rebut in later years. " If a consequence of his theory is absurd, impracticable, unsupported by a shadow of argument, moral or otherwise, he has a theory ready to account for the failure of his theory," namely, " that it only states the rights and duties of perfect man." Of the article generally Spencer says : " There is only one fair criticism in it. All the rest is merely misunderstanding or misrepresentation. I do not like being identified with the 'Ethics of the Voluntary System' either."
Mr. Hutton was not the only one who thought him too ready to take shelter behind the rampart of absolute morality. Mr. Lott urged the same objections, which Spencer tried to meet.
You compare me to a physician " who was perpetually announcing that he only prescribed for man in a normal state of constitution," and say that I u dwell too constantly in the normal state and consequently am disgusted and impatient with the abnormal one." Either you have not read Social
60 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vi.
Statics, or have forgotten a good part of it. So repeatedly have I there insisted that it is impossible to act out the abstract law and impossible to reach a normal state save by the slow process of growth, that I am charged with teaching that we ought to sit still and do nothing. You will find that I constantly recognize the necessity of existing institutions, and that all social forms have their uses.
In justification of the use of the ordinary language of theology, which, knowing his religious opinions, his father could not understand, he wrote : " I have always felt some difficulty, but have concluded that the usual expressions were as good as any others. Some words to signify the ultimate essence, or principle or cause of things, I was obliged to use, and thinking the current ones as good as any others, I thought best to use them rather than cause needless opposition."
The chapter on " National Education " was a theme of controversy from the beginning. He was invited to lecture on it, but declined. " I should damage my influence by lecturing. Very few men fulfil personally the promise of their books." He mentions to his father that " the National Public School Association are falling foul of me." On the other hand, the Congregational Board of Education re- printed the chapter at Mr. Samuel Morley's expense, under the title " State Education Self-defeating." A second edition being called for, a postscript of six pages was added.
Among those to whom the pamphlet was sent was Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton, who wrote about its contents that " he had been much struck with their boldness, originality and absence of all false thinking and rhetorical varnish." Still, he could riot arrive at the same conclusion as Spencer with regard to absolute non-interference with education, which he thought was a " somewhat chilling result." " Perhaps there is a difference between them at starting. Mr. Spencer seems to dislike forming and fitting the mind into national idiosyncrasies. Sir Edward, on the contrary, holds such formation to be essential to the vitality and permanence of States."
As an indication of growing appreciation he mentions, with evident satisfaction, that his name was being coupled with that of Mr. J. S. Mill. " I have had a third application
^l His First Book 61
*J J
for my autograph," is the first intimation of a familiar experience of later years. The frequent mention of Social Statics leads him to say, with an optimism not yet chastened by experience : " If the book is so interesting as this there can be no doubt about its paying."
To HIS FATHER.
25 March, 1852.
Mrs. Chapman told me .... they had recently had a letter from a working stonemason, stating that their family monument was much out of repair, and offering to put it in good condition if they would let him have a copy of a work called Social Statics. ... I called the other day on Charles Knight, the publisher, in company with Chapman, when he took the opportunity of thanking me for the great amount of information he had gained from my book. This giving me personal thanks has been quite frequent of late.
All this raised his hopes that a new edition would soon be called for. As early as March, 1851, he had begun to revise it, paying much attention to style. " I am surprised to find so many defects." " I have been subjecting Macaulay's style to the same minute criticism that I am now giving my own, and I find that it will not stand it at all."
When he joined the Economist there was little of the cheery optimism that was so marked on his going to London in 1843. His uncertainty as to the future may be gathered from the fact that emigration to New Zealand was again being discussed. " What should you say to our all going out together?" he asks his mother. The risks to his parents of such a long voyage and his reluctance to leave them behind, led to the idea being given up. Emigration was, moreover, gradually losing its attractiveness as interest in his book became more engrossing and the prospects of a literary career improved.
About his general reading during these years little is known. He had decided views as to what was worth reading. Carpenter's Principles of Physiology was deemed "considerably more useful and vastly more entertaining" than books about "fights and despatches and protocols." He did not think that gossip about current events "would at all help me in learning how to live healthily and happily,
62 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vi.
or that it would give me any further insight into the nature of things." Nor did he care for what is called history.
To EDWARD LOTT.
23 April, 1852.
My position, stated briefly, is that until you have got a true theory of humanity, you cannot interpret history ; and when you have got a true theory of humanity you do not want history. You can draw no inference from the facts and alleged facts of history without your conceptions of human nature entering into that inference : and unless your conceptions of human nature are true your inference will be vicious. But if your conceptions of human nature be true you need none of the inferences drawn from history for your guidance. If you ask how is one to get a true theory of humanity, I reply — study it in the facts you see around you and in the general laws of life. For myself, looking as I do at humanity as the highest result yet of the evolution of life on the earth, I prefer to take in the whole series of pheno- mena from the beginning as far as they are ascertainable. I, too, am a lover of history ; but it is the history of the Cosmos as a whole. I believe that you might as reasonably expect to understand the nature of an adult man by watching him for an hour (being in ignorance of all his antecedents), as to suppose that you can fathom humanity by studying the last few thousand years of its evolution.
In the spring of 1850 he had ceased to live at the office of the Economist, and took lodgings in Paddington along with Mr. Jackson, whom he had joined in trying vege- tarianism. Of this experiment he tells his mother (whom, by the way, he reproves for her "dietetic habits," and " con- stitutional Toryism ") : " I am getting quite learned in cooking and am daily scheming new combinations, some of which have been very successful. I will by and by send you our diet table, which, I doubt not, will in time be sufficiently varied and palatable, as well as nutritious." Vegetarianism, not coming up to expectations, was given up before the end of the second month.
The year 1851 witnessed the inevitable reaction after the strenuous efforts of the two previous years. As regards visible results it may deserve the title "An Idle Year," given it in the Autobiography, but in reality the ground was being prepared for the fertile productiveness that was to follow. It was the year of the Great Exhibition, which "passes all expectation." He was particularly anxious that his mother,
1848-53] His First Book 63
" with her passion for sight-seeing," should not miss coming up, and advised his father and uncle William to come up separately, as he could give them more help and attention than if they came together. That his former professional interests had not given place entirely to his newer literary interests was shown by an article on "A Solution of the Water Question " (Economist, 20 December), in which he made suggestions for the supply of pure water to London and the improvement of the Thames. A scheme similar to one of the suggestions has been recently before the public, Gravesend taking the place of Greenwich as the site of the proposed dam.
" The early years of the fifties were fertile in friendships commenced." Social Statics was instrumental in bringing about an introduction to Mr. Octavius Smith. Acquaint- ance speedily ripened into intimate friendship, which in due course brought him, in manifold ways, some of the greatest pleasures of his life. The weekly evenings at Mr. Chap- man's brought him other friends, one of the earliest being Mr. G. H. Lewes, whom he got to know in the spring of 1850 ; but with whom there was little intimacy till the following year.
To HIS FATHER
22 September, 1851.
I had a very pleasant walking excursion with Lewes on Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday last, up the valley of the Thames. We began about Slough, and got as far as Abingdon. It did us much good, and we enjoyed it immensely. I mentioned to Lewes my notion about the law of vegetable development, and the carrying out the idea in the examination of various plants added much to the interest of the walk. He was greatly delighted with the doctrine.
3 October. — Lewes is about 34 or 35, of middle height, with light brown long hair, deeply marked with small-pox, and rather worn-looking. He is very versatile. He is a successful novelist and dramatist, writes poems occasionally, is an actor, a good linguist, writes for the reviews, translates for the stage, is a musical critic, and is, as you may suppose, deeply read in philosophy. He is a very pleasant companion. He is married and has three children.
About the middle of 1851, Spencer first met Miss Marian Evans, who was on a visit to the Chapman's. Later in the
64 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vi.
same year he took Mr. Lewes to call on her. In 1852 he made the acquaintance of Mr. David Masson and Mr. T. H. Huxley. To the latter he introduced himself when seeking information bearing on a theory of population he had entertained as far back as 1847. Regarding this he told his father in September, 1851 : "I have commenced drawing out a skeleton plan of my book on population and shall send it to you by and by. I think it will be beautifully complete and perfectly conclusive." Intending it to form a book of some twenty odd chapters, he at first declined Mr. Chapman's request that he should make it the subject of an article. Eventually he agreed to give an outline of it in the Westminster Review, and on his return from a Christmas visit to Mr. and Mrs. Potter he set to work on it.
To HIS FATHER.
April, 1852.
You have not given me any opinion of the Population article yet. ... I met Robert Chambers the other night and he complimented me highly upon it. Mr. Greg disapproves and has narrated to Chapman various objections, but they are easily answerable.
May. — You will be pleased to hear that Professor Owen has nothing to say against the Theory of Population. Chapman asked his opinion of it. He said it was a very good article. Chapman then pressed him to say what he thought of the theory. This he declined to do, stating that he had read it rapidly and was not prepared to give a decisive opinion. His known caution as to new views is sufficient to account for this ; and the fact that he raises no objection may be taken as satisfactory. Professor Forbes, an authority who, on such a point, stands perhaps next to Owen, says he "thinks there is some grounds for the theory." He is a cautious Scotchman, and hence probably thinks more than he says.
28 May. — I met Professor Forbes on Sunday. He told me that he had read the population article twice and was about to read it a third time. He said he should like to have some talk with me about it.
A notice of the population article in the Leader gave rise to a misunderstanding between Mr. Lewes and Spencer. The chief biographical interest of the lengthy correspondence that ensued lies in the fact that it is the first of many instances exemplifying Spencer's extreme sensitiveness about
1 848-^3] His First Book 65
his rights as an original thinker. Mr. Lewes had used expressions which, in Spencer's opinion, " will lead all who read them to suppose that your ideas on the subject were not derived from me, and that the formula just quoted is one originating with yourself." While pained to think that he should be supposed to have denied Spencer's priority, Mr. Lewes maintained that he had arrived at his conclusions by an independent path, though acknowledging that it was Spencer that had put him on the track in the course of their country rambles. The misunderstanding was cleared up to Spencer's satisfaction, and led to no diminution in their friendship. The article out of which the difference had arisen was, as already stated, the means of initiating a new friendship, the first step towards which was a note dated 25 September, 1852 — "the politest note you ever sent me" was Profeesor Huxley's description of it more than forty years after. " Mr. Herbert Spencer presents his compliments to Mr. Huxley, and would be obliged if Mr. Huxley would inform him when and where his paper on the Ascidians, just read before the British Association, is likely to be published in full. The contents of the enclosed pamphlet will sufficiently explain Mr. Spencer's reason for asking this information." The friendship thus initiated paved the way to another. In the following year, in the rooms of the Royal Society, Somerset House, Mr. Huxley introduced him cO Mr. Tyndall, describing him by a line from Faust as " Ein Kerl der speculirt."
A series of papers in the Leader under the head " Travel and Talk " was projected, in which expression was to be given to "the overwhelming accumulation of thoughts" that bothered him. " The Haythorne Papers " — the title finally adopted (Autobiography, i., 386) — were to be unsigned, because he " did not wish to be publicly identified with the Leader's Socialism." The first, " Use and Beauty," appeared on 3rd January, 1852. The second, "The Development Hypothesis," on 2oth March. This was the outcome of several years of thought.
To HIS FATHER.
25 March, 1852.
The Haythorne Paper, No. II., has created a sensation. I have had many people complimenting me about it. Copies
66 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vi.
of the paper containing it have been sent to Owen, Lyell, Sedgvvick, and others. My consent has been asked to reprint it in the Reasoner ; and Robert Chambers, after expressing to Lewes his admiration of it, said that he meant to write to Lyell about it.
If things go on in this way my contributions will be getting in demand.
He exerted himself to meet the anticipated demand. Other papers of the series published during the year were "A Theory of Tears and Laughter," "The Sources of Architectural Types," " Gracefulness," and in the middle of the following year " The Valuation of Evidence."
The importance of a clear and forcible style had been impressed on him in season and out of season by his father, and memoranda on the subject had been accumulating for years. In the Autobiography he mentions a paper on ''Force of Expression" (written for Tali's Magazine some nine years before, but declined), as forming the basis of an article now to be written for the Westminster Review. In August, 1852, he set to work on it.
To HIS FATHER.
1 October, 1852.
The article is entitled "The Philosophy of Style." It is good, but a little too scientific. You will find it a great im- provement upon the original essay, if you have any recollection of that.
20 October. — The article is a good deal praised, both in the press and in private. .. . , I shall probably expand it .-a good deal eventually when I come to republish it along with other " Essays and Critiques." All the articles I write I mean to be of that solid kind that will be worthy of republication ; and when my name has risen to the position that it will by and by do, such a republication will pay.
Among the private commendations was one from Alexander Smith, of Edinburgh, who was flattered by the recognition given him in the article, the author of which he was ignorant of until Spencer wrote to him.
To EDWARD LOTT.
10 September, 1852.
Did I mention to you when in Derby last the new poet Alexander Smith ? I consider him unquestionably the poet
1848-53] His First Book 67
of the age. Though a Scotchman (and I have no partiality for the race) I am strongly inclined to rank him as the greatest poet since Shakespeare. I know no poetry that I read over and over again with such delight.
In a letter to his father of 3rd September, 1851, a hint had been given of a new departure. " I have been much absorbed of late in metaphysics, and believe I have made • a great discovery." The following up of the "great discovery " was probably hindered by the writing of the earlier of the Haythorne Papers and the article on " Popula- tion " ; but in a letter of i2th March, 1852, he says of it : " I mean to produce a sensation." To get time for this he had begun to think of resigning his post on the Economist, making up for the loss of salary by writing for the Quarterlies. His mother urged caution.
To HIS MOTHER.
27 October, 1852.
Do not fear that I shall take the step that alarms you unless I see it safe to do so. ...
Your objection to the risk is an objection that would apply to every change. . . . But be assured I shall not change until I have well tested the propriety of the step.
The book-selling agitation, initiated by Chapman's article on the "Commerce of Literature " in the Westminster Review for April, 1852, at once claimed his active interest. In a letter signed, " An Author," in the Times of April 5, he related his experience in connexion with Social Statics. A deputation of persons connected with the bookselling trade waited upon Lord Campbell, Dean Milman and Mr. Grote, who had been chosen as arbitrators. The Booksellers' Association failed to establish its case, the result being a decision against it.1 In 1853 he joined the society formed for promoting the repeal of the taxes on knowledge.
The amount of work he accomplished during 1852 and the first half of 1853 is surprising when one considers the claims upon him arising out of the ill-health of his father and the illness and death of his uncle Thomas. Both father and uncle were proof against warnings. Here is a sample
Times 15 and 16 April, 1852.
68 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vi.
of his letters to his father, giving advice which in after years he might well have followed himself. " I was sorry to find that your nervousness made you, as usual, expect the worst result conceivable. It is a pity, when inclined to take such gloomy views, you cannot call to mind how many times you have prophesied dreadful results and have been mistaken. But I suppose some mental idiosyncrasy prevents this." Again and again did he remonstrate with his uncle. Early in 1852 he wrote a paper on the "Value of Physi- ology," intended for the National Temperance Chronicle, edited by his uncle, who, however, " did not publish it when it was written, being offended by an apparent (but unintended) allusion to himself." The illness of his uncle required his frequent attendance at Netting Hill, his aunt being "quite touched by his affectionate interest": she " never saw anything more heartfelt than his grief."
Under the terms of the Will of his uncle, who died in January, 1853, his aunt and he were left executors. This work, which fell mainly on his shoulders, was transacted in what his aunt describes as "a prompt, business-like, satisfactory manner." Legacies were left to his father, his uncle William, and himself. Through all the negotiations he showed an entire absence of a desire to force his views upon his co-executor or co-legatees. Only one matter gave rise to friction. At a meeting held four days after the funeral, " it was agreed that several persons should give a small sketch of Thomas," for consideration at a subsequent meeting, with a view to its publication in the Temperance Chronicle.
To HIS UNCLE WILLIAM.
21 February, 1853.
What I had written was received somewhat coolly, not being uniformly eulogistic. It was not, however, objected to at the time. But next day my aunt came to me at the Strand (after Newcombe had gone off with the MS. to Leicester), wishing modification of it, and expressing her dissatisfaction with its tone. Our conversation ended in my offering to with- draw it, which was agreed to, and a letter was written to that effect at once. It is in type, however, and I have asked Newcombe to have some proofs struck off for me so that you will see what I wrote.
1848-53] His F*rst Book 69
To HIS FATHER.
2 March, 1853.
I was very much vexed to see yesterday . . . that the sub- secretary, Newcombe, had embodied extracts from it. He was not authorised to do it, and has just defeated me. I wished to say all I thought or none. I dislike insincere, one-sided statements, and am provoked that what I wrote should have been turned into one.
7 March. — I am glad you like the sketch of my uncle Thomas. I almost began afterwards to doubt, when I saw the dissatisfaction it gave, whether I had done him justice. But the fact is, people cannot bear the truth in these matters.
In preparation for the time when he would be thrown entirely upon the proceeds of his pen, he completed his article on " The Universal Postulate," and sketched one on " Over- Legislation."
To HIS FATHER.
28 April, 1853.
I am busy with the article on u Over- Legislation," which is two-thirds done. I am about to get a letter of introduction for the North British Review, so that I may have an article in hand for them by the time I leave the Economist.
17 May. — I am extremely busy writing. . . . This arises from the fact that both the article on " Over- Legislation " and the one on the " Universal Postulate " are to be published in the Westminster. The first is already done and going to the printer. It is much approved. The other is working out to my full satisfaction.
24 May. — I do not think you need feel any nervousness as to my change of position. With the two articles in the next Westminster, in addition to all I have written, I do not fear having quite enough demand. I have already taken steps for contributing to the North British, as you will see by the en- closed note from Masson, who is one of the chief writers for it. ... I shall obtain an introduction to Cornewall Lewis, the editor of the Edinburgh Review, as soon as the next Westminster is published.
7 June. — I have just been writing to the editor of the North British, and have named five articles for him to choose from. I have two-thirds done the " Universal Postulate," which works out quite to my satisfaction.
./o Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vi.
15 June. — The paper on the " Universal Postulate " will not after all go into the next Westminster. Editorial exigencies have necessitated its postponement till the succeeding number. However, Chapman proposes to put it into type at once, so that I may send proof sheets to each of the leading thinkers forthwith.
The article on " Over-Legislation " appeared in the Westminster for July. The same month he severed his connexion with the Economist.
7'.
CHAPTER VII.
A NEW PSYCHOLOGY.
(July 1853— December 1857.)
BEFORE settling down to those literary enterprises, that, with the youthful optimism which in those days seldom failed him, were expected to compensate for the loss of a sub-editor's salary, Spencer had resolved to take a holiday in Switzerland along with Mr. Lewes and Mr. Lott, the legacy of .£500 from his uncle putting him at ease with respect to finances. From Standish, where he was paying the first of many visits to Mr. and Mrs. Potter, he wrote to his mother with a view to set her anxious mind at rest : " I daresay before I leave this I shall be quite right again, and that my Swiss journey will make me stronger than I have been for years. . . . Do not fear that I shall run into danger in Switzerland, or that I shall over-exert myself. I am too cautious for that."
A list of projected articles had been sent, along with a copy of "The Universal Postulate," to the editor of the North British Review.
To A. CAMPBELL ERASER.
LONDON, 29 July, 1853.
The article on " Method in Education " which, I infer from your expressions, is the one most likely to suit your present purposes, is also the one which (of the three you mention) I am best prepared to write. ... I propose therefore to get the article ready in time for your February number.
30 July. — Your note of the 25th requested me to mention any other subject I had in contemplation. Though I had one which I felt would be suitable to you I did not make any rejoinder in my note of yesterday, from the belief that in pro-
, i., chaps, xxix., xxx., xxxi., xxxii., xxxiii.
72 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vn.
posing it I should probably clash with my friend Masson, which I am anxious to avoid doing. I have since seen him, however, and find that he has no intentions in the direction I sup- posed.
The topic to which I refer is the " Positive Philsophy." Miss Martineau's translation of Comte will be out probably by Christmas ; and having much to say on his system — mainly in antagonism to it — I am desirous of reviewing this forthcom- ing English edition of his works.
On the same day he tells his father that he had agreed to write an article on " Manners and Fashion " for the Westminster. " Moreover, I have been twice pressed within these few days by the proprietor of the Leader to write him a number of Haythorne papers. ... So you see I shall have as much to do as I want ; and all of it on topics of my own choosing. No fear of becoming a hack."
Owing to Mr. Lewes being unable to join and Mr. Lott having to delay starting for some days, he set out alone on the ist August to begin his acquaintance with foreign countries.
To HIS FATHER.
ZURICH, 12 August, 1853.
I had a few hours to spend at Antwerp which I devoted to seeing the churches. . . . The outside [of the Cologne Cathe- dral] I admire extremely, and when finished. . . . there will be no such sample of Gothic in the world. The inside, however, I do not admire, save in the grandeur arising from its great size. The architecture is by no means equal to that of the outside, and it is quite spoilt by the chromatic decora- tions. There is a strange mixture in it of magnificence, tawdriness, and meanness. . . . [Frankfort] is much to be admired. The houses are fine, the streets clean and well paved, and everything looks likely and attractive. On the whole, these continental towns make one feel quite ashamed of ours. . . . Certainly in respect of many things I felt inclined to question our boasted superiority.
In the matter of colouring he thought Switzerland inferior to Scotland. Of this he wrote to Mr. Potter : " I remember being astonished when ascending Loch Lomond at the splendid assemblage of bright purples, reds and blues of various intensities, which the mountains towards the head of the lake presented. I saw nothing to compare with this
A New Psychology 73
in Switzerland. Mainly in consequence of this superiority of colouring, I think the view from Ben Nevis quite equal to the view from the Righi."
He had set out with great hopes of benefit to health and with excellent resolutions not to over-exert himself. On his return he wrote : " Although I did not gain as much benefit whilst there as I hoped — though to my surprise I experienced no exhilaration from the mountain air — yet I think the change in constitutional condition is pretty sure to be advantageous." In this he was grievously mistaken. He began to be troubled by his heart. His opinion that this was due to over-exertion will not appear improbable to one who knows what hill-climbing, such as he and his friend accomplished, means to a person not in training. In reply to enquiries Mr. Frank E. Lott writes :
I never remember my father referring to that holiday or warning me against over-walking, though I believe that he did so on one or two occasions without quoting his own case. My aunt [Mrs. Glover] remembers his return from the 1853 Swiss holiday, and he looked as if he had overdone it, and told them that such was the case. To such an extent had they both overstrained themselves that the noise of the river Aar in the valley beside which they were walking on one occasion be- came unbearable ; so that the nervous systems were decidedly strained, and my father was far from naturally a nervous subject.
For many years before his death my father's heart was far from normal, and the more I think the matter over the more I agree with Mr. Spencer that the over-straining of the consti- tution in 1853 seriously affected both of them.1
Before going away he had distributed copies of " The Universal Postulate," one being sent to Sir William Hamilton.
FROM SIR WILLIAM HAMILTON.
LARGO, FIFESHIRE, 12 September, 1853.
But though I admired the talent with which the paper is written, you will excuse me, I am assured, when I say that I by no means coincide with your views upon the points in question. But to enter upon these in detail would engage me in a dis-
' Autobiography, i., 431-3.
74 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vn.
cussion which, I am afraid, would not be agreeable to you, and for which, in fact, I feel myself at present unable.
Those familiar with the great Scotch philosopher's contro- versial style will appreciate the force of the remark that his criticisms would not have been agreeable to the youthful essayist.
" I am making further important discoveries in psycho- logy," he tells his father in October, " and accummulating memoranda. I am getting anxious to begin the book." But before he could take up the projected work on Psychology he had to fulfil the engagements entered into. At home, in November, he worked hard at the article on " Education." On returning to town he set about getting "Manners and Fashions" ready. In March he mentions a Haythorne Paper which had " been standing in type these two months." One on " The Use of Anthropo- morphism" had appeared in the Leader of November 5. The paper now referred to must be that on " Personal Beauty," the first part of which appeared on April 15, and the second on May 13. There were still two articles to write before he could turn to the Psychology, which was "growing into yet grander form in my mind." One was the paper on Comte. In fulfilment of a promise made to Professor Fraser before going to Switzerland, he now offered to send a sketch of the article, being "aware that the topic is one requiring some editorial caution."
To A. CAMPBELL FRASER.
26 January, 1854.
The article on Comte would not at all touch on the theo- logical aspect of his doctrine, but would be purely scientific. I propose to call it uThe Genesis of Science." It would treat first of the relationships of science to common knowledge, including an important definition which M. Comte has over- looked ; next of the incongruities in M. Comte's arrangement, showing that a theory of the very reverse nature might be founded on his own facts ; next of the radical vice of all attempts at a serial classification of the sciences — such classifica- tion being altogether impossible, and finally of a sketch, partly psychological, partly historical, of what I believe to be the true process of evolution. I will forthwith write out my memoranda under these heads.
I fear that what I should write on the Sanitary Question
1 853-57] A New Psychology 75
would be inadmissible in the North British. It would be in the same sense as my article on " Over- Legislation" in the West- minster for July last. I should endeavour to show that the evidence on which sanitary agitators are demanding more law is grossly garbled and one-sided ; that the inferences drawn from local statistics of mortality are in many cases absurdly fallacious ; that many of the evils about which the greatest out- cry is raised have been themselves produced by previous sanitary regulations, and that current legislation will inevitably produce similar ones ; further, that the agencies that have brought the drainage, &c., of our towns to its present state would effect all that is needed were legislation obstructions removed ; with sundry other positions akin to these.
28 January. — Herewith I enclose the sketch of the first part, or destructive part, of the article on Comte. The second or constructive part cannot be represented in a sketch.
The article was not accepted for the North British, owing to an article on Comte in the same number having antici- pated Spencer's offer. It appeared, however, in the British Quarterly.
Early in August he left town, intending to spend some months on the French coast and then to winter in Paris, devoting himself to the Psychology. But after a month at Tr£port his restlessness drove him to Paris, where he had not been many days, when, owing to the heat, he regretted that he " did not stay another week at Treport." " I am getting on very well with the Psychology, which goes on unfolding into more and more complete form as I advance. From time to time I keep making fresh discoveries which harmonise with and confirm the rest. My private opinion is that it will ultimately stand beside Newton's Principia." This opinion must have struck him as somewhat presump- tuous, for twelve days after he tells his father that it will be well not to mention it lest it may be thought " a piece of vanity." Paris being too hot and too dull, by the middle of September he left for Jersey. He was " delighted with the island ; " but " the cooking is not good." "They bake their meat instead of roasting it. However, by evading the ques- tionable dishes I do pretty well, and as I do not think of staying more than a week longer it is not worth while to change." Early in October he was in Brighton. Taking
76 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vn.
lodgings "some distance from the sea, hut high up on the West Cliff, overlooking the town," he expected to get on with his work. But by the I9th he was back in town with the intention of settling there for the winter.
The following extracts give some of the impressions received from this first visit to France.1
To EDWARD LOTT.
14 November, 1854.
Two dinners a day (and the French regime may be properly so described) strikes one at first as rather queer — especially the regiment of wine bottles at breakfast. But approval soon supplants surprise (at least it did with me) and I have come so far to prefer their system in respect of hours, that I have since adopted it. ... Paris is a parasite, and considering how abnormal is its degree of development relatively to the rest of the body politic, and how disastrous to the nation at large is the perpetual abstraction of vitality by it, I do not feel in the least envious of its superiority in respect of the arts of life. Our efflorescence is to come ; and based as it will be on an abundant nutrition, on a veil organised nutritive system now in course of development, it will be both more complete and permanent.
Leaving all reflections, however, Paris is certainly a wonder- ful place. [But] it soon satiates. As for the architectural beauty of the place, it certainly makes one feel ashamed of London. Not that I think the architecture itself is really of a very superior order. It is rather by the amount of it and by the general regard to appearance that the effect is produced. Analysis of the public buildings and the house fronts leaves my opinion of French taste much as it was — by no means a high one. There is a certain poverty of conception, a mechanical- ness in the designs — a formality, a lack of poetry. And there is frequently in the French buildings what I have often noticed in the French furniture — a want of that massiveness, that sub- stantiality, which is a requisite basis of true beauty. . . . On Sunday, I went to the fete of St. Cloud. . . . One thing I saw astounded me not a little, and, little squeamish as I am likely to be on such a matter, somewhat shocked me. Fancy a tableau vivant-oi the crucifixion performed by three children — two boys and a girl, on a little revolving table in the midst of holiday-makers.
The article on " Railway Morals and Railway Policy," appeared in the Edinburgh Review for October, 1854.
1 Compare Autobiography, i., 455-9.
HERBERT SPENCER, from a photograph taken in 1855.
^5 3- 5 7] A New Psychology 77
To HIS FATHER.
24 October, 1854.
The railway article is quite a success. The Economist and Spectator of this week have both leading articles upon it, approv- ing the principle enunciated, and hinting at an alteration of the law. . . . The Railway Times, too, notifies that it has more extracts in type. These things render it probable that some result may arise from the article in a public point of view ; and personally they will be very advantageous in putting me on a good footing with the Edinburgh.
19 November. — I have just been making such additions to the " Universal Postulate " and such divisions of it into parts as were needful to form it into the first part of my Psychology — the u General Analysis." I have made it clearer and stronger ; and have met such objections as had been raised.
11 March, 1855. — It is sufficiently clear, therefore, that be the ultimate arrangement [for publishing the Psychology^ what it may I shall not be able to get any sum paid down, to be forthcoming on the completion of the MS.
Such being the state of the case, and the American dividends not having been paid in cash. I shall soon be " hard up " if I stay here ; and therefore propose, if you have no objection, to come down to Derby for a while, on the same terms as before.
15 March. — The printing is to commence forthwith. . . . Under this arrangement the printers will about overtake me by the time I get to the end, in June next, or thereabouts.
The next three months he spent at home, writing for five hours a day, with no relief from cogitation even during the hours devoted to walking. The portrait opposite shows that he was overworking himself. About the end of June he went to Wales to write the three concluding chapters. Pen-y- Gwyrid, at the foot of Snowdon, he calls (Autobiography, i., 466) " a place of sad memories to me ; for it was here that my nervous system finally gave way." From this time the finishing of the Psychology was done by little bits at a time, some of it in Wales and the last chapter at home. To expedite publication he went to London, and by the middle of August the book was out.
78 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. VH.
To ALFRED TENNYSON.
1855.
I happened recently to be re-reading your Poem, "The Two Voices," and coming to the verse
" Or if thro' lower lives I came — Tho' all experience past became Consolidate in mind and frame —
it occurred to me that you might like to glance through a book which applies to the elucidation of mental science the hypothesis to which you refer. I therefore beg your acceptance of Psycho- logy, which I send by this post.
To T. H. HUXLEY.
16 August, 1855.
Knowing as you must do how greatly I value your criticisms — much at my expense as they often are — I need hardly say how glad I shall be if when reading the book (or such portion of it as you have patience to read) you will jot down on the margin any remarks that occur to you, and will some day let me see them.
I have knocked myself up with hard work and am going to relax for six months. I start in the morning for Treport on the French coast.
My best congratulations on the recent event [Professor Huxley's marriage] will be best conveyed by saying that I envy you.
Next morning he set out on that pursuit of health which was to last, not six months only, as he anticipated, but eighteen months, and which neither during that nor any future time was to be crowned with complete success. At Treport, with Mr. Lott as companion, he made rapid progress ; but, as usual, he soon tired of the place. He next tried Dover, but did not like it : " It is too much in a hole." Then Folkestone, where he "slept much better in consequence of having adopted a new course of regimen." He intended to move on to Hastings, but the next we hear of him (29 September) he is at Gloucester on his way to join Professor Huxley at Tenby, in the hope that " the going out with him dredging daily will do me good." It would be amusing, were it not so pathetic, to read how theory succeeded theory as to the abnormal condition of his brain, and remedy gave place to remedy ; there being all
1853-57] A New Psychology 79
the time a hopefulness which adverse experiences seemed unable to quench.
To HIS FATHER.
29 September, 1855.
The fact is, I have been making blood faster than the weakened blood vessels of my brain will bear, and I see that I must live low a while.
10 October. — Dr. Ransome might be right were the present state of my brain one of excess of circulation. But it is the reverse. Conversation with Huxley, joined with my own obser- vations and deductions, have proved to me that the cause of my sleeplessness is defect of blood in the brain. All modes that excite the cerebral circulation (thinking excepted) are beneficial — stimulants, smoking, and so forth.
23 October. — I have come to the conclusion that the fault is not in the vessels of the brain but in the nervous substance. ... I have no unusual sensation in my head unless I excite myself.
30 October. — -I have come to the conclusion from sundry experiments of different kinds that tonics of all kinds are unfit for me at present, and that sea-air has been doing me harm rather than good. . . . Derby air, will I think, be suitable for a time.
After some five weeks at home, he went to live on a farm at Ideford, in Devonshire, the neighbourhood being favourable for riding, to which form of exercise he now took. From Devonshire he migrated to Gloucestershire, going first to Cirencester, where he found the air " bracing enough— almost too bracing at present, it would seem, for I have not slept so well since I came. I miss the horse exercise, which gives me exposure without much exertion." By January 20 he had taken up his abode at a farmhouse at Brimsfield, near Painswick, in Gloucestershire. The receipt of ^67 for work done on some of Mr. Prichard's railway schemes years before, was "a very opportune wind- fall. I had long ago ceased to expect it." On February 7 he tells his mother : " I am getting on quite satisfactorily. I now take a great deal of exercise every day — walking, riding, and thrashing, which I find a very beneficial exer- cise." Next day, owing to the wet weather making "every-
8o Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP, vii
thing, indoors and out, insufferably damp," he resolved to go home. Home he went, but within three weeks he was back at Brimsfield. " By far the best exercise I have found yet is grubbing up tree-stumps and splitting them into pieces for burning. It is not simply exhausting exercise, but it is interesting, and fully occupies the attention." Mr. Lewes chaffs him about this : " And so you have become a hewer of wood and drawer of water ! Is that the exodus of philosophy ? "
Among the remedies recommended by his friends at Standish were marriage and the exercise of the emotions, more especially the religious emotions. Parts of his replies to these suggestions are given in the Autobiography (i., 477-9). The letter to Mrs. Potter goes on to say : —
With respect to your special suggestion for the exercise of the feelings in default of a more direct means, I should say that it might be efficient in cases where the emotional part of the nature was already in a state of tolerable activity. But I have little faith in the effect of precept or example in a case like mine, where the feelings have been so long in an almost dormant state. Nothing but an actual presentation of the objects and circumstances to which they stand related will, I believe, suffice to excite them in any adequate manner. More- over, there is in me a special hindrance to the production of any such effect as that you anticipate from reading the Gospels. Owing to the foolish pertinacity with which, as a child, I was weekly surfeited with religious teachings and observances, I have contracted a decided repugnance to the very forms in which they were conveyed. I cannot hear scriptural expres- sions without experiencing a certain disagreeable feeling ; and I can no more escape this than I can the nausea produced in me by particular sweets that were commonly given me after medicine when a child. You will readily understand, therefore, that narrations clothed in language for which I have this dis- taste would fail in the desired result. Even were it otherwise I should doubt the practicability of efficiently arousing the im- personal emotions before the personal ones ; the reverse is the natural order. And further, it is not as though your plan had never been tried. Up to seventeen I was constantly in the way of hearing the gospels.
Mr. and Mrs. Potter were more successful in inducing him to try another remedy — a visit to Standish — which he accepted, though not without misgivings as to the effect of " cultivated Society " on his brain. He enjoyed himself
l853'57] A New Psychology 81
greatly, participating especially in the amusements and recreations of the children. So great was the benefit that he thought of trying the effect of a visit to London. " I doubt not that rambling about London, sight-seeing, and occasionally calling on friends, will be just the thing for me."
He meant to economize during his stay in town, and not without reason : there being ground to fear that the Psychology would be a loss, and his pen had long been idle. The notices of the book, during the time he had been in retirement, did little to create a demand for it. The charge of " materialistic and atheistic," which the Nonconformist had brought against it, he repudiated. " Not only have I nowhere expressed any such conclusion, but I affirm that no such conclusion is deducible from the general tenor of the book. I hold, in common with most men who have studied the matter to the bottom, that the existence of a Deity can neither be proved nor disproved." The notice in the National Review he thought "decidedly dishonest. I am going to write a letter to the editor similar to that to the Nonconformist."
To HIS FATHER.
STANDISH, 9 April, 1856.
You have probably heard what a scurvy notice the Athenceum has got of the Psychology. . . . The National Review has de- clined to put in my letter. If I can get it back I shall publish it elsewhere.
1 send you the British and Foreign Medico-Chirurgical Review with a very good notice of the Psychology. It is by Morell.
LONDON, 13 April. — Huxley has lately been reading the latter part of the Psychology, a propos of his lectures. He says " there are grand ideas in it." I value his approval more than that of any one ; as he is always so critical and sceptical, and so chary of his praise.
2 May. — Bain,1 who was excessively civil the other night, told me that John Mill spoke highly of the Psychology, and that he was preparing a reply to my attack on him, which is to appear in the 4th edition of his Logic.
1 This, his first meeting with Professor Bain, was at a party at Mrs. Masson's.
6
cS2 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vn.
The summer of 1856 was memorable as being the date of the first of many holidays spent at Achranich (afterwards Ardtornish), the Argyllshire home of Mr. Octavius Smith. On his way north he stopped for a week at Beoch, on the shore of Loch Boon, in Ayrshire, and put to the test some of his conclusions on the psychology of fishes.
To HIS FATHER.
ACHRANICH, 16 August, 1856.
I received the enclosed note a few days since and the volumes [Mill's Logic] have now reached me. There is nearly a whole chapter devoted to a reply to the Universal Postulate. I have glanced through it, and am not at all alarmed. Nor does his reply on another point at all stagger me.
9 September. — I think it probable that I shall soon be able to do a little work daily ; especially if the Brighton air suits me, as I expect it will. I have not caught a salmon yet ; but I have hooked two.
Brighton not coming up to expectations, he made up his mind to go to Paris, and asked his father to send his skates, his map of Paris, and Nugent's dictionary.
To HIS MOTHER.
PARIS, 20 October, 1856.
The weather here is bright and clear, and Paris looks more charming than ever.
I called on Comte yesterday to give him a remittance from Chapman. He is a very undignified little old man. My French sufficed me to carry on an argument with him in a very slip- shod style.
Albeit that Paris was "more charming than ever," within a week he was tired of it. The idea of inventing a smoke-consuming fireplace had taken possession of him. " It is extremely simple, will possess very many advantages, and can, I think, scarcely fail to succeed. Moreover, the bringing it to bear will be a very good occupation for me, as being alike new and interesting."
To HIS FATHER.
LONDON, 4 November, 1856.
I am busy getting information about smoke-consuming grates. Arnott's does not act perfectly, though it is an immense
1 853-57] A New Psychology 83
improvement. Moreover, it is liable to get out of order and difficult to manage. I am sanguine of success, and hope to combine many advantages besides smoke-consuming.
A day or two after this he went home, remaining till about Christmas. The smoke-consuming fire-place "ended in smoke " he tells us. " Smoke would not behave as I expected it to do."
New Year's Day, 1857, was noteworthy as being the first of a long series of New Years' Days on which he dined with the Huxleys. To be near them he took up his abode with a family at 7, Marlborough Gardens, St. John's Wood, hoping to do a little work. Two years before this he had promised an article for the Westminster Review on "The Cause of All Progress." He now set about redeeming that promise.
To HIS FATHER.
4 February, 1857.
I am attending a course of Huxley's lectures at the Royal Institution, to which he has given me a ticket. I was lately present at Dr. Tyndall's lecture on glaciers, in which he over- turned sundry of the current theories.
23 March. — I finished my article on u Progress " on Satur- day. I have been rather hard pressed for these ten days. . . . On the whole, I have decidedly progressed with this hard work.
The article was " very well received," he writes in May. " Huxley, whose criticism I value most, said he could not pick a hole in it, and that he meant to read it two or three times. He thought it would have great results on science." For the next few months he was engaged on an article for the National Review on " Transcendental Physiology," which appeared under the title " The Ultimate Laws of Physiology." Huxley told him that it had been ascribed to Huxley himself ; " and that by no less a person than Dr. Hooker. I have heard Huxley say that there are but four philosophical naturalists in England — Darwin, Busk, Hooker, and himself. Thus the article has been ascribed bv one of the four to another of the four."
The midsummer holiday of 1857 was spent in Kirkcud-
84 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vii.
brightshire and Ayrshire. While there he elaborated into an article for Fraser's Magazine some notes previously made on " The Origin and Function of Music." Discovering on the way south that he would arrive at Derby on a Sunday evening, he wrote to his mother : " I believe there are no cabs at the Derby station on Sunday. Will you therefore please send one to the station to be there ready for me at 7.35. For with my fishing basket and rod, and my some- what dilapidated costume, I shall hardly like walking up home." During the few weeks at home he began an article on " Representative Government," which was completed at Standish. He was back in town in time for its appearance in the Westminster in October.
To HIS FATHER.
LONDON, 28 November, 1857.
I have undertaken to write a short article on this Banking Crisis — perhaps under the title of the Bunglings of State- banking — in which I propose showing the evils of meddling and the superiority of an unrestricted system. It is for the next Westminster.
I have also engaged to supply the April number of the British Quarterly with an essay on u The Moral Discipline of Children."
I have just revised the last sheet but one of the volume of Essays. It will be out, probably, by the end of this next week.
CHAPTER VIII.
THE UNIFICATION OF KNOWLEDGE.
(January, 1858— May, 1860.)
ONE of the reasons which weighed with Spencer in selecting 13, Loudoun Road, St. John's Wood, as his residence in the beginning of 1858 was its nearness to Professor Huxley. Henceforth their intercourse became more frequent, and whether or not they met during the week, the Sunday afternoon walk could be looked forward to for healthy exercise and mental stimulation.
The revision of the Essays towards the close of the previous year was doubtless the immediate cause of that synthesis of his thoughts which, to outward appearance, suddenly took place during the last days of 1857 and the first days of 1858. It would be a mistake, however, to assume that the scheme, dated January 6, 1858, which he forwarded to his father on the Qth, was hastily con- ceived. Towards such a synthesis his ideas had for years been tending, the general drift of thought in the scientific world being also in the direction of some unifying principle. In his writings, varied as they had been in subject-matter and treatment, there could be traced a fundamentally uniform method of looking at every problem, as well as many of the leading conceptions embodied in the scheme. The revision of the Essays was but the completing link in the chain of antecedents.
While thinking over his project he had to fulfil engage- ments already entered into, such as the article for the British Quarterly on the " Moral Discipline of Children." An article on " Physical Training" was proposed for the Quarterly Review, and one on the "Nebular Hypothesis" was begun.
NOTE. — Autobiography, ii., chaps, xxxiv., xxxv., xxxvi.
86 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vm.
To HIS FATHER.
1 April, 1858.
I am very well, and am going on satisfactorily with my article for the Quarterly. I think it will be interesting.
I happened to meet at ' Chapman's on Sunday a Captain Pelly [afterwrards Sir Lewis Pelly], and through him received a most flattering and rather startling compliment. After ex- pressing his own obligations to me for instruction derived from Social Statics, he went on to say that it was much read by the officers on the northern frontier of India — that they had a dozen copies in circulation among them — and that Colonel Jacob, the Chief Commissioner in Scinde, who is in fact the Governor of Scinde, swears by it, and acts completely on its principles. This Colonel Jacob has just wrritten a book which his friend Captain Pelly has brought out for him in England, in which he gives his political experiences illustrating these doctrines to which he has been converted. I little thought that Social Statics was already regulating the government of some millions of people.
He had promised to accompany his father to France for the next midsummer holiday. But when the time drew near he hesitated owing to the warlike preparations going on across the channel.
To HIS FATHER.
14 June, 1858.
What do all these enormous preparations mean ? An attack on England seems improbable ; but every other conceivable purpose seems equally improbable. As the preparations must mean something the question is, of the various improbabilities, which is the least improbable. Certainly nothing would delight the army more than to attack us. I saw not long since a copy of verses that are sung by the French soldiers, breathing most ferocious feelings against us. Louis Napoleon would not hesitate if he thought it politic ; but can he think it politic ? I do not know what to think.
18 June. — It seems very probable that I shall be prevented from joining you myself. There is an arbitration case of Prichard's just coming on, in which I am wanted as witness ; and if I can get paid my last account for similar services, due now these five years, I must stay to give evidence. It is pro- voking that things should so happen as to hinder this long- arranged joint excursion.
The next three months were spent for the most part in his native county. With Derby as his headquarters he made excursions hither and thither in the vain hope
1858-60] The Unification of Knowledge 87
of getting fishing. At Matlock, " where the fishing is free there being no fish ! " he made up for the want of his favourite pastime by attacking the theory of the vertebrate skeleton. His dissatisfaction with the Archetype theory dated from 1851, when he attended Owen's lectures. A lecture by Professor Huxley, showing the inadequacy of Owen's doctrine in so far as it concerns the skull, en- couraged him to express his disbelief in the theory as a whole. " I am busy," says a letter (9 July) " with the on- slaught on Owen. I find on reading, the ' Archetype and Homologies' is terrible bosh — far worse than I had thought. I shall make a tremendous smash of it, and lay the foundations of a true theory on its ruins." The month after the article appeared he writes to his father : " Hux- ley tells me that the article on Owen has created a sensa- tion. He has had many questions put to him respecting the authorship — being himself suspected by some. The general opinion was that it was a settler."
On return to town in October he set about writing a promised article on "The Laws of Organic Forms." In view of another article he mentions that he was to "dine with Mr. Cross, of the great firm of Dennistoun, Cross and Co. He is to give me some information bear- ing on the morals of trade." An article on " Physical Training," declined for the Quarterly, had been accepted for the British Quarterly. He had been distributing a few volumes of the Essays. Two of the letters of acknowledg- ment are worth quoting, Mr. Darwin's being one to which Spencer attached great importance.
FROM CHARLES DARWIN.
25 November [1858].
Your remarks on the general argument of the so-called Development Theory seem to me admirable. I am at present preparing an abstract of a larger work on the changes of species ; but I treat the subject simply as a naturalist, and not from a general point of view ; otherwise, in my opinion, your argument could not have been improved on, and might have been quoted by me with great advantage.1
1 Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, ii., 141. Autobiography, ii., 27.
88 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vin.
FROM THOMAS HENRY BUCKLE.
3 December, 1858.
Rarely, very rarely, have I read a volume containing so much thought. Indeed, some of your views almost trouble me with their wealth — the ideas, in spite of their clearness, being so suggestive as to fatigue. But to oppress in this way is the highest proof of power. . . . The one on Progress interested me much ; but you would doubtless be the first to allow that our knowledge is hardly ripe enough to verify the whole generalisation it contains.
While at home he had been turning over in his mind plans for securing a living while giving him leisure to carry on his literary work. The re-organisation of the Adminis- tration of India having suggested a possible solution, he wrote to Mr. J. S. Mill.1 Application was also made for a post under the Education Commission. And, in addition, Mr. Octavius Smith had some plan which, if carried out, would give him a position in Mr. Chapman's firm. The letter to Mr. Mill, owing to the death of Mrs. Mill, did not reach its destination till November, when he was favoured with a reply which " though sympathetic, was disappoint- ing," as far as prospect of employment was concerned.
To J. S. MILL.
RICHMOND, 27 November, 1858.
I hardly know how adequately to thank you for your very generous letter ; and my difficulty is increased by the remembrance of the sad circumstances under which it is written. . . .
I have scarcely any claim to express my sympathy with you. But I cannot refrain from saying that I hope, both on public and private grounds, that the depression which the opening of your letter implies, may not be lasting ; and that you may here- after resume your career of usefulness.
The expression of opinion with which your letter concludes is much stronger than I had hoped, and cannot fail, if I may make use of it, to be of great service.
Among the friends whose interest he sought to enlist was Dr. Hooker.
Autobiography t ii., 23.
1858-60] The Unification of Knowledge 89
To J. D. HOOKER.
13 December, 1858.
I am about to seek some such position as that of foreign consul ; and my purpose in seeking it is to obtain the means of prosecuting various literary (or more properly, scientific) projects which I am now unable to carry out.
What I have hitherto written bears but a small ratio to that which I am anxious to write. Aims, originally somewhat exten- sive, have been gradually growing more so. Especially of late certain ideas, of which a few crude, misshapen rudiments exist in the Essays, have been developing in a way I never anticipated — promising in great measure to absorb, and give unity to, the separate works I had before contemplated. And this has made me the more eager to go on.
But, unhappily for me, my books have no adequate sale. . . . Under these circumstances the course suggested to me is to obtain, if possible, some post, rather of responsibility than of much active duty, which would afford me adequate leisure for executing the contemplated works. . . .
If you believe it is desirable to treat Psychology and Sociology after the spirit and methods of physical science (I give this as the best brief" indication of my chief aim) — and if you believe, from what you see of my writings, that I am likely to achieve anything in this direction, perhaps you will add the weight of your name to that of others. I am desirous to have the matter considered solely on public grounds. If you think that, through the advancement of opinion, an adequate public advantage would probably result from my gaining the desired position, and if, in so far only as you think this, you could aid me by your testimony, you would do all that I wish, and would much oblige.
In the matter of consular appointments, Dr. Hooker's reply was not encouraging.
They do entail an amount of worry to a sensitive and duty- loving man that is far from congenial to reflection. ... I hence question whether some post demanding the veriest drudgery and nothing else, during work-hours, would not prove more suited to your pursuits, so long as the said drudgery was limited as to time per day and entailed no after cares. . . . This is teaching the teacher with a vengeance, for no one should know all this so well as you ; but no man can be his own physician or metaphysician either !
When inviting the opinions of his friends, he had been careful to state that he wished this question of an appoint-
9O Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vin.
ment to be treated solely on public grounds. The testi- monials he received laid stress, therefore, on the public value of his work as a thinker and writer, the importance of giving him the means and -leisure to carry it on, and the possession by him of the intellectual and moral qualifica- tions that go to make a valuable public servant. Here are a few extracts from the testimonials.
Mr. J. S. MILL. — I should think it a credit to any minister to obtain the aid of abilities and principles like yours for the public service, and an absolute disgrace not to avail himself of them when offered.
Dr. R. G. LATHAM. — I have no hesitation in committing myself to the opinion that any position which gave you leisure and opportunity for continuing your labours in the direction in which they already lie, would be a benefit not only to a limited number of readers, but to the national literature and science in general.
Dr. J. D. HOOKER. — I have been deeply impressed with your accurate and extensive information, your vast power of acquiring knowledge, and the sagacity with which you analyze and generalize the facts and ideas which lay at the foundations of both the Natural and Physical Sciences. Nor are you less happy in your manner of expounding your results than in your methods of arriving at them. ... In common with all your friends, my great desire is to see you placed in some responsible position, where you could devote a fair share of your time to the solution of the great problems that occupy your attention, feeling assured as I do, that wherever you may be placed, your love of these sciences, your power of observation and reflection, and your ability and promptness in treating of them, will lead to your developing results of the greatest importance to the advance of human knowledge and happiness.
Mr. GEORGE GROTE. — I feel assured that your services are likely to prove extremely valuable in any department of administration to which you may be named : not merely from such a combination of intellectual study with knowledge of practical details, but also from that uprightness, sincerity of character, and habit of diligent industry, which I know you to possess besides.
Professor CAMPBELL FRASER. — I am happy to give my testimony to his power of invigorating and inspiring other minds. ... I should anticipate a salutary impulse to surrounding opinion wherever he may be placed, from his fearless investiga- tions, as well as valuable results to science from his habits of unbiassed and laborious interpretations of phenomena.
Sir HENRY HOLLAND. — I am very desirous to aid, in any way that may be in my power, the desire you express to obtain
1858-60] The Unification of Knowledge 91
some office under Government. I may in part perhaps do this by writing a few lines to convey my opinion of your eminent fitness for any position, in which high honour and integrity are required ; conjoined with equally high intelligence and mental cultivation.
Professor HUXLEY. — Founded as it is upon the accurate observation of facts, science would soon stagnate if the co- ordination of its data did not accompany their accumulation — and I can conceive nothing that would give a more vigorous impulse to the progress of science than the promulgation of a modern " novum organon " adapted to the state of knowledge in these days, and showing the unity of method of all science and the mutual connexion and interdependence of all forms of cognition.
I cannot testify more strongly to my estimation of Mr. Spencer's abilities, than by expressing my belief that if health and moderate leisure be granted him, he will very satisfactorily perform this necessary piece of work for us.
Professor TYNDALL. — It gives me pleasure to state that in your writings I discern the working of a rarely gifted and a rarely furnished mind. I do not know that I have met any- where a deeper and truer spirit of research. Your facts are legion, and your power of dealing with them ... is to me almost without a parallel. ... I would here express the earnest hope that circumstances may be so shaped as to enable you to apply powers of the rarest order, and knowledge which it must have required long years of labour to attain, in its advancement and propagation.
Of the letters of thanks two only have been found — namely, to Dr. Hooker and Professor Huxley.
To J. D. HOOKER.
16 December, 1858.
Thank you very heartily for your valuable testimonial, and the sympathetic expressions accompanying it. Of the one let me say that it is quite the kind of thing I wanted, but much better than I had dared to hope. . . .
My reason for choosing this [a foreign consulship] as the direction in which to seek an appointment was partly because I thought the requisite leisure would thus be secured, and partly because the office is one which I could undertake con- sistently with my views on the limits of State-duty. But your remarks give me pause. . . .
I looked for you last night at the meeting of the Geological Society, wishing to thank you in person, but I could not see you. The evening was a triumph for Huxley, and rather damaging for the progressive theory, as commonly held.
92 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vm.
t
To T. H. HUXLEY.
31 December, 1858.
I scarcely know how adequately to thank you for your most cordial testimonial. It far surpasses what I had hoped. . . .
I had no idea that you had so far divined my aim ; though you have given to it an expression that I had never thought of doing. I know that I have sometimes dropped hints ; but my ambition has of late been growing so wide that I have not dared fully to utter it to anyone. But that, having in some sort recog- nized it, you, who so well know my weak points, should still think that I may do something towards achieving it, is, I assure you, an immense satisfaction, and will be to me a great en- couragement to persevere.
Though I fear few will realize the possibility, or at any rate probability, that results of value may arise from giving me the opportunity of working out my aims, yet that one in your posi- tion should express this conviction cannot fail to be of important service to me.
In pursuance of his idea of getting some post in connection with India he had applied to Lord Stanley, who, as well as Mr. Disraeli, expressed a desire to help him.
FROM LORD STANLEY.
EAST INDIA HOUSE, 4 January, 1859.
I have long been familiar with your works on Psychology and Social Statics, and accept with pleasure the copies which you send, although I have already other copies in my library. Having read these works with close attention, I require no further proof of your qualification in point of intellectual ability for public service ; and I should be glad to be able to secure for the State the advantage of your talents and assiduity. But it is fair to inform you that the amount at my disposal of what is called " patronage " is but small. . . . My power of furthering your wishes is therefore very limited ; but if you will state to what particular branch of the service your wishes point, I shall be better able to say whether I see any prospect of being able to offer you employment.
To HIS MOTHER.
28 March, 1859.
A few days ago I was much disheartened in consequence of finding, in the course of a conversation with Mr. Wilson, that there were now very few posts that would at all suit me — very few that would give adequate leisure. . . . The only posts that Mr. Wilson thought would be available were those of stamp- distributors.
1858-60] The Unification of Knowledge 93
These endeavours to find employment interfered with the article on "The Morals of Trade," which was not finished till January. At home for a few weeks he began a paper on the relative values of the different kinds of knowledge. He also made his first regular experiment in dictation in the shape of a memorial from his father to the Town Council about the houses in Bridgegate.
To J. S. MILL.
DERBY, 17 February, 1859.
I should ere this have thanked you very much (as I now do) for the copy of your Essay On Liberty, which you have been so kind as to send me.
In recent times the topic has been so much disgraced by clap-trap declamation and the questionable characters of those who have dealt with it, that it has become one apt to call up more or less derision in the minds of a large class of people. And greatly needing as it did to be rescued from its damaging associations, I rejoice that it has been taken up by one whose name will beget for it respectful consideration.
I am very glad, too, that you should have treated that aspect of the matter which so greatly needs exposition — the claims of the individual versus those of society. Unfortunately, the notion of Liberty has been so much mixed up with that of organic reforms, that, with the mass of men, it has come to be synony- mous with democratic government ; and many of those who think themselves its warmest advocates are above all others inclined to increase the tyranny of the State over individuals. Indeed, the strong tendency there is on the part of the working classes to Over- Legislate has given me the only qualms I have had of late years respecting the effects of increased popular power.
You do not carry the assertion of private against public claims quite so far as I do. But though as a matter of theory I could have wished for something further, yet, considered with reference to its influence, I am glad your Essay asserts no more than it does : it will have the greater weight with almost all readers. I hope for great effects from it in mitigating that mania for meddling which has been the curse of recent legis- lation. And I know of no more important service to the time than to reform public opinion in this matter.
The next letter acknowledges a copy of the pamphlet on Parliamentary Reform.
94 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP, vm
To ]. S. MILL.
LOXDOX, 25 March, 1859.
I scarcely know what to say respecting an educational qualification ; but on the whole my leanings are, I think, rather towards dissent than otherwise. Setting aside practical diffi- culties, which I expect would be considerable, I doubt whether education, of the elementary kind, is a trustworthy test of the intelligence requisite to give a vote. The mass of those who have the mere rudiments of education, are, I believe, as pro- foundly ignorant of all matters bearing on legislation as those who cannot read and write. By-and-bye, perhaps, as cheap newspapers spread, it may become otherwise ; but at present I fancy this is the case. Moreover, the sprinkling of artisans who have made some use of their education, and are politically active, would not improbably make worse voters [rather] than better. If the rest know nothing, the knowledge of these consists chiefly of error. Preferring publications that promise them impossible advantages, and reading only these, they contract some of the wildest hopes and will listen to no criticism of them ; and very generally their desire for political power origin- ates in the determination to enact their utopias. The present strike of the shoemakers (an intelligent body of artisans) against the sewing-machine shows that, relatively to social phenomena, they are no wriser than peasants.
I merely set down these considerations at random — not having thought out the question carefully.
Respecting the ballot I own to being very much shaken, if not indeed converted.
May I draw your attention to a point in the representation which seems to me of more importance than any other ? I mean the propriety of insisting that those who have votes shall personally pay rates. The tendency of late has been exactly in the opposite direction. Small householders have been more and more freed from direct taxes, without diminishing their political power. Some years since they were disfranchised when their landlords compounded for the rates ; but now it is otherwise. The result is that the connexion between all governmental action and the demand for taxes — a connexion far too faintly realized even under the most favourable cir- cumstances— is becoming less and less familiar to the working class mind. The result is necessarilv an increased leaning towards over-legislation. This is now conspicuously the case in municipal governments. The municipal taxes being paid by the landlords of small houses, and the tenants being not reminded by increased rates that they have to pay for extra municipal outlay, it has now become in towns the popular policy to make public gardens, and build public baths, &c., at the town's expense : the popular candidate gains suffrages
1858-60] The Unification of Knowledge 95
by promising these things. If all the men who had political power had constantly thrust upon them, in a quite distinct, tangible manner, the fact that for every additional function undertaken by the Government, general or local, they had to pay so much the more money, there would be an efficient check upon interference. I feel very much inclined to think that representation may be safely extended so fast only as taxation becomes direct and equitably distributed.
A paper on Geology was dictated during a six weeks' sojourn at home before going to Achranich. The following are extracts from letters to his parents while he was in Argyllshire.
21 July, — They are all very kind, and everything goes on very agreeably. The weather is very fine and the scenery magnificent.
7 August. — As I did before, I find this air rather enervating. But I am sleeping well and enjoying myself greatly. . . .
This is a capital place for studying geology, and especially the geology of metamorphic rocks. There is an immense variety of formations within a small area.
4 September. — Mrs. Smith has pressed me to stay as long as I find it agreeable. ... I am pretty well, but am rendered rather stupid by this damp climate.
13 September. — Valentine Smith, with whom I was intending to come south, does not start till Tuesday, and they have per- suaded me to stay till he leaves. . . .
We yesterday had the most charming excursion I ever had in my life. We went by sea — a boat containing twelve — down the Sound of Mull, up Loch Sunart and Loch Teacuis, and home by land. The scenery was splendid and the colouring marvellous. The day was one I shall never forget.
He had got over the dread of society experienced during the eighteen months following the writing of the Psychology. Thus he writes (14 November) : —
Along with some others I supped with Hepworth Dixon, the editor of the Athenceum, on Tuesday. ... I dined with Sir J. Trelawney on Saturday ; and at Massons' last night. Notwithstanding which, I am very well to-day. I am . . . feeling as usual the benefits of London. I think it not impro- bable that the dry ness of the London air, from there being so
96 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vin.
many miles of paved and roofed surface, is the cause of its salubrity.
All this was favourable to work. In addition to a review of Bain's The Emotions and the Will, he finished an article on the "Social Organism," and began one on "Prison Ethics." For Macmillaris Magazine, to which Mr. Masson had asked him to contribute, he thought of writing on "The Physics of Physiology," but took instead " The Physiology of Laughter." When, many years after, he came upon the letter to his father in which this, projected paper on the "Physics of Physiology" is mentioned, he appended to it the following note : —
I did not know that the conception of such an article dated so far back ; but I have often since thought the topic one which deserved special treatment. Indeed, there is ample scope for a large work dealing with this division of biology. The mass of medical men are generally very ignorant of physics, and either misinterpret or fail to interpret many simple physiological phenomena from the absence of fit knowledge. ... A \vant of knowledge as thus illustrated is, as I say, very general, and there needs a scientific setting forth of all such organic processes as come under ordinary physical laws. . . . This scheme for an essay on "The Physics of Physi- ology," which has an immense number of applications, was for some reason not carried out. I suppose it must have been that other essays took precedence of it.
By the beginning of 1860 he had given up all hope of obtaining an appointment that would make his livelihood secure and at the same time allow him the leisure necessary for writing a system of philosophy. Most men in these circumstances would have given up further attempts to combine ends apparently so incompatible, and would have sacrificed philosophy. Not so Herbert Spencer. In a letter to his father, dated January 20, after mentioning that he had agreed to write an article for the Westminster on " Reform — the Danger and the Safeguard," he adds : " I shall send you something that will surprise you in a few days." This referred to the programme of the System of Philosophy. A printed copy bears a note in his own handwriting : " Do not let this be seen at present. I want to take some opinions on it before finally issuing it." With some verbal
1858-60] The Unification of Knowledge 97
differences it is the same as the programme given in Appendix A of the Autobiography. Only in place of the first sentence as finally adopted one reads: " In most cases writers of philosophical books who are unable to bear heavy •losses, or have already lost what they had to lose, must either be silent or must publish by subscription. The last alternative Mr. Spencer proposes to adopt rather than leave unwritten a connected series of works which he has for several years been elaborating."
From the replies to his circular the following are a few pertinent extracts.
Mr. R. CHAMBERS. — It is certainly a very grand design, such as few living men could have grappled with, or even conceived. If you execute it in a manner at all attractive you will obtain a great fame.
Mr. H. T. BUCKLE. — I am so sensible of the value of what you are doing that you may rely on my co-operation as far as my power extends.
Mr. J. A. FKOUDE. — May it (the projected work) answer all the questions which your prospectus suggests. Your first pro- position I confess myself unable to understand. Mansel says his absolute is the unknowable. How by following out his reasonings you are to establish a belief in it, I am curious to see. . . . But, by all means, let us hear what you have to say.
Sir JOHN HERSCHEL. — I could wish you had not adopted in the very outset of your programme the Shibboleth of the Hegel and Schelling School of German Philosophy, " The Absolute."
Rev. CHARLES KINGSLEY. — Anything from your pen will be important to me ; and from your programme you are facing the whole matter from that side from which it must be faced, sooner or later.
Sir CHARLES LYELL. — I hope you will not consider it im- pertinent in me to remark that I regret the first four lines of your printed programme. There is nothing in your writings and style to entitle even a hostile critic to raise up images of u heavy losses " and unsaleability in your future projected works.
F. W. NEWMAN. — It must surely tend to public enlighten- ment that the works of one who has thought so continuously should appear in a continuous shape, provided only that you do not become too voluminous.
98 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. vin.
FROM CHARLES DARWIN.
2 [February, I860.]
From your letter I infer that you have not received a copy of my book, which I am very sorry for. I tolcl Mr. Murray to send you one, amongst the first distributed in November. . . . I have now written a preface for the foreign editions and for any future English edition (should there be one), in which I give a very brief sketch [of the progress of opinion], and have with much pleasure alluded to your excellent essay on Development in your general Essays.
To EDWARD LOTT.
10 February, 1860.
Have you got a copy of the "Theory of Population," and if so, can you find it ? I have no copy left save one that is cut into parts for future use.
I am just reading Darwin's book (a copy of which has been searching for me since November and has only just come to hand) and wyant to send him the " Population " to show how thoroughly his argument harmonizes with that which I have used at the close of that essay.
I shall shortly be sending you something which will surprise you.
At the foot of a copy of this letter Spencer has noted : " This makes it clear that the programme of the ' System of Philosophy,' in its finished form was drawn up before I read the Origin of Species." Along with the pamphlet on " Population," he sent Mr. Darwin a note, acknowledging the Origin of Species, and apparently remarking on it.
FROM CHARLES DARWIN.
23 [February, I860].
I write one line to thank you much for your note. Of my numerous (private) critics, you are almost the only one who has put the philosophy of the argument, as it seems to me, in a fair way — namely, as an hypothesis (with some innate probability, as it seems to me) which explains several groups Of facts.1
You put the case of selection in your pamphlet on Popula- tion in a very striking and clear manner.
The issue of the programme seemed a favourable oppor- tunity for carrying out the intention, expressed some years
1 See also Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, ii., 290.
1858-60] The Unification of Knowledge 99
before, of trying to introduce his books to the American public. The response from an American friend, Mr. Silsbee, though somewhat vague, was not discouraging. In a sub- sequent letter from the same correspondent, Mr. Edward Livingston Youmans is for the first time brought to Spencer's notice. Mr. Youmans's interest had been awakened some years before on reading a notice of the Principles of Psychology. No sooner had he read Spencer's circular and programme than he wrote (February 23) a letter — the first of a long and important series — full of enthusiasm and promising hearty co-operation. He wished to include, in a book he was about to bring out, two of Spencer's educational articles, and deeply regretted Spencer's refusal, "as it took from me the instrument upon which 1 prospectively and chiefly relied for advancement of your larger enterprise. Upon taking hold of the matter I en- counter the difficulty which I anticipated : it is that you are almost unknown to the people."1
The article on " Parliamentary Reform : the Dangers and Safeguards " was published in April, and that on " Prison Ethics" in July. The former was the last of the essays written for the Quarterly Reviews prior to the com- mencement of his great undertaking. About the writing of it he says in a memorandum :
It was, moreover, the most rapidly written article which I ever published. At the time I had engaged an amanuensis who could write shorthand, and who during the pauses of my dicta- tion was in the habit of transcribing his shorthand into long- hand. This, of course, was a considerable economy of time ; and I remember observing that I then achieved a page of print per hour — a rate of composition which I never before nor after equalled.
Edward Livingston Youmuns, pp. 104-110.
100
CHAPTER IX. FIRST PRINCIPLES.
(May, I860— February, 1863.)
THE following letter marks the beginning of what was described by Mrs. Huxley as the long path he had marked out for himself to travel.
To His FATHER.
18 TORRINGTON SQUARE,
8 May, 1860.
I am fixed as above pretty comfortably. I began writing yesterday, and did better than I expected. Number of subscribers is now 280. Holyoake's are coming in ; and I doubt not I shall get 350 without America.
He had not been many days at work when bad nervous symptoms drove him to Brighton for a few days. The month following he wrote, backing out of the arrangement previously made to join his father at Treport for the holidays. " Health is the- first consideration, especially under my present engagements; and I am very decidedly of opinion that I shall benefit more by joining Lott's party at Llandudno than by going to France. . . . Add to which that it will be more economical, which just now is a consideration." Eventually, putting economy aside, he did both ; spent first a short time at Llandudno and then joined his father and mother at Treport, returning to London in July. News from the United States was encouraging ; putting him at ease as to the financial aspect of his undertaking. In a list of some of the earlier American subscribers one meets the names of George Bancroft, Henry Ward Beecher, Henry W. Bellows, F. Bowen, J. I. Bowditch, Henry C. Gary, E. H. Chapin, George W. Curtis, J. W. Draper, Edward Everett,
NOTE. — Autobiography, ii., chaps, xxxvii., xxxviii.
1860-63] First Principles 101
C. C. Felton, John W. Francis, Dr. Furness, Walcott Gibbs, Asa Gray, Horace Greeley, E. E. Hales, Geo. S. Hillard, F. H. Hodge, Francis Lieber, J. R. Lowell, W. B. Rogers, Jared Sparks, Charles Sumner, Bayard Taylor, George Ticknor, E. P. Whipple, Jeffries Wyman.
On his way to Achranich in September he spent a few days at home. The first of the two following extracts acknowledges the return of proofs of First Principles, the second gives expression to his sympathy on the occasion of a domestic bereavement.1
To T. H. HUXLEY.
DERBY, 11 September, 1860.
I was, as you may suppose, immensely gratified to have from you so decided an expression of approval. Coming from you, who are so critical and sceptical, it took me somewhat by surprise ; and the more so because I feared that this first part would prove a choke-pear to the subscribers. Judge, then, how great a relief it was to read your letter.
Achranich, 23 September. — I sincerely sympathize with you and your wife in your great loss, knowing as I do how much you prized your little boy. I well remember your having told me how his existence had disclosed to you a new side of your nature, previously dormant ; and I can well understand how one, feeling so deeply the interests of parenthood, not only on their instinctive, but on their rational side, must be affected by such a catastrophe.
He would not allow Professor Huxley or Dr. Hooker to remain as paying subscribers, for the reason given in a letter of 6 October, 1860. " I have all along calculated on obtaining from you much aid in the shape of information, advice, and criticism ; and may, I fear, if you will allow me, from time to time, trouble you a good deal with ques- tions and discussions. Though in such a case a pepper-corn acknowledgement, in the shape of a presentation copy, leaves the obligation just where it was, yet there is a certain satisfaction in going through the form of an acknowledge- ment ; and this satisfaction you must not deny me." 2
1 Life of Professor Huxley, i., 212-4.
2 Professor Huxley's letter of loth October, 1860 (Life and Letters, i., 214) is in reply to the above letter. His biographer, when referring to the circumstances in which the letter was written, was misled, owing to Spencer having, through oversight, endorsed on the letter that it was written in 1866, when he had issued a notice of discontinuance.
IO2 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. ix.
To Mrs. POTTER.
LONDON, 25 October^ 1860.
Have you seen the volume of Essays by Jowett and Co. ? They appear to be creating a considerable sensation. As com- ing from some of the most influential men connected with the Church, they are extremely significant of the progress of opinion. . . .
By the way, referring to matters bearing upon the current theology, let me horrify you by the announcement of a recent discovery. There has just been sent over from Germany to Sir Charles Lyell the cast of a " skull, found along with the bones of the mammoth and other extinct mammals which lived during the period of the drift," or latest geologic epoch. And this skull, which, judging from the remains with which it is found, was contemporaneous with those flint implements which have lately been creating so great a sensation, by proving the vast antiquity of the human race — this skull, mark, is inter- mediate between that of the gorilla and that of man ! There is a startling fact for you.
After this, anything else would be bathos, so I will leave off. With kindest regards to Mr. Potter and the little girls.
He was afraid that the delay in the issue of the first number of the serial might prejudice his interests in the United States, but Dr. Youmans set his mind at rest on that score.
FROM EDWARD LIVINGSTON YOUMANS.
6 October, 1860.
I was anxious to get the volume on Education out at the earliest moment, before the first part of the serial arrives. We don't exactly know about that " Unknowable," we have great faith in it, undoubtedly ; but we are sure of the weapon in hand and prefer to open the campaign with that. I there- fore by no means regret the delay of the first part, nor need you trouble yourself to hasten the sending of it now.1
Hardly had he settled down to work when he was summoned to Derby, owing to the illness of his uncle William — an illness which had a fatal termination towards the end of November. The legacy left by his uncle put him in possession of funds likely to be needed if his literary project was to be carried out. The number of subscribers,
1 Edward Livingston Youmans, p. 1 1 2
1860-63] First Principles 103
if it could be kept up, would suffice to pay the cost of publication and yield him a small income — provided there were no defaulters. But it would not prove sufficient if there came a falling away of subscribers and bad debts. Even already there were indications that there might be difficulty in meeting the printer's bill, to say nothing of earning a living. The legacy came, therefore, at an oppor- tune time.
Early in 1861 the second number was issued, and "so far as I have at present heard, meets with high approval." He mentions that he was " attending various lectures — seven this week," leading his father to fear a break-down. No letters between February 13 and June 14 are to be found ; but one gathers from the Autobiography (ii., 65) that coincident with the bringing out of No. 3 of the serial there was a relapse ; that he sought relaxation in visits to Standish and Derby ; and that during these visits he revised the articles on Education, which he saw through the Press in May and June. As usual, he improved at Achranich (or Ardtornish, as his friend's Argyllshire home was now called) in July and August, and looked forward to being "able to go ahead with the work on return." This expectation was not realised ; for soon after arriving in town the strain of bringing out his fourth instalment proved too much. By the middle of October he was contemplating going to Paris, where " change of air, change of scene, entire relaxation, and plenty of amusement, will, I hope, soon set me right." The Autobiography makes no mention of this visit, and beyond a reference to letters written in Paris on Novem- ber 5 and 15, the above is the only hint of it. That it answered his expectations for a time at least may be inferred from a letter, dated Torrington Square, December 12, in which he says : " I am improving considerably ; and have done a fair share of work this week without detriment." Early in 1862 we find him in Bloomsbury Square, which is, he fears, " too far away from the most of my friends."
In May he tells his father : "The chapter on 'Equilibra- tion,' which I am now revising, works out beautifully ; but it is giving me a good deal of trouble." " Equilibration " had been giving him trouble for several years. In an undated letter to Professor Tyndall from 13, Loudoun
iO4 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. ix.
Road, written probably towards the end of 1858 or very early in the year following, he says : —
Had not the announcement of coffee prevented, I had hoped to carry much further the discussion we commenced on Satur- day evening. Lest you should misunderstand me, let me briefly say now what I wished to say.
In the first place, I fully recognize, and have all along recognized, the tendency to ultimate equilibrium ; and have, after sundry other chapters on the general laws of change, a final one entitled "The Equilibration of Force." Indeed, of the general views which I have of late years been working out, this was oddly enough the first reached. Among memoranda jotted down for a second edition of Social Statics — memor- randa written towards the close of '51, or early in '52 — I have some bearing on this law in its application to society. . . . Thus, you see, that my views commit me most fully to the doctrine of ultimate equilibration.
That which wras new to me in your position enunciated last June, and again on Saturday, was that equilibration was death. Regarding, as I had done, equilibration as the ultimate and highest state of society, I had assumed it to be not only the ultimate but also the highest state of the universe. And your assertion that when equilibrium was reached life must cease, staggered me. Indeed, not seeing my way out of the con- clusion, I remember being out of spirits for some days after- wards. I still feel unsettled about the matter, and should like some day to discuss it with you.1
The completed volume was published the third week of June, when he gave himself up to relaxation, acting as guide at the International Exhibition to his parents and others. This summer's visit to Scotland, whither he went after two weeks in Wales, is described with more than usual fulness in the Autobiography (ii., 77-83), owing probably to its having been mainly a walking tour. Of the scenery from Invergarry to Loch Alsh he writes : " I have seen some magnificent scenery — the finest I have seen in the kingdom." This enjoyable tour was made shorter than he intended by the arrival from New York of Dr. and Mrs. Youmans, whom he arranged to meet in Glasgow. After a few days spent with them, he went South, taking Derby and Coventry on the way, London being reached by the middle of September.
' See Appendix. "The Filiation of Ideas."
1860-63] First Principles 105
While away he had been on the look-out for notices of his book. " No reviews of First Principles have reached me yet," he writes in July. " It is a book that reviewers are glad to put off as long as they can." October brought several notices : among them the article on " Science, Nescience, and Faith," in the National Review for October, which is thus referred to : —
To His FATHER.
9, GLOUCESTER SQUARE,
3 October, 1862.
It is ... evidently by Martineau. When you get to the end of it you will see pretty clearly that it is animated by a spirit of retaliation for the attack I made upon him. It is clever, as might be expected ; but it contains sundry cases of the usual Martineau Jesuitisms and dishonesties — ascribing to me things which I have not said, and misinterpreting things which I have said ....
The Westminster Review devotes three pages to the book. . . . But the tone of it is somewhat tepid — as I expected it would be.
The British Quarterly has given me an agreeable surprise. In its epilogue on books and affairs under the head of Science, there is a brief notice very cordially expressed, stating that they . . . propose to devote an article to it in their next number. It is rather odd that here, where I had expected most antagonism, there is most recognition. . . .
I am well and getting on with my work satisfactorily. I was strongly tempted to go to Cambridge [to the British Association], but concluded that the excitement would be too much for me.
13 October. — I think I told you that I had promised to go to Paris with Mr. Silsbee. ... I shall have a quantity of work with me to revise, which will occupy me during my stay of three weeks or so ; so that I shall not lose any time.
As usual, he very soon got weary of Paris and returned in a fortnight. As soon as he came back he took up Mr. Martineau's review of First Principles. In a letter to the Athencenm (November 8) he mentioned that the National reviewer has classed him "with a school whose religious conclusions I repudiate, alike on logical grounds and as a matter of sentiment." In a second letter he adduced evidence to show that he had ample justification for charac-
io6 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. ix.
terizingthe reviewer's statements as "misrepresentations and grave ones." The " agreeable surprise " given by the British Quarterly Review in October was not long-lived. The next issue showed that his original expectation was not far wrong. For in the promised review his analysis of ultimate religious ideas is described as sounding "like a great blazon of trumpets over a very small victory." The analysis of ulti- mate scientific ideas "is occasionally tedious, but if the tediousness be overlooked, is very amusing, or might easily be made so."
Spencer objected to press notices of his books being used for advertizing purposes. But to satisfy Dr. Youmans, whom he wisely recognized as the best judge of what was expedient for the American public, he sent, early in 1863, a collection of such notices. "As I told you, I do not propose to have them quoted in England ; having a decided dislike to the practice. But I have no objection to their being used in the United States, if you think it will be desirable." There was indeed an urgent necessity for something being done there to sustain the interest that had been aroused in 1860. The unsettled political condition during 1861 had been "deadly to generous support " of such literature as did not bear upon the struggle in which the country was engaged.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
27 February, 1862.
When next you favour me with a letter I shall be very glad to hear from you what is the present state of affairs and opinions respecting the secession. One sees here nothing more than ex- tracts from American papers, and these are mostly from papers which probably do not truly represent the real feeling that prevails among you.
FROM E. L. YOUMAXS.
4 April, 1862.
The fact is incontestible that the North is fighting for liberty, order, free industry, education, and the maintenance of stable government, while the South is contending for the opposite — slavery and its dark' concomitants. Here the thing is well understood, but wherefore England should sympathize with the South, I confess, is not understood. How the views of large classes in England may be warped by their interests
1860-63] First Principles 107
is plain ; and how the newspapers may be influenced is also obvious ; but how your dignified and philosophic Quarterlies can be brought to utter such unjust sentiments and flagrant misconceptions as their last issues contained, we are unable to explain. Do those Reviews fairly represent British feeling ?
To E. L. YOUMANS.
15 May, 1862.
I am glad to see by the last account that the North is making great progress. I have held all along that whatever may be the solution to be finally desired, it is quite necessary that the North should show its power ; and I rejoice to see it now doing this. I think Dr. Draper, in common with most other Americans over-estimates what adverse feeling there is here. . . . Such adverse feeling as does exist is due to what we consider here to be the perverse misinterpretation of our motives — the sus- picion that our commercial interests must bias us in favour of the South, and then the twisting of whatever we said and did into proof that we were biassed in favour of the South. As far as I had the means of judging, the feeling here was at first very decidedly on the side of the North ; and the change that has taken place has, as far as I have been able to observe, [been] wholly due to the cause I have assigned. But that feeling, however caused, has now very considerably abated.
14 February, 1863. — I am grieved to see the recent news respecting the state of the war. Though, as you know, I have all along held that it was both a necessary thing, and a desirable thing, that the separation should take place, yet I have always hoped to see the South restrained within narrow limits, and regard as disastrous, both for America and the world at large, anything which looks like a possibility of extension in their territory.
io8
CHAPTER X. BIOLOGY.
(September, 1862— March, 1867.)
ON his return from his holiday in September, 1862, he at once began the Principles of Biology, the first number of which was issued in January, 1863, and the second in April.
The announcement of Mr. Mill's Utilitarianism afforded him an opportunity of stating more clearly than he had done in Social Statics, his attitude towards the doctrine of Utility. The greater part of his letter of February 24, 1863, appears in the Autobiography (ii., 88). It concludes by expressing the hope that " the above explanations will make it clear that I am not really an antagonist to the doctrine of Utility. If not a Utilitarian in the direct sense, I am still a Utilitarian in the transcendental sense."
FROM J. S. MILL.
25 February, 1863.
I am obliged to you for your letter, and if the sheet is not struck off (which I fear it is) I will add to the note [pp. 91-2] in which you are mentioned, what is necessary to prevent the misapprehension you desire to guard against.
Your explanation narrows the ground on which we differ, though it does not remove our difference ; for, while I agree with you in discountenancing a purely empirical mode of judg- ing of the tendencies of human actions, and would on that subject, as well as on all others, endeavour to reach the widest and most general principles attainable, I cannot admit that any of these principles are necessary, or that the practical conclu- sions which can be drawn from them are even (absolutely) universal.
As I am writing I cannot refrain from saying that your First Principles appear to me a striking exposition of a consistent
NOTE. — Autobiography, ii., chaps, xxxix., xl., xli., xlii., xliii., xliv.
1862-67] Biology 109
and imposing system of thought ; of which, though I dissent from much, I agree in more.
To J. S. MILL.
1 March, 1863.
I am greatly obliged to you for having not only made the desired alteration, but allowed me to see the proof. Taking advantage of your permission, I have ventured to make, in pencil, such changes of expression as are needed more com- pletely to represent my view.
20 March. — I am much obliged to you for the copy of your
reprinted essays on Utilitarianism Let me also thank you
for having so readily acceded to my request respecting the explanation, as well as for having introduced the modifications of expression in it which I suggested.
To HIS FATHER.
9 June, 1863.
For myself I am well and busy — going out a good deal, and indeed rather too much. Saturday and Sunday I spent at the Lubbocks, along with Huxley and his wife, and Tyndall. On Wednesday I dine out again, on Friday again, and again on Sunday. . . . On the Friday I am going specially to meet Lady Lubbock, who, Mrs. Lubbock says, is ''dying to see me."1
Having issued the third number of the Biology, and taking with him the Essays he proposed to revise, he went about the middle of July to see his mother at Scarborough. While there he writes to his father : " I find my mother looking pretty well and in tolerably good spirits. . . . Your hand is very much bolder, whence I infer that you are con- siderably better. . . For myself I am very well and comfort- ably placed, and like Scarborough much for its variety and picturesqueness." From Scarborough he went to the West of Scotland, in company with Mr. Lott and another friend, eventually reaching Ardtornish.
His interests in the United States were being well looked after by Dr. Youmans, who thus describes the two objects to be aimed at : " To circulate your writings as extensively as possible, and to do it in such a manner that you might share the pecuniary results. It has been comparatively easy to accomplish the first object unembarrassed by the
1 See Autobiography, ii., 71.
no Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. x.
second." Mr. Appleton being ready to share the risk of publishing a selection from the Essays, though not seeing his way to take the whole of it, Dr. Youmans set about securing the necessary support, which was more liberal than Spencer could accept, though he warmly appreciated the generosity that prompted it. 1 But he acquiesced in an arrangement according to which his American friends were to provide the publishers with the stereotype plates, on the understanding that no royalty should be paid to him until his friends had been recouped their outlay. In the Auto- biography he says : " This was, I believe, the course eventu- ally adopted. Funds were raised to pay the cost of reprinting the several volumes named, and after those who furnished them had been recouped, I began to receive a royalty on all copies sold." Subsequent correspondence does not bear out his recollection of " the course eventually adopted."
FROM E. L. YOUMANS.
1 January, 1865.
As respects the copyright money sent you, or the certiricates of its investment, I have only to say that it accrues to you from the sale of your books, and if you do not draw it, D. Appleton & Co. will have the benefit of it.
When your letter, refusing to accept anything from the avails of your books until all who had subscribed to their republication were repaid, was received, I circulated it among those principally interested. They appreciated your feelings in the matter, but said your scruples were groundless, as you totally misconceived the case — that they had aided to republish the works for public reasons, as they had a perfect right to do, and were ready, if desirable, to increase their contributions, but not to receive back what they had so gladly given. They have not regarded it at all in the light of a personal matter, nor can they be made to do so now. While they consider themselves richly compensated by the success of your works, and the unmistakable symptoms of their powerful influence upon public opinion, the fact that the'author gets his just compensation is regarded as an agreeable incident of the enterprize.
And now allow me to remind you of a remark you made some time since to the effect that you had better leave this business of reprints to us on this side and take no responsibility in the matter.
1 Edward Livingston Youmans, p. 161. Autobiography, ii., 97.
1862-67] Biology in
To E. L. YOUMANS.
23 January, 1865.
I am very much impressed by the manifestation of sympathy and generosity implied in your explanation respecting the proceeds of copyright. I should have preferred that the matter should have been transacted in the modified way that I origin- ally requested, and I feel somewhat uncomfortable under the much heavier obligation entailed on me by the course pursued ; but, at the same time, this extreme self-sacrifice displayed by my American friends is a source of very pleasurable feeling to me, not only in its personal aspects, but also as a testimony of their interest in the propagation of the views with which I am identified.
The success of the Essays had suggested the expediency of bringing out an American edition of Social Statics.
FROM E. L. YOUMANS.
12 April, 1864.
I think you once remarked to me that certain of your views had been considerably modified since the publication of Social Statics, but as you intimated that the change consisted in a divergence from the democratic views there expressed, the volume may be more acceptable to us in its present form than it would be after your revision.1
To E. L. YOUMANS.
18 May, 1864.
Respecting Social Statics, I gave you a somewhat wrong impression if you gathered from me that I had receded from any of its main principles. The parts which I had in view, when I spoke of having modified my opinions on some points, were chiefly the chapters on the rights of women and children. I should probably also somewhat qualify the theological form of expression used in some of the earlier chapters. But the essentials of the book would remain as they are. When you come to the reprinting of Social Statics, should that project be persevered in, I should like to put a brief prefatory note, stating my present attitude towards it.2
Dr. Youmans hoped that Spencer would devote sufficient space to put readers in full possession of his later views. When the promised preface was sent in November, Spencer
Edward Livingston Youmans, p. 1 76. Ibid., p. 1 80.
ii2 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. x.
wrote : " I fear it will disappoint you in not containing any specific explanations. But I could not make these in any satisfactory way without occupying more space than would be desirable and more time than I can now afford. I think, too, it will be better policy at present to leave the disclaimer in the comparatively vague form in which I have put it."
FROM E. L. YOUMANS.
1 January, 1865.
I was not disappointed in it as a disclaimer, but was some- what so that it was only a disclaimer. I had hoped there would be a little of something else to relieve it of its naked, negative character. . . . But the effect of this preface in its present form will undoubtedly be bad upon the work. ... If I had followed my own preference I would have written a preface saying certain things which I could very well have said, and absorbing the entire contents of your preface into it as a private letter, stating your present attitude to the work. ... I do not pur- pose to change a word nor to neutralize its influence by counter-statements ; but simply, by distributing it through another medium, to somewhat diminish the injurious effect which it will have by being placed and read alone.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
23 January, 1865.
Pray do as you think best respecting the preface to the American edition of Social Statics. Probably it will be better to embody the explanations I have made in an introduction of your own, as you propose. All I wish is, to make it under- stood that the book must be read with some qualifications ; and this end will be as well achieved in your own [words] as in mine.
"After repeated attempts to comminute and macerate" the preface Dr. Youmans had to give it up, and let it appear as Spencer had put it.
The fourth instalment of the Biology had been delayed partly owing to his having devoted some three months to the revision of a second series of Essays. A more serious interruption was caused by his having turned aside to set himself right as to his relations to Comte and Positivism. In a letter to the New Englander towards the end of November, 1863, he repudiated being classed as a follower of Comte.
1862-67] Biology 113
On all . . . points that are distinctive of his philosophy, I differ from him. I deny his hierarchy of the Sciences. I regard his division of intellectual progress into three phases, theological, metaphysical and positive, as superficial. I reject utterly his religion of humanity. And his ideal of society I hold in detestation. Some of his minor views I accept ; some of his incidental remarks seem to me profound ; but from everything which distinguishes Comtism as a system, I dissent entirely.
When he wrote to the New Euglander he had no idea of going beyond the immediate purpose of correcting the misapprehension in the United States. But it now occurred to him that it might be well to set forth his views in full, and immediately on his return from Derby in January, 1864, he set about doing this. Once more he was led further than he at first intended. While preparing the pamphlet on " The Classification of the Sciences," there appeared M. Laugel's article in the Revue des Deux Mondes for February 15, 1864. "I find the impression that I belong to the school of Comte is so general," he tells his father, "and so likely to be confirmed by M. Laugel's article, that I am about to write a full denial on all points." Proofs of " Reasons for Dissenting from the Philosophy of M. Comte" were sent to Mr. G. H. Lewes.1 Several scientific men were invited to say whether Comte had influenced them, or any men they knew. The gist of their replies was embodied in the pamphlet, but after it had been put in type this paragraph was omitted.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
26 March, 1864.
I enclose along with this a slip-proof of a portion which I suppressed from the pamphlet, from a desire not to seem needlessly hostile to the Comtists here. I do not suppose you will find any use for it. But if you do, do not make use of my name. Since having suppressed it from the pamphlet here, it is not desirable that I should assert it elsewhere.
The suppressed paragraph, besides summarizing the denials of Tyndall, Huxley, Herschel, Babbage, Lyell and
^Autobiography, ii., in; also Appendix B, p. 485. George Eliofs Life, ii., 381. 8
114 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. x.
Faraday that their course of thought had been influenced by Comte, points out how scientific conceptions and me- thods repudiated by Comte had, nevertheless, gained wider acceptance and greater definiteness. " Thus not only have M. Comte's teachings failed to change in any appreciable way the course of scientific thought in England ; but its most marked advances have been in directions which he says it should not take."
With reference to this question, he wrote to Mr. Mill enquiring whether a letter dated 29 July, I858,1 was still in existence. " Unless I am very much mistaken respecting its contents, this letter would form tolerably conclusive evidence " as to the actual origin of the system of phil- osophy.
FROM J. S. MILL.
3 April, 1864.
I am, fortunately, able to send you the letter you want. No Englishman who has read both you and Comte, can suppose that you have derived much from him. No thinker's con- clusions bear more completely the marks of being arrived at by the progressive development of his own original conceptions. . . . But the opinions in which you agree with Comte, and which, as you truly observe, are in no way peculiar to him, are exactly those which would make French writers class you with him ; because, to them, Comte and his followers are the only thinkers who represent opposition to their muddy metaphysics.
I myself owe much more to Comte than you do, though in my case also, all my principal conclusions had been reached before I saw his book. But in speculative matters (not in practical) I often agree with him where you do not, and, among other subjects, in this particular one, the Classification of the Sciences. The fact you mention of your having read only a portion of his Cours de Philosophic Positive, explains some things to me which I did not understand previously ; for, if you had read the entire book, I think you would have recognized that several of the things which you urge as objections to his theory, are parts of the theory.
I have lately had occasion to re-read, and am still reading, your Principles of Psychology. I do not agree any more than I did before with the doctrine of the introduction ; but as to the book itself, I cannot help expressing to you how much my opinion of it, though already high, has been raised (I hope from a progress in my own mind) by this new reading. There is
1 Autobiography, ii., 23.
1862-67] Biology 115
much of it that did not by any means strike me before as it does now ; especially the parts which show how large a portion of our mental operations consist in the recognition of relations between relations. It is very satisfactory to see how you and Bain, each in his own way, have succeeded in affiliating the conscious operations of mind to the primary unconscious •organic actions of the nerves, thus filling up the most serious lacuna and removing the chief difficulty in the association psychology.
To J. S. MILL.
8 April, 1864.
I am greatly obliged to you for your letter of the 3rd, enclosing the letter I referred to, which has been so fortunately preserved. Your expression of opinion on the question at issue was also extremely satisfactory to me : coming as it does from one so fully acquainted with the facts of the case, and so free from bias. It has served to confirm me in the belief that the position I have taken is a justifiable one.
Let me thank you also for the very gratifying expression of your opinion respecting the Principles of Psychology. I need scarcely say that, coming from you, this favourable criticism gives me a better assurance than any which I have yet had, that the book has not been written in vain.
Respecting the doctrine of the introduction, I have hitherto postponed returning to the question until the time when a second edition afforded an opportunity to do so. But as you have referred to it, it seems proper now to say, that I believe the disagreement arises mainly from a difference of verbal interpretation. It did not occur to me when I used it as I have done, that the word " inconceivable " was liable to be understood as the equivalent of " incredible." By an incon- ceivable proposition, I, in all cases, meant an unthinkable proposition — a proposition of \vhich the elements cannot be united in consciousness — cannot be thought of in direct relation.
Towards the end of his letter of 3rd April, Mr. Mill mentions with approval the work being done by Professor Bain and Spencer, each in his own way. The differences between these two on philosophical questions seemed but to bring out more clearly their regard for one another — a regard (already strong in those early days) which grew in strength as year succeeded year. The following is an acknowledgement of the second edition of The Senses and the Intellect, which Professor Bain had kept back as long as possible in order to be in possession of Spencer's latest utterances in the Biology.
u6 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. x.
To ALEXANDER BAIN.
March, 1864.
I see that you have made some references to my speculations and criticisms ; and have done so in a very friendly spirit. I am the more gratified by this, because I feared that you might 'be somewhat annoyed by my review of your second volume. I am very glad to find that the differences of opinion which I freely expressed in it, have not induced any disagreeable feeling. I am, indeed, impressed with the great generosity of nature which your reception of them implies.
His health and power of work were about this time better than usual. The excitement accompanying his criticism of Comte had, he thought, done him good. The social excitements of the London season were also borne for a time without injury. But by midsummer he had to admit that he had been going out too much. After bringing his mother home from Matlock, and spending a short time with the Lotts in Wales, he went to Scotland.
To HIS FATHER.
ARDTORNISH, 28 August, 1864.
I have now been here nine days ; and the time has passed very pleasantly. I have been very cordially treated — more so than usual, I think. . . .
I have declined Bain's invitation. I did not dare to run the risk of discussions.
7 October. — The opening article in the North American Review for July is one on the Nebular Hypothesis — taking for text my second series of Essays. It disagrees on some points, but is very civil and complimentary.
About the middle of October, the concluding number of the first volume of the Biology was issued. " Fancy my disgust," he writes next month, " on reading in the list of the books of the week in the London Review, my own just published volume announced as Electro- Biology, vol. i. . . . I am getting on with my writing satisfactorily, and am working out the Morphology of Plants with unexpected success." The issue of the first number of vol. ii. was delayed "in consequence of the number of woodcuts I am having prepared in illustration of vegetal morphology. The choice and arrangement and execution of these gives a great
1862-67] Biology 117
deal of trouble, and keeps me tied here. I shall not, in consequence, be able to get down to Derby till after Christmas." As if his biological work were not enough to have on hand at one time, he took an active part along with a few friends in an attempt to reorganize the Reader. He himself contributed four articles : " What is Electricity ? " " The Constitution of the Sun," "The Collective Wisdom," and " Political Fetichism." Endeavours were made to obtain the co-operation of- men of standing.
To CHARLES DARWIN.
22 April, 1865.
We are getting our staff of the Reader into better working order ; and are proposing forthwith to use all the means avail- able for making a more decided impression, and establishing our position. Profs. Huxley and Tynclall, Mr. J. S. Mill and myself, have severally agreed to write a few leading articles by way of giving the intended tone and direction.
Among other means of making the public aware of the character of the Reader, we propose to obtain, so far as pos- sible, occasional brief letters from the leading men of science, announcing such interesting novelties as admit of being under- stood by the general public, and are of fit nature to be quoted from our columns. I have a letter from Sir John Herschel con- senting to aid us in this way. Sir Charles Lyell, too, has pro- mised the like aid. Can you in like manner give us, occasionally, the valuable help of your name ? . . .
A letter of a dozen lines would suffice the purpose of giving us the weight of your name, and making it apparent that you joined in the effort to establish a scientific journal, and an organ of progressive opinion.
To J. S. MILL.
26 May, 1865.
I hope you are better satisfied with the Reader, It is rapidly improving in circulation ; but I fear we shall now have to pass through a trying period, during which the want of advertisements will be very much felt.
It appears that the putting of initials to articles is not of very much service — many of the public having been quite in the dark as to who " J. S. M." was. It is suggested that the full names should be put. What is your feeling on this point ?
The article some weeks since on the Edinburgh Review caused a breach with the Longmans, as was to be expected. They had not advertised for some time previously, and of course have not done so since.
ii8 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. x.
FROM J. S. MILL.
AVIGXOX, 29 May, 1865.
With regard to the Reader, I like the plan of full signa- tures. . . . But, to admit of this it would |be necessary for the Reader to give up the plan it has recently adopted of making slashing attacks to right and left, with very insufficient produc- tion of evidence to justify the vituperation ; and in a manner which gives to an indifferent spectator the impression either of personal ill-will in the particular case, or of general flippancy and dogmatism. Contributors will not like to identify them- selves by name with a publication which would embroil them with an unlimited number of angry and vindictive writers, together with their friends arid their publishers. I myself should not like to be supposed to be in any way connected, for instance, writh the attack on the Edinburgh Review (for which I am at this very time preparing an article) — an attack of which I totally dislike the tone, and agree only partially with the sub- stance : and it happens that the article singled out from the last number for special contempt, my name, too, being cited against it, is by a personal friend of my own, a man of very considerable merit, whom I was desirous of securing as a recruit for the Reader, and who is very naturally hurt and indignant at the treatment of him. I am by no means against severity in criticism, but the more it is severe, the more it needs to be well weighed and justly distributed.
It was now some years since Spencer had written an article of any magnitude or importance for the larger Reviews. The reason for breaking his rule in 1865 is given in the following correspondence, which, apart from its bearing on the questions discussed, has value as a revelation of the generous catholicity of the writers.
FROM J. S. MILL.
BLACKHEATH, 11 March, 1865.
Dr. Chapman will send you in the course of a day or two a copy of an article of mine on Comte, which is to be published in the forthcoming Westminster. In forming an estimate of him, I have necessarily come into collision with some of your opinions — a thing for which I should never think of apologizing to you or any advanced thinker ; but it has so happened that though our points of agreement very greatly exceed in number and importance those of difference, the latter are those respect- ing which, accidentally, most has been said to the public, on my side at least. What I have now written, however, will give a very false impression of my feelings, if it raises any idea
1862-67] Biology 119
but that of minor differences of opinion between allies and fellow-combatants. In a larger volume which I shall soon have the pleasure of offering to you, there will be little or nothing to qualify the expression of the very high value I attach to your philosophic labours.
To J. S. MILL.
13 March, 1865.
I am greatly obliged to you for your note of the llth ; and appreciate the kind feeling which dictated it.
I thoroughly sympathize with your view respecting the candid expression of differences of opinion. My own practice has always been that of pointing out what appears to me erroneous, quite irrespective of any personal considerations ; and I am quite prepared to have the opinions I express treated by other thinkers with a like individual regard for the interests of truth. Moreover, I am fully convinced that what you may think it needful to say, in opposition to anything that I have said, must always be something wrhich it is well to have said : either as an indication of a mistake, or else as the indication of some imperfection in the argument or some fault of exposition which needs rectifying.
On receipt of the promised copy of Mr. Mill's Examina- tion of Sir William Hamilton's Philosophy Spencer deemed it necessary to deal with the question at issue between them, namely, the ultimate test of truth. This was done in the Fortnightly Review for July.
FROM J. S. MILL.
12 August, 1865.
When I received your article in the Fortnightly Review, the reprint of my book on Hamilton was too far advanced to admit of my correcting at the proper place the misconception which you pointed out in p. 536 of the Review. I consequently added a note at the end of the volume, of which, in case you have not seen it, I enclose a transcript.1
I do not find that the distinction between the two senses of the word inconceivable, removes or diminishes the difference between us. I was already aware that the inconceivability which you regard as an ultimate test, is the impossibility of uniting two ideas in the same mental representation. But unless I have still further misunderstood you, you regard this incapacity of the conceptive faculty merely as the strongest proof that can be given of a necessity of belief. Your test of
1 Essays, ii., 195. Mill's Examination, p. 175, note t, third edition.
I2O Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. x.
an ultimate truth I still apprehend to be, the invariability of the belief of it, tested by an attempt to believe its negative.
I have, in my turn, to correct a partial misunderstanding of my own meaning. I did not assert that a belief is proved not to be necessary by the fact that some persons deny its necessity, but by the fact that some persons do not hold the belief itself ; which opinion seems as evident as the other would be absurd.
On the main question between us, your chief point seems to be that the Idealist argument is reduced to nonsense if we accept the Idealist conclusions, since it cannot be expressed without assuming an objective reality producing, and an objec- tive reality receiving, the impression. The experience to which our states of mind are referred is, ex m termini (you think), experience of something other than states of mind. This would be true if all states of mind were referred to something anterior : but the ultimate elements in the analysis I hold to be themselves states of mind, viz., sensations, memories of sensation, and ex- pectations of sensation. I do not pretend to account for these, or to recognize anything in them beyond themselves and the order of their occurrence ; but I do profess to analyze our other states of consciousness into them. Now I maintain that these are the only substratum I need postulate ; and that when any- thing else seems to be postulated, it is only because of the erroneous theory on which all our language is constructed, and that, if the concrete words used are interpreted as meaning our expectations of sensations, the nonsense and unmeaningness which you speak of do not arise.
I quite agree with you, however, that our difference is " superficial rather than substantial," or at all events need not and does not affect our general mode of explaining mental phenomena. From the first I have wished to keep the peace with those whose belief in a substratum is simply the belief in an Unknowable. You have said what you deemed necessary to set yourself right on the points which had been in controversy between us. I am glad you have clone so, and am now disposed to let the matter rest. There will probably be other and more hostile criticisms, by Mansel or others, and if I should think it desirable to reply to them, I could on the same occasion make some remarks on yours, without the appearance of antagonism which I am anxious to avoid.
To J. S. MILL.
ARDTORXISH, 21 August, 1865.
I am much obliged by your courtesy in sending me a copy of the note to the new edition of your work on Hamilton. . . . Thank you very much for the very candid explanation which the note contains. It sets the matter quite straight.
1862-67] Biology 121
The partial misstatement of your own view which you point out I will endeavour to set right should there occur (or rather as soon as there occurs) an opportunity for doing so.
I am much gratified to find that the discussion has been thus far carried on, and, indeed, for the present concluded, without having produced anything beyond intellectual differ- ence.
LONDON, 1 1 October. — Many thanks for the copy of the sixth edition of your Logic, which you have been so kind as to send me. I shall have to study it afresh before preparing the second edition of my Psychology, should I ever get so far ; and I am very glad to have, thus brought up to date, the latest develop- ments of your views on the many important questions dealt with.
I have of course already read the chapter in which you discuss the chief questions at issue between us ; and am obliged to you for the care you have so promptly taken to restate my position as recently explained afresh. Without entering upon any of the chief points of the argument as it now stands, I will just refer to the fact that on one of the issues the question is greatly narrowed — coming, as it does, to a direct opposition between the verdicts of your consciousness and my own. You remark — " When Mr. Spencer says that while looking at the sun, a man cannot conceive that he is looking into darkness, he means, a man cannot believe that he is doing so. For he is aware that it is possible, in broad daylight, to imagine oneself looking into darkness." To these interpretations of my meaning I demur ; I do really, in this case as in other cases, mean the words u cannot conceive " to be used in their rigorous sense. The verdict of consciousness, as it seems to me (and I find it the same with three competent friends to whom I have put the question), is that when looking at the sun I not only cannot imagine that I am then and there looking into darkness (and this is the point at issue), but I cannot even imagine darkness at all. The attempt to imagine myself looking into darkness, I find can be carried to the extent of imagining some other scene in which I have before experienced darkness ; but while I can imagine the various elements of the scene which accompany the dark- ness, I cannot imagine the darkness itself. I can bring into consciousness all those impressions along with which I have experienced the darkness of a cellar, but I cannot bring with them the impression of darkness itself, while my consciousness is occupied with the vivid impression of light. Even did I find that I can, under such conditions, imagine darkness in the abstract, this would not be equivalent to finding that I can, under such conditions, think, or conceive, or imagine, that I am actually at the moment, looking into darkness ; and. this, I take it, is the real point.
122 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. x.
FROM J. S. MILL.
AVIGNON, 29 October, 1865.
I have kept your letter by me unanswered, partly for want of time, and partly in hopes that the delay might enable some- thing to occur to me which would throw light on the rather subtle matter of difference between us which you bring to my notice. It is evident that I have again a misapprehension of your opinion to confess and correct, since -you do not acknow- ledge it as yours in the mode in which it is stated by me. We seem to differ on two questions, one a question of fact, viz., whether it is possible, while looking at the sun, to imagine darkness. You, and your three friends, think it is not, while my conciousness seems to tell me that it is quite as possible to imagine darkness in its absence, as anything else in its absence. Of course, the stronger present impres- sion of an actual sensation makes the simultaneous conscious- ness of a mere recollection seem feeble by comparison. But it appears to me perfectly real, and as like the impression of sense which it corresponds to as most reminiscences are to their originals. But, you say, even if I could, under such conditions, imagine darkness, it would not follow that I could imagine that I am actually at the moment looking into darkness. To me it seems that to imagine an object of light is always to imagine myself actually at the moment seeing it. I think one never imagines anything otherwise than as an immediate and present impression of one's own. Indeed, when the object to be conceived is darkness, there is absolutely nothing else to imagine than oneself trying to see and not seeing ; for darkness is not a positive thing. It seems to me, then, that I can, in broad daylight, conceive myself then and there looking into darkness. Is this the same thing, or not the same thing, as what you mean by the words " conceive that I am then and there looking into darkness ? " It strikes me that this change of the expression to the form / am, just marks the transition from conception to belief — from an imagination of something thought as absent from the senses, to an appre- hension of something which is thought to be present to the senses ; of which two states of mind I hold the former to be, in the assumed circumstances, possible, the latter impossible. It was in this way I was led to think that you were here using the word conception in the sense of belief. Even now, I cannot see how the phrase, to conceive that I am, or that anything is, can be consistent with using the word conceive in its rigorous sense.
These letters bring out (as clearly perhaps as the subject permits) " the rather- subtle matter of difference " between Mr. Mill and Spencer concerning the ultimate test of truth.
THE SHAPES OF LEAVES. 145
differentiated in proportion as their relations to incident forces become different. And here, as before, we see that in each unit, considered by itself, the differences of dimension are greatest in those directions in which the parts are most differently conditioned ; while there are no differences be- tween the dimensions of parts that are not differently conditioned.*
* It was by an observation on the forms of leaves, that I was first led to'the views set forth in the preceding and succeeding chapters on the morphological differentiation of plants and animals. In the year 1851, during a country ramble in which the structures of plants had been a topic of conversation, with a friend — Mr Q. H. Lewes — I happened to pick up the leaf of a buttercup, and drawing it by its foot-stalk through my fingers so as to thrust together its deeply- cleft divisions, observed that its palmate and almost radial form was changed into a bilateral one ; and that were the divisions to grow together in this new position, an ordinary bilateral leaf would result. Joining this observation with the familiar fact that leaves, in common with the larger members of plants habitually turn themselves to the light, it occurred to me that a natural change in the circumstances of the leaf might readily cause such a modification of form as that which I had produced artificially. If, as they often do with planes, coil and climate were greatly to change the habit of the buttercup, making it branched and shrub-like ; and if these palmate leaves were thus much over- shadowed by each other; would not the inner segments of the leaves grow towards the periphery of the plant where the light was greatest, and so change the palmate form into a more decidedly bilateral form? Immediately I began to look round for evidence of the relation between the forma of leaves and general characters of the plants they belonged to ; and soon found some signs of con- nexion. Certain anomalies, or seeming anomalies, however, prevented me from then pursuing the inquiry much further. But consideration cleared np these difficulties; and the idea afterwards widened into the general doctrine here elaborated. Occupation with other things prevented roe from giving expression to this general doctrine until Jan. 1869 ; when I published an outline of it in the Medfci-Chiruryieol Review.
i
10
(Facsimile proof page from "The Principles of Biology").
1862-67] Biology 123
The microscopic investigations undertaken while dealing with morphology and physiology had opened up an interest- ing enquiry regarding circulation in plants and the forma- tion of wood, his earlier preparations being shown to Dr. Hooker, Professor Huxley, and Dr. Busk in January, 1865. " Most naturalists will regard it as an audacious specula- tion," he tells Dr. Youmans, "but as Hooker and Huxley are inclined to endorse my reasonings, I feel at ease on the matter."
The usual respite was taken after the issue of his serial in June, 1865. During his stay at Ardtornish this year he mentions having caught a salmon of 9^ Ibs. — the largest he had ever yet got. He expected " to be in first-rate condition " by the time he left.
To HIS FATHER.
LONDON, 3 October, 1865.
I am getting on satisfactorily with my work and expect to send you some proofs in less than a fortnight. The theory of the vertebrate skeleton works out far more completely than I had expected.
II December. — Meanwhile I am busy with No. 16 ; ... By the 20th I hope to get ready as much MS. as will give me something to do in revising while I am down at Derby. If nothing intervenes I propose to come down to you about the 21st, and stay with you till the end of the month ; after which, if you feel equal to it, you had better come and spend a week with me in town. I am glad to gather that my mother has borne up so well during your late attack. I hope she continues to do so. Give my love to her and say I shall see her shortly.
During the few days at home he carried on his micro- scopic study of the circulating system of plants, returning to town in time for the usual New Year's dinner at the Huxley's, to which he refers when writing to his father.
To HIS FATHER.
3 January, 1866.
Our evening was a very pleasant one. Among other guests was Mr. Ellis, an ardent educationist, who has done great service in popularizing Political Economy for schools. . . .
I am busy while I dictate in re-examining my preparations, which, while I was at Derby, I had only so far examined as
124 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. x.
to see that they were worth preserving. I find they now furnish me with far more beautiful cases than I had before perceived. While I was travelling up I hit upon the idea needful for the complete interpretation of plant circulation. I have the whole thing now as satisfactorily demonstrable as can well be imagined.
15 January. — Since I wrote last I have been showing my preparations to Hooker, Busk and Huxley. The results turn out to be new. These structures in certain classes of leaves were unknown to them all ; and they could find no descriptions of them, and they recognize their significance. It turns out, too, that though there have been experiments on the absorp- tion of dyes, they have been limited to the cases of stems, in which the results are, when taken by themselves, confusing and indeed misleading. They were all of them taken aback by the results I have shown them ; which are so completely at variance with the doctrines that have been of late years current ; and they have nothing to say against the hypothesis, based on these facts which I have propounded to them. It is proposed that I should put the facts and arguments in the shape of a paper for the Linnaean Society ; and it is probable that I shall do so, eventually including it in the appendix to the Biology.
24 January. — I am half through, or more, with my paper for the " Linnasan." The argument works out very satisfactorily.
30 January. — I am using as a dye, infusion of logwood, which I find answers in some respects much better than magenta. I shall be able, I think, very completely to demonstrate my proposition. I am getting much more skilled in making pre- parations, and have hit on a way of doing them with readiness and efficiency. On Sunday I discovered some spiral and annular structures of marvellous size — four or five times the diameter of any that I have previously found, or seen figured. They exist in the aberrant leaf of an aberrant plant, which I daresay has never been before examined.
26 February. — I should have written before, but I have been so very busy preparing specimens, making drawings, and revising my paper for the Linnaean Society. It is announced for Thursday next.
The paper was read on ist March. Further examina- tions and experiments in revising it for inclusion in the Transactions of the Society occupied him during the month. After a visit to his parents at Easter he set to work on the fourth number of vol. ii. of the Biology, which was issued
1862-67] Biology 125
in June. Of this number Mr. Darwin wrote to Dr. Hooker : —
" It is wonderfully clever and I daresay mostly true. . . . If he had trained himself to observe more, even at the expense, by the law of balancement, of some loss of think- ing power, he would have been a wonderful man." x On his return to London in September, he took up his abode at 37, Queen's Gardens, Bayswater, which was to be his home for many years. Here he set to work, amid many inter- ruptions, to complete the volume, three numbers of which still remained to be brought out. Towards the close of February, 1867, he was able to tell Dr. Youmans : "I am in the middle of the last chapter but one of the Biology ; and make sure of getting the volume out before the end of March, if no unforeseen hindrance occurs. It will be a cause of great rejoicing with me to have got through so trying a part of my undertaking."
1 Life and Letters oj C. Darwin, iii., 55.
126
CHAPTER XI.
SUNSHINE AND SHADOW.
(December, 1865— July, 1867.)
THE number of the Biology issued in December, 1865, contained a notice to the effect that on completion of the volume the series would cease. The circumstances that led to this decision, and the efforts made to prevent its being carried out, are narrated in the Autobiography (ii., 132, 491). One of the first to interest himself was Mr. J. S. Mill.
To HIS FATHER.
15 February, 1866.
I enclose you a very gratifying letter which I received from John Mill some ten days ago. It shows great generosity. I have, however, declined both the offers it makes. As you will see, he clearly does not understand the nature of the loss which led me to issue the notice — he thinks that it is nothing more than the difference between the receipts from the subscribers and the cost of printing ; and that were the bare expenses of publication met I should have no difficulty in going on. I have explained to him how the matter stands.
Williams and Norgate hinted to me the other day that there was a movement in progress to do something that would meet the case in a way that I could agree to. I learn also that John Mill has called upon them since he got my reply to his letter.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
2 March, 1866.
Count Limburg Stirum . . . one of Comte's executors, has written to Lewes, sending through him to me a draft for £10 towards a publication fund, and proposing to form a committee for the furtherance of the matter, and wishes that the Fort- nightly Review should make itself the organ for carrying out
NOTE. — Autobiography, ii., chaps, xlii., xliii., xliv.
1865-67] Sunshine and Shadow 127
such a plan. Of course, in pursuance of the attitude I have taken up, I returned him the draft, explaining how matters stood.
A proposal that came from some of his friends that those interested " should subscribe for a sufficient number of copies to secure the author from loss," was not so easily disposed of.
To T. H. HUXLEY.
11 April, 1866.
My reflections over the matter of our talk the other night have ended in a qualified agreement to the arrangements — an agreement under conditions.
In the first place, as to the number of copies to be taken. This is too great. I do not know how 250 was fixed upon. . . . Thus, then, I conclude that an extra circulation here of 150 will suffice, joined with what I may otherwise fairly count upon. And to this number, I should wish that the additional copies taken may be limited.
In the second place, as you say that the wishes to further the continuance of the work have, in the main, acted spon- taneously, I will yield to your argument that the acts are in a sense public ones, with which I am not personally con- cerned— but with one reservation. I can take this view of the matter only in those cases where the sacrifices involved are not likely to be seriously felt. Those to whom guineas come in some abundance may be allowed to spend them in this way ; but those who have to work hard for them, and have already heavy burdens to bear, cannot be allowed to do so. Having granted your premises, my exception to your conclusion may be quite illogical ; but I must, nevertheless, make it. No re-assertion of the position that the act is public and the motive impersonal would suffice to get rid of what would be to me an intolerable consciousness, were any save those who are quite at their ease to join in these transactions.
Subsequently he withdrew this conditional acquiescence for the reason given in a letter to Professor Huxley, written from Derby in May, about three weeks after the death of his father.1
Not less eager were his friends in the United States to avert, if possible, the threatened calamity. On learning the facts towards the end of 1865, Dr. Youmans
1 Autobiography, ii., 491.
128 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. XL
had remarked : " You will not object to my using them here in any way that seems desirable." Had Spencer known what his friend thought of doing, he would certainly have taken measures to prevent it. No one knew this better than Dr. Youmans. " Of course it won't do to let Spencer know what is going on at all. He would spoil it, sure as fate." By the middle of June, 7,000 dollars had been collected. " So the Spencer affair is finished, all but the most trouble- some part," he told his sister ; anticipating difficulty in persuading Spencer to accept the gift. It had not all been smooth sailing. Besides having to rouse the enthusiasm of disciples, he had to counteract the effects of adverse criti- cism, which " embargoes ' Liberal Christianity' and leaves us to raise money out of ' the world, the flesh, and the devil.' " A criticism in the Christian Examiner (March, 1866) was described as " the ablest thing yet against Spencer," and for a time he feared the effect it might have on his appeal.
As the bearer of the letter from Mr. R. B. Minturn, announcing the handsome testimonial, Dr. Youmans came to London. Writing to'his sister, he describes the astonish- ment and pleasure with which Spencer read Mr. Minturn's letter.1 Other letters of sympathy and encouragement accompanied this token of America's good will.
FROM WILLIAM R. ALGER.
18 June, 1866.
We do this in a pure spirit of loyalty to truth and humanity, without the slightest egotistical thought of ourselves or of you. We do it as a simple act of justice. We shall be deeply dis- appointed if you do not rise above every disagreeable personal feeling, and accept this offering in the spirit in which it is made, in the service of science and society.
FROM HENRY WARD BEECH ER.
June^ 1866.
The peculiar condition of American society has made your writings far more fruitful and quickening here than in Europe. We are conscious of great obligations to you, and perplexed because we cannot acknowledge them as we could were we your fellow citizens.
But we cannot consent to lie under such obligations with-
1 Autobiography, ii., 140. Edivj-rd Livingston Youmans, p. 213.
1865-67] Sunshine and Shadow 129
out some testimonial of our feelings respecting your eminent service to us, and to the cause of the emancipation and enlight- enment of the human mind, so dear to us all.
And we are sure that you will not allow any scruples of personal delicacy to make you unjust to us, or to compel us to forbear the only action which is possible to us at this distance, and in our circumstances.
In the last, or one of the last, of his letters to his father (March 27) he enclosed a letter from St. Petersburg, "which will give you an agreeable surprise, as it did me." The agreeable surprise was a request for permission to translate his books into Russian. " The Classification of the Sciences," was the first to appear. To meet his objection to this being selected to start with, he was informed that books discussing religion or politics would not be tolerated by the authorities. The "Classification" passed successfully; but a translation of the Essays was seized, owing to the essay on " Manners and Fashion," which was supposed to call in question the validity and eternity of the monarchical principle and of divine right ! For attempting to publish it the translator had rendered himself liable to prosecution for a criminal offence, the penalty for which varied from six years penal servitude to eight months imprisonment in a fortress. The translator requested Spencer to be in readiness to insert a paragraph in the Times, in the event of an adverse verdict. It was not till March of the following year that Spencer learnt that the charge had been withdrawn — "s'est termini parfaitement a la russe."
A French translation of First Principles was being made by Dr. E. Gazelles, who was strongly recommended by Mr. J. S. Mill. Writing to his father in October, 1865, Spencer had enclosed a letter from M. Renan informing him that the book was likely to. be translated. On hearing from Dr. Gazelles, towards the end of the following year, that half of it had already been translated, Spencer urged him to wait for the second edition before proceeding further.
Of his other doings during the second half of 1866 little is known. When narrating the occurrences of this time, he admitted that his memory was not very clear. He missed the letters to and from his father, which hitherto
i' 3d Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xi.
had served as milestones and sign-posts by which to follow the course of events. That his memory should have failed him is not surprising. The shock of his father's death, anxiety about his mother, depression consequent on the contemplated discontinuance of the System of Philosophy, and the unexpected manner in which that trouble had been removed, all these tended to prevent the course of things leaving a permanent impression. Before going to the meet- ing of the British Association, at Nottingham, Dr. Youmans and he spent a few days at Aberdovey, in Merionethshire. While there the article in the Christian Examiner by Mr. F. E. Abbot was discussed with a view to a reply Dr. Youmans intended to publish on his return to New York. "We are taking it up point by point," Dr. Youmans tells his sister. " Spencer talks, and I am amanuensis. . . . I have myself learned some matters and things worth know- ing. Spencer doesn't recede or budge a hair, but he interprets." l
At Aberdovey, and afterwards in London, there were frequent talks about a lecture which Dr. Youmans was to deliver at the College of Preceptors on the "Scientific Study of Human Nature." How he took the manuscript to Spencer, and what Spencer thought of it, are related by Dr. Youmans (28 September) :
I arranged to call to-day at eleven to read my production to him. With my tail feathers spread and in a state of infinite complacency I went, and returned trailing my glories in the infernal London mud. Poor man ! What could he do ? There was but one thing to do, and he did it, you had better believe. Faithful indeed are the cruelties of a friend. My lecture was fairly slaughtered. I had such nice authorities for everything. What are " authorities " to Herbert Spencer. The pigs went to the wrong market this time. " A little too much effort at fine writing " — forty-five pages. " You have lost your point at the fifth page and not recovered it. Why, I thought you wished to make a sharp presentation of science in its bearings upon the study of human nature, and you seem to have entered upon a systematic treatise on physiology interlarded with bad psychology." The unfeeling wretch ! u Strike out half, put the rest in type and work it up," was the final injunction.2
1 Edward Livingston You mans, p. 220. - Ibid., pp. 223 and 451.
1865-67] Sunshine and Shadow 131
In March, 1867, Spencer took up what he calls the " agreeable task" of reorganizing First Principles. As the earlier portions could be done out of London it occurred to him to take a short holiday in Paris.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
3 May, 1867.
I start for Paris on Sunday (very glad so to utilize that day) ; and expect to remain away ten days or so — taking a little work with me to revise, but devoting myself mainly to sight-seeing.
7 June. — I went for a fortnight, and came back before the week was out. Perpetual sight-seeing soon became a weari- ness ; and I was heartily glad to get back.
19 June. — The second edition of First Principles is working out very satisfactorily — even more satisfactorily than I had anticipated. In its reorganized form it will be extremely coherent all through — the thread of the argument will be unbroken ; and it will, I think, have the obvious character of completeness.
The present seemed a favourable opportunity for intro- ducing a distinctive general title for the series. In his letter to Dr. Youmans of 7 June, he mentioned that the evils arising from the want of such a title had just been thrust upon him afresh by the new edition of Lewes's History of Philosophy. "The Positive Philosophy will continue to be understood as the philosophy of Comte, and as I so distinctively repudiate the philosophy of Comte, it is needful to take some step to prevent the confusion. So long as there is no other title in use to express a philosophy formed of organized scientific knowledge, one cannot expect people to discriminate." Fearing that, in giving his reasons for adopting the new title, he would make it the occasion for emphasizing afresh his antagonism to Comte, Dr. Youmans advised him to avoid the Comte discussion in the preface to the revised edition. Before the book was published in the autumn he had given up, though with reluctance, the idea of using the new title. " I discussed the matter with Huxley and Tynclall, and though I do not think that the objections raised were such as to outweigh the manifest advantages, still there doubtless are objections ; and in the midst of conflicting
132 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xi.
considerations I eventually became so far undecided as to let the matter stand as it was."
In the midst of the anxieties arising from the prospect of having to relinquish his work, there came in April, 1866, the shock of his father's sudden illness and death. What this signified to him can be understood only by one who has, like the present writer, read the correspondence between father and son, carried on for three and thirty years. It must have seemed to Spencer a cruel fate that the premature abandonment of the System of Philosophy should so nearly coincide with the loss of one who had watched over its inception and been consulted in every detail. Although not indebted to his father for the leading doctrines of evolution, he was largely his debtor for the intellectual discipline which had made it possible to plan and so far elaborate his scheme, as well as for literary and expository criticism step by step as each chapter passed through the press. In the soundness of his father's critical judgment, he retained to the last the greatest confidence.
Hardly had he recovered from the shock of his father's death when he had to face the loss of his patient and gentle mother, who died in May, 1867. This event, although it did not come upon him, like the death of his father, with little warning, and although it did not mean the ending of an intellectual companionship which had been for so many years a precious possession, appealed nevertheless in a special manner to the emotional side of his nature. He knew that his mother had little sympathy with his intellectual pursuits, but he also knew that his welfare and happiness ever held a chief place in her thoughts, and that no sacrifice on her part would have been grudged, if by it she could have promoted his interests. The death of his father deprived him of one with whom he had walked in the closest communion of thought since boyhood ; by the death of his mother he was bereft of one in whom he saw embodied in no small measure those feminine affec- tions for which, as he repeatedly tells us, his nature craved.
For years the health of his parents had been a source of increasing anxiety. As for his mother, he had long given up the hope of arresting, even if only for a time, the downward progress towards confirmed invalidism. Unlike
1865-67] Sunshine and Shadow 133
his father, whose chronic nervousness tended to aggravate his disorders, his mother paid too little attention to pre- monitory symptoms, and neglected ordinary precautions. With his father, his endeavour generally was to convince him that he was not so ill as he thought he was ; with his mother his aim was to get her to realise that she was worse than she thought she was. The ups and downs of his father's health had their sources in the condition of the nervous system which led to acts of imprudence when he was well, and to undue depression when he was ill. His mother's permanent ill-health was due to over- drafts on a system of low vitality. Her conservative obstinacy was proof against advice and remonstrance. The difficulty with his father was not occasioned by obstinate adherence to an adopted course of living, but to ever- changing views regarding his numerous ailments, and endless experimentation in the matter of diet, clothing, and therapeutics. Concern for his father, keen while it lasted, had months of respite, during which he felt at ease, provided that no unforeseen imprudence was committed. But as regards his mother his anxiety had never been relieved by periods of hopefulness or satisfaction.
These remarks have been suggested by reperusal of his letters home during the last eight or ten years of his parents' lives : letters full of advice, expostulation, and entreaty. Here are a few characteristic extracts — mostly to his father.
It would almost seem as though you acted upon the maxim — '' Of two evils choose the greater."
I think you are wrong in taking such liberties with yourself as you describe. ... I wish you would be less particular about small risks and more particular about great ones.
All the reasons you name for not coining are so many reasons for coining. You are evidently nervous, and as usually happens with you in such condition, make mountains out of mole-hills. The various things which you say you want to settle, leave unsettled ; and settle them on your return. In your present state, you are not a fit judge of what is best for you. Therefore, do just what I tell you. Pack up your carpet-bag and write me word by return of post at what hour on Sunday or Monday I shall meet you at King's Cross or Euston Station.
It is useful in this life to tolerate annoyances, and to think as
134 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xi.
little about them as possible. Everyone has lots of things to worry him. ... In respect to present arrangements of the household, we must be content if matters can be made to go with some approach to regularity and smoothness. It is out of the question under such circumstances to avoid small evils.
You did not tell me when I asked you some time since how you were going on in respect of money. Pray do not borrow from anyone, but let me know if you fall short.
I think you had better give up your lessons. It will be very bad policy to make yourself ill over them. You must do as much teaching as will amuse you, but no more.
If (this to his mother) I thought it would be any good I would say a good deal in the way of exhortation that you should take care of yourself. But you are so incorrigible in the matter, that I expect you will do much the same whether I expostulate or not. I fear that nothing I can say will h ive any effect. I can only hope that you will behave better in this respect when I am absent than you do when I am present.
I hope (he writes to his father) you will insist on her not exerting herself by making the needless journeyings into the town which she does. They ought not to be allowed, whatever may be the reasons she assigns ; for she will make any reason a sufficient one.
I am sorry to hear that my mother is becoming still feebler, and still persists in over-exerting herself. There is no remedy but positive prevention — using as much peremptoriness as may be needful.
You must do what you can to prevent her from fidgeting herself, and make her feel that it is better to let tilings go a little wrong, rather than make herself worse by trying to keep them right.
Your accounts of my mother are depressing ; but I fear it is needful to reconcile ourselves to them, and to the expectation of such symptoms becoming more decided. You are doubtless right in thinking it may be needful to have more assistance. Pray do so whenever it seems requisite ; do nor let expense be a consideration.
It is sad to hear the accounts of my mother, though what you tell me is not more than \vhat was to be expected. We may, however, be glad she is free from pain and is usually in pretty good spirits. This is as much mitigation as can well be looked for. . . . Give my love to my mother, and you may add that she will probably see me shortly.
The following appears to be the last letter received from home.
1865-67] Sunshine and Shadow 135
FROM HIS FATHER.
9 April, 1866.
\Yith regard to myself I am mending but slowly, if any. I seem to tire sooner, but so long as it does not get like the other attack, I shall do. I liked your proofs very much and hope my memoranda may not annoy you. When shall I be favoured with the next ? . . . Your mother wonders from day to day that you don't come to see her. [He had just been to see her, but her memory was gone.] My back aches, so excuse more.
It has been the fashion to speak of Spencer's character as if it were all intellect and no feeling. The falsity of such an opinion was, however, well known to his friends. No one who knew him at all doubted his absolute sincerity when giving expression to his feelings ; but even those who knew him intimately were apt to underestimate their inten- sity. Of the purity and depth of his affection for his parents, his letters, written during a period of more than thirty years, furnish a testimony that is conclusive. Some might think these letters lacking in gushing terms of endear- ment. But it is unsafe to draw conclusions as to the strength or the weakness of the emotions from the language employed to express them, unless account be taken of the character of the writer. In Spencer's case it would be a mistake to conclude that his feelings were of a low degree of intensity because he gave expression to them in subdued terms. Some people unintentionally use the strongest terms in the language to express the most ordinary degrees of emotion. Others deliberately try to conceal the shallow- ness of their feelings in a turbulent torrent of superlative words. Spencer's dislike to exaggeration led him, of two or more ways of expressing his feelings, to choose the least highly coloured. Add to this his singular sincerity, which would not brook the use of language to conceal or miscolour his sentiments. And after all, mere emo- tional display of interest in the welfare of others is a form of sympathy which costs the giver as little as it benefits the receiver. In reading the letters to his parents, in which he enters into the minutest details regarding bodily ailments, or family misunderstandings, or business misfortunes, or mental distress, one cannot
136 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xi.
help thinking how much easier it would have been to have contented himself with offering the usual sympathetic platitudes. Time and trouble spent in trying to put right what he considered wrong were never grudged ; no detail was too wearisome. If the emotional manifestations of sympathy were more subdued than usual, the rational considerations involved were dwelt upon with a minute- ness and care rarely met with. Writing home was never a perfunctory duty coming round at stated intervals. The most remarkable feature of the correspondence is the revelation it affords of the closeness of the communion of thought and feeling between him and his father. With a qualification this holds true as regards his mother also. For, though aware that she took little interest in his writings, he kept nothing back from her. His almost invariable custom was to send home all letters he received, whether relating to his writings, to his plans and prospects, or to his social engagements. In this way his father and mother were kept informed of every detail of his life. This openness on his part was reciprocated by a like open- ness on theirs. Rare indeed are the instances in which father and son have laid bare their minds so freely to one another. Rarer still are the instances in which father and son have for over thirty years carried on their corres- pondence on such a high level of thought and sentiment. Fortunate it has been for the writer of these memoirs that the son was so unsparing with his letters, and the father so careful in preserving them. They have been the main sources of information down to this time.
137
CHAPTER XII. PSYCHOLOGY AND DESCRIPTIVE SOCIOLOGY.
(July, 1867— October, 1872.)
THE holiday of 1867 embraced Yarrow, Glenelg, Ardtor- nish, Scarborough, Stourbridge, and Standish, followed by a walking tour in Surrey with Mr. Lewes, in the course of which, passing through Wey bridge, he introduced his companion to the family of Mr. Cross, afterwards to become the husband and biographer of George Eliot. His own acquaintance with Mr. Cross dated from 1858.
Views expressed in Social Statics had led him to be looked upon as a supporter of the admission of women to the suffrage. Hence a request from Mr. J. S. Mill in August to join a society about to be formed to promote that object. Some two months before this Miss Helen Taylor had requested permission to include, in a series of papers she was bringing out, the chapter in Social Statics on " The Rights of Women."
To J. S. MILL.
28 May, 1867.
You will, I am sure, understand that in the course of the seventeen years that have elapsed since Social Statics was written my thoughts on various of the matters it deals with have assumed a more complete form ; and you will, I doubt not, sympathize in my reluctance to have reproduced in their original shape, any of them which I should now present in a better shape. At the same time, ... I cannot, without too much deranging my plans, undertake to re-write the parts with which I am dissatisfied.
Had he been more explicit in the above letter it would have been known how far he had receded from the position held when Social Statics was written, and Mr. Mill would
NOTE. — Autobiography, ii., chaps, xlv., xlvi., xlvii., xlviii.
138 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xn.
have understood that it was futile to ask him to join the proposed society. He had now to make his position clear.
To J. S. MILL.
YARROW, 9 August, 1867.
Your note has reached me here, where I have been spending a few days with Prof. Masson on my way north.
Probably you will remember that in a letter some time since, written in reply to one of yours, I indicated that my views had undergone some modification since the time when I wrote Social Statics. The modification goes as far as this, that while I should advocate the extension of the suffrage to women as an ultimate measure, I do not approve of it as an immediate measure, or even as a measure to be shortly taken. I hold, as I doubt not you also hold, that political liberties or powers, like that of voting, are simply means to an end. That end, you would probably say, is the securing of the good of the indi- viduals exercising such powers ; or otherwise, as I should say, it is the securing the greatest amount of individual freedom of action to them. The unhindered exercise of faculties by each, limited only by the equal claims of others, is that which the right of voting serves to obtain and to maintain. This is the real liberty in comparison with which right of voting is but a nominal liberty.
The question with me then is : How may this substantial liberty to pursue the objects of life with least possible restriction be most extended ? And as related to the matter in hand the question is : Will giving the suffrage to women, which is in itself but a nominal extension of liberty, lead to a real extension of liberty.
I am decidedly of opinion that it will not. The giving of political power to women would, I believe, restrict, and indeed diminish, liberty in two ways. It would strengthen the hands of authority, both political and ecclesiastical ; for women, as a mass, are habitually on the side of authority. Further, it would aid and stimulate all kinds of state administrations, the great mass of which are necessarily antagonistic to personal freedom. Men in their political actions are far too much swayed by proximate evils and benefits ; and women would be thus swayed far more. Given some kind of social suffering to be cured -or some boon to be got, and only the quite exceptional women would be able to appreciate detrimental reactions that would be entailed by legislative action. Political foresight of this kind, uncommon enough in men, is extremely rare in women.
Of course, whoever holds that the minds of men and women are alike, will feel no difficulty of this kind. But I hold them to be unlike, both quantitatively and qualitatively. I believe
1867-72] Psychology and Sociology 139
the difference to result from a physiological necessity, and that no amount of culture can obliterate it. And I believe further that the relative deficiency of the female mind is in just those most complex faculties, intellectual and moral, which have political action for their sphere.
When the State shall have been restricted to what I hold to be its true function — when it has become practically im- possible for it to exceed that function — then it will be alike proximately and remotely equitable that women should have political power.
To put the right construction on these reasonings of mine, you must bear in mind that to me the limitation of the functions of the State is the question of questions, in comparison with which all other political questions are trivial ; and that to me electoral changes and other changes in forms of government are of interest mainly as they promise to make men freer, partly by the removal of direct injustices, and partly by the removal of those indirect injustices which all undue legislative action involves.
I greatly regret not to be able to coincide with you on this matter ; and the more so because I recognize the nobility of your motive, and, could I reconcile it with my conscience, would fain follow your example.
Two years later he had an opportunity still further to explain his views-.
To J. S. MILL.
9 June, 1869.
Thank you for the copy of your essay on The Subjection of Women. . . .
Meanwhile I will just remark that I think the whole ques- tion, under its social and political aspects, is being discussed too much upon the assumption that the relations among men and women are determined only or mainly by law. I think a very trenchant essay might be written on the Supremacy of Women, showing that, in the present state of civilization, the concessions voluntarily made by men to women in social arrangements have become an organized set of laws, which go far to counterbalance the laws that are legally enacted ; and that throughout a large part of society the tyranny of the weak is as formidable as the tyranny of the strong.
Mr. Mill was in full agreement with Spencer in thinking "that in a great many cases women tyrannize over men," and "that it is generally the best of men who get most tyrannized over. But . . . two contradictory tyrannies do not make liberty."
140 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xn.
He returned to town in the beginning of October, eager to commence the revision of the Principles, of Psychology, about which he says in a memorandum : —
Nominally, this was a second edition, but it was more nearly to be regarded as a new work ; for besides the fact that sundry of the parts were considerably further developed, there were four divisions which did not exist in the work as originally published. . . . This I had now to execute, and entered on the task with considerable zest ; for I had much interest in what I saw would be the working out of the harmony between these further views and those previously enunciated.
I had a further satisfaction in the preparation of an edition more completely developing the general views which I hrst had set forth, since there was now a widely different attitude in the public mind in relation to this view from that which existed when the hrst edition was published. In 1855, this view got scarcely any attention, and what little it did get brought upon me little else than vituperation. The tacit assumption, and towards the close of the work the avowed belief, that all organisms had arisen by evolution, and the consequent concep- tion running throughout the whole work that the phenomena of mind were to be interpreted in conformity with that hypo- thesis necessarily, in 1855, roused not sympathy, but antipathy. It was only after the publication of Mr. Darwin's Origin of Species, some four years subsequently, and only after this work, drawing so much attention — causing so much controversy — began presently to affect deeply the beliefs of the scientific world, that the views contained in the Principles of Psychology came to be looked at more sympathetically. . . . Not, however, that the book began at once to get that credit which had been originally withheld ; for now, with this change in the current of opinion, there came other books setting forth this advanced view, and which, with the change of the times, were sympa- thetically received. Especially was this so with the work of Dr. Maudsley on the Physiology and Pathology of flic Miiuf, which, proceeding throughout on the evolution view of mind, and adopting the cardinal conception of the Principles of Psy- chology, without at all indicating whence that conception was derived, was reviewed with applause and had a great success. In now returning to the Psychology', therefore, for the purpose of further developing it, I had the consciousness that something would be done towards rectifying the arrangement in which I had got all the kicks and others the halfpence.
He was also looking ahead to the time when he would enter upon the sociological portion of his scheme, for which ample provision would have to be made. His changed
1867-72] Psychology and Sociology 141
circumstances, there being now no one dependent on him for support, led him to take a step he had for some time deemed desirable, namely, to get this preparatory work done by deputy. He took counsel with Professor Masson, on whose recommendation the present writer was engaged as sec- retary. Simultaneously, therefore, with the commencement of the Psychology he began to put into shape his idea of "making tabulated arrangements of historical data, showing the co-existence and succession of social phenomena of all orders." For an hour or so before dinner he would listen while his secretary, pencil in hand, read from books of travel. " Mark that," he would say when anything pertinent was met with. After familiarity with the work had in this way been gained, the present writer was left largely to his own discretion. One of the instructions was characteristic. Impressed with the magnitude of the undertaking and the time it would occupy, he urged his secretary to avoid reading many books. " If you read, say, three trustworthy authors on any one tribe, that will be enough." This instruction had tacitly to be disregarded. For, in addition to the con- siderations that few travellers had the ability to note " social phenomena of all orders," that many had no interest in certain aspects of savage or semi-civilized societies, and that others lacked opportunities for studying any but the most superficial features of a community, there was the obvious reflection that a traveller's trustworthiness could ordinarily be ascertained only by the perusal of what he had written. Spencer's own account of these preparatory occupations is as follows : —
Some little time was passed in elaborating a method of classification, for it did not prove easy to devise any method of presenting all the phenomena of society in a form at once natural and methodic. But eventually I pretty well satisfied myself as to the system of arrangement, and by the time Mr. Duncan had been familiarized, by reading aloud to me and receiving the needful suggestions, with the nature of the work to be done and the heads to be filled up, I finally decided upon a form of table for the uncivilized races, and had it litho- graphed in blank form with the headings of columns. All this was done simply with the intention of having prepared for my own use the required materials. . . . But when some of the tables had been filled up and it became possible to appreciate
142 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xn.
the effect of thus having presented at one view the whole of the essential phenomena presented by each society, the fact dawned upon me that the materials as prepared were of too much value to let them lie idle after having been used by myself only. I therefore decided upon publishing them for general use. Thereafter Mr. Duncan did his work in the consciousness that it would be not lost in the fulfilment of a private end merely, but that he would have the credit derivable from it on publication. And thus was initiated Descriptive Sociology.
With the year 1868 came an attack "of greater nervous- ness than usual." Hence the question put to Professor Tyndall : " Do you know any lively, pleasant fellow who would make a good travelling companion ? " Rackets, played in a court attached to a public house in Pentonville, was resorted to again. Having never played before, the present writer was, if not a very formidable, a very exasperating antagonist ; an ill-directed ball not infrequently disappear- ing among the neighbouring houses, to be presented a few minutes later by a messenger claiming compensation for a broken window. But Spencer took it all — broken windows and poor play — in good part. After some twenty minutes he would sit in one of the adjoining sheds and dictate for about the same length of time ; then another game, and so on during the forenoon. On one occasion Professor Tyndall was persuaded to come. There was a look of amused incredulity when Spencer told him that the Psycho- logy was being written in such a piecemeal fashion and amidst such unattractive surroundings. If the day was unsuitable for rackets, billiards would be resorted to. In warmer weather he would betake himself to the Serpentine, where the forenoon would be spent in rowing and dictating by turns, or to Kensington Gardens, where short periods of dictation while sitting under a tree would be relieved by short periods of walking. With his election to the Athenaeum early in 1868 a new source of enjoyment was opened up.
Having waited in vain for a "lively, pleasant fellow" as a travelling companion, he made up his mind by the end of February to start for Italy alone. About this tour enough has been written in the Autobiography (ii., 178-98). He was back by the middle of April not much better — " too
1867-72] Psychology and Sociology 143
idle and out of spirits to write letters," but hoping that, if unable to do much work, he and his secretary might "at any rate get through some reading."
The supervision of the preliminary sociological work and the state of his health furnish only a partial explanation of the slow progress of the Psychology. His good resolutions notwithstanding, he was continually being drawn aside from regular work. One such interruption arose out of a lecture, delivered while he was in Italy by Mr. Kingdon Clifford at the Royal Institution, "On some of the Conditions of Mental Development." Thinking that the lecture conveyed an erroneous impression as to the authorship of the doctrines discussed, he consulted Professor Tyndall.
To JOHN TYNDALL.
11 May, 1868.
[The lecture contains] nothing more than brief and popu- larized statements of some of my already published doctrines.
. . . My impression is that there is scarcely a proposition, save quite familiar ones, that is not to be found somewhere or other in my book, either in the same shape or some kindred shape. ... I feel it the more necessary not to let this occur- ence pass without notice, because by it, and by another occur- ence of kindred nature, I am put in a very disagreeable position.
... I am now so placed that in reproducing some of my own ideas I shall run the risk of being supposed to have appropriated the ideas of others. The circumstances are these. There was published last year, by Dr. Maudsley, a book on the Physiology anil Pathologv of (he Mind. . . . Dr. Maudsley is now being cited as the authority for these doctrines which he appropriates from me. . . . See, then, my predicament. I am beginning to prepare a second edition of the Principles of Psychology, in which these doctrines that are being widely diffused in connec- tion with other men's names will reappear. . . . The reproduc- tion of my own thoughts will render me liable to the charge of plagiarism !
When the matter was brought to Mr. Kingdon Clifford's notice, he settled it to Spencer's satisfaction by means ot a letter in the Pall Mall Gazette of June 24.
Part of the autumn holiday of 1868 was spent at Inveroran, where he had good fishing on the Orchy. In a memorandum he compares, with almost boyish satisfac- tion, his own success with that of two others staying at
144 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xii.
the hotel; one of whom "got up at 5 o'clock, and fished all the pools before us (Scotchman like !)." His stay was, nevertheless, cut short for the characteristic reason that he got "quite sick of the food, so wanting in variety."
Towards the end of the year his work was again inter- rupted. In an article on " Philosophical Biology " in the North American Review, for October, Mr. F. E. Abbot examines Spencer's answers to certain fundamental ques- tions. To the question — What is the origin of life ? " We find no definite reply of any sort in the volumes before us." To the question — What is the origin of species ? Mr. Spencer "returns substantially the same answer as Mr. Darwin." To. the third question — What are the causes of organic evolution ? Mr. Spencer traces it entirely to mechanical and physio-chemical forces, and recognizes no force or forces to be called vital in any special sense. And yet he makes the very assumption which he condemns, namely, that of an " inherent tendency, or power, or aptitude," or an " organic polarity." He abandons the mechanical theory and practically adopts the vitalist theory. These criticisms led to what Spencer calls, in one of his memoranda, "a small controversy."
I had been charged with inconsistency because I did not accept the current doctrine of spontaneous generation, which was supposed to be not only harmonious with the doctrine of evolution as I held it, but was thought to be a part of it, which I was in consistency bound to adopt. Feeling that there was some ground for the representations made, I had to write a rejoinder, explaining my view of this question ; and, as com- monly happens, strove to get this done by a fixed day, thinking that I could just do this before I rested. It is always these efforts to achieve some proximate end before leaving off that do the final mischief ; for nearly always the threatened mis- chief comes before this proximate end is reached. It did so in this case. I had to break away from my work and leave town ; going first of all to Malvern, then afterwards to Ben Rhydding.
Spencer's reply (the facts and arguments of which had " the unqualified endorsement of Huxley, Tyndall and Frankland ") did not appear in the North American Review, as he intended it should.1 Dr. Youmans, reflecting prob-
1 Principles of Biology , i., Appendix D, p. 696.
1867-72] Psychology and Sociology 145
ably American opinion, told him the reply was "of no value for the general public — they cannot understand it. ... Now what I wish is to take up the subject myself and put it so that they can understand it, always provided that I can arrive at a proper understanding of it myself. But before going into it I should like to hear whether you consider that the inquiry has at all changed aspects. Is it, in fact, needful for you to commit yourself to either side of the question as at present contested ? "
To E. L. YOUMANS.
16 March, 1869.
Respecting the reply to the North American Review, you need not be alarmed at the aspect of the " spontaneous genera- tion " question, and the way in which I have committed myself upon it. Huxley has lately been experimenting on the matter, and reaching remarkable results ; and though he says that they confirm some of the observations of Pouchat, he considers that they make the hypothesis of " spontaneous generation " more untenable than ever.
It will be very well to have the ideas . . . popularized, if, as you say, it is not comprehensible to the generally intelligent. But I should like the reply as it stands to be made accessible for the benefit of such as can understand it.
While his prudence stood him in good stead in pre- venting him from joining the newly-formed Metaphysical Society, for the atmosphere of which h;s temperament would have proved ill-suited, it failed to prevent him from going out of his way, about the middle of 1869, in an endeavour to remove the anti-British feeling which had prevailed in the United States since the Civil War. This was not a sudden resolve ; for, as far back as 1866, he had endeavoured to get Mr. Moncure Conway to take the matter up. Those who have read the Autobiography are aware of the circum- stances which led him to write the letter, as well as of the reasons that induced him to withdraw it in deference to the strongly expressed disapproval of his American friends.1
When he returned from Scotland towards the end of September, 1869, he had barely reached the middle of the first volume of the Psycliology. He would fain
1 Autobiography, ii., 210, and Appendix E, p. 497. JO
146 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xil.
have gone to Switzerland to see Professor Tyndall, who was laid up in consequence of an accident ; but " I have been idle for so long a time, I am anxious to get some work done." It is questionable whether such an extension of his holiday would have added to his working power ; for he was wont to say that Tyndall's " infectious vivacity " was too exciting. By sticking to work he suc- ceeded in issuing three instalments of the Psychology between December, 1869, and March, 1870, inclusive, thus affording a prospect that ihe remaining part — " Physical Synthesis " — although it covered entirely new ground, would be finished before the autumn holiday. This holiday of 1870 was longer and more varied than usual. It included ten days at the Argoed, near Monmouth, with Mr. and Mrs. Potter ; a fortnight with the Lotts on the north coast of Wales; and a visit lo Ireland and to Scotland. Of Ireland he wrote : " I spent three days in Dublin, which has things in it worth looking at. But I found the living bad — slovenly and dirty. . . . Having heard that they had room at Inveroran, I determined to go there by way of Belfast. Belfast I found worse than Dublin— the most stinking place I was ever in, indoors and out ; and I was glad to get away as quickly as possible." A ramble with Professor Tyndall in the Lake District, after the meetings of the British Associa- tion in Liverpool, was an enjoyable ending to his holiday.
In the expectation that the " Physical Synthesis" would be completed before he went away he had been disap- pointed. It "is very difficult to treat satisfactorily. But I see that it will form a very important addition to the general argument." The volume was published in Decem- ber— fully three years after the revision had been begun. This seemed a favourable opportunity for carrying out his intention of dedicating the System of Philosophy to his American friends. Dr. Youmans was, of course, con- sulted : a proof of the proposed dedication being sent for suggestions. To his great surprise the proposal was strongly disapproved of. While it " no doubt would please American vanity amazingly," " it would be unjust to your sincere friends in other countries." Thereupon he can- celled the dedication and ordered the type to be distributed.1
1 Edward Livingston YOUHUWS, p. 262.
1867-72] Psychology and Sociology 147
The second volume of the Psychology progressed more rapidly than the first had done, five instalments being issued in 1871, and the three remaining in 1872. The forecast given in the following letter was to prove very far from correct. Twenty-four, instead of twelve, years were needed to finish the Synthetic Philosophy.
To E. L. You MAXS.
12 October, 1872.
I have just finished the second volume of the Psychology. . . . 1 find on looking back that it is just twelve years since I com- menced. Having now got half through, it might be inferred that it will take another twelve years to finish. I have reason for hoping, however, that ten will suffice. Considerably more than two years, I believe, have gone in interruptions — partly due to occasional relapses of health, partly to the second edition of First Principles, partly to various incidental essays and articles, and partly to the arrangement and superintendence of the Descriptive Sociology, which, during the earlier stages, occupied much time. Indeed, now that I put them down, these interruptions account, I think, for more than two years' loss of time. As I am much better now than I was when I commenced, and as I do not see the likelihood of much incidental writing hereafter, I am inclined to hope that, after completing the Study \_of Sociology], ten years will suffice to carry me through.
The other main occupation during those years — the superintendence of the Descriptive Sociology — was disturbed in 1870 owing to his secretary (the present writer) going to Madras. Having been led by Dr. Youmans to believe that there were many young men with the requisite qualifica- tions who would gladly undertake the work, his disappoint- ment was all the keener when he failed to find one. After endeavours continuing for nearly a year, he secured the services of Mr. James Collier. The printing of the extracts and tables had not gone far, when the cost began to look serious, partly owing to the manuscript being sent to the press in the original rough draft. Before leaving for India the present writer had drawn attention to the fact that the manuscript was not in a fit state for publication, and had suggested taking it with him for revision ; but the risk was thought too great. One may wonder that, in view of the cost so far exceeding his expectations, he did not suspend
148 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xn.
the work altogether. Instead of that he was on the look- out for a third compiler to undertake the Extinct Civilized Races. Through Mr. Lewes, towards the end of the year, he, for this work, entered into an arrangement with Dr. Scheppig.
The supervision of the Descriptive Sociology had, from time to time, suggested interesting lines of thought, tempt- ing him to turn aside from the Psychology. One of these was connected with the worship of animals, his conclusions being embodied in an article in the Fortnightly Review for May, 1870, in which he sought to answer the question, " how primitive men came so generally, or universally, to believe themselves the progeny of animals, or plants, or inanimate bodies." Another line of thought led to the strengthening of previously formed convictions regarding the origin and growth of moral opinions and sentiments.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
3 March, 1871.
I am about, after getting rid of this forthcoming part, to make another short parenthesis in my work. The representa- tions of my doctrine respecting the genesis of moral sentiment, which Mr. Hutton made in Macmillan's Magazine about a year ago, have been spreading through other channels, and I rind it needful to put a stop to them. I had intended to let the matter stand over until I came hereafter to deal with it in the course of my work : but Mr. Hutton will now have to pay the penalty a good deal sooner. I am going to prepare the article for the next Fortnightly.
To CHARLES DARWIN.
3 Marc/i, 1871.
What I have read [of the Descent of Man'] has surprised me by the immense* accumulation of evidence, interesting in itself and doubly interesting by its implications, which you have brought to bear on the questions you discuss. I had no idea that such multitudinous proofs of the action of sexual selection were forthcoming.
I am glad that you have so distinctly expressed your con- viction on the more special question you treat. It will, I doubt not, raise afresh the agitation on the general question ; since many who have in a considerable degree reconciled themselves to the conception of evolution at large, have never had repre- sented to them, in a positive way, these ultimate implications
1867-72] Psychology and Sociology 149
of it. Many such will doubtless fight against them ; and out of the fighting there is sure to come further progress.
I very much wish that this book of yours had been issued somewhat earlier, for it would have led me to introduce some needful explanations into the first volume of the Principles of Psychology, lately published. One of these explanations I may name. Though I have endeavoured to showr that instinct is compound reflex action, yet I do not intend thereby to negative the belief that instincts of some kinds may arise at all stages of evolution by the selection of advantageous variations. I believe that some instincts do thus arise ; and especially those which are operative in sexual choice.
The Descent of Man indirectly led to another "parenthe- tical " bit of work, foreshadowed in the following letter :
To CHARLES DARWIX.
2 May, 1871.
It has occurred to me that it may be worth while to write a few lines to the Contemporary Review a propos of Sir A. Grant's article.1 I think of drawing his attention to the Principles of Psychology as containing proofs both analytic and synthetic, that the division between Reason and lower forms of Intelligence, which he thinks so unquestionable, does not exist.
Before deciding on this course, however, I think it is proper to enquire whether you propose to say anything on the matter ; seeing that the attack is ostensibly directed against you.
Apparently Mr. Darwin was not induced to take the matter up. Hence the short paper on " Mental Evolution," published in the Contemporary for June, to which reference is made in a letter to Dr. You mans (5 June).
I enclose a brief article just out. I wrote it partly as a quiet way of putting opinion a little right on the matter. Since the publication of Darwin's Descent of Man, there has been a great sensation about the theory of development of Mind — essays in the magazines on u Darwinism and Religion," u Darwinism and Morals," u Philosophy and Darwinism " : all having reference to the question of Mental Evolution, and all proceeding on the supposition that it is Darwin's hypothesis. As no one says a word in rectification, and as Darwin himself has not indicated the fact that the Principles of Psychology was published five years before the Origin of Species, I am obliged to gently indicate this myself.
1 " Philosophy and Mr. Darwin," Contemporary Review for May.
150 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xn.
Towards the end of the year he was drawn into a controversy with Professor Huxley, whose address on "Administrative Nihilism," while dealing with the objec- tions raised to state interference with education, criticized adversely the view that Government should be restricted to police functions, and set aside as invalid the comparison of the body politic to the body physical, worked out by Spencer in the article on " The Social Organism." Spencer replied in the Fortnightly Review for December in an article on "Specialized Administration," expressing at the same time his reluctance to dwell on points of difference from one he so greatly admired.
"The X tit ion," wrote Dr. You mans (May, 1869), "gave you a little thrust the other week, and our friend, Henry Holt, of the firm of Leypoldt and Holt (publishers of Taine), took them to task in last week's paper." The " little thrust " was made in the course of a notice of Taine's Ideal in Art, in which it was said that "it is Herbert Spencer's reputation over again ; all very well for the ' general public/ but the chemists and physicians, the painters and the architects, are disposed to scoff at the new light." The point of this innuendo must have been very illusive, for when first Mr. Holt, and afterwards Mr. Fiske, adduced evidence to prove that, taking Spencer as a philosopher, "it is clearly not the 'experts' that do the scoffing," the editor retorted that both of them had missed it.1 " The correspondence in the Nation," wrote Dr. Youmans, "has elicited a good deal of comment, not concerning your doctrines, but yourself. Emerson, Agassiz, and Wynian are quoted against you on the ground that a man who attempts so much must be thin in his work." Spencer could treat such criticisms with equanimity, knowing the esteem in w<hich he was held by experts.2 Mr. Darwin, for example, showed no inclination to scoff. " I was fairly astonished," he writes, "at .the prodigality of your original views. Most of the chapters [of the Biology'] furnished suggestions for whole volumes of future researches." Nor did Spencer write to Mr. Darwin as if he were liable to be scoffed at
1 The Nation, from 20 May to 3 June, 1869.
* Life and Letters of C. Darwin, iii., 120. Autobiography, ii., 216.
1867-72] Psychology and Sociology 151
by the great naturalist. Witness the following (dated 8 February, 1868), written on receipt of the Variation of A ni nuils niul Plants under Domestication :
I have at present done little more than dip here and there — paying more special attention, however, to the speculation on " Pangenesis," in which, I need hardly say, I am much in- terested. It is quite clear that you do not mean by u gemmul.es" what I mean by " physiological units " ; and that, consequently, the interpretations of organic phenomena to which they lead you are essentially different from those I have endeavoured to give. The extremely compound molecules (as much above those of albumen in complexity as those of albumen are above the simplest compounds) which I have called u physiological units," and of which I conceive each organism to have a modifi- cation peculiar to itself, I conceive to be within each organism substantially of one kind — the slight differences that exist amongst them being such only as are due to the slight modifica- tions of them inherited from parents and ancestry. The evolution of the organism into its special structure, I suppose to be due to the tendency of these excessively complex units to fall into that arrangement, as their form of equilibrium under the particular distribution of forces they are exposed to by the environment and by their mutual actions. On the other hand, your u gemmules," if I understand rightly, are from the beginning heterogeneous — each organ of the organism being the source of a different kind, and propagating itself, as a part of succeeding organisms, by means of the gemmules it gives off.
I must try and throw aside my own hypothesis and think from your point of view, so as to see whether yours affords a better interpretation of the facts.1
The year before the Nation made its " little thrust," Dr. Hooker, in his presidential address to the British Asso- ciation, gave Spencer's observations on the circulation of the sap and the formation of wood in plants, as an " in- stance of successful experiment in Physiological Botany." " It is an example of what may be done by an acute observer and experimentalist, versed in Physics and Chemistry, but above all, thoroughly instructed in scientific methods." Another expert, Mr. Alfred R. Wallace, in bis Presidential Address to the Entomological Society in January, 1872, spoke of Spencer's view of the nature and origin of the Annulose type of animals as "one of the
1 See Life and Letters of C. Darwin, in., 78, 80.
152 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xn.
most ingenious and remarkable theories ever put forth on a question of Natural History," and as "a most promising line of research."
Such were the opinions of "experts." Here is the opinion of one who, if not an expert in any branch of natural science, was one of the leading thinkers of the time.
FROM J. S. MILL.
2 December, 1868.
This I may say, that I have seldom been more thoroughly impressed by any scientific treatise than by your Biology ; that it has greatly enhanced my sense of the importance of your philosophical enterprise as a whole ; and that, altogether apart from the consideration of what portion of your conclusions, or indeed of your scientific premises, have yet been brought into the domain of proved truth, the time had exactly come when one of the greatest services that could be rendered to knowledge was to start from those premises, simply as a matter of hypo- thesis, and see how far they will go to form a possible explana- tion of the concrete parts of organisation and life. That they should go so far as they do, fills me with wonder ; and I do not doubt that your book, like Darwin's, will form an era in thought on its particular subject, whatever be the scientific verdict ultimately pronounced on its conclusions ; of which my knowledge of the subject-matter does not qualify me to judge.
Academical honours were of no value in his eyes, except as indications that his work was appreciated. He declined to be put forward for the Lord Rectorship of the Univer- sity of St. Andrews, or to be nominated for the degree of LL.D.,1 or to accept an honorary membership of the St. Andrew's Medical Graduates' Association. To the Secretary of the Association he stated his reasons in full (December 16, 1871).
Some years ago, while occupied in biological enquiries, I should doubtless have been able to make much use of the advantages which such an election would have given me ; but I fear that, as now my studies lie almost wholly in other directions, these valuable facilities will be almost thrown away upon me. Doubtless it is true that honorary memberships in such cases are not supposed to imply habitual participation,
1 Autobiography, ii., 233.
1867-72] Psychology and Sociology 153
either in the advantages or in the proceedings of the bodies giving them. . . .
Beyond the general objection I have to all names and titles that are not descriptive of actual function, there rises before me in this case an objection of another order, which •will very possibly be regarded as no less peculiar. I see that one of the purposes of the Association is u the maintenance of the interests of the Medical Graduates of the University." . . . I think that very probably any public action the Association might take would be one I should disapprove. The doctrines I have long publicly held respecting the functions of the State and the liberties of the subject, are of a kind quite at variance with the policy pursued by the Medical Profession, when it has brought its combined power to bear upon legislation. ... I fear that this letter will be regarded as a very ungracious response to the compliment which your Association has paid me. But, as I hope your Council will see, my course is one taken altogether irrespective of the particular circumstances. The principles I have indicated are principles long since adopted, and from which I have not hitherto swerved.
The. French translation of First Principles was expected to appear early in 1868. When spring of the year following came without any sign he was "beginning to get a little anxious." About the middle of 1870 he found out that the delay was due in part to the difficulty experienced in preparing the prefatory note, which was growing to the dimensions of a volume. There were three points Dr. Gazelles wished to bring out : " To determine your place in the experimental school ; to trace the evolution of your idea of Evolution ; in fine, to mark the differences which separate your philosophy from the only scientific general- ization known in France — the positivism of Comte." To This Spencer replied at great length in June, 1870, tracing the development of his thought. Being now in possession of the required information, Dr. Gazelles expected to have the translation published in July or August, little thinking of the disaster that was about to overtake his country.
To E. GAZELLES.
10 March, 1871.
I have not endeavoured to communicate with you during this period of dreadful disaster for France that has elapsed since I last heard from you about midsummer, 1870. My silence has been partly due to the feeling that the entire
154 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xn.
absorption of your thoughts and feelings by these unhappy events made attention to any other matters out of the question ; and partly to the belief that during this reign of confusion, a letter would very likely not reach you. Now that I do write it is more to express my sympathy with you in this time of national misfortune, than because any matter of business requires me to write ; for I conclude that, in the state of prostration under which France must for some time suffer, literary activity is likely to be almost entirely suspended. My chief hope is that when social order becomes fairly re-established and the corrupting effects of the Imperial regime partially got rid of, the result may be a turning of the national energies into more healthful channels.
The long-delayed translation at length saw the light during the troublous days of the early summer of 1871. Neither Dr. Gazelles nor M. Ribot could tell how the book had succeeded in escaping from Paris. The Introduction pleased Spencer greatly.
To E. CAZKLLES.
3 3/mvl871.
The lucidity of your brief statements is admirable, and, in many cases, presents to me my own ideas with a freshness and neatness which gives them almost the effect of novelty. Indeed, I cannot better express the effect produced on me by what I have read, than by saying that it seems to me as though I were looking at myself in a glass, not having before known '' what manner of man I was," as seen externally. This effect is in part due, I doubt not, to the comparative brevity with which you have sketched out the System of Philosophy in its essentials— so giving me, free from superfluous details, that which is habitually present to me under more involved forms, and in part to the quite different order in which you have exhibited these essentials. This new concatenation, consider- ably unlike that through which my thoughts habitually run, enables me to judge of the ensemble from a fresh point of view, and thus gives me an impression of it which I can look at as though it proceeded from some one else. ... I am so struck by its lucidity and by the vividness due to a presentation of the main features in rapid succession, that I should like very much to have it diffused in a separate form. . . .
I should some time since have replied to your letter of March 21st, had not the occurrence of this dreadful second disaster in France [the excesses of the Commune] led me to suppose that a letter would probably miscarry. I wish I could do something towards mitigating that despondency which must accompany the view you take respecting the future of
1867-72] Psychology and Sociology 155
France. I wish this the more because in the interests of civili- zation at large, as well as in the interests of France, I should be glad to rind rational grounds for taking a more favourable view than that which you take. But, though I shall hope to see society in France re-organize itself in a more satisfactory form, I cannot with candour say that my hope is at all a sanguine one. It has seemed to me for these many years past that from some cause difficult to trace (race, or the particular mixture of races, being perhaps at the root) there has arisen an obstacle to further development. The nature of the social units seems to have become different from that required for a higher type of social structure, and, in fact, there seems to be no type that is suitable. In the average French nature there appears to be an intolerance of despotism along with an unfit- ness for freedom — or, at least, if these characters do not co-exist in the same individual, they co-exist in the individuals of the same society, and prevent that society from organizing itself into a type under which the units can co-operate harmoniously.
10 July. — I am glad to see affairs in France assuming so much better an aspect and promising tranquillity for some time to come, at least. I should have greater hope for the future were there not already so many indications that the dominant feeling is that of revenge, and were there not a consequent determination to still further exhaust the national resources by military pre- parations, and so to entail a further retardation, if not arrest, of social growth.
Unknown to Spencer, M. Ribot had already completed a translation of the original edition of the Psychology. It was now arranged to substitute a translation of the new edition. Meanwhile, to give the public some idea of the psychology of evolution, M. Ribot wrote, for La Philo- sophic Positive, an article which M. Littre had agreed to publish, but on seeing it drew back. " Without contest- ing the great merit of M. Herbert Spencer," wrote M. Littre, "there are between him and us differences so profound that we could not receive your article as it is." He was willing to publish the article, however, on condition that it were " transformed into an exposition pure and simple."
156
CHAPTER XIII.
THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY.
(December, 1869— January, 1874.)
THE adoption of a general title for the System of Philosophy, reluctantly laid aside in 1867, came up again in connexion with Mr. Fiske's lectures at the Harvard University, which were published as delivered in the New York World, then owned by Mr. Manton Marble. Spencer was gratified to know that his philosophy was to be expounded by a disciple so able and enthusiastic, but the title of the course was not to his liking.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
4 December, 1869.
I am very much annoyed that he should have used the title he has done. . . . What he has called Positive Philosphy . . . has little or nothing in common with the philosophy of Comte ; for even the relativity of knowledge, joined with the deliberate ignoring of an unknown cause of phenomena is a quite different thing from the relativity of knowledge joined with the deliberate assertion of an unknown cause of phenomena. And while this general doctrine, which Fiske calls Positivism, is not what the Positivists mean by that title, it is a doctrine which is held by those who distinctly repudiate the name Positivists. So far as I can judge from his programme ... a title, which is applied both by its adherents and opponents to one system of thought, he is applying to another system of thought, the adherents of which do not acknowledge the title. Among other evils, one result of this will be that all who wish to direct against the doctrine of Evolution such objections and prejudices as have grown up against the system of Comte, will be able to cite justification for doing this.
NOTE. — Autobiography, ii., chaps, xlvii., xlviii., xlix., 1.
1869-74] T^e Study of Sociology 157
To JOHX FISKE.
2 February, 1870.
If the word " Positive " could be dissociated from the special system with which he [Comte] associated it, and could be connected in the general mind with the growing body of scientific thought to which he applied it, I should have no objection to adopt it, and by so doing accord to him due honour as having given a definite and coherent form to that which the cultivated minds of his time were but vaguely conscious of. But it seems to me as the case stands, and as the words are interpreted both by the Comtists and by the public, the amount of correct apprehension resulting from the adoption of the word will be far out-balanced by the amount of mis- apprehension produced.
In so far as I am myself concerned, I still hold that the application of the word to me, connotes a far greater degree of kinship between Comte and myself than really exists. . . . Such elements of my general scheme of thought as you have brought into prominence as akin to those of Comte (such as the relativity of knowledge, and the de-anthropomorphization of men's con- ceptions) . . . have been all along quite secondary to the general doctrine of Evolution, considered as an interpretation of the Cosmos from a purely scientific or physical point of view. ... If you bear in mind that my sole original purpose was the interpretation of all concrete phenomena in terms of the redistribution of matter and motion, . . . you will see why I regard the application of the word Positivist to me as essentially misleading. The general doctrine of universal Evolution as a ncccssarv consequence from the Persistence of Force is not contained or implied either in Cointism or in Positivism as von define it.
By the end of the following year Mr. Fiske had come to the conclusion that Spencer was right " in refusing to accept the appellation ' Positivist ' in any sense in which it is now possible to use the word. ... I should like also to know what you think of the terms ' Cosmic PhilosopW ' and ' Cosmism.'" To these also Spencer objected. Think- ing the time had now come to give effect to his former intention, lie set aside the reasons that had been urged against the title " Synthetic Philosophy,"1 and forthwith had a new7 general title-page inserted in the unsold copies of First Principles, Biology, and Psycliology. His objections to " Cosmic " and his reasons for choosing " Synthetic " are set forth in a letter to Mr. Fiske in 1872 or 1873.
1 Supra, p. 131.
158 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. XIH.
To put my view in its most general form, I should say that a system of philosophy, if it is to have a distinctive name, should be named from its method, not from its subject-matter. Whether avowedly recognized as such or not, the subject- matter of philosophy is the same in all cases. . . . Though every philosophy is more or less synthetic, it seems to me that that which formulates and elaborates the " Doctrine of Evolution " is synthetic in so especial a manner that it may fitly take from this pecularity its distinctive title.
It is synthetic as recognizing avowedly that philosophy is a synthesis of all knowledge — that which unifies the partial unifi- cations achieved by the several sciences.
It is synthetic as uniting Science and Nescience as the correlative parts of an integral conception of the Universe.
It is synthetic as recognizing each derivative law of force as a demonstrable corollary from the ultimate law, the Persistence of Force.
It is synthetic as proceeding consciously to the interpretation of phenomena as caused by a co-operation of forces conforming to these derivative laws.
•It is synthetic as proceeding to deduce from the general law of the redistribution of matter and motion the successive orders of concrete phenomena in their ascending complexities.
Further, it is synthetic under sundry more special aspects as combining and reconciling opposing views — as those of the transcendentalists and the experientialists.
And yet once more it is synthetic in its conception of the Universe as objective, since it regards the progress of things which brings about evolution as being itself a synthesis — a reaching of more and more complex products through succes- sive increments of modification.
Mr. Fiske did not think " that Synthetic, any more than Cosmic, will apply, as a distinctive name to your philosophy. The differential mark of your philosophy is, not that it is Synthetic or that it is Cosmic, but that it is based upon the conception of Evolution as opposed to the conception of Creation."1 The term Cosmic would, however, in Dr. Youmans's opinion, " probably come under popular use in this country. Nothing short of the Cosmic will satisfy the American spread-eagleism."
Into the project for an " International Scientific Series" Spencer entered with the utmost cordiality, the proposed arrangements seeming to "practically amount to inter-
1 Edward Livingston Youmans, pp. 290-92, note f-
1869-74] The Study of Sociology 159
national copyright." a The international character of the scheme gave occasion for the clashing of interests, the exciting, of jealousies, unlooked-for delays, and many disap- pointments. After some six months negociations in Europe Dr. Youmans found, on returning to New York, that American writers had to be propitiated. " There was unani- mous and much bitter complaint on the part of the press at the absence of any American element, and it was urged upon me all round in the interest of the undertaking that the omission should be supplied as early as possible." From the side of the public came complaints of overlapping of subjects, of over-prominence given to certain topics, and of inequality in the amount of mailer. Even the size of the page agreed upon had to be strictly adhered to. " Books of that kind we cannot sell," wrote Dr. Youmans, with reference to a proposal to introduce a larger paged book into the series. Altogether, the task which Professor Huxley, Professor Tyndall and Spencer took upon themselves when they agreed to act as a London Advisory Committee, proved by no means light. On Spencer from the very outset fell the burden of the Committee's work.
Spencer's hands being full, he had at first no idea of himself contributing to the series. But for several years he had been impressed with the necessity of preparing the way for Sociology by an exposition of the method by which, and the spirit in which, the phenomena of society should be studied. Failing to find any one to do this, or to collaborate with him in doing it, he at last yielded to Dr. Youmans's persistent suggestion that he should write the book himself and include it in the Series. The result was an arrange- ment that the Stiutv of Sociologv (the name to be given to the book) should first appear as articles in the Contemporary Review, with simultaneous publication in an American period- ical, about the standing of which he was very particular.2 No sooner had Dr. Youmans seen the first article than he made up his mind to start a magazine (the Popular Science Monthly]
1 Edward Livingston Youmans, pp. 266-94. Autobiography, ii., 227, 230-2.
• Edward Livingston Youmans, p. 295.
160 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xm.
forthwith, with this article in the opening number. Spencer was rather taken aback to find that the articles got so little attention in the United States. Of the chapter on " The Bias of Patriotism," he writes : —
As its contents are varied, and part of it has a considerable interest distinct from that of the argument in general, its length will perhaps not be objectionable. Especially, I suppose, the castigation of Arnold will excite some attention. . . . You will see how the sales of my books are increasing. If things go on thus, I shall make a fortune by philosophy.
For the chapter on " The Political Bias," he had asked Dr. You mans to send him "a supp'y of typical illustrations of the way in which your political machinery acts so ill — its failures in securing life, property and equitable relations. I want to use the case of America as one among others to show how baseless is the notion that the form of political freedom will secure freedom in the full sense of the word."
Mr. Martineau's article in the Contemporary Review for April, on "The Place of Mind ijn Nature, and Intuition of Man," caused a brief interruption in the Study of Sociology, for the purpose of writing a reply. To this he refers in the course of a letter to Dr. Youmans : " I have just had a very enthusiastic letter from Darwin J about the article, which is, of course, satisfactory ; for I feel since the article was published that he might think I ought to have referred to him personally in connexion with the doctrine defended."
To CHARLES DAKWIX.
\2Junc, 1872.
I cannot consent to let your letter pass without saying how much gratified I am by your approval. I should very well have liked, had time permitted, to deal somewhat more fully with the metaphysical part of Mr. Martineau's argument. If, as I expect him to do, he makes some reply, it will probably furnish the occasion, after an interval, for a fuller exposition ; by which I hope to make clear to quite ordinary apprehensions, the absolute emptiness of all such propositions as that with which Mr. Martineau deludes himself and his readers.
1 Life and Letters of C. Darwin, iii., 165.
1869-74] The Study of Sociology 161
To J. E. CAIRNES.
21 March, 1873.
At present I have done nothing more than just dip into your essay on Laissez-faire. Without being quite sure that I seize your meaning exactly, I feel inclined to object to that current conception of laissez-faire which you appear to accept and argue upon. You say that " the able men who led the agitation for the repeal of the Corn Laws promised much more than this. They told us that the Poor Laws were to follow the Corn Laws ; that pauperism would disappear with the restric- tions upon trade, and the workhouses ere long become obsolete institutions."
Now as a Poor Law is itself a gross breach of laissez-faire, in what I conceive to be the true meaning of it, this passage seems to me to be tantamount to an expression of disappoint- ment that obedience to laissez-faire in one direction has not cured the evils caused by continued disobedience to it in another direction.
I do not think that laissez-faire is to be regarded simply as a politico-economical principle only, but as a much wider principle — the principle of letting all citizens take the benefits and evils of their own acts : not only such as are consequent on their industrial conduct, but such as are consequent upon their conduct in general. And while laissez-faire, as I under- stand it, forbids the stepping between these private acts and their consequences, it is quite consistent with the doctrine that a government should, far more effectually and minutely than at present, save such individual from suffering evils or claiming benefits due to the acts of others.
About this time he became acquainted with Mr. Arinori Mori, the Minister of Japan to the United States. " He came," says Spencer, " to ask my opinion about the re-organization of Japanese institutions. I gave him conser- vative advice — urging that they would have eventually to return to a form not much in advance of what they had, and that they ought not to attempt to diverge widely from it."
Spencer's aversion to self-advertisement comes out in his reply to a suggestion made by Dr. You mans regarding the final chapter of the Study of Sociology.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
3 June, 1873.
To your suggestion that in the concluding chapter I should outline the coming treatment of the subject in the Principles of
ii
1 62 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xm.
Sociology, I fear I cannot yield. The concluding chapter, as I have outlined it, in thought, \vill make no reference whatever to the Principles of Sociology, and could not do so \vithout an obvious departure from the proper limits of the book. To the advantage that might result from indicating the scope of the Principles I am entirely indifferent — about any probable increase of sale I do not care in the least. Indeed, so far from being tempted by an opportunity for something like an advertisement, I should be tempted to avoid it if it came naturally. Even as it is, I feel a certain distaste for the inclusion of the two chapters, "Preparation in Biology" and u Preparation in Psychology" ; since these may be regarded as indirect advertisements of my own books. I would escape this implication if I could ; and I shall solicitously avoid any such further implication.
His sojourn in Scotland this year was cut short owing to " very bad weather, very little amusement, and un- satisfactory health." Taking into account the expediency of proceeding at once with the Principles of Sociology, one would have thought he would have avoided outside entan- glements. But the writing of the Study of Sociology had revived his former active interest in the question of the separation of Church and State, leading to meetings and discussions with those in favour of the movement.1
In the last chapter of the Study of Sociology he had singled out Mr. Gladstone as " the exponent of the anti- scientific view." Mr. Gladstone repudiated the interpreta- tion put on his words : " Whether there be or not grave differences of opinion between us, they .do not arise from the words in question." Spencer thereupon withdrew the erroneous construction, and took steps to counteract it.-' Thinking the small controversy between them had thus been amicably terminated, Mr. Gladstone did not read the proof which Spencer had sent him showing how it was proposed to correct the misinterpretation in future editions. When he did look into this some five weeks afterwards, he found there a reference to the other passage quoted, the manifest meaning of which he had not disclaimed. This " other passage," Mr. Gladstone wrote, had not been disclaimed because it was not in the Contemporary Review article, but appeared for the first time in the book itself. Moreover,
1 Autobiography^ ii., 258-60. • Study of Sociology, note 5 t-> chapter xvi.
1869-74] The Study of Sociology 163
" you can hardly have taken the pains to read the words you have quoted — they speak, as you will see on perusing them, of a third person — and they run thus ; ' // ivonld scan that is his view.' . . . That which I describe as the opinion of the man I am condemning, you quote as my opinion."
To W. E. GLADSTONE.
14 January, 1874.
I greatly regret that any act of mine should have called for your letter of the 12th — regret it alike for the reason that your valuable time has been thus expended, and for the reason that you have found just cause of complaint against me.
Let me at the outset, however, draw your attention to the fact that, having forwarded to you before it was printed, a proof of the addition I proposed to make to the volume, it is manifest that such misrepresentation as is chargeable against me, however otherwise blameworthy, was not committed consciously. . . .
But now proceeding to the points at issue, let me say that I by no means admit all that you allege against me. A large part of the allegation is founded on an oversight almost as remark- able as that which I have myself made. . . . For the " new passage " which I am said to have " introduced " into the volume, and which directly and by implication is said not to have been in the Contemporary Review, was in the Contemporary Rc'i'iezv. . . .
But now having, as I think, conclusively shown that one of the two complaints against me is unfounded, I go on to admit that the other is well founded. . . . How I came so to mis- construe the sentence as to ascribe to you that conception of the attitude of Science towards Providence which you ascribe to another, I do not know. It was a piece of stupidity which, when I read your letter at the Athenaeum, I could scarcely believe I had been guilty of ; and it was not until I returned home and referred to the volume, that I became convinced I had been thus careless where I ought to have been specially careful.
With respect, however, to the essential issue, I cannot see that I have misapprehended or misstated your position. . . .
Returning, however, to the immediate question, I will forth- with erase the rinal paragraph of my comment on your letter, and in its place put one apologizing for the misconstruction of the sentence referred to. ...
Hoping that you will forgive me for having unintentionally entailed on you so much trouble and annoyance.
It was now Mr. Gladstone's turn to apologize. Even were he inclined, he said, to push matters to extremes he
164 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xni.
felt that he had forfeited all title to do so by having himself committed an oversight which he thought quite equal, to say the least, to Spencer's. " I am glad," he added, " a correspondence has occurred which proves your anxiety not to wound or misrepresent, and I shall be further glad if circumstances should, with your permission, allow our acquaintance to be improved." To this Spencer responded: "It is almost superfluous on my part to say that I very gladly reciprocate the wish with which you obligingly close your note."
The Descriptive Sociology, upon which he had drawn largely in writing the Study was making increasing calls upon ins time and his purse. His friends in America wished to relieve him of the cost of Dr. Scheppig's volumes, but their proposals were declined owing to his annoyance at reports respecting the aid which had been rendered by Americans and the embarrassments from which he had been rescued by them. While holding this decision to be mistaken, Dr. Youmans felt that " there is nothing for me but acquiescence under the circumstances, but I do not agree to it as a final thing." " I am not certain about the general policy to be pursued, having been a good deal demoralized by your refusal of the movement we had planned." Eager and energetic as usual, he was ready to undertake any amount of work to promote the sale. But Spencer would neither himself push the sale at home, nor sanction arrangements proposed for pushing it in America.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
11 July, 1873.
The undertaking gives me an immense amount of worry and trouble, and seriously hinders other work, and I cannot enter- tain any plans that will involve re-arrangements and give further trouble. You must just do the best with the thing as it comes to you. If it is profitable, so much the better. If not, it cannot be helped. The first consideration with me is to have this organization of materials available for my own use ; the second, that of making it available for general use. The third con- sideration, of a greater or smaller amount of profit, weighs with me but little.
15 July. — I fear that my last letter, written in a hurry, was somewhat too directly expressed, and that the negation of your
1869-74] The Study of Sociology 165
proposed plans may have been a source of annoyance. Pray forgive me if it \vas so.
27 September. — I am quite content to give my labour for nothing. I am content even to lose something by unrepaid costs of authorship ; but it is clear that I shall not be able to bear the loss that now appears likely.
12 November. — Referring to the business arrangement of the Descriptive Sociohgv in America, I shall prefer to have it on a mercantile basis ; and believe that on the terms I proposed, I shall be able to carry it on, if not without loss, still without greater loss than I can bear. I have carried it on thus far single-handed ; and I purpose to continue it in the same way.
The interval between the completion of the Study of Sociology and the beginning of the Principles of Sociology, offered an opportunity for carrying out the intention, re- ferred to in the first paragraph of the article on Mr. Martineau, of dealing with the chief criticisms that had from time to time appeared on the general doctrine of Evolution as set forth in First Principles. While he was engaged on this the Quarterly Review for October, 1873, had an article, " respectful, though antagonistic." Simultaneously there appeared in the British Quarterly an article also an- tagonistic, but, as he thought, not respectful. These led him to write a postscript dealing with the new points raised. Of this he says to Dr. Youmans (12 November) : "I enclose the postscript to the ' Replies to Criticisms,' which runs to a greater length than I intended. It is desirable, however, that these attacks in the Quarterly and British Quarterly should be effectually met. That in the Quarterly is clearly by Mivart, and that in the British Quarterly is by a man named Moulton (a senior wrangler, I hear)." A portion of the proof of the reply to the British Quarterly was kept back to be used or not at the discretion of his biographer. l
A rejoinder by the British Quarterly reviewer led to another from Spencer when issuing his Replies in the form of a pamphlet. Before this, however, he had told Dr. Youmans : " You will see that the reviewers are both pretty
1 The " Replies to Criticisms" is reprinted in Essays, ii., 218 ; for the postscript dealing with the Quarterlies, see p. 258.
'66 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xm.
effectually disposed of. Tyndall and Hirst have both verified my position against the British Quarterly. Tyndall thinks that Tait will very likely show fight. I hope he will, I shall be down upon him still more heavily if he does." Professor Tait did "show fight." His letter in Nature of 26 March, 1874, initiated a correspondence in the pages of that journal, on the nature and origin of physical axioms, which continued for months, even after the original com- batants had retired from the contest.1
A few matters of interest, more or less outside his main pursuits, may be gathered from the correspondence.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
16 February, 1872.
On Friday I had the latest news of Huxley. He wrote from Malta and was beginning to get over his depression. We are using influence to get out to him a peremptory official order not to return in time to finish his course of lectures, as he had intended to do.
22 March. — The publishers here have done what I expected they would do — make a counter-move trying to commit the authors to combined action with them. They have hooked a few, and leave no chance unused to hook others ; for they have actually written to me to join their Committee !
8 April. — Tyndall is obviously nettled by my attack on the men of science in the Contemporary article — 2taking it as per- sonal ; which, indeed, remembering some discussions we have had, he has some ground for doing. He says it is well for me that his hands are full ; betraying, at the same time, an amusing unconsciousness that it is possibly well for him also.
9 December. — Huxley is beginning decidedly to improve. He has been building a house, and migrates to it next week.
This migration was the occasion for one of those inter- changes of expressions of mutual regard that go so far to sweeten life.3 In replying to Spencer's reference to their long-standing friendship, Professor Huxley wrote: "You
1 Nature, 26 March, 1874; 2, 16, 23, 30 April; 7, 14, 21, 28 May ; 4, 11, 18 June; 20, 27 August. Essays, ii., 298. - The Stuffy of Sociology, chapter i. 3 Life of Professor Huxley, i., 385.
1869-74] The Study of Sociology 167
do not set a greater value on our old-standing friendship than I do. It has been the greatest pleasure to me to see the world in general gradually turning to the opinion of you which is twenty years old in my mind." A further proof of Spencer's affection was shown in the active steps he took along with other friends to enable Professor Huxley to take a much needed rest.
To CHARLES DARWIN.
26 April, 1873.
I rejoice with you that our plot has succeeded so well — beyond expectation, indeed.
One thing, I think, remains to be done. Huxley talks of taking a long holiday " in the summer." I think he must not be allowed to postpone taking it. He must go away at once, and to that end we ought to put pressure on Foster.
I have been to see Tyndall about it, and he agrees in my proposal to write and ask your opinion.
We might send a joint letter to Foster (which you would write) giving emphatic expression to our opinion in the matter ; and judging from what Farrar said when I saw him, there will probably be no difficulty.
The death of Mr. J. S. Mill in May of this year brought Spencer "a serious deprivation." In an obituary notice in the Examiner (17 May), he gave expression to his sense of the public and private loss sustained by the passing away of one, distinguished alike by the force and perspicacity of his intelligence and by the loftiness of his moral character.1
Autobiography^ ii., 247, 506.
i68
CHAPTER XIV.
DISTASTE FOR HONOURS AND CEREMONIAL.
(January, 1874 — December, 1877.)
SPENCER'S "abortive attempt to keep a diary" during 1874, affords little help to his biographer. The entries, few and meagre, occur only in January and March. On 4 March, there is an entry : " Breakfasted with Mr. Glad- stone"— a carrying out of the wish expressed by both at the conclusion of their controversy.
Efforts were being made to induce him to join the Royal Society.
To j. D. HOOKER.
28 March, 1874.
Since our brief conversation some two months ago, I have repeatedly considered your kindly expressed wish that I should join the Royal Society ; and, that I may not fail in treating the overture with due appreciation, I have decided to set down my thoughts on paper.
When, on several occasions during recent years, the like suggestion has been made to me, my response has, I doubt not, seemed eccentric. I have a dislike, perhaps morbid in degree, to the tendency shown in the Royal Society, as in the com- munity at large, to hang on to the skirts of the titled class. The maintenance of special facilities for the admission of peers, and the appointment, as Presidents, of men who, but for their rank, would not have been thought of as appropriate, have always seemed to me to imply a disrespect for science which the Royal Society should, above all bodies, have avoided show- ing. When, not very long since, a nomination to the Council was advocated by Sabine, then President, on the ground that the nominee had induced two peers to become Fellows, the continued existence of this feeling was clearly proved, and it was the continued existence of this feeling which I remember
NOTI . — Autobiography, chaps, liii., liv.
1874-77] Distaste for Honours and Ceremonial 169
giving as my objection, the last time the question of my joining the Society was raised at the X (Asa Gray being, I remember, our guest on the occasion). Since then, there has doubtless been a great improvement. Your own election as President, in preference to the Duke of Devonshire, has illustrated it in a striking way ; and the pending proposal to alter the rule respecting the admission of peers, further shows it. So that, were there no other reasons, this would now be no deterrent.
Other reasons, however, remain. In the case of the Royal Society, as in the case of other learned bodies, there grows up, in addition to the first purpose, a second purpose, which even- tually becomes predominant. Co-operation for the advance of knowledge is the original purpose ; the wearing a badge of honour is the derived purpose ; and eventually the derived purpose becomes more important than the original purpose. Now badges of honour of this kind are beneficial or mischievous according to circumstances. When given to men early in their careers, they serve them as authoritative endorsements ; and thus diminish the difficulties to be contended with. When, contrariwise, they are not given, an increase of these difficulties results. Absence of the endorsement becomes an additional hindrance. The world at large, little capable of judging, and led by marks of this kind, thinks lightly of those who do not bear them, and pays relatively less attention to anything they do. There arises, in fact, to use a sporting metaphor, a kind of inverse handicapping — a system under which those who, from youth or other causes, are already at a disadvantage, are artifi- cially disadvantaged still more ; while those who have already surmounted their difficulties have their progress artificially facilitated. Evils arise from this, of which my own experience has made me conscious. If, within a moderate time after the publication of the Principles of Psychology in 1855, a proposal to join the Royal Society had been made to me, it is possible that the hope of having my path made somewhat easier might have over-ridden the feeling described above. But during the long period throughout which I was frittering away what property I possessed in publishing books that did not pay their expenses, there came no such aid. There came, rather, the hindrance which, as I have said, results from the non-possession of a mark of distinction possessed by others — a hindrance shown at home by the long neglect of my books by the press, and abroad by the absence, until recently, of translations. The natural diffi- culties, which are quite great enough and often prove fatal, and were more than once nearly proving fatal in my own case, are thus made greater than natural. That many aspirants should be killed off in the struggle to gain recognition, may be, on the whole, salutary ; though, among them, adverse circumstances probably extinguish some of the best. But I think it undesir- able that the natural struggle should be made artificially more
170 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xiv.
severe for those whose circumstances are already unfavourable. I do not by any means intend to imply that the Royal Society has not, in many cases, endorsed men at those early stages when its endorsement was valuable. So far as it has done this, let the fact be recognized ; and so far as it has not done this, let the fact be recognized ; so that there may be a balanced judgment respecting the extent to which the presence or absence of its endorsement is to be taken as a test.
Yet a further motive, more exclusively personal than the last, weighs with me — the motive which prompted my remark to you that " I thought it was too late." Next year, my career as an author will have extended over a quarter of a century. Were I now to become a candidate for the Royal Society, and to be elected, the interpretation generally put upon the fact would be that only now, after this long period, has the pro- priety of such an election become manifest. A tacit admission to this effect, I feel disinclined to make. And in addition to the feeling which disinclines me to make it, I have a suspicion that it might not be altogether politic ; so tardy an election would, I think, be rather damaging to me than otherwise.
Thus you see that I have sundry motives for still holding back. Though my great respect for you, personally, and the desire to yield to your friendly overture, led me for a while to waver ; yet, after repeatedly thinking the matter over, un- original reasons and feelings have reasserted themselves. I regret that it is so ; and that I am obliged thus to make what I fear you may regard as an ungracious response.
The English translation of Dr. Gazelles' Introduction to First Principles was now (May, 1874) ready for the press. It had at one time been intended that Mr. Fiske should prepare it; "but," wrote Spencer in May, 1871, " a reason has occurred to me for not asking him. The name is doubly odious here just now — not only because of your finance schemer of that name, but also because the name is also that of an American who is implicated in a horrible scandal now before our courts." The title selected for the translation may cause surprise to one who has in mind the correspondence a year or two before about the title "Synthetic Philosophy." "'Synthetic Philosophy' would be a damper to most, even when it was intelligible, which it would be to but few. " Evolution Philosophy," will, on the contrary, be attractive, and will convey some idea of the book."
The following refers to a lecture by Dr. Youmans before
1874-77] Distaste for Honours and Ceremonial 17 i
the Liberal Club, New York, on " Herbert Spencer and the Doctrine of Evolution." J
To E. L. YOUMANS.
20 /»/?<-, 1874.
Of course, I cannot but rejoice at the complete success of your address and exposition.
But while it is a source of satisfaction to me to have such able defence and advocacy, I see abundant reason to congratu- late you upon the clearness and power of that which is wholly your own. Your sketch of the pre-existing state of opinion, and of the irrational compromise which had been made by scientific men is admirable ; and you bring into a vivid light their failure to recognize the changed position of things that had grown up, and the necessity for a total reorganization of thought. So well have you put the matter that everyone who reads may see that such a change was impending ; and that the last generation of scientific men, narrowly disciplined by their special studies, were incapable of seeing it.
You have put in immense claims for me ; and doubtless greatly astonished your audience, and will greatly astonish also the more numerous readers of your address. . . .
I see you finally decided to have your say about Emerson. It is very pungent, and will, I should think, cause considerable sensation. If as you say, controversy has been growing hot, we may expect it to growr hotter, now that you have added to it these burning criticisms.
His persistent defence of his originality and inde- pendence was associated with an equally persistent repug- nance to anything that had the appearance of blowing, or conniving at blowing, his own trumpet. His dislike of self- advertisement made him hesitate as to the publication in London of Dr. Youmans's eulogistic lecture either separately or as an appendix to the English translation of Dr. Gazelles' Introduction. Written, as its author said, for the meridian of New York, it might, Spencer feared, compromise him if published in the meridian of London. Similarly, when towards the end of the year he learnt that some verses "gracefully written and eulogistic in a high degree," which Mr. Grant Allen had sent him,2 had also been sent to Mr. Morley for publication in the Forfnightlv Review, he decided
1 Edward Livingston Youmans, p. 325. • Memoir of Grant Allen, p. 55.
i/2 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xiv.
that it would never do to have them published with his cognisance.
" Pray do not fail to reach Belfast by August 19," he wrote to Dr. Youmans, in view of the Meeting of the British Association there, under the presidency of Professor Tyndall. This meeting cut down his holiday in Scotland to about one month. The earlier portion was spent with Mr. and Mrs. Holt at the Dell of Abernethy, on Speyside, and the latter portion at Ardtornish.
To MRS. HOLT.
ARDTORXISH, 5 August, 1874.
By the time this reaches the Dell, I suppose you will have returned to that comfortable nest where you left your little ones — finding them, I hope, all well.
My journey went on without hitch — weather good and times fitting as intended. The drive along the shores of Loch Laggan was well worth having — quite new to me and bearing compari- son with other fine scenes which Scotland offers.
... I have spent the time in lishing, with tolerable success. Not to you perhaps, but to Mr. Potter ... it may be worth stating the results : — Saturday, 13 sea- trout weighing 15 Ibs., and Monday one salmon of 7 Ibs. and 15 sea- trout weighing 9 Ibs. ... I hope it has been different on the Spey, and that your papa has done better than I did. Mr. Holt, too, has, I hope, not come home empty-handed three times running !
My best way of thanking you for your kind hospitalities will be to tell you how very much stronger I found myself than I expected. On Monday my 8 hours continuous fishing, which would have quite exhausted me a fortnight ago, did not make me more than pleasantly tired — all the result of life at the Dell.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
28 August, 1874.
You would have enjoyed the Belfast meeting. It went off very well, and Tyndall's address, though it called forth many sermons, was otherwise well received. Huxley's lecture, too, was a great success. The occurrence of the two together is regarded as a throwing down the gauntlet.
6 November. — I suppose that with you, as here, the forma- tion of opinion is increasing at a great rate. Tyndall's address has greatly added to it. The newspapers make it a topic, letters are published, pamphlets issued ; and there is a continual increase of magazine-essays and books, dealing with one or other aspect of the general question. The results are coming
1874-77} Distaste for Honours and Ceremonial 173
to be altogether incalculable. There seems to be no knowing what a few years might bring forth.
One of the most remarkable signs is that Mivart is com- mencing in the Dublin Review a most elaborate examination of the Principles of Psychology. He is actually taking it chapter by chapter, and proposes, in successive articles, to go thus through the whole of it ! So far as I have seen, his criticisms are the merest quibbling ; which, besides being baseless, do not in the least touch the general issues. But I am quite content : he will doubtless aid in the further diffusion of the work. The current number of the Revue des Deux Monties had an article by M. Janet, of the1 French Institute, on the Study of Sociology. I have not yet had time to read it ; but see that it is apprecia- tive, though critical. Morley, too, tells me that he is going to have an article on it in the Fortnightly by Professor Cairnes.
One of the results of the awakened interest alluded to was the starting of a journal of mental science by Professor Bain — a project in which Spencer took a great interest, and in the initiatory stages of which he assisted Professor Groom Robertson with his counsel.
It is time that something was said about the Principles of Sociology, for the writing of which the way seemed clear in the spring of 1874. The protracted course of the Psychology had come to an end ; the exciting episode of the Study of Sociology had attracted the notice of a wider public than any of his previous books ; the " Replies to Criticisms " had squared accounts with opponents ; and the sociological materials he had been accumulating by proxy for the past six years were now in a sufficiently advanced state for use. It is true that his anxieties about the Descriptive Sociology had not grown less as the work progressed. Its importance urged him to push on ; the outlay urged him to hold back. His letters on the subject took their colour from whichever of the two feelings happened to be uppermost at the time. " Sir Rutherford Alcock, our late minister in Japan, who is preparing an article on Japan for the next Quarterly, told me that he had found it [the' English '] of immense service in comparing Japanese feudalism with English feudalism." " I begin to hope that eventually, though slowly, the cost of production will be repaid, or at any rate nearly, so that I shall not be prevented from going on." This fear of being " prevented from going on " was at the bottom of his
174 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xiv.
anxiety. About one of the schemes that emanated from Dr. Youmans's fertile brain he writes in August, 1874 : " The matter is too marvellously involved to allow of my clearly understanding all the bearings of the proposal you give in the space of a single sentence." The " marvellously involved" scheme arose out of a generous offer of ^,500 from Mr. Edwin W. Bryant, of St. Louis.1 "The anticipa- tion that I should have to stop or to lose has, of course, as you know, been my own anticipation. But, as you know, I do not care for this if I do not lose more than I can bear. The miserable ambition of merely scraping together money, is one with which I have so little sympathy that I can scarcely comprehend it." In January, 1875, he was hopeful, " My other books are prospering so well that I shall be able to carry on. ... So that I am in good spirits, notwithstanding the heavy drafts on my resources." Next month the other feeling was uppermost. " It is clear that, as things now look, I must stop." The volumes already begun must be published ; " but after this is done I shall be disinclined to sacrifice further large sums and give myself continued trouble for the benefit of so incredibly stupid a public."
When he mentioned in the spring of 1873 that he did not expect to issue the first number of the Principles of Sociology before going on his holiday, he little thought that March of 1874 would find him with only about sixty pages of manuscript ready. About the second instalment he writes in November : " I am delighted with the piece of work I now have on hand. The genesis of superstitions has been slowly improving with me into a coherent doctrine for years past, and has now become quite clear and complete." The third instalment was out in February, 1875. They were now appearing too rapidly for Dr. You mans, who, as editor of a journal appealing to the general public, was finding their destructive character somewhat embarrassing ; more especially seeing that the "great irritability in the theological mind, since Tyndall's bomb-shell " had not yet been allayed. Occasionally the heterodox ideas were met by ridicule in place of censure, as
1 Autobiography, ii.. 268.
1 874" 7 7] Distaste for Honours and Ceremonial ,175
in the instance alluded to by Spencer in a letter of 22iid January, 1875 : " I enclose you two jcnx d' esprit which will amuse you. The one from Punch1 is admirably witty. I wish Tyndall had done what I urged him — asserted more emphatically that the atom is but a symbol."
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
14 April, 1875.
You are quite right as to withholding from the Monthly the chapters I sent you [chapters xvii. to xx.]. I sent them merely because you requested it. I have often had qualms as to the policy of making the Monthly a propagandist organ to so large an extent ; and I am rather glad than otherwise that you are limiting this use of it. Especially it is, as you think, wise to do so in respect of these present chapters ; and the forthcoming ones are still stronger. Indeed, I am beginning myself to have some fears as to the effect ; for, as you will by and by see, this constructive set of chapters is so utterly destructive (far more so than is manifest at present) that it leaves nothing standing. I cannot see how the so-called orthodox can fail to be made furious by it. But the thing has to be done.
Among the extra bits of work this year was the revision of several chapters of First Principles to meet the criticisms of Professor Tyndall.
To JOHN* TYXDALL.
24 March, 1875.
I send the enclosed, thinking that if it reaches you before you leave town for. Easter, you may perhaps find time, during the recess, to cast your eye over the more important of the changes I have made ; and to add to my already heavy obliga- tions, by telling me whether you think your objections have had the desired effect.
You need not, I think, trouble yourself to re-read the chapter on the " Indestructibility of Matter." I have duly attended to all the points noted in it, and have put at the end of it a suffi- ciently emphatic note concerning the meaning of a priori. The chapter on the u Continuity of Motion " is, most of it, quite transformed ; and is now, I think, not so far from what it should be. I am very glad you have persisted in making me think it over again, and recast it. It is now at any rate very much better than it was.
Respecting the chapter on the u Persistence of Force," I still find myself unable to take the view that u Conservation "
1 16 January, 1875, "Address to an Atom."
176 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xiv.
is a good word, and that u Energy " suffices for all the purposes. By an added sentence or two, I have sought to make this point clearer.
Mr. Sidgvvick's representation in the Methods of Ethics of some of the views contained in Social Statics he could not accept as correct.
To HENLRY SIDGWICK.
12 January, 1875.
In the chapters from which you quote — u Derivation of a First Principle " — it is, I think, sufficiently manifest that my purpose is not to assert the law of the freedom of each limited only by the like freedom of all, as a sufficient guide for in- dividual action. It is represented as a first principle to be subsequently limited by secondary principles — a u law of right relationship between man and man " ; to be qualified by further restrictions originating in the judgment of the individual. It is concluded that in drawing " deductions respecting the equitable constitution of society, we may safely assert in full this liberty of each limited alone by the like liberty of all " ; but it is not thereby concluded that this liberty to exercise the faculties bounded only by the like liberty of others, is a sufficient guide for the individual — the contrary is indicated. The aim of the chapter is to assert the basis of justice. But justice is not alleged to comprehend all ethical restrictions : there are distinct statements to the contrary. The purpose is to establish what claims of the individual are to be held valid against the claims of other individuals (i.e. society) to control them. And it leaves the actions of the individual to be further controlled by his own judgment — does not in the least assert that he ought to give free play to all his instincts regardless of the dictates of reason. My assertion that this free play of the whole nature within the assigned limits may be safely left to mould the character by adaptation, through the experiences of pleasures and pains, is not in the least the proposal that u reason is to abdicate in favour of instinct," as you state. The assertion is that within the assigned limits of equal freedom, the accumulation of experiences by the individual, suffering and benefiting by his own conduct, and checking himself by his own judgments (wise or foolish as the case may be), will work out a beneficial adaption more certainly than will the enforcing of additional restraints by the reason of society as embodied in law — a reason inevitably vitiated by the ignorance and defective sentiment of the time.
I quite recognize the fact that in ascribing to me u a negation of the natural supremacy of reason over impulse," you are presenting a paradox which elucidates your argument ; but it is somewhat too much at my expense.
1874-77] Distaste for Honours and Ceremonial 177
In May, 1875, he began to write the Autobiography. His thoughts naturally turned towards his boyhood.
To GEORGE HOLME.
H J/oy, 1875.
I was very much pleased to hear some time ago, that you had been elected Mayor of Derby. It was a well deserved recognition ; and I am glad that it was not longer delayed. It crowns very satisfactorily that long career of deserved pros- perity which, beginning gradually in the days when we first knew one another, has gone on with increasing speed. Little did we suspect what the future would bring forth on the day when you saved me from being drowned. Little did the spectators, who saw a dripping youth conducting home a half-drowned boy, think that the one would rise to be chief magistrate of the town, while the other would become — well, somewhat widely known. The recollection must ever continue to be a source of satisfaction to you as of gratitude in me.
In an article written for Nature, Mr. D. A. Spalding drew attention to an inconsistency arising out of Spencer's assumption " that feelings stand in a causal relation to bodily movements."
To D. A. SPALDJNG.
5 July, 1875.
The implication of your argument seems to be that I identify motion as it actually exists with motion as manifested to our consciousness. Did I do this there would be the inconsistency you allege in the supposition that feeling is transformable into motion and motion into feeling. . . . But that transformation which I assume to take place (though without in the least understanding how) is the transformation of the subjective activity we call feeling (unknowable in its ultimate nature) and the objective activity we call motion (also unknowable in its ultimate nature). . . .
Simply stated, my position everywhere implied is that the objective activity is inscrutable, the subjective activity is inscrutable, and the relation between the two is inscrutable. But looking at the facts of nervous organization and function I find myself obliged to hold that the two are in some way related, though I cannot conceive how. I find myself also obliged to recognize the fact that they are quantitatively related ; and the fact of quantitative relation implies trans- formation.
In December of the following year this question of the relation between mind and body came up again, in a corre- 12
178 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xiv.
spondence with Professor Hoffding, \vho had translated a selection from the Essays into Danish.
FROM HARALD HOFFDING.
COPENHAGEN, 14 December, 1876.
I beg leave to ask you for some information with regard to some places in your works, in which I, after repeated study, believe to find an inconsistency. . . .
(1) In your First Principles, § 71 [ed. 1867], you teach : u The law of metamorphosis, which holds among the physical
forces, holds equally between them and the mental forces." In the same work, § 194, it is said to be " a necessary deduction from the law of correlation that what exists in consciousness under the form of feeling, is transform able into equivalents of all the other forces which matter exhibits." In the Principles of Psycho- ^°&i § 47 [ed. 1870], the relation between a physical change and the psychical change accompanying it is compared with the relation between heat and motion.
(2) But in " Corrections and Additions " to the first volume of the Principles of Psychology it is said : "Of course I do not mean that material actions thus become mental actions. . . . I am merely showing a parallelism between certain physical changes and the correlative psychical changes." With this agrees First Principles, § 143, Principles of Psychology, § 221 and § 469. It is here said, that the evolution of consciousness follows the general law of evolution, but that it cannot be explained by deduction from the persistence of force, while such a deduction is possible with regard to its obverse, the development of physical changes in a physical organ.
As for me, I believe that these last-named places explain the real state of the problem. I also believe that [they] express your real doctrine.
To HARALD HOFFDING.
LONDON, 18 December, 1876.
Your letter of the 14th needs no apology on the score of giving me trouble. Contrariwise I feel indebted to you for drawing my attention to the inconsistency you name. It is due partly to the fact that some qualification of the view originally expressed in First Principles has actually taken place, as was stated in the earlier part of the Psychology; and it is in part due to imperfection of expression which I did not observe. Until now that you draw my attention to the fact, I had for- gotten that it was needful to make some modification of state- ment in the passage to which you refer, in First Principles, so that it may harmonize with the more detailed exposition set forth in the Data of Psychology. And it did not occur to me
i 8 74- 7 7 j Distaste for Honours and Ceremonial \ 79
that the quotation you make from the u Corrections and Addi- tions " is so expressed as to seem incongruous with what had been previously slated. As you may infer from various other passages, my conception, inadequately expressed by the word " parallelism," is better expressed by describing the subjective states as forming an obverse to those objective states described as physical changes. And by "parallelism" I meant to indi- cate the fact that throughout these changes, physical on the one face arid psychical on the other, there is maintained a definite relation such that the increases and decreases of the one are accompanied by increases and decreases of the other. The word parallelism, however, is misleading to a certain extent, inasmuch as it supposes that the series of psychical changes is outside of, and separate from, the series of physical changes. This, however, is not my view. I conceive the mental force manifested in consciousness to be the actual correlate of the physical forces which arouse it, and of the physical forces which it thereafter initiates ; not, indeed, as I have explained in the Data, a quantitative correlate, either of the change initiated at the place where the stimulus is applied, or of the quantity of motion evolved in a muscle : but the quantitative correlate only of such nervous discharge as is produced in the centre of sensation. My view of the relation between the mental force we know as consciousness, and the physical forces which initiate it on the one side, and which it initiates on the other, may be best under- stood by the analogy which I have sometimes used in discussing the matter with friends. If you cut the copper wires which join the positive and negative poles of a galvanic battery, and between the two ends interpose a piece of platinum wire, then when the circuit is completed, the galvanic current passing through the copper wires without sensible change in them, raises the interposing piece of platinum wire to white heat (supposing the current is strong enough). If, now, we suppose that the one piece of the copper wire represents an afferent nerve, and the other piece of copper wire an efferent nerve, while the interposed piece of platinum wire represents the sentient centre to which the stimulus is brought and from which the motor impulse is discharged, then this raising of the platinum wire to a state of incandescence by the passage of a current through the entire arc, may be taken as symbolizing the evolution of consciousness in the sentient centre that accom- panies the entire nervous discharge, constituted on the one side by the sensory impulse, and on the other side by the motor impulse. Of course this is simply a symbol, inasmuch as you are well aware that I do not regard the nervous discharge as in any sense electrical ; but it seems to me conceivable that the form of force which in us constitutes consciousness, is correlated with the force which in shape of an afferent stimulus initiates it, and with the form of force which it afterwards initiates as
180 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xiv.
a motor discharge, in a way similar to that in which this in- candescence is correlated with the strength of the electric discharge. Thus looking at the matter, it is possible dimly to see how consciousness is related both to the physical force which initiates it, and to the physical force which it initiates ; and how it varies in intensity with each of them, at the same time that it remains incomprehensible how the transformation takes place, and what the force constituting consciousness is. And it becomes also possible to conceive how the psychical action is the obverse of the physical action which initiates it, and again of the physical action which it initiates. Con- sciousness may, from this point of view, be regarded roughly as a kind of transverse section of the entire arc of nervo-motdr change. It occurs at a place in the arc where there is a certain resistance to a passage of the physical discharge (and this we see to harmonize with the fact that repetition of the discharge until it becomes automatic ends in cessation of consciousness. So regarding the facts we may say that that form of the ultimate force which we symbolize as motion (and this is to be regarded simply as our symbol for a certain form of the ultimate force) is under certain conditions presented by a sentient nervous centre, changed into that other form of the unknown ultimate force which constitutes a state of consciousness, and that this, subsisting for a moment, becomes again instantly transformed into the previous state of the unknown force which we symbolize as motion. This view must be joined with the view which I have repeatedly elsewhere expressed, that both these forms of force are in themselves but symbolic of the Unknowable Power of which they are both manifestations, and that the distinction between them is essentially this : that what we call our con- sciousness is a circumscribed portion, while that which we think of as unconscious or physical, is simply that which lies outside the circumscribed portion called consciousness. Thus regarding the matter we shall not be perplexed by the supposed impossibility of the transformation of the physical into the psychical.
I am, as I say, obliged to you for pointing out these incon- gruities of statement, and will take care in subsequent editions to modify the expressions so as to avoid them.
The passages referred to were modified in subsequent editions. As regards the above letter, Professor Hoffding informed the present writer in 1904 that he could not at the time, " and can not yet find it quite clear."
After spending August, 1875, at Ardtornish, he went to Llandudno. The day after his arrival he wrote to his late hostess.
1874-77] Distaste for Honours and Ceremonial 181
To MRS. SMITH.
LLANDUDNO, 29 August, 1875.
I need not say literally where I am — I say it pictorially. The representation serves a further purpose ; that of showing you how judiciously I let myself down gently from the glories of Scotch scenery to the ugliness of London streets. The contrast would be too violent without the intermediate picturesquesness.
I did not reach this till yesterday — a day later than I in- tended. This was all due to the crowded state of the " lona." How so ? you will ask. Well, the sequence is not very mani- fest, but it happened thus. The multitude of passengers led to a crush at dinner ; the crush involved difficulty in getting what was asked for ; inability to get whisky led me to take beer ; the beer gave me a headache ; the headache made me decide that I was unlit for a night journey ; this decision deter- mined my stay in Glasgow for the night, and hence I could not take the Liverpool route and had to come by Chester. So you see the causation is quite clear — almost as clear as that which I was thinking of the other day when lying on the river-bank ac Acharn after eating my lunch ; namely, that had not Mr. Smith seen the advertisement of the Achranich estate, the thoughts of a good many people in America, France, Germany, Italy, Russia and other places would not have been quite the same.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
29 November, 1875.
The new edition of Bain has reached me.1 I think it greatly improved and though he takes to the doctrine of Evolution in rather a gingerly way, still, he has made a great step for one brought up under the regime of pure empiricism. The book is admirable from a natural history point of view. I met recently a very promising young biologist, Mr. Romanes, who had been making some important and highly instructive researches on the nervo-muscular actions of the medusa?. He brings out facts which he says justify in a most remarkable manner the speculations respecting the genesis of the nervous system set forth in the fifth part of the Psychology.
When intimating his approaching marriage, which was to take place in the Jerusalem Chamber, Westminster Abbey, Professor Tyndall wrote : " I should like to see you, but you may have scruples that 1 know not of. So I
The Emotions and the Will. Compare Bain's Autobiography, p. 324.
r 82 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xiv.
shall not be angry if you abandon me." And abandon his friend he did, though not without a wrench.
To JOHX TYXDALL.
24 February, 1876.
I wish you were going to be married by registrar. It would delight me extremely on all accounts, and I would, in such case, travel from John o'Groats to be with you.
But as it is — Well, I have repeatedly tried to reconcile myself to the idea of being present, but without success.
Pray forgive me. None the less heartily shall I wish you every happy sequence to the wedding, though I am not present at it.
In February, 1876, lie was elected a foreign corre- spondent of the Accademia dei Lincei.
To THE COUNCIL OF THE REALE ACCAUEMIA DEI LIXCEI.
11 March, 1876.
The diploma and accompanying letter, informing me of my election to foreign membership of the Roman Academy, reached me a few days since.
That this recognition by the countrymen of Galileo, and by the members of a learned body which dates from his time, is a source of gratification to me — a gratification in large measure due to the implied fact that the views with which I am identi- fied are obtaining attention — scarcely needs saying.
Of course, along with this satisfaction of an impersonal kind, there is joined some personal satisfaction ; it is impossible for me not to receive pleasure from a mark of esteem given by so select a society. This expression of pleasure I desire to empha- size the more, because I must join with it the explanation that I have, up to the present time, not availed myself of any scientific distinctions, or marks of honour — of a kindred kind. I entertain the belief that all titles which are not descriptive of functions, are, in the end, injurious — that the effects which seem directly beneficial are more than counter-balanced by indirect effects that are detrimental.
Too large a space would be required were I to state in full the reasons which have forced this belief upon me and have led me to decline scientific honours in England. I may, however, give the chief reason by quoting a passage from my reply to the President of the Royal Society, on the last occasion on which I was invited to become a candidate for fellowship [see p. 169, paragraph beginning " Other reasons"].
The conviction which prompted me to take the course thus intimated, not with respect to the title of F.R.S. only, but
1874-77] Distaste for Honours and Ceremonial 483
with respect to other titles, is one which I still entertain, and in conformity with which I must continue to act. If, therefore, it is observed that on the title-pages of my books, my name appears without intimation of that corresponding membership which the Roman Academy has honoured me by according, it must be observed that its absence is accompanied by the absence of all other titles.
In the following year, under the impression that the Roman Academy had not conferred upon him the highest honour in its power, he addressed the Secretary (24 Sep- tember, 1877), requesting his name to be removed.
Being, as implied by the facts I named, indifferent to academic honours in general, it may naturally be supposed that if honours of the first class did not effectually attract me, honours of an inferior class would be wholly unattractive. . . . Had I understood the matter at the time when I received the offer of the distinction ... I should without hesitation have declined it. What I should at once have done then, I am anxious to do now without further delay. Will you therefore oblige by directing that my name be erased from your list, and that any other steps requisite for cancelling my election be taken forthwith ?
Signor Quinto Sella, the President of the Academy, hastened to remove the misapprehension. " Your letter impressed me painfully" (he wrote October i, 1877). "I fear you have thought that the Fellows of the Roman Academy have not for you and your highest services to science and humanity the esteem that you and they deserve. But such a thought is quite contrary to the truth." The distinction between sod stranieri and sod correspondenti did not, he explained, indicate the Academy's estimate of scien- tific merit. By its statutes the number of sod stranieri was limited to ten, and there was a natural wish, if not a duty, to show special recognition in the first place, to those who had devoted themselves to old Roman history, institutions, and language, or who had rendered important services to modern Italy. " The task was easier for the election of the corres- pondenti. The number is greater, and they are divided by the statutes between the different branches of knowledge. The first election of correspondenti stranieri in the class of moral sciences ended February 7, 1876. Three Fellows
184 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xiv.
were to be elected, one for historical, one for philosophical, and one for social and political sciences. Your name came out in the first election with the utmost votes, i.e., seventeen votes upon twenty-one voters scattered in the different parts of Italy." An election with such a result, Signer Sella con- sidered so high an honour, that he felt justified in urging Spencer not to insist on the purpose expressed in his letter of September 24. His retirement would "give to the dis- tinction between sod stranieri and correspondents a character which is not the intention of the Fellows of the Academy," and would " be the source of troublesome embarrassment. Certainly your wish is not to damage those who honestly intended to show to you their highest esteem." Signer Sella added that he had requested a colleague of the Academy, the Marquis Menabrea, the Italian Ambassador, to seek an interview with Spencer in order to remove the erroneous impression.
To QUINTO SELLA.
October, 1877.
When proposing to take the step indicated in my recent letter, which seemed to me called for by regard for my position, I did not, of course, wish in any way to give offence to the members of the Roman Academy, still less to entail on them any such difficulty with respect to the distinction of classes as that which your letter of the 1st indicates ; and I should regret to pursue a course which should have these results. . . .
Your letter by its details sufficiently shows me that there was not on the part of the Roman Academy any intention to make such a distinction as that which the classification nominally expresses. . . .
As, however, I should be reluctant to create any disagree- able feeling and further difficulty, and as I gather from General Menabrea that this inclusion in the second class is not likely to be permanent, I yield to your representations and agree not further to press the request made in my letter to you.
In July of the following year he was transferred to the class of sod stranieri.
He had been invited in 1874 to stand for the Lord Rectorship of the University of Edinburgh, and in the following year for that of Aberdeen. Though in both cases he declined the honour, his refusal was not so unqualified as in the case of St. Andrews. In his reply to the overtures from Edinburgh he said : —
1874-77] Distaste for Honours and Ceremonial 185
If, as seems not improbable, I should, in years to come, be capable of undertaking more work than at present, I might, should the wish be expressed by many of the students, assent to a nomination as candidate for the Rectorship, and in the event of being honoured by their choice, should gladly avail myself of the opportunity afforded of doing what I could towards educational reform.
To the Aberdeen Committee his answer was more en- couraging still : —
I should like very much to respond affirmatively to your question and to accept the implied invitation of your fellow- students. There are some views fit for an inaugural address, which I should gladly find an occasion to set forth. I must, however resist the temptation.
A renewal in October, 1876, of an invitation to lecture at the Royal Institution met with the same response as before.
As years go by I feel more and more that life is short and philosophy is long. . . . Were there no such reason I should very willingly yield to your suggestion, and if I decline I must beg you to interpret my decision as entirely due to this peremp- tory requirement that I shall economize my time and energies to the uttermost.
Ceremonial functions had no attractions for him. To- wards some of them he had indeed an invincible repug- nance, nurtured in early life by the precept and example of his father, and adhered to in after life on principle. In May, 1874, he was invited to an " At Home " at the Foreign Office, "To have the honour of meeting His Majesty the Emperor of Russia ; " but regretted that he could not avail himself of the invitation. " The necessity of wearing a levee dress, to which Mr. Spencer has an insuperable objection, compels him to decline the offered pleasure." On being informed that Lady Derby would be sorry to be deprived of the pleasure of his company from a question of costume, and suggesting that he might come in ordinary evening dress, he wrote again.
Mr. Herbert Spencer is greatly indebted to the Countess of Derby for her kind concession. Not having foreseen any such
1 86 Life of Herbert Spencer CHAP. xiv.
contingency, Mr. Spencer finds himself in a position for which he was not prepared.
While in the habit of disregarding conventions in ways not too obtrusive, Mr. Spencer feels that to make himself a solitary exception in so conspicuous a manner on such an occasion would be even more repugnant to him than conformity itself. Further, he sees that his act, inevitably ascribed to other motives than the true one, would subject him to the disagreeable comments which a wrong interpretation would excite. Thus explaining his difficulty, Mr. Spencer hopes that the Countess of Derby will not regard him as perverse if he does not avail himself of her kind permission. . . .
Fearing lest his course may seem to imply an undervaluation of the privilege conceded, Mr. Spencer yet trusts that the least unfavourable construction will be put upon it.
A few extracts may be given from a memorandum of his doings during the holiday of 1876 :
July 22. — Corran Ferry. Read by daylight at 10 at night.
August 5. — Reached the Dell. While at the Dell continued reading McLennan.
16. — Left for Kingussie and Fort William.
17. — Drive from Banavie to Arisaig — the most beautiful drive in the kingdom, as far as I have seen.
24. — Reached Mrs. Mitchell's at Laidlawstiel. Stayed till August 31. Walking, talking, driving, playing lawn tennis, and making memoranda of Domestic Institutions.
To MRS. HOLT.
Steamer u/o//a," 22 August, 1876.
I am, as you see, on my way south. The fishing [on the River Morar] was a delusion. The alleged 2\ miles of river specified in the Sportsman's Guide dwindled to 1 mile. I gathered on approaching the place that only half a mile was worth fishing ; and on inspection this half mile shrank to 150 yards ! Further, in this 150 yards there were but three practicable casts ; and in all but one of these, you were more likely than not to lose your salmon when you had hooked him ! When with this was joined the lowness of the water and the continual fineness of the weather, you may understand why I so soon changed my address.
I had, however, some compensation in the beauty of the scenery my journey carried me through. Though the cost of posting more that forty miles gave me a prospective pain in the pocket, yet I was quite reconciled by what I saw. The drive from Banavie to Arisaig exceeds in number and variety of pic- turesque views any drive in Scotland I have seen ; and that is
1874-77] Distaste for Honours and Ceremonial 187
saying a great deal. If you should ever be in that region, pray do not forget it. I am about to write to my friends at Ard- tornish, suggesting that they should go in their yacht to Banavie, drive across, and be taken up by it on the other side.
Early in 1874 Spencer had urged, as a reason for Dr. Youmans coming to London, that the International Scien- tific Series " evidently wants a spur — some of the authors are lagging, and it is quite time that measures were taken for finding successors to them." A difference of opinion had also arisen between the publishers and the London Com- mittee. The relations of this Committee to the publishers on the one hand and to authors on the other had never been defined. According to Spencer, " we are bound as a Committee to see that the understanding with authors who wrote for the series should be fulfilled. ... I shall have a talk with Huxley and Tyndall upon it." Dr. Youmans reminded him that Professors Huxley and Tyndall " at the outset declined to have anything to do with the matter if it involved the slightest correspondence or business, or any- thing more than the giving of an opinion now and then in regard to the competency of writers. So, to protect the Committee from annoyance that would have been sure to follow publicity, I carefully refrained from having their names published." He feared, therefore, that any attempt to get them to move in the matter " might lose us the moderate benefits we now derive from them." Dr. You- mans had already begun to weary of an enterprise which at the outset was so full of promise. " The ' Series ' seems to be in a very bad way (internationally), and I don't know but we shall have to let it go ; it was a quixotic project and I doubt if it is worth much further attention."
To E. L. YOUMANS.
7 October, 1876.
I daresay you have observed in the two last numbers of the Contemporary Review two ferocious and utterly unscrupulous attacks on Huxley, Tyndall, and myself by Dr. Elam. The misrepresentations are throughout of the most unblushing kind. I was very nearly in the last number publishing a brief letter giving a sample, and indicating others, but was dissuaded by Tyndall and Lewes from taking notice of them. He evidently was shown a proof of my letter before I withdrew it, and has in consequence put an apology to his second article — an
1 88 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xiv.
apology, however, which really, unawares, commits him to a still more serious predicament. It is possible that I may still take up the matter in a general article under the title of the " Ethics of Theologians " or the " Ways of Theological Critics," giving examples from Kirkman, Mivart, Elam, and probably also from Canon Birks, who, I see, has just announced a book in which he avowedly makes an attack on First Principles.
The purport of the letter referred to, which was with- drawn after he had corrected the proof, may be gathered from the following sentences : —
Much space would be required to expose all Dr. Elam's misrepresentations. I should have to instance words put within quotation-marks in such a manner as to seem mine, which are not mine. I should have to instance sentences quoted alone, which derive all their significance from the adjacent sentences omitted. I should have to instance cases where that which is shown by the context to be a supposition is, by detachment from the context, made to appear an affirmation.
When on a visit to Mr. and Mrs. Potter in November Spencer saw a good deal of Bishop Ellicott, for whom he had a great regard.
To E. L. YOUMANS,
25 November, 1876.
You would have been amused had you heard the conversa- tion. As I was saying afterwards, he is a typical sample of religious opinions of the advanced type at the present time, which reminds me very much of the condition of a piece of furniture that has been attacked by white ants, which are said to honeycomb and eat out all the interior, and leave the exterior apparently unchanged — the result being that eventually the whole thing some day suddenly conies down with a crash.
The first volume of the Sociology would before now have been completed but for the fact that as he proceeded it dawned upon him that he had made a serious omission in not having included "Domestic Relations" in his original scheme. He had been working at this since some time before he went on his holiday in 1876 ; but the subject had grown upon him, and November found him some way from the end. He was " undecided what to do. There are four chapters which I ought to add to the part on ' Domestic
1874-77] Distaste for Honours and Ceremonial 189
Relation ' to complete all that I intended to say, and which seem to be called for by the requirements of the subject." Nevertheless, he decided to issue the volume in December without these four chapters. Exaggerated rumours about his health had spread both here and in America, calling forth many letters of sympathy : one being from Professor Bain, who was himself the object of regretful references in the United States early in the following year.
FROM E. L. YOUMANS.
9 February, 1877.
We had a great scare about the death of Bain. It was cabled over, and as there was no Alexander Bain in the Cyclopaedias but him of Aberdeen, our friend was obituarized next morning in all the papers of the country. We all felt very badly about it, of course, and I wrote an elaborate leading article for the Monthly, which was just ready to stereotype, when we learned that it was the wrong man. I wrote to Bain that I was quite disgusted at having to throw away so much excellent work, and cudgel out something else at the last moment.1
To E. L. YOUMANS.
14 March, 1877.
I write immediately on the receipt of your letter, which reached me this morning, apropos of your remarks concerning Appleton's article on u Copyright " in the Fortnightly. Pray write a brief letter to the Fortnightly rectifying his misstate- ments. It is important to do so especially at the present moment. There is now sitting a Copyright Committee which is entertaining some most monstrous proposals, going far to abolish copyright ; and it is needful to do everything which tends to resist these proposals. I am myself giving evidence before it — have given part and have yet more to give. I hope we shall succeed in smashing the scheme, but it will not do to let any effort be neglected.2
26 May. — I ought to have written sooner. . . . But I have been very shaky. I have had to postpone many things. Among other distractions there has been the need for rectifying Tylor's statement in Mind [April, 1877], and there has also been the need for replying to McLennan's two articles in the Fortnightly,
1 The Alexander Bain who died in 1877 was the author of several important telegraphic inventions. • Various Fragments, p. 18.
190 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xiv.
which I have done in some papers appended to the last of them. Yesterday I took to the printers the last few pages of the Sociology, all which will be in type this evening.
With a view to remove the impression conveyed in Mind that in his Ghost theory he had adopted Mr. Tylor's views and had done so without acknowledgment, Spencer sent the editor a few pages for the next number, showing that he had not adopted Mr. Tylor's opinions. The correspondence with Professor Groom Robertson, the editor, continued till about the middle of June,1 Spencer's replies being sent to Mr. Tylor before publication, and Mr. Tylor's to Spencer. In June Spencer writes: "My reply to Mr. Tylor, . . . while I think it completely rebuts his charges, establishes more clearly than before my own independence, and brings out with increased distinctness the inconsistencies in Mr. Tylor's statements of his own views." When forwarding this to Mr. Tylor, the editor expressed the opinion that Spencer " does in his second rejoinder establish his independence, and I shall be very glad if the controversy can be dropped." To the same effect a few days later : " You will let me repeat my opinion that in the statement Spencer establishes his independence, and I confess I shall be somewhat surprised if you can bring decisive evidence to the contrary. If you cannot, I am still of the same opinion I before expressed that you can, when there is no question as to your indepen- dence, well afford to make a frank allowance of his." Apparently this was what Mr. Tylor did not see his way to. " My belief," he wrote, " is strengthened the more I examine Spencer's writings, that his memory quite misleads him about where he gets his ideas."
The additional chapters of the first volume of the Sociology being off his mind only a short time before the end of May, it was a question how to spend to best advantage the weeks intervening between then and his annual holiday. Having as yet made no plans, a letter from Mrs. Smith inviting him to Ardtornish was welcomed. His stay there from the middle of August to the middle of
1 Mind lor July, pp. 415-29.
1874-77] Distaste for Honours and Ceremonial 191
September fully realised his expectations as to enjoyment and health.
To Mrs. SMITH.
LONDON, 17 September, 1877.
I may say that I think I am stronger than I have been since this time last year. Thanks in great measure, and I think chiefly, to Ardtornish and all its pleasures, indoor and outdoor, for this. Again I have to thank you for many happy days in addition to those enjoyed in years gone by. Should any one hereafter use the materials of a biographical kind which will be left behind me, he will probably hnd clear enough evidence that the most of the happiest days of my life have been spent at Ardtornish. And not only in respect of pleasure and health, but, as a consequence, in respect of working power, I feel my indebtedness. As with parents it ultimately becomes the chief object of life to rear their children and put them forward prosperously in the world, so, as an author's life advances, the almost exclusive object of anxiety becomes the fulfilment of his literary aims — the rearing of the progeny of the brain.
The needful data for " Political Institutions " not being yet ready for use, he made up his mind to take up the division dealing with " Ceremonial," publishing the suc- cessive chapters in the Fortnightly Review. By the end of the year arrangements were being made for their simultaneous appearance in the United States, France, Germany, Italy, Russia and Hungary. When 1877 closed, everything seemed favourable for uninterrupted progress.
192
CHAPTER XV.
THE SECULARIZATION OF MORALS.
January, 1878— October, 1879.
WITH the new year he made another attempt to keep a diary. The entry on January i, 1878, runs : "'Presents.' Business. Club. Dined at Huxley's : Morley, Waller, Mr. Smalley." The entry " Presents," referring to the chapter so headed in " Ceremonial Government," occurs for the first eight days, except the 5th and 6th, when he was revising. Ninth — " Unwell — in bed all morning. Dictated intro- duction to 'Consciousness under Chloroform/ and memo. for Principles of Morality." Ethics was entered upon just now in the fear, as stated in the Autobiography (ii., 314), that he might never reach it in the ordinary course.
On the 1 3th began what he describes as " about the most miserable time that I can recall in my experience."
13th. — Wretched night — pain and no sleep. Indoors all day after getting up at 1. Rather better in evening. Mr. Bruce came in the morning and prescribed. 14th. — Wretched night. No sleep, but less pain. Indoors all day. No appetite. Sciatica, &c., pretty well gone. 15th. — Another dreadful night. Only sleep was while sitting in a chair by the fire in the middle of the night. 16th. — Wretched night. Took chloral. Very weak. In bed all day. No sleep. Little better appetite. 17th. — Hor- rible night again. Better, however. Down room after break- fast. Revised some proofs by hearing them read. Walshe came to consult. Appetite better. Lord A. Russell called. 18th. — Bad night again after taking quinine. Revising proofs by hearing read. A little appetite. Temperature still too high. 19th. — Another wretched night. Finished proofs. Walshe came again. Gave up quinine and prescribed bromide of potassium. Lewes called. 20th. — Better night. A little work — revising. Lewes called to see me. Temperature still too high. 21st. —
NOTE. — Autobiography, ii., chaps, liv., lv., Ivi.
1878-79] The Secularization of Morals 193
Still better night. Revising. Sent proofs of Chapter III. to translators. Lewes and Mrs. Lewes called and spent an hour. Temperature lowering. 22nd. — Very good night. Improved generally. Letters and dictating Autobiography. Temperature lowering. 23rd. — Night not so good. Temperature nearly normal. Appetite fair. At 4.30 left Victoria — Brighton at 5.30. Reached Bristol Hotel without damage. Slept fairly by aid of chloric ether.
He remained at Brighton for over a week, improving daily. On return he plunged at once into social engage- ments. The social distraction cure had long been a favourite remedy, and he seemed bent on now giving it a fair trial. In the diary for March one reads: " Called on Mr. Glad- stone, Sir H. Thompson and Mrs. Smith." " Fancy ball at the Huths. Went in plain dress to look on." " Gaiety Theatre." " Globe Theatre." "X dinner." " Exhibition of Old Paintings at Royal Academy." Another visit to Brighton. A " Paper by Bell at Anthropological on the Gesture-Lan- guage of Deaf Mutes." " Dined with Debus at the Saville Club." " Went to Hemming's for billiards." " Afternoon concert . . . pupils of Blind School." It was the same during April. One day he lunched with the Leweses, afterwards going with them to Herschel's concert ; another day he dined at A. Sellar's, where he met Mr. Grant Duff, Smalley, and T. Sellar. On the I2th he wrote a letter to Mr. Fronde for Edinburgh Review about copyright. On the 1 6th he gave a dinner at the Club to " F. Harrison, Morley, Pelly, Busk, Debus, Rutson and Frankland." Two days after he went to Standish, where he stayed a week, unwell most of the time. To the Adelphi Theatre on his birth- day; to the wedding breakfast of Professor Huxley's eldest daughter on 4th May. Took Mr. Lott to the Royal Academy on i yth ; and on evening of same day "dined at Spottis- woode's and went with them to the R.I. to hear Graham Bell." Next day he was off to Paris with Mr. Lott, taking with him a little work to revise. On 24th called on Bailliere, the publisher. Next day " Dined chez Brabant with a party of 1 6 professors, journalists and deputies, invited by Bailliere to meet me." Replying to the toast of his health he proposed "The Fraternity of the two nations," commenting on the great importance of cordial relations between France and England.
194 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xv.
By the month of June he had come to the conclusion that the interest shown in the articles on " Ceremonial Government" was not sufficient to justify their continuance in the Fortnightly. The concluding chapter was begun, but put aside in favour of the " Data of Ethics," several chapters of which were now rough sketched in Kensington Gardens. Of this he writes to Dr. Youmans (5 July) : —
I am quite satisfied with the working out of it ; and when issued it will be a good piece of work done, and will, more- over, I think, be useful for the cause at large, as showing its moral bearings, and as disposing pretty effectually of all those reprobatory views which the theological party continually utter. I hope to begin writing it soon after my return to town in the autumn.
The following are further extracts from the diary : —
2nd July. — Italian Ambassador called to say that the Roman Academy had elected me a member. 5th. — To Kew to Hooker's garden party. Dined with Potters to meet Prof. Marsh. 6th. — Gave picnic at St. George's Hill, Weybridge, to four Potters, two Busks, two Harrisons, two Crosses, Lewes, Prof. Marsh. Tea at Oatlands. Went off very well. 14th. — Called to enquire of Mrs. Smith — not likely to live through the day. 16th. — Dined with Sir H. Thompson : Huxley, Trollope, Lord A. Russell, Prinsep, Knowles, Marks, &c.
The death of Mrs. Smith must have brought vividly to his mind the shock he had experienced in 1871, when her husband passed away. " The consciousness/' he then wrote to Mr. Valentine Smith, " that the friendly grasp of his hand is one that I shall never again feel, already makes, and will continue to make, an appreciable difference in my world of thought." x
To W. VALENTINE SMITH.
18 July, 1878.
I sympathize deeply in your feelings and in those of the family at large, and I enter the more into your griefs, as Mrs. Smith's death is a grief to me also. By her countless kind- nesses, she is associated in my thoughts with my happiest days ; 'and the world is the poorer to me, now that she has passed ^away from it.
1 Autobiography, ii., 229.
1878-79] The. Secularization of Morals 195
As you well know, I am not given to exaggerations ; so that I may be understood literally when I say that in all my experience I have known no one so svveet-natured, and in all ways so admirable, as your mother. There would be some- thing like a justification for the Comtist religion — "the worship of Humanity " — if there were much humanity like hers.
Leaving town in the last week of July he spent a few days in Liverpool with Mr. and Mrs. Holt, and then went to Inveroran. The weather being too dry for fishing, the first eleven days of August were spent in rambling, revising, and reading Bain's Mental and Moral Science. Note the boyish satisfaction implied in the concluding remark in the diary for each of the next three days : —
12th. — Fishing. River up. Got two salmon : one of 20 Ibs. weight, one of 12 Ibs. Three other fishermen caught nothing. 13th. — Fishing. A flood. One grilse of 5 Ibs. Three other fishermen caught nothing. 14th. — Fishing. No sport. Three other fishermen caught nothing. 17th. — Reading and revising in the morning. Afternoon at 3.30 began fishing. Lost four salmon in succession.
He was back in London on the 23rd, at least two weeks earlier than he intended. " My holiday has not been a success," he writes to Dr. Youmans from Carlisle on his way south, sending him also the paper on " Consciousness under Chloroform," being the experiences of a university graduate under chloroform, to which Spencer began dictat- ing on 9th January what he calls an introduction, but which was really an appendix or summing up, showing how those experiences "furnished remarkable verification of certain doctrines set forth in the Principles of Psychology." '
On the 3rd September he wrote to Professor Tyndall, who was in Switzerland : " I send you from to-day's Times a leading article containing a passage which concerns you and which, being considerably to your disadvantage, alike as a man of science and as a logician, I think you ought to rectify." Taking as its text an address by Virchow on the necessity of caution in receiving and still more in teaching
1 Mind for October, 1878. Also Popular Science Monthly for October. Principles of Psychology, i., 636.
196 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xv.
to the young some of the doctrines of modern science, the Times, maintained that such problems should be reserved for one who will " devote himself to research in silence." Professor Tyndall does not appear to have responded to Spencer's suggestion ; but the article led to letters in the Times from Prof. Ray Lankester and Mr. Richard Proctor.
While engaged in putting the rough sketch of the " Data of Ethics" into shape, he had been trying to persuade Dr. Youmans to join him in a proposed sojourn in the south of France.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
27 September, 1878.
I intend to take with me a good quantity of MS. to occupy me in revision. ... If you could make up your mind to come with me and do a little idling in pleasant places, I am con- vinced that you will find it in the long run a great economy of time. As to not seeing how such things are possible, I hold it to be an instance of the absurd fanaticism of men like yourself, who think that the one thing impossible is to let business go, and that the only thing possible is to sacrifice health and life to it.
30 October. — My going abroad will very much be determined by your answer. . . . For once in your life resolve to take a little leisure and relaxation. You have not so very great a length of life left that you can with wisdom put it off. You should remember that you have not only got to do your work, but you have got to live ; and, ever since I have known you, you have been thinking only of the work and never of the living. ... I hope you will be able to arrange for your sister to come with you.
A few weeks before starting for the south of France, he had to mourn the loss of his oldest intimate literary friend — Mr. G. H. Lewes — to whose burial he went on December 4th. This (like the funeral of Mr. Octavius Smith in 1871) was one of the few instances in which he made an exception to his usual practice of avoiding funerals.1
Spencer and Dr. Youmans left London a few days before Christmas. Their time on the Riviera was divided
1 Autobiography, ii., 318.
1878-79] Tke Secularization of Morals 197
between Hyeres, Cannes, Nice, Cimiez, and Mentone. Mentone " is a charming place, far preferable to any of the others along the Riviera. . . . The multiplicity of beautiful walks is almost incomprehensible — how so much can be put in so small a space. The place, however, like nearly all the others in that region (I except Cimiez), is decidedly relaxing." From Mentone excursions were made to Ventimiglia, Bordighera, San Remo, Monaco and Monte Carlo. Here are some of the entries from the diary : —
9 January, 1879. — Rained at night and all day. Very cold — could not keep warm with fire in room night and day. Revising. Indoors all day. One day. — Excursion up one of the valleys, Youmans on an ass, I walking. Next day. — Long walk with Oscar Browning and Youmans. Another day. — Wet night and rainy day. A good deal of revising, very little walking. Returned Lord Acton's call. Feb. llth. — Finished all my revising. 14th. — Wet morning. Reading Sidgwick. Found that Lord Acton had called with Sig. Minghetti. Returned Sig. Minghetti's call— out. 15th.— Went to station 10.40. Lord Acton brought Sig. Minghetti and M. Lavallie to the station to introduce, just before I started. Left at 11. Dined at Marseilles about six. Travelled in the Wagon-lit. Got very little sleep. 16th. — Reached Paris at 10, not much the worse. . . . Youmans exhausted. 17th. — Called on Bailliere and arranged about the translation of Ethics and retranslation of Education. Left Paris at 1.20. Got home at 11. 30.1
Hitherto he had escaped the attentions of Vanity Fair, but on 30 April he wrote : " You will laugh at Vanity Fair which I send you, and in which I am gibbeted this week. The biographical sketch is about as absurd as the portrait."
While correcting proofs of the .last chapters of the "Data of Ethics" he spent a few days at Wilton. The diary runs : —
9th June. — Got to Wilton at 5. Cordially received by Lord and Lady Pembroke. Guests : Hon. S. Littleton, Mr. Wheatley. 10th. — Revising proofs. Walking. Afternoon played lawn
1 For an account of the journey to and sojourn in the south of France from his companion's point of view, the reader is referred to Dr. Youmans's racy letters to members of his family, printed in Edward Livingston Youmans, pp. 350-61.
198 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xv.
tennis. Drove with Lady Pembroke and her sister. Lord and Lady Vesey arrived, and Mr. Val Prinsep. llth. — Bad morning : lounged and talked. Afternoon took a long walk alone to escape talking. Lady Lothian, sister of Lady Pem- broke, arrived — a disciple of mine. 12th. — Bad day. Lounging and talking. Afternoon walked and played lawn tennis. Mr. and Lady Constance Lawley, a disciple of mine, came.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
20 June, 1879.
The " Data of Ethics " was issued on Tuesday. . . . If you could cultivate a more u devil-may-care " attitude of mind, it would be a very good thing for you, and would eventually conduce to doing a great deal more. Now that I am not with you and cannot play the bully over you daily, I see you are relapsing into your old malpractices. . . . How- ever, it is no use saying anything.
Dr. Youmans intended to write an introduction to the American edition of the " Data of Ethics," so as to " give a pretext to copyrighting it, and at all events mark it as a kind of authorized edition that could not be fully repro- duced. . . I have worked upon the matter, though the result will not answer." The proposed introduction was after- wards amplified and altered, and appeared as an article in the North American Review for August. At home the book was welcomed with many private expressions of approval.
FROM WILLIAM E. H. LECKY.
20 June, 1879.
I am glad to gather from your prospectus that you mean in the ensuing parts to deal with the different groups or classes of virtues separately, describing, no doubt, their genesis, their relations to one another, their limitations and their proportionate value. Most books on moral philosophy seem to me almost worthless because they do not deal sufficiently in the concrete, do not divide or distinguish the different kinds of moral action and show how frequently they conflict with one another, and how trains of circumstances which foster one class of virtues will often inevitably depress another. ... I think a great deal has still to be written on the filiation of moral qualities, on the history of moral types — the proportionate value which different qualities bear in the ideals of different ages.
1878-79] The Secularization of Morals 199
FROM MRS. LEWES.
27 June, 1879.
I rejoice not in the cause, but in the fact of your having broken the contemplated order of your series for the sake of securing this portion of your Ethics, and if I did not believe it to be an impertinence to tell an author what one would wish him to do, I should say a little more of the value that many would attach to a continuation of this weft as something more needed than even the completion of the Sociological portion. Of course, as you predict, you will be partly misunderstood and misrepresented. That is destiny unshunnable. All one must care about is that some grains of corrective knowledge or useful stimulus will be here and there swallowed and digested.
I have an evil pleasure in observing that you have as good a crop of little misprints as I should have left myself.
FROM THE EARL OF DERBY.
30 June, 1879.
Lord Derby is glad to have the opportunity ... of express- ing to Mr. Spencer personally his sense of the intellectual obligation under which he lies to a writer whose thoughts he has for many years endeavoured to understand and follow. It is neither his wish nor his right to pay compliments ; but he may be allowed to acknowledge a debt.
FROM ALFRED R. WALLACE.
2 July, 1879.
I must express my admiration of the complete way in which you have developed the true nature of Ethics. On that aspect of the question I agree with you unhesitatingly throughout. ... But I doubt if evolution alone, even as you have exhibited its action, can account for the development of the advanced and enthusiastic altruism that not only exists now, but apparently has always existed among men. ... If on this point I doubt, on another point I feel certain, and that is, not even your beautiful system of ethical science can act as a " control-- ling agency" or in any way "fill up the gap left by the disappearance of the code of supernatural ethics."
French appreciation of Spencer's writings did not always take a form so agreeable as that described in the Autobiography (ii. 326). A reactionary member of the Chamber of Deputies had invoked Spencer's opinion against one of the two "Lois Ferry" — the one excluding from the superior council of public instruction the representatives
2oo Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xv.
of the clergy. Spencer mentions this in a letter to Dr. Youmans (July 26).
If you happen to see the Times of the 24th (I think it was) you will see, in the letter of the Paris correspondent, indication of the fact that, in the Chamber of Deputies, the clerical party have been trying to support their views by quotations from one of my books, and that I have had to write to Alglave a letter, which he has published [Revue Scientifique for July], correcting their misapprehension. The Times correspondent rightly re- marks, however, that I am clearly opposed to that part of the " Ferry " bill which negatives private initiation of teaching.
During August and the greater part of September he was on holiday — at Inveroran, Ardtornish, Laidlawstiel, and Russland. At Laidlawstiel he had a great deal of discus- sion. " As both Lord and Lady Reay are very stimulating companions I did an amount of talk which over-tired my brain."
To Miss FLORA SMITH.
LAIDLAWSTIEL, 9 September, 1879.
There had been a great clearance here the day before my arrival — chiefly of French friends ; and there remained only Mr. Rollo Russell, the second of the late Earl's sons. On Sunday two local notabilities came — two of the Cecils, Lord Arthur and Lord Lionel — who have taken to sheep-farming ; one of them having married the daughter of a Northumberland farmer under whom they studied farming. They are very pleasant and intelligent, and surrender themselves completely to their careers. Since their departure yesterday, I have been the sole guest, and have had a dreadful amount of talking to do. ...
And now let me say how much I have enjoyed my stay at Ardtornish — more happy days added to the countless happy days of past years. When I look back on my life, I feel that the part of it which I would willingly live over again, is the part made up of my many visits to your Highland home.
Pray accept, and give to your brother, my thanks for un- ceasing kind attentions.
On his return to town what remained of September and the whole of October were occupied mainly with giving the final touches to "Ceremonial Institutions" (the name he had substituted for " Ceremonial Government"), in arranging his memoranda for the next division of the Sociology, and in writing the first chapter of " Political Institutions."
1878-79] The Secularization of Morals 201
To E. L. YOUMANS.
1 October, 1879.
I have already seen the Nation's review [of the "Data of Ethics."] . . It is not much amiss save in being rather too jaunty in its style.
The other reviews have been quite satisfactory — the one in the Pall Mall Gazette and the one in the Academy being, like that in the Athenceum, careful analyses. I feel alike surprised and gratified at this new turn reviewers are taking, in occupying the space not so much in giving their own opinions as in giving the author's. Bain's review in Mind is just issued, and is extremely satisfactory. It, too, is essentially analytical, with a small amount of criticism expressing no dissent of an impor- tant kind ; and, coming as it does from an adherent of the old utilitarian view, and from one who has familiarized himself so completely with the whole field of Ethics, with all its con- troversies, it is entirely what I could wish. He really, I think, behaves very well considering that I have on so many occasions been rather unsparing in my criticisms of him.
6 October. — I have just received a volume attacking me, entitled "On Mr. Spencer's Formula of Evolution." You may judge the character of it from my acknowledgment sent to the author, which was as follows : — u Mr. Spencer is obliged to Mr. Guthrie for the copy of his work. Mr. Spencer is not obliged to Mr. Guthrie for his elaborate misrepresentations."
8 October. — Your letter of the 26th has just reached me, and in the course of two or three hours afterwards, the copy of the North American Review. Many thanks for both. I am glad you have made use of the notice which you proposed to affix to the American edition of the u Data of Ethics." On the whole it is more appropriate, and will be of much greater service, where it is.
It is capitally done, I think, . . . The taking as a text of the initial sentence of the u Data of Ethics " — the relations between the part and the whole — is very happy, and is especi- ally true in its relation to the Synthetic Philosophy. I was glad also that you dwelt upon the great perversion of opinion that has resulted from the strange, almost universal, tendency to take the negative part of First Principles as the characteristic part ; ignoring the positive essential part constituting the theory of evolution. It is a wonderful illustration of human perversity. One never gets over the tendency to suppose that if things were clearly put before people, they will somehow or other see them ; but one ever gets repeated proofs that no matter how conclusive the demonstration, no matter how abundant the
2O2 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xv.
illustrations, they will persist in some absurd misapprehen- sion or other.'
10 October. — I enclose you something to astonish you. Imagine my name being received with cheers at a Church Congress ! After such a sign of the times as this, what may we not expect ? The fact may serve you upon occasion to throw at the heads of your theologians in the United States.
The enclosure was a report, in the Times of October 10, of a meeting of the Church Congress at Swansea, at which a paper was read on " Religious Benefits from Recent Science and Research." In the discussion that followed, the Rev. Professor Watkins, of St. Augustine's College, Canterbury, speaking of the Evolution theory, said that " he felt sure that when the history of this century came to be written from the standpoint of the future, the name of Herbert Spencer would be found in the very first rank among English speakers and thinkers (Cheers). In ultimate principles he differed from Spencer toto coelo, but he was therefore the more anxious to acknowledge the greatness of his work and the philosophical spirit in which it had been conducted." Another clergyman of the Church of England — the Principal of St. Aidan's College, Birkenhead, sent him an Inaugural Address. " It will show you how greatly I value your works on Evolution and how deeply I am in- debted to you in my studies on sociological subjects. . . . I am not a solitary instance of belief in Evolution among my confreres in the ministry." From Nonconformists came similar proofs of an open-mindedness, the absence of which among the clergy Spencer was too ready to assume.
FROM E. L. YOUMANS.
29 October, 1879.
Thanks for the slip, from the Times which did astonish me. There was an American Church Congress in session in Albany, and Appleton's country parson, Mr. Wylde, was secretary of it. Mr. W. H. Appleton posted the slip to him as soon as it came, and it was passed around and produced a great
1 About this constant complaint of misunderstanding or misrepresen- tation a critic remarked : " Whether that is a just reproach to his critics or to himself, as being the author of a system so liable to be misunder- stood, may well be considered. "
1878-79] The Secularisation of Morals 203
deal of gratification. Rev. Mr. Wylde said on his return, u We are coming over to you just as fast as we can get there."
What you said about the anti-military movement1 interested me much. I have thought a good deal about it. But will it really be worth while for you to move in the matter ? Will not the burden of such a thing fall very much on yourself, and have you an ounce to spare from your legitimate work, which in the long run must tell more widely and powerfully upon public sentiment than any organised agitation could do.
1 In a postcript to letter of October 10, quoted in Autobiography, ii., 329-30-
2O4
CHAPTER XVI. EGYPT AND AMERICA.
(November, 1879— December, 1882.)
HITHERTO Spencer's farthest journeys abroad had been the visits to Italy in 1868, and to the south of France in 1878. His friends in the United States had for years been pressing him to come to America, but, while continuing to treat it as a probable event, he had from time to time put it off on one pretext or another. And now, towards the end of 1879, he suddenly made up his mind to go — not to America, but to Egypt. This step would, he felt sure, astonish his friend in New York.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
5 November, 1879.
You will be startled by the intelligence that in a few days hence I start for Egypt — having agreed to join a party up the Nile. The intention is to be away for four months ; so that it will probably be the beginning of March before I come back. I hesitated some days because, not being able to take an amanuensis, my work will 'be retarded ; for I have no MS. ready for revision as I had last winter. However, I have decided that I must revert to primitive practices and be my own amanuensis while on the Nile ; where, as I hear, there is plenty of leisure.
The volume of " Ceremonial Institutions " will be out of my hands before I go next Tuesday.
P.S. — I enclose you an inaugural address of Calderwood, Professor of Moral Philosophy at Edinburgh. It is a piece of poor fumbling. But it is a good sign of the times.
The following are extracts from the diary : — 30th October. — Went to see Kate Potter about going to Egypt. 31st. — Decided to go to Egypt. 6th November. —
NOTE. — Autobiography, ii., chaps. Ivii., Iviii., lix., lx., Ixi., Ixii.
1879-82] Egypt an(t America 205
Letter from Mrs. Potter proposing that Margaret should go with me to Egypt. . . . Called on W. Cripps (Margaret's brother-in-law) to see whether he thought Mrs. Grundy would frown. He pooh-poohed my qualms. 9th. — Finished revising proofs of "Ceremonial Institutions." George Holme and his son Charles called and lunched with me. . . . Went to say good- bye to Huxley, Mrs. Lewes, Busks. . . . Called at Meinert/- hagens. 10th. — Final preparations. Seeing last revise. 14th. — Got to Bologna. 15th. — Started at 9 sight-seeing. Saw San Petronio and San Dominico ; the University and the gallery des Beaux Arts. 16th, Sunday. — Went up the great 'tower of Bologna. Saw more churches. 20th. — Arrived at Alexandria. Took guide and went with Margaret round bazaar. Saw the remaining obelisk cased for journey to America. 21st. — Arrived at Cairo. After dejeuner saw howling dervish worship. Saw mosques of Sultan Hassan and Muhammad Ali. Tomb of kings and cemetery. 26th. — Started with party to the Pyramids. Did not ascend, but perambulated all of them. Examined various tombs. Much impressed. Day to be remembered. 27th. — Arranging memo, for chapter on " Political Organiza- tion." In afternoon walked with Mr. Barnett to old Cairo. Back on donkeys. 28th. — Went to dancing dervishes and to ancient mosque salon. 29th. — Went with our party to decide on boat. Fixed on the " Hedwig." 30th. — Saw two mosques by permission ; also Arab University (!) and bazaars. 1st December. — Moonlight ride with party on donkeys to see the tombs of the caliphs. [Mariette Bey was read and re-read during a visit to Helouan from the 5th to the 9th.] 6th. — Wan- dered over adjacent desert. . . . Struck by marks of denu- dation. Recent storms and great torrents. 12th. — Started about 11. 13th. — SawT the step-pyramid, the tomb of Tih and the Serapeum. 22nd. — Beni- Hassan. Ice on deck fit night. 23rd. — Good sailing day. Reached Assiout at about 4 in the morning. Sailing all night that I might catch the train and return. 24th. — Bade good-bye to Barnetts and Potters and left at 8 for Cairo. At 10.15 three carriages thrown off the rails by a buffalo. Started again at 12.15. [This sudden resolve to return home, of which no mention is made in the Autobio- graphy, was due to his having fallen into a state of health such as that described in the Autobiography, " in which fancies, afterwards seen to be morbid, took possession of me." After seeing Dr. Grant and two days' rest at Cairo, the morbid fancies vanished!] Decided to rejoin my friends. 28th. — Started at 8. Got to Assiout at 7. Mr. Miles gone. Taken on board the "Vision" by Mr. Darrell. 29th.— Telegraphed to Mr. Barnett that I am coming. Blew a gale, could not leave our moorings. [Left on 30th, doing forty miles that day, and twenty the last day of the year. In the diary for 1880, across the first five days one reads :] Not having my new diary with
206 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvi.
me, could not fill up these days, during which I was travel- ling on towards Luxor with Mr. Darrell and Mr. Wroughton. 6th January. — Arrived at Luxor at 2 o'clock. Got on board the " Hedwig." Friends absent. Went to the temple of Karnak and spent the afternoon there. 8th. — Saw the temple of Esneh. 9th. — Saw the temple of Edfou. llth. — Assouan. Went to see the semi-detached obelisk. 13th. — Got to Philae. Scenery around very fine. Interesting day. 14th. — Spent day at Philae and adjacant shores. Disappointed with remains, but not with the scenery. 16th. — Excursion to Assouan and island of Elephantine. None but small donkeys which I would not ride, disliking to overtax them. Walked through desert both ways. 17th. — Friends started for second cataract and I went on board Cook's steamer. Found there Professor Sayce. 20th. — Across desert to Assouan, partly riding, partly walking. 21st. — To Luxor. Went to see Karnak by moonlight. 23rd. — Excursion to Abydos, very instructive, with Professor Sayce as cicerone. [On the 25th he was at Cairo, where he stayed till 28th, when he went to Alexandria, embarking on 29th for Venice, which was reached on 4th February.] 5th. — Along various small canals, and saw sundry churches and the Accademia. Up the Campanile of St. Mark, and gondola round the Giudecca in afternoon. 6th. — Saw Chiesa della Salute, St. Giorgio Mag- giore, the Arsenal, the north shore of Venice, the Doges' Palace, and into St. Mark again. 7th. — Got to Milan. Glanced into Duomo and walked about admiring the town. 8th, Sunday. — Heard part of mass in Cathedral. Gallery of the Brera. Explored town. Evening at La Scala. 9th. — Went to the gallery of paintings at the Brera. Went again to admire the cathedral. 10th. — Reached Paris, llth. — Called on Bailliere, saw Ribot and Marion. 12th. — Got to London. Heartily glad — more pleasure than in anything that occurred during my tour.
His experiences he thus sums up : " At my age I feel more and more that the game is not worth the candle." " However, I have gathered some valuable information and gained some valuable impressions." One of these impressions he describes with genuine and deep feeling in the Autobiography (ii., 342). The materials he had taken with him, intending to write some chapters of " Political Institutions" on the Nile, were brought back unused. He was therefore anxious to go on with this at once, but hesitated in view of the need for adding to the Psychology a new Part — on " Congruities."
1879-82] Egypt and America 207
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
23 February, 1880.
While I have been away in Egypt my affairs have been going on swimmingly. . . .
I am just now in an undecided state whether forthwith to go on with " Political Institutions," or whether to add a new division to the Principles of Psychology. . . .* Possibly I may first write some two or three chapters of " Political Institutions " which I have pretty well thought out, and which may suffer by delay, and then turn to this addition to Psychology.
Dr. Youmans was decidedly of opinion that the Psychology should be attended to first. " The repetition and concert of attack at this point with no reply are construed as a victory of criticism. So that just now it seems more important to strengthen the discussion than extend it. A reply at this time, and bringing out the congruities you originally thought of, would be very telling." This advice was not followed, probably for the reason given above that his mind was already occupied by the ideas to be set forth in " Political Institutions," the earlier chapters of which were written during the excitement of a general election.
To EDWARD LOTT.
8 April, 1880.
Let us shake hands over this immense political change. I expect you are even more surprised than I have been, judging from the discouragement you were under when you were with me. I suspect we have none of us sufficiently appreciated the great effect of late years produced in divorcing provincial opinion from London opinion by the growth of the provincial daily press. The result of this has been that whereas in past times the provincial towns took their tone from London daily papers, now they in large measure take their tone from their own daily papers.
The chapters he was writing and the political situation were probably responsible for his again raising the question of the feeling towards America at the time of the Civil War.2 Dr. Youmans would fain have shelved the matter altogether, but, fearing that Spencer would not agree to that, he pleaded
1 For the omitted portion of the letter see Autobiography, ii., 362.
2 Supra, chap, xii., p. 145.
2o8 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvi.
for postponement. " There would certainly be less objection to its publication now than formerly. But there are special reasons why it should not appear now. The public are occupied with you now in another relation, and it would be inexpedient to divide, or divert, attention. I send you some papers illustrative of the row at Yale College." The " row " had arisen out of the use of the Study of Sociology as a text-book by Professor Sumner ; President Porter objecting to the use, in a college "intimately associated in its history and constitution with the Christian religion," of a book the tone of which was calculated to diminish respect for Christianity. When the excitement had died down, the letter was sent to Dr. Youmans "with the com- mission to give the Tribune the alternative of either publish- ing it entire or not at all." It appeared in full in the Tribune of June 28, 1880, accompanied by a dissident leading article, in which it was said : —
" Any letter which Mr. Herbert Spencer addresses to the American people will be read with respect and interest. . . . There is less misconception of the facts, on this side of the water, than Mr. Spencer imagines. . . . Mr. Spencer's citations refer to a time so long before the actual outbreak of war that they cannot be considered of great value. Perhaps we can best learn the state of English sentiment in 1861 by consulting an English statesman who knows his countrymen much better than we do, and better than even Mr. Herbert Spencer." Quoting from Mr. Bright's speeches the Tribune goes on to say : " It is interesting to remark how differently the hasty recognition of confederate belligerency struck Mr. Spencer and Mr. Bright. ... If Americans were becoming irritable toward Great Britain, Mr. Bright could not help admitting that many things had been said and done in England to justify the feeling — even to make England cordially hated. That is now a thing of the past ; but if our English friends will discuss it they must hear the truth."
Of the reception of the letter Dr. Youmans writes (3 July) :-
It does not seem to have made any public impression. . . . I have seen several of your old and staunch friends, who expressed emphatic regret at its appearance. The strain of comment being as follows : " The first weak thing with which Spencer's name has publicly been associated " ; and "So Spencer is beaten for the first time" ; "A bad introduc-
1879-82] Egypt arid America 209
tion for Spencer's forthcoming Political Discussion" ; " Happily it has fallen so dead it cannot do much mischief." I have simply replied that it was an honest piece of work that Spencer thought important and wished published, and it is therefore best that it should be printed. He will care little how it is received.
As for Anglo-American copyright, it was becoming a crying necessity.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
27 April, 1880.
I regret that the copyright question stands in so little hopeful a position ; for I quite agree with you that in the absence of popular opinion in favour of a change, there is little chance of making an effectual one. I regret to hear that Matthew Arnold's absurd article is doing mischief with you. It did not occur to me that any one would pay much attention to it. I will glance at it and see whether it may not be effectually dealt with in a short space, and may, in such case, possibly say something about it.
6 October. — Knowles tells me that your representative over here, Lowell, has drawn up a form of treaty, the basis of which is giving copyright to authors if the works are reproduced in the United States — such reproduction allowing of the trans- mission of stereotype plates. This seems to be all that is wanted, if the details are not such as to hinder the working of it.
In July, 1881, Dr. Youmans was hopeful of the result; but after a visit to Washington in December, along with Mr. Appleton and Mr. Harper, he wrote in a tone of deep despondency. The visit " amounted to nothing, and I was fairly ashamed of the whole transaction."
To E. L. YOUMANS.
10 January, 1882.
Your accounts of copyright negociations and of the con- dition of the publishing business are certainly very unsatis- factory. . . .
I wish your American public could be made to feel the utter viciousness of the plea commonly put in in defence of. your piratical system — that it is essential for your institutions that the people should have access to knowledge, unrestrained by regard for the author's claims. The truth which, instead
2io Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvi.
of this, should be impressed upon them, but which I fear nothing will make them recognize, is that free institutions can exist and work well only in virtue of an all-pervading equity. The coercive form of government, itself implying an over-riding of men's rights, is capable of maintaining a tolerably stable social state among citizens whose regard for one another's rights is comparatively small : force does what conscience fails to do. But in proportion as a government becomes non- coercive, and is the concomitant of a social system based upon contract and the working together under voluntary co-operation, things can go well only in proportion as citizens have such natures as prompt them to respect one another's claims.
Already the well-working of your institutions is perturbed in all kinds of ways by dishonesty. Any increase of dishonesty will eventually, in some way or other, cause their collapse ; their only salvation is increase of honesty. Hence, so far from its being needful, as your people allege, that the necessity is diffusion of knowledge at the expense even of honesty, it is, contrariwise, needful that there should be a diffusion of honesty, even should there be some consequent impediment to the spread of knowledge. It is, I suppose, hopeless to try to make them see this.
To return to the spring and early summer of 1880. Mention is made in the diary of meeting M. Renan and Mr. Robert Browning at dinner at Mrs. Lecky's ; of being at Professor Huxley's lecture on "The Coming of Age of the Origin of Species ;" of meeting M. Vambery at Mrs. Huxley's, and Mr. Gladstone and a "distinguished party" at Lady Reay's. Of work on which he was engaged he mentions a reply to Mr. Guthrie, a postscript to the Study of Sociology ' and a preface and appendix to the fourth edition of First Principles. He was also in correspondence with Mr. William De Morgan, who was annoyed that in the Study of Sociology his father had been charged with " recklessness of misrepresentation." To avoid giving offence Spencer offered to modify the passage in the International Scientific Series edition and to suppress it in the library edition. Mr. De Morgan preferred, however, that the passage should be left as it was, Spencer adding his reasons for the charge. 2
1 Library edition, p. 398.
* Study of Sociology (I.S.S. edition, p. 412 ; library edition, p. 426).
America 211
To E. L. YOUMANS.
8 July, 1880.
Grant Allen is busy with the article " The Ways of Ortho- dox Critics." The materials for it, which I have fur- nished for him, are abundantly strong, and will, if rightly put together, form a very telling response to their attacks. . . . I shall probably send you, in a few days, proof of a portion of the Appendix to First Principles, in which I am making a rejoinder to Tait and Kirkman in respect to a criticism on the formula of Evolution. It will, I think, prove somewhat amusing.
Yesterday, in pursuance of an appointment made with him, I had an interview with Lord Derby for the purpose of enlisting his sympathies in favour of a professorship of Sociology which I want to get established at Liverpool. They are about to form at Liverpool a college, and have raised some £70,000. Lord Derby has subscribed £10,000 to found one of the chairs, and until I saw him I was unaware that he had decided what the professorship should be. It seems, however, that he has settled that it is to have a chair for Natural History, so that my hope that he would at my instigation establish a chair of Sociology is balked. ...
Just now I am writing the additional part of the Psychology, promised some years ago under the title " Congruities," and hope I may get through it before I leave town. So long a time has passed since the subject was out of my hands that I feel somewhat slow in my thought on returning to it, and am perplexed how to present the leading facts in adequately small compass, and at the same time in a sufficiently clear way.
16 July. — I received a day or two ago a work on Protection and Free Trade from a Spaniard at Barcelona, in which he lays my various books under contribution, and especially the general ideas of the social organism, by way of supporting the protec- tionists' doctrine ! . . .
A curious incident, and one of considerable importance to me, occurred a few days ago. You remember my old antago- nist, Moulton, and our tremendous fight. I do not know if I ever told you that not long after, he made, as I per- ceived by the signs, various endeavours to establish friendly relations, and after a time, by force of getting to meet me at dinner parties, succeeded in doing so, and ever since then he has been very civil.
The " curious incident " had reference to information from Mr. Moulton bearing on the Nebular Hypothesis.1
1 Infra, chap. xxvi.
212 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvi.
Reports even more absurd than usual were going the round of the Press, both at home and in America. One was to the effect that he was about to marry an American heiress, whom he was said to have met at Cairo. Another that he was about to " make the tour of the world by the United States and Japan route. He will devote two years to it, take ' sociological observations ' at the more important points, and be accompanied by one or two scientific friends and one of his secretaries."
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
8 September, 1880.
How the false statement has originated I have not the remotest idea. Commonly, for these gossiping paragraphs, absurd as they mostly are, I can discern some origin ; but in this case I know of none whatever. Nothing that I have said or done, so far as I know, gives the slightest foundation for the statement. . . .
I had a call from Mr. Savage, the Boston minister, the other day. He seems to be an intelligent and broad-minded man.
6 October. — I am just about to commence a reply to the criticisms of Sidgwick and others on the u Data of Ethics," to be published in the January number of Mind. After this is out of hand, I shall have done all my fighting for the present, and shall resume work quietly on the u Political Institutions."
8 November. — Tait made my criticism upon him the subject- matter of his inaugural lecture to the students at Edinburgh thjs year. ... He is, as I hear, about to publish the lecture in Nature, and in that case we shall have a fight. If there is nothing in his lecture better than appears from this report, he will, I fancy, have to repent breaking silence.
Some little time ago a Mr. Richard Hodgson, Jr., a perfect stranger to me, a graduate of St. John's, Cambridge, wrote to me saying that he had been allowed, on his own request, to take as a subject, . . . the examination of Green's articles in the Contemporary of some two years ago, in which he made an attack upon my metaphysical doctrine. Mr. Hodgson offered to send me his paper, and did so. It was very good in sub- stance but too diffuse and unorganized ; and after suggesting various omissions and a second time sending it back to him for further revision and abridgement, it has been reduced to a satisfactory form and is, I think, very telling. It has been sent to the Contemporary.1
1 Contemporary Review, December, 1880.
1879-82] Egypt and America 213
30 Xorcntbcr. — I have just got through my various small hindrances, including, among other things, the new division of the Psychology, . . . Unless Tait makes his threatened attack in Xature, for which I have been waiting for several weeks, I shall have done with my critics for some time to come, I hope, and shall be able to get on with my work more satisfactorily.
2 December. — Tait has been showing fight at last, and fired off his gun in the last number of Nature. . . . There will pro- bably reach you, simultaneously with this, my rejoinder.
17 December. — In your copy of Nature, which I suppose will reach you at the same time with this letter, you will see the end of the Tait business. As I told you before the controversy began, I suspect he will repent having moved further in the matter.
10 January, 1881. — I thought I had finished my fighting for the present and pretty well settled all my critics. Still, there is something remaining to be done. Professor Green has answered Mr. Hodgson in the last number of the Contemporary, and I think it will be needful to take up the matter briefly myself.
The other day I found lying for me at the Athenaeum a letter containing a copy of some verses a propos of the fight with Tait. By way of amusement I send a copy.1
14 February. — I am just getting through a chapter on " Compound Political Heads " — the most perplexing chapter I had to write on any topic. When I have got it to my satisfac- tion I feel that I shall have done the hardest bit of work in this division. You saw the reply to Green in the Contemporary, I
1 On a recent encounter between a great Counter and a great Accounter.
" Like braying ass doth Spencer bray,"
Cried Tait to raise the laugh. "Nay, what he sells as wholesome wheat Is simply wind-blown chaff."
When Spencer sharply pinked him fort,
Tait bawled, his class to cozen, " He smites because I dared term six,
What he terms half-a-dozen ! ! "
When Spencer this poor fiction called,
What then did P. G. say ? "My facts called fictions, I shan't stand,"
He howled and ran away.
214 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP, xvi
suppose. He has written to Strahan saying he does not intend to continue the matter, and requesting that his letter should be sent on to me. In it, while he does not confess that he is wrong in his representations, he apologizes for the expres- sions he had used, which he admits to have been altogether out of taste. This controversy having come to an end I now feel free, and hope to avoid all such wastes of time for the future — especially as my critics are all as quiet as mice.
The following are from the diary at the end of 1880 : —
19th December. — Called on Mrs. Cross and Lady Claud Hamilton. [On 20th he went to Hastings on a visit to the Busks.] 24th — Saw announced the death of Mrs. Cross. Telegraphed to Cross. Later, at his request, to the Dean of Westminster, and to Huxley and Tyndall. 29th — " George Eliot's " funeral at Highgate. Large gathering, though very bad day.
The day before he called on Mrs. Cross she had written to him.
FROM MRS. CROSS (" GEORGE ELIOT ").
4, CHEYNE WALK,
18 December, 1880.
I have been slow to thank you for the kind present of your latest publications, of which I have made ample use, having re-read with Mr. Cross your " Data of Ethics," and the Study of Sociology. We saw that you had left your card at the Priory, and therefore we hope that you will find your way to this new home, where you would certainly be welcome.
At the foot of the above Spencer has written : —
I believe this was the last letter she wrote.' I called the next afternoon (Sunday) and had a long, pleasant talk with her — thought her looking worn, but she did not seem otherwise unwell. I little thought I should never see her more ! She was taken ill that night, and I heard nothing of it until, at Hastings, I saw it announced in the papers that she had died on Wednesday night. Alas !
As " one of the very oldest and most valued of her friends," Spencer was the one to whom Mr. Cross naturally turned for assistance in carrying out his wife's wish to be buried in Westminster Abbey. Professor Tyndall warmly
1 But see George Eliofs Life, iii., 438.
18/9-82] Eg)'pt and America 215
pressed her claims ; but on hearing from Dean Stanley that the movement had been abandoned, he wrote to Spencer : " Between you and me I think this wise. Better far to bury her with silent reverence at Highgate, than to raise a clatter of tongues as to her claims to be buried in the Abbey." But the " clatter of tongues " was heard both in this country and in the United States, with reference to the part which Spencer had taken in her education. This erroneous state- ment, which had been repeated at intervals for many years, was at once rectified by a letter to the papers.1
During a week at Brighton, in March, he met the Leckys almost daily, played billiards most evenings with Mr. William Black, and was twice photographed by Mayall. It was probably with reference to one of these photographs that Professor Huxley wrote : " There is just a touch of severity in the eye. We shall hang it up in the dining- room, and if anybody is guilty of exaggerated expressions or bad logic (five womenkind habitually sit round that table) I think they will feel that that eye is upon them." From the diary may be culled the following items : —
27th April. — Finished by dictation memo, on the Physiology of Character. 9th May. — Club. Annual meeting. My service on the Committee ends, after seven years (two threes and a year on joint Committee). 12th. — To breakfast with Gladstone. 19th. — Gave Dinner at Club to the Japanese minister, Bain, Masson, Morley, Frankland, Sir H. Thompson, and Lord Arthur Russell.
Owing to the articles on Political Institutions not meet- ing at home with the appreciation he had looked for, he urged Dr. Youmans, if he found their popularity decreasing in the United States, not to continue to pub- lish them. Dr. Youmans assured him that "we cannot get enough of this kind of discussion in our Magazine. There is no salvation for this continent except in the ac- quirement of some proximate scientific conception of the nature of Government." " There have been a few bursts of impatience, and one unhappy man in Pennsyl- vania wrote as follows : ' I sent you five dollars for the Monthly some months ago ; either stop those stupid articles of Spencer or stop my subscription.' "
1 Autobiography^ ii., 363.
216 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvi.
Thinking that Professor Golchvin Smith had denounced scientific doctrine as tending to give a charter to personal and political selfishness and tyranny, he induced Miss Bevington to reply.
To Miss L. S. BEVINGTON.
18 May, 1881.
To the passage you copy from Goldwin Smith's article, which is evidently consequent upon a protest I made to him personally when we met at Buxton, and when I reproached him for this misrepresentation, you might make a very effectual reply. In the first place, you may remark that this assertion that their [men of science] conduct was due to the lingering effect of their theology is purely hypothetical. He has not a particle of evidence that such is the fact. And then, passing over that, you may remark that if it be as he alleges, then we have the remarkable anomaly that whereas the class of men who not only have been brought up under the old theology, but still adhere to it, show relatively little humanity, relatively much humanity is shown by those who, brought up under it, have abandoned it. That is to say, the effect of the alleged cause is the greatest where it has ceased to be in operation. Those on whom it continually acts show less of this effect than those on whom it long ago ceased to act.
"The Inhumanity of the Orthodox" was suggested by Spencer as a title, but Miss Bevington thought that would be "too pugnacious, and would assuredly offend many half-way minds." The article appeared in the Fortnightly Review for August, under the heading " The Moral Colour of Rationalism." Professor Goldwin Smith's answer to it in the Contemporary Review for February, 1882, was dealt with by Spencer in the March number of the same review.
His holiday movements are alluded to in a letter to Mr. Lott, dated, Ardtornish, 10 July.
I went to Ballater and Braemar,1 not having before seen that region, and having the option of subsequently going to Dr. Priestley's place on the Spey, and having some fishing there. However, on Friday last, I got Valentine Smith's letter asking me here, and I started next morning, having seen some- thing of the Grampians, but not having explored the chief places of interest. The only picturesque mountain I saw is Lochnagar.
1 Autobiography, ii., 371.
1879-82] Egypt and America 217
I stay here till the close of the month and then go to the British Association. I had not intended to go, but two invita- tions— to Escrick Park and to Fryston — which promise to make the week or ten days pass agreeably, have turned the scale.
To Miss FLORA SMITH.
ESCRICK PARK,
- 3 September, 1881.
Escrick is very tame after Ardtornish. Undulating green- sward does not adequately replace rock and moor ; and herds of fallow-deer constantly seen are less interesting than red- deer seen occasionally. However, the internal attractiveness is considerable if the external is not. The circle is agree- able ; our hostess charming as ever ; and our host . . . pleasant and cordial. Since Wednesday, Association proceedings have absorbed all the time, and this is the first morning on which I have found time for writing.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
21 September, 1881.
I am glad to hear that you are gaining strength, — not so glad to hear that you are " more in the spirit of work." If instead of this you would write " more in the spirit of play," it would be very much better. . . .
I am glad that you like the two chapters on the " Militant Type " and the u Industrial Type." They are, in fact, the culminating chapters of the part, and, indeed, of the whole work, in point of importance.
8 October. — I count Fairbairn's attack1 as having been decidedly advantageous in virtue of its sequence in the shape of your article in the number of the Monthly just received. . . . It adds but another to the many illustrations of your admirable faculty of exposition, at once lucid and popular, and especially showing the aptitude for seizing the cardinal points.
The visit to America was now assuming definite shape. What he dreaded most was "the bother of having to see so many people, but I suppose I must make up my mind to go through it as well as I can." While his New York friend was planning how to make the proposed visit pleasant and profitable, Spencer was thinking over various measures for enabling Dr. Youmans to tide over the
1 Contemporary Review for July and August.
218 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvi.
ensuing winter. " In furtherance of my advice to go south for the winter, I wish you would appropriate, in advance, the proceeds of my next half-year's account with the Appletons, which will, I suppose, be something over ,£100. If you agree to this it may facilitate your plans, and will put you under no obligation. It will still leave me immensely your debtor." Though not accepting this offer, Dr. Youmans was grateful for the generosity that prompted it. " I am already indebted to you for the funds advanced when we went to the Mediterranean, and if I have said nothing about its payment, it is not because I have for- gotten what I owe you." When pressing his offer again in November, " not as a loan, but as an acknowledgment of obligation," Spencer added : "As for Riviera expenses, I never dreamed of the present position of things being changed — as you would soon find if you proposed to reimburse me."
About the middle of 1881 Mr. Alfred R. Wallace had tried to interest him in the Land Nationalization Society, which was an outcome of Mr. Wallace's reading of Social Statics. Looking upon Social Statics as " having in some degree ploughed the ground for his own book," Mr. Henry George had expected Spencer to welcome Progress and Poverty. Early in 1882 they met at a reception given by Mrs. Jeune (now Lady St. Helier). The meeting was a great disappointment to Mr. George. Here were probably sown the seeds of the virulence with which he attacked Spencer some years later.
The announcement of the cessation of the Descriptive Sociology led to a generous offer being made by Mr. Hegeler, of La Salle, Illinois.1
To B. HEGELER.
14 February, 1882.
I have this morning received your sympathetic letter with its enclosed Bill of Exchange for £204. ... I thank you very cordially, and admire very greatly the generosity which has prompted your gift ; but you must excuse me if I do not accept it. ...
It is interesting and encouraging to find here and there men
1 Autobiography, ii., 351, 372,
1879-82] Egypt and America 219
whose interest in the diffusion of advanced ideas, and whose care for what they hold to be the welfare of the race, prompts not only so much active generosity, but also personal efforts of a more active kind. These are above all wanted. The great deficiency on the part of men is that the feeling enlisted on behalf of their convictions is not sufficiently strong to prompt any sacrifice of time and labour in spreading them.
On hearing of the proposed visit to America Mr. Hegeler asked to be allowed to pay all the expenses incurred by Spencer and Mr. Lott there and back — an offer which was also gratefully declined. Mr. Hegeler was, more- over, one of the first to furnish capital to push the sale of the Descriptive Sociology in the United States. For this object Dr. Youmans had several plans, though he had said little about them, because, as he wrote, " the tenure of my strength is insecure, and because, even when stronger, I could never half carry out my plans. My career is so strewn with the fragments of unexecuted projects that I think it time to stop talking at least." All he asked Spencer for was a free hand. Capital could be secured to move the work vigorously, if the price could be reduced. " But everybody agrees that between its ugly form and its large cost it is commercially impracticable."
In 1880 Spencer had been invited to join in an address to be presented to Lord Kimberley " on the native ques- tion in South Africa," arising out of the disarming of the Bastitos. The memorialists were in favour of removing the Government of Basuto territory from Cape Colony to the Home Government.
To F. W. CHESSOX.
18 November, 1880.
I should have been glad to join in the manifestation of opinion to be made by the Deputation to which you invite me to-day, had I been able to agree in the special proposal made. But in the face of multitudinous experiences, it does not seem to me that the transforming the Basuto and other such territories into Crown Colonies would permanently secure the end in view. So long as it is felt by colonists that when they aggress on natives and get into quarrels, the home govern- ment will come to their defence, and so long as men who initiate aggressive policies, which end in the annexation of territory, get titles and honours, notwithstanding their unauthorized actions
22O Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvi.
and even their disobedience to orders, the filibustering policy with all its atrocities will continue.
Looking about for a powerful pen to stir up the national conscience he bethought him of Mr. Swinburne.
To ALGERNON CHARLES SWINBURNE.
8 March, 1881.
Some two years ago I obtained with considerable difficulty a copy of your "Word of an English Republican on the Mus- covite Crusade " — wishing to foster it as something worthy to be preserved as an example of magnificent writing. The other day, after reading some passages of it to a friend and evoking from him also great admiration, it occurred to me that your marvellous powers of expressing well- justified anger might be fitly used at the present time in condemnation of our filibustering atrocities all over the world. You have, I doubt not, been in a chronic state of indignation daily intensified, by our doings in Afghanistan, in Zululand, in the Transvaal, and on a smaller scale in other places. There never was, I think, an opportunity for a more scathing exposure of the contrast between our Christian creed and pagan doings, our professed philanthropy and our actual savagery, and I long to see the traits of the matter presented with that extreme power and pungency with which you exposed Mr. Carlyle's creed and his absurd inconsistency. I cannot imagine anything more telling than a pamphlet by you, written after the same manner, and holding up to the English people a glass in which they might rightly see themselves and their doings.
Pray consider the matter, and if you can do so, yield to my suggestion.
Mr. Swinburne was " sincerely and deeply gratified " on learning that what he had written " on a practical ques- tion of national politics " had seemed to Spencer deserving of a different notice from that vouchsafed by the press. But he did not see his way to come forward at that time with a volunteer's contribution to the political literature of the day. Mr. Swinburne's refusal was a great disappointment to Spencer, who needed all the help he could summon in the crusade he was about to enter upon.
A motion by Mr. Henry Richard in the House of Commons respecting the conduct of civil and military agents in the Colonies, suggested to Spencer that the time
1879-82] Egypt and America 221
had come for action. Steps were taken to secure the co-operation of those whose sympathies were supposed to be in favour of the movement. A circular was drawn up, the rough draft of which in Spencer's own handwriting, and dated 16 June, 1881, was "done under pressure in forty minutes."
To JOHN BRIGHT.
2 July, 1881.
When some six weeks ago I had the pleasure of a conver- sation with you at Lord Airlie's on the subject of the antagonism between industrial progress and war, I stupidly forgot to name the fact that I had been for some time past contemplating an attempt to gather together the large amount of diffused opinion against our aggressive policy, which now tells but little because it is unorganized.
My leading idea was and is that the efforts of the Peace Society are practically paralysed by its identification with the principle of non-resistance. . . . My belief is that all the diffi- culties hence arising may be excluded by having in place of the principle of non-resistance the principle of non-aggression, which for all practical purposes would prove equally efficient.
At a meeting held on July n Spencer's circular of June 16 was discussed, and slightly modified before being sent out in search of adherents. Many subsequent meetings had to be attended, and much correspondence carried on between that date and the end of the year. Suffice it to say that the reception given to the circular was sufficiently favourable to justify the convening of a public meeting early in 1882, with a view to which an address, setting forth the principal objects of the proposed League, was drawn up by Spencer. As the date of the meeting came nearer he felt more and more out of sorts. The diary says : —
\9tli February. — Getting worried with A.A.L. matters.- 20th. — Anti-Aggression League arrangements. 22nd. — Much busi- ness. Feared should collapse, but did not. Anti-Aggression League meeting took place quite successfully. I spoke well, and was much complimented.
Until he saw how little attention was given to the movement by the London press, he had hoped to interest
222 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvi.
French liberal papers in it. But the day after the meeting he wrote to Dr. Gazelles, expressing disappointment with the reports. "The tremendous disturbance in the House of Commons about the case of Mr. Bradlaugh had the double effect of keeping away very many members of Par- liament who had promised to attend, and the further effect of occupying so large a space in the papers as to leave little room for the report of the meeting." As evidence of the popular estimate of the relative importance of events, he mentions that the Times of February 23 had no notice of the meeting at all, and that the Daily Telegraph devoted half a column to a report of the meeting, and about three columns to Jumbo, the elephant. Three weeks later (March 15) the Times published Tennyson's English and Colonial song — " Hands all Round." Two of the lines near the end ran —
" Pray God our greatness may not fail Through craven fears of being great."
Spencer himself tried his hand at a poem in reprobation, under the title, " The Craven Fear of being Great," but got no further than two stanzas. At the foot of these he has pencilled : " I was made very angry by some verses of Tennyson's having the above burden, and began to write a reply."
The writing of a paper of " Anti- Aggression League Memoranda," describing the origin of the movement, and the policy which in his opinion should be pursued both in Parliament and in the country, in carrying out its aims, drove him back to Brighton on March 15. Turning to the diary one reads : —
I6tli March. — Train to Arundel. Spent morning in Park. Some revising. . . . Evening, billiards with Black. 17th. — Walked with Bridge [his Secretary], sitting down to dictate occasionally. Evening with Black. 18th. — Walking and dicta- ting to Bridge in morning. Afternoon walking. Evening with Black playing billiards. 19th. — Evening, billiards with Black and Lockyer. [To London on 22nd.] 24th. — Ended chapter on Political Retrospect and Prospect. Finished vol. ii. of the Sociology', so ENDING HARDEST BIT OF WORK. Dined at Huxley's.
1879-82] Egypt an(t America 223
To E. L. YOUMANS.
29 March, 1882.
You will rejoice with me that this division of my work is now completed. I regard it as by far the most difficult piece of work I have had to do, and now that I am through with it I feel that what is to come is comparatively plain sailing.
The diary for April 26 says : "Attended Darwin's funeral at Westminster Abbey." Some misunderstanding gave rise to the following letter : —
To GEORGE DARWIN.
4 May, 1882.
Thank you for your explanatory letter. I regret that any misunderstanding should have entailed on you the trouble of writing it. I fancy some remark of Huxley's (made probably to Galton and then to you) to the effect that my very pro- nounced non-conformity in the matter of ecclesiastical cere- monies (which he knew had prevented me from being present at Tyndall's marriage) might perhaps be an obstacle to my attendance. But I felt the occasion of your father's funeral to be so exceptional that I could not let this feeling prevent me from manifesting my great respect. . . .
If anything could serve as adequate consolation to Mrs. Darwin and yourself it would be the immense manifestation of sympathy — a manifestation which I should think has never been paralleled in the case of any man of science.
The League continued to involve much correspondence and many interviews. Efforts were made to adjust terms of union with other societies, such as the International Arbitration Co-operative Society, and Mr. Cremer's Work- man's Peace Association. The Egyptian imbroglio was taken up — a Memorandum on " The crisis in Egypt " being prepared by Spencer, embodying the substance of a circular addressed to the members of the League by the Executive Committee. Spencer thought that the opportunity should be taken "to express somewhat more sympathy with the Government in the difficulty of its position than has thus far been done." " If, while advocating a non-aggressive policy, the League could be represented as sympathizing with the Ministry in its difficulties, much might be done towards conciliating those whose aid is important."
224 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvi.
To THE RIGHT Hox. JOHN BRIGHT.
24 June, 1882.
On Thursday I had the pleasure of breakfasting with Mr. Gladstone, and had after breakfast a quarter of an hour's talk with him concerning the Anti-Aggression League. He expressed his entire sympathy with its aims. He felt the need for it, saying, to use his own words, that the Peace Society had "botched the matter" by its impracticable principle ; and he recognized the fact that our aims were in harmony with the progress of Liberalism at large.
In consequence of this conversation I next day forwarded to him a copy of the report of our inaugural meeting, and drew his attention to the address setting forth the aims of the League. . . . He has written me himself a note in which he expresses, to use his own words, " not literally or formally concurrence, but very hearty sympathy."
He asked me whether I had communicated with you on the matter, and I said that you had expressed yourself sym- pathetically.
Now I think that under these circumstances there is encouragement to decided action. If you will speak to Mr. Pennington you will find from him that sundry of those who, besides himself and Mr. Samuel Morley, wish to aid us are deterred by the fear of hampering the ministry — especially now that the Egyptian business complicates matters. Now if it could be known among such that not only do you sympathize with us, but that Mr. Gladstone does so too in respect of our general aims, the difficulty would disappear and we should at once have ample and probably energetic aid.
It would be difficult to say which feeling was stronger — that roused by the aggressions of the Government on weaker nationalities, or that roused by the aggressions of the State on the liberties of citizens. He counselled co- operation between different societies to protect the indi- vidual liberties of citizens. Writing to Mr. W. C. Croft in December, 1881, he said :
In our day Toryism and Liberalism have become confused, and the line between them has to be drawn afresh. Toryism stands for the coercive power of the State 'versus the freedom of the individual. Liberalism stands for the freedom of the individual versus the power of the State. At present the Liberal party have lost sight of their essential principle, and a new Liberal party has to be formed to re-assert it.
No documents can be found with which to supplement the account of the visit to America given in Chapter LXII.
1879-82] Egypt an(t America 225
of the Autobiography. It is true, we have the diary, which on more than one occasion, has helped to complete the narrative. When one turns to it, however, it soon becomes apparent that the chapter describing the visit to America must have been dictated with the diary in his hands, nothing of interest being left for the biographer. As for the absence of documents, that is explained by the cessation of his ordinary correspondence while he was away. At most only a few letters passed between him and his friends and acquaintances who offered their services with a view to render the visit as comfortable, enjoyable, and instructive as possible. The managers of the great railways vied with one another in offering him luxurious travelling facilities. Hotel proprietors showed in every possible way their desire to welcome him as an honoured guest. Friends heaped upon him and Mr. Lott unbounded private hospitalities and unwearied kindnesses. And, to crown all, there was the banquet given to him at Delmonico's by leading repre- sentatives of American thought and enterprise, the remem- brance of which, he said in the speech he delivered on the occasion, would " ever continue to be a source of pleasurable emotion, exceeded by few, if any, of my re- membrances."
That Spencer was deeply touched by the genuine warmth of the welcome he received wherever he went in the United States and Canada is certain. No one regretted more than he did that he could not avail himself to a larger extent of the facilities for enjoyment so freely placed at his dis- posal. The pity of it was that he could not throw off that morbid dread of social excitement, the imagination of which, in this instance as in many others, did him more harm than the reality would have done. Mr. Lott had, one can well believe, a very trying time acting as " buffer " between his friend and interviewers, not even finding time to visit his own relatives in Chicago, though that was one of the objects he had in view when he offered to accompany Spencer as far as New York. Spencer's dis- like to being lionized showed itself on his arrival at Liver- pool. Immediately on landing he took train to London : thus depriving Mr. Robert Holt and others of the pleasure they had looked forward to of giving him a complimentary 15
226 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvi.
dinner as a welcome home and as an expression of their warm regard and admiration.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
25 Xwember, 1882.
You were amused, I daresay, to find that I was actually interviewed after all ; just at the last moment on board the "Germanic." A Herald reporter got hold of me, and, before I was aware who he was, managed to get some remarks out of me which I probably should either not have made, or should have expressed differently if I had been on my guard. I suspected immediately afterward what had happened. . . .
I find I have lost about half a stone in weight. I was worn while with you, more than I have been these many years ; and was conscious that among other evil effects of my nervous debility, there were aberrations of word and deed in various small matters which annoyed me very much afterward to recall.
12 December. — This morning I got the copy of the pamphlet.1 ... I have glanced through the parts which were new to me ; and have found my nerves somewhat tried by the amount of eulogy. I am not without fear that it may cause, in some minds, a reaction. However, in America you are so accustomed to having things strongly put, that I suppose such an effect is not so likely to be produced as it would be here.
Now, as always, you have in your own remarks seized all the essential points -and presented them in the clearest way. I know no one who has the art of saying in so brief a space that which most needs saying. You know I never pay a com- pliment with an " i." Mine is always a complement with an u e " — that which is due. . . .
I join in the great regret for Draper's death, when he was just getting into conditions for doing his best work. The scientific world has been very unfortunate this year. J evens, Balfour, Draper — all men from whom much was to be hoped.
1 Herbert Spencer on the Americans, and the Americans on Herbert Spencer. New York : D. Appleton and Co. This gives a complete report of an "interview" pre-arranged between Dr. Youmans and himself, which was published in the New York papers of October 20. It contains also an account of the banquet given in his honour at Delmonico's on November 9, with full reports of the speeches delivered on the occasion, as well as of speeches not delivered, and letters of regret for absence from distinguished men in different parts of the United States. The " interview " and Spencer's speech were after- wards published in the Contemporary Review for January, 1883 ; and were finally included in the Essays (iii., 471).
227
CHAPTER XVII.
A POLITICAL CREED FOR TRUE LIBERALISM.
(January, 1883 — December, 1885.)
THE year 1883 opened not very hopefully, though, as far as health was concerned, things were not so bad as he thought. A visit was paid to a Hydropathic establishment at Tunbridge Wells, " not with a view to the. ordinary treat- ment, but with a view rather to fresh air and a pleasant place for passing the time." It did not prove such a " pleasant place " after all ; the entries in the diary for the three nights he spent there being — " very good night," " poor night," " very bad night."
To E. L. YOTMAXS.
9 January, 1883.
I enclose some pages from the Medical Times and Gazette [6 Jan.], sent to me the other day by Dr. Hughlings Jackson. The initiative he made years ago by applying the doctrine of dissolution to interpretation of nervous disorders — an initiative that is now being followed and in that direction — seems likely to lead to other results. The paper is very clearly and con- clusively argued ; and is to me just as much a revelation as was -that which Hughlings Jackson made of the doctrine.
Yesterday I received a copy of Savage's sermon, from which you made a quotation. The part I had not seen is remarkably good, and puts very clearly and eloquently the points on which Fiske also had insisted. I think something ought to come out of the movement of which Savage appears to be the most distinct head.
Gratified by Spencer's endorsement of his attempt " to re-construct religion and ethical teaching on the basis of Evolution," Mr. Savage sent copies of the sermon to London for distribution. About this Spencer wrote to Professor Huxley and other friends : —
228 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvn.
It is long since I have been so excessively annoyed as I was yesterday on learning that Mr. Williams, my publisher, has been sending to some of my friends copies of a sermon by the Rev. Mr. Savage, of Boston. He has done it entirely with- out any authority from me, and without giving me the slightest reason to suppose that he was about to do it. Otherwise I should have given him a very peremptory interdict.
The fact was, Spencer never felt quite at ease with the demonstrative activities of some of his American admirers, and often reminded them that things which would be con- sidered matters of course on the other side of the Atlantic, were viewed in a different light- on this side.
One of the " excitements " of which he complains arose from the Kantian Revival and criticisms connected with it.
To RICHARD HODGSON*.
16 January, 1883.
I wish you would look at some of the writings of the Neo-Kantians, who are becoming dominant, and who, as for example, Watson, think they have made unanswerable attacks upon Evolutionary Empiricism. Their policy throughout appears to be to evade or ignore entirely the criticisms made on Kant, and to pass on to raise other issues. I have nowhere met with any attempt whatever to meet the objections I have made to the Kantian doctrine of Space, set forth in the Psychology,
Moreover, there is another very effectual movement of attack to be made against them. They deliberately ignore the position which I have insisted upon, that every scheme of philosophy must set out by taking for granted such data of consciousness as are involved in the very action of intelligence ; since thought cannot stir a step towards any conclusions what- ever without positing these, any more than the body can move without using its limbs. Disregarding this truth, the Kantian critique sets out without asking what are the things involved in the very first act of judgment which must be made in positing any fundamental proposition in philosophy, and with- out recognizing the truth that the validity of this act of judg- ment cannot be proved by anything preceding it, but must be subsequently justified by the congruity of all results that are subsequently arrived at in conformity with this first act. I have, as you may remember, pointed out that the fundamental question is — why is one dictum of consciousness accepted as true rather than some counter-dictum ? — finding the answer to this question in the testing of the relative cohesions among states of consciousness. Clearly this necessary determinant
1883-85] A Political Creed for Liberalism 229
of choice among judgments must precede in authority all such judgments as those with which Kant sets out. But the Kantists ignore this truth, and suppose themselves to have undisputed authority for the primary judgments they start from — do not apparently suspect that their authority for them may be challenged by asking why the deliverance of consciousness which yields them, must be held valid rather than the opposite deliverance of consciousness.
The Kantians think they have gone behind other philo- sophies. The thing to be done is to go behind them, and to show [that] the true u form of thought," is a relation between states of consciousness, and the true process of thought a survival of the more coherent relations in the struggle for existence.
To G. CROOM ROBERTSON.
22 January, 1883.
Probably you have already looked at an article in the current number of the Edinburgh on the a Kantian Revival." Joined with some other incentives which have arisen of late, as, for instance, the criticisms contained in the work of Professor Watson, I feel prompted to say a few words about the matter in so far as it concerns myself.
My notion is not that of entering into any controversy at present, but simply to draw attention to my own objections to the Kantian philosophy, and to ask for answers to these before I proceed further. I am perfectly prepared for the issue raised by Watson and others ; but before thinking it worth while to meet it I propose that they shall meet the issues I have raised.
To Dr. Youmans he writes : " I enclose you a copy of a page of the 57. James Gazette (14 February), in which I recently published a letter which you will find there. I was glad to have the opportunity of giving the Edinburgh Review a wipe ; and I was not sorry to have the occasion of publicly repudiating Mr. Henry George." In this letter to the St. James Gazette he says :—
I suppose that now, when, after I have been publishing books for a third of a century, " the leading critical organ " has recognized my existence, I ought to feel thankful. . . . But such elation as I might otherwise be expected to feel is checked by two facts. One is that the Edinburgh Review has not itself discovered me, but has had its attention drawn to me by quotations in the work of Mr. Henry George. The other is that . . . the reviewer ... is apparently unconscious that
230 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. XYII.
I have written other books, . . . that the last of them, u Politi- cal Institutions," contains passages concerning the question he discusses. Writers in critical journals which have reputations to lose usually seek out the latest version of an author's views.
His speech at the banquet at Delmonico's was still being discussed in the American Press. Not only the soundness of the dictum — " Life is not for learning, nor is life for working, but learning and working are for life" — but even its originality, was called in question. "We have had somewhat too much of the gospel of work/' Spencer said. " It is time to preach the gospel of relaxation." In a book on "American Nervousness" Dr. George M. Beard, had already urged that " the gospel of work must make way for the gospel of rest." In a pamphlet on " Herbert Spencer on American Nervousness : A Scientific Coincidence," he now drew attention to the similarity of Spencer's much talked of maxim to his own published opinion. Dr. Youmans had no difficulty in showing how slight the coin- cidence was, and also mentioned having " heard Mr. Spencer give expression to the main idea of his address long before the name of Dr. Beard was ever publicly heard of. It was an early outcome of his evolution studies."
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
8 Ma /v//, 1883.
The incident is very annoying. Had I known that he had used an antithesis so like that which I have used I should most carefully have avoided it. The phrase " gospel of relaxation " was first used by me in the course of a discussion with Mr. Garrett when we were at Montebello ; and at the time of using I thought I will try and make that stick. As to my general view you say very rightly that it is of long standing. I am glad you remembered that many years ago I contended (somewhat to your surprise, I think, at the time) that the aesthetic element in life would in the future, take a larger development than now.
One outcome of his speech was the formation in New York of the Twilight Club, of which he accepted an hono- rary membership. " I \vould, however, remark that the re- ports of your proceedings seem to imply rather more gravity of speech in your conversations than is altogether consis- tent with the ' expectation of relaxation.' "
At Birmingham a movement was on foot that had
1883-85] A Political Creed for Liberalism 231
important consequences, leading to friendship with Mr. \V. R Hughes and Mr. F. Howard Collins, and years of unstinted services on the part of the latter. The Birming- ham Natural History and Microscopical Society, of which Spencer was an Honorary Vice- President, had decided to form a Sociological section, the opening meeting of which took place in May.1 When this was brought to the notice of Dr. Youmans as an example to be imitated, it elicited the remark : " This matter of an organization in New York has been much on my mind, but I have not seen my way to move in it. It is the easiest city in the world to start anything ; the hardest to continue anything."
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
12 April, 1883.
Your reference to the cheap edition of the " Data of Ethics " reminds me by the title of an interesting bit of information I had the other day from the Japanese Minister over here, to the effect that they have issued a translation of it in Japanese. I was rather amused to think of the amount of bother they would have to render some of the words ; and also bethought me that their furniture of ideas, apart from the difficulty of translation, would scarcely enable them to follow the argument. However, they are a sharp people.
... I am beginning quietly to take measures for preparing a iinal edition of my Essays. . . . My method is simply to take with me to the Athenaeum a sheet for revision, and to do half an hour's work upon it in the course of the afternoon. . . . This will get me through at such rate that by the time other things are out of hand the three volumes will be ready for the press. . . . When I speak of other work being out of hand I refer more especially to a new edition of the first volume of the Sociology, to which there will be appended the complete references. ... I am making an engagement with an expert — the librarian of the Athenaeum Club, a very clever and very erudite young fellow — to go through them all and verify and correct all details.
The following has reference to an article by Lord Pem- broke in which some of Spencer's views were criticized.
1 Nature, 19 -April and 17 May. A letter from Spencer, dated 20 March, is printed in the Midland Naturalist, June, 1883.
232 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvn.
To THE EARL OF PEMBROKE.
2 May, 1883.
I am much obliged by your letter of explanation and the manifestation of kind feeling implied by it — and all the more so because I do not know that in its absence I should have felt any explanation required. Having myself never allowed personal considerations to prevent me from candidly expressing in a public way my criticisms upon others, I, of course, always expect to be dealt with in like manner, and so far as I re- member, have never felt aggrieved by criticisms however trenchant when fairly made. Indeed regarding it as a duty to express my own dissent from the views of others on im- portant matters, I necessarily recognize it to be a duty on the part of others to express dissent from my views where the question at issue is of moment. And I fully recognize the fact that those, who like yourself, hold positions which call upon them to act and therefore to form definite judgments are bound by public duty to oppose beliefs which they think erroneous, and, where the matter is important, to freely state, for the benefit of others, their reasons for doing this. I have ever insisted that things will go well when each utters and en- deavours to get accepted that which he thinks to be the truth, leaving the average opinion produced to work out such results as it may.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
17 J///v, 1883.
I lately took up a book at the Athcnrjuiii entitled Natural Law in the Spiritual World, by Henry Drummond. I found it to be in considerable measure an endeavour to press me into the support of a qualified theology, by showing the har- mony between certain views of mine and alleged spiritual laws. It is an interesting example of one of the transitional books which are at present very useful. It occurs to me that while the author proposes to press me into their service, we might advantageously press him into our service. Just look at the book and see.
By this post I send you a copy of yesterday's Standard in which you will see a leading article concerning my election to the Fiench Academy. I affix also at the top of the page a cutting from the Pall Mall Gazette giving a different version of the election, which I suspect is the true one. If it is the true one, which I am taking steps to ascertain, then it appears that while the vacancy in the higher grade of membership made by the death of Emerson is filled by the promotion of Sir Henry Maine from the lower grade to the higher, I am invited to accept the vacant place left by this promotion of Sir Henry Maine. If I accept, it seems to me that I am by
1883-85] A Political Creed for Liberalism 233
implication recognizing the propriety of this estimate of relative claims. Sir Henry Maine is my junior by two years, and he is in his standing as an author my junior by ten years ; so that no plea of seniority can be alleged : it comes unquestionably to a judgment of our respective positions. . . .
I have been hesitating for a day or two. . . . Seeing that as the majority by which I was elected was so great (27 to 2), and that it might be ungracious to refuse this, which is in some sort an international courtesy, I felt somewhat inclined to commit the inconsistency of accepting that which I had in previous cases refused. But if it turns out that I am asked to authorize and endorse that academic judgment which ranks me as lower than Sir Henry Maine, I feel very strongly inclined to take the course I originally intended.
24 May. — I am sending off to-day my letter to the French Academy, declining the so-called honour they have done me, in electing me a correspondent. . . .
I received from the Secretary of the Academy an official letter which runs as follows : —
" Sir, I have the honour to inform you that at the meeting to-day, May 12, the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences elected you correspondent in the section of Philosophy, in place of Mr. Tappan deceased."
... In any case the fact is that Emerson's death having made a vacancy in the class of associates, Sir Henry Maine is promoted from the list of correspondents to fill his place ; and into that list of correspondents I am drafted to fill the place of Mr. Tappan. " Who is Mr. Tappan ? " will be the general question. . . .
The whole transaction is, I think, so thoroughly absurd, that it affords a good opportunity for a trenchant criticism, not upon the French Academy alone, but upon academic selections generally.
To JULES SIMOX.
May, 1883.
I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your communication informing me that the Academic des Sciences Morales et Politiques has elected me a correspondent in the section of philosophy, in the place of Mr. Tappan, deceased. Along with my thanks for the intended honour, will you please convey to the members of the Academy the following reasons which oblige me to decline it. The first of them may conveniently be given in the words used by me when, some twelve years ago, I declined an honorary degree offered to me here : —
" Certain convictions which have been long growing up in me, respecting the effects of honorary titles, will, however, I
234 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvn.
fear, stand in the way of my acceptance of the degree which the Professors kindly suggest should be conferred upon me. I have come to the conclusion that such honorary titles, while they seem to be encouragements to intellectual achievement, do, in reality, by their indirect influences, act as discouragements.
" If, supposing due discrimination were possible, men of much promise received from a learned body such marks of distinction as would bespeak attention from the world at large, I can well imagine that such men would be greatly helped, and would oftentimes be saved from sinking in their struggles with adverse circumstances in the midst of a society prepossessed in favour of known men. But there ordinarily comes no such aid until the difficulties have been surmounted — supposing, that is, that they have not proved fatal.
" Probably it will be said that because honorary titles do not commonly yield benefits so great as they might yield if given earlier, it does not therefore follow that when given they are otherwise than beneficial. I think, however, that if, instead of considering their direct effects on those older men who have received them, we consider their indirect effects on those younger men who have not received them, we shall see that to these they become, practically, an additional obstacle to success. Always the impediments in the way of one who, without authority, enters the field of intellectual activity, in competition with those having established authorities, are suf- ficiently great. The probability that he has nothing to say worth listening to, is so strong, that he is almost certain to receive for a long time scarcely any of the attention he may well deserve. But this unavoidable difficulty is made artificially greater when, bearing no stamp of value, he has for competitors those who, to the advantages of known achievements, add the advantage of officially-stamped values. The larger reading world, and the narrower critical world which leads it, are greatly biassed by whatever bespeaks respectful consideration. And if the presence of an honorary title gives this positive advantage to one bearing it, its absence involves a positive disadvantage to one not bearing it." l
The evils resulting from this system (which, were it allowable to adopt a word from sportsmen, might be called inverse handicapping) — these evils which, during the earlier part of my career, were revealed to me by personal experiences, are not the sole evils caused. Even leaving out of considera- tion those who do not receive these honorary titles from Universities and Academies, and limiting our attention to those who do receive them, it may, I think, be shown that the distribution inevitably involves both personal injustices and
Autobiography, ii., 233.
1883-85] A Political Creed for Liberalism
235
public mischiefs. It must do this whether the choice of those to be honoured is ideally good or whether it is such as we actually see.
Supposing that the selection is made with perfect fairness and the best judgment, it is manifest that the number of those at any time existing who bear these marks of honour, is so great that there must be an immense contrast between the claims of the few higher in the group and the claims of the many lower, who are nevertheless made to appear equally worthy of being distinguished from the mass of cultured persons. If society at large is at all influenced by these titles (and if not they are wholly futile), then, inevitably, the tendency is to equalize in public estimation those who bear them ; and while unduly raising the inferior, to do this at the expense of depressing the superior.
But it must, I think, be admitted that the distribution is not guided by either correct appreciation or unbiassed feeling. Besides the personal favouritisms and antipathies which occa- sionally influence it, the selection is inevitably influenced very greatly by the religious bias, and in a considerable degree by the political bias. It is further swayed by the bias which the leading men of a University or an Academy have in favour of this or that school of thought, scientific or literary. And since every established body tends to become conservative, the titles it confers are tolerably sure to be distributed in such way as to encourage the upholders of traditional views and to discourage the advocates of those newer views which are in course of replacing them.
The perversions of choice resulting from the co-operation of all these causes are notorious. Any one who, in our English and Scotch calendars, reads the five hundred and more names to which are affixed LL.D. or D.C.L., can scarcely avoid smiling at the irony of fate which has united under the same badge men so distinguished with men so undistinguished. And though in the groups of those who bear titles given by Academies on the Continent the differences in respect of capacities or achievements may not be so extreme, still they are sufficiently striking.
But it is not only, or chiefly, the effect upon individual status which is objectionable, the effect upon public opinion is even more objectionable. The mass of men accept their beliefs on authority ; and beliefs which bear the endorsement of a University or an Academy appear to them more acceptable than those which are avowedly or tacitly rejected by it. Hence, during each transition period, occupied in the conquest of old ideas by new, honorary titles accorded by such a body to the defenders of the old, and long withheld from the propagators of the new, necessarily retard the change.
I may add that these evils are increased when Academies
236 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvn.
separate the foreign members affiliated - to them into two ranks ; since by thus giving judgment, or appearing to give judgment, respecting the comparative merits of men elected, now to the higher and now to the lower rank, they affect the public estimate of the comparative authorities of their opinions or writings. For reasons like those assigned above, these academic estimates of relative worth are not unfrequently erroneous, and are therefore misleading to the public at large.
Beyond these general reasons which sway me, there is a special reason. Already on three successive occasions I have declined a correspondentship accorded to me by a foreign academy. Manifestly, I cannot now accept a correspondent- ship from the French Academy without passing a deliberate slight upon each of these three academies. As it would be improper to do this, there remains no alternative for me but to persist in the course which I have already pursued, and again to decline.
Conscious as I am that the Members of the Academy of Moral and Political Sciences, in electing me by so large a majority, have testified in a marked way their sympathy, and, in a. measure, their approval, I regret that I am obliged thus to respond in what seems an ungracious manner. But, as will be seen, the motives which prompt me are strong, and the last of them peremptory.
For a time Dr. Youmans was disinclined to meddle with such high and delicate personal matters. When he did take it up, it was mainly because "it seemed to be an opportunity to reinforce a view that I am more and more inclined to regard as important. The erroneous view of your relation to Darwin is very wide-spread." On this Spencer remarked (3 September, 1883 ) : —
I see that you have turned the incident into " capital " with great effect : making, indeed, much more of it than I had thought of. It has been an early custom in various parts of the world, and was the custom even in the highlands, for chiefs to have official orators. Somebody will be noting the fact, and saying that I must have appointed you as mine ; and that a most eloquent one you are. Certainly no man ever had another who set forth his claims so persistently or effectually.
The Hrst half of July he was at Inveroran, disappointed with the fishing — not catching even one salmon to send with congratulations to Professor Huxley on election as President of the Royal Society.1 After a few weeks at Ard-
Life of Professor Huxley, ii., 53.
1883-85] A Political Creed for Liberalism 237
tornish he turned homewards, travelling via Fort William, Kingussie, Grantown, Edinburgh and Derby.
To Miss FLORA SMITH.
EDINBURGH,
11 August, 1883.
As I came away from Ardtornish I gazed with sad eyes on the scenes where I had known such kind friends and passed so many happy days — my presentiment being that I was seeing them for the last time ; for I fear that I am on the way to become a wreck, fit for nothing and for no society. The chief qualification to my melancholy was the thought of the genuine sympathy and the anxiety for my welfare which you had shown. I shall always remember them with gratitude.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
LOXDOX, 21 August, 1883.
The same .post lately brought me three letters from the antipodes — one from an ardent disciple in Australia, and the others from Collier and from Sir George Grey, in New Zealand, both describing the growth of influence out there.1 . . .
Such small amount of work as I have been doing since I left town, is devoted to revision of my Essays. . . . There will be an important supplement to the Essay on the " Origin and Function of Music/' ... In it, while defending my own view versus that of Darwin, I shall make a general criticism on the Darwinian Hypothesis, which will flutter the strict Darwinians considerably. I have for some time contemplated this, but was arrested in my intention by his death, which made the writing of such a criticism undesirable for a time. It will probably be a year before I fulfil the intention.
After two weeks at Standish, where he had "plenty of out-door games — lawn tennis, bowls, and quoits — with billiards in the evening," he told Miss Beatrice Potter : — " The game-cure joined with other agencies has done much, and as I was saying at the Huxley's yesterday, if I were a young man and a speculator, I would set up an establish- ment to treat patients by it."
'About New Zealand Mr. Collier informed him "that a range of mountains in Nelson province bears, and for twenty years has borne, your name." He had heard from Lady Dalhousie that his books were much read in New Zealand, "although," she added, "as Dalhousie remarked, there is no country where your teaching is less acted upon."
238 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvn.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
September, 1883.
I have now to break off this [the Autobiography^ for the purpose of preparing a second edition of " Ceremonial Institu- tions." Some alterations in the plates are needful, for I have to tackle Tylor's criticisms, or rather his elaborate attack on me, which was given as a lecture at the Royal Institution, and published in Macmillan [May, 1882]. One only of his criticisms is, I think, valid.1
3 October. — We are on the highway to Communism, and I see no likelihood that the movement in that direction will be arrested. Contrariwise, it seems to me that every new step makes more difficult any reversal ; since the re-active portion of the public seems likely to become weaker and weaker.
13 November. — I shall probably commit myself to a series of four political articles. For some time past I have been getting more and more exasperated at the way in which things are drifting towards Communism with increasing ^velocity ; and though I fear little is to be done I am prompted to make a vehement protest, and am intending to say some very strong things. Oddly enough, yesterday while exciting myself over it, as I have been doing lately, the editor of the Contemporary Review called on me, wanting me to take up the question, which has just been raised in a very startling way by an article of Lord Salisbury's on the dwellings of the industrial classes. Though I have not yet committed myself I shall probably do so. Of course I do not like to suspend other work, but the matter is pressing and important, and, in a sense, permanent ; for, these four articles I contemplate, dealing with the questions not after a temporary, but after a permanent manner, will have their future value.
12 January. — The programme of the forthcoming number of the Edinburgh I see contains an article on " The Spencerian Philosophy." I expect it will be civilly dissentient.
28 January. — I went yesterday to look at the article to find a sentence which would serve my purpose, and found one on the last page admirably fitted, which I inclose. I am going this week to issue advertisements of First Principles in all the leading papers, to which I shall fix this adverse opinion of the Edinburgh by way of showing my contempt for it.
The advertisement accordingly appeared with the selected sentence : " This is nothing but a Philosophy of epithets
1 Principles of Sociology, ii., Soa, new edition.
1883-85] A Political Creed for Liberalism 239
and phrases, introduced and carried on with an unrivalled solemnity and affectation of precision of style, concealing the loosest reasoning and the haziest indefiniteness." A copy was sent " to the editor and another to the contributor, who, I find, is Sir Edward Beckett."
The entry in the diary for New Year's Day, 1884, was a bad omen : "Had to decline dining at Huxley's New Year's Day dinner — feared effects." " Resumed the practice which I began before Christmas, of going to Kensal Green every morning and playing quoits, at intervals between games getting some work done and deriving benefit." The work done under this " eccentric arrangement," was the writing of the political articles : the benefit was of a mixed kind. Playing quoits in January, with intervals of dictation, had a result that might have been looked for — an attack of lumbago. This was no sooner got rid of than he reverted to quoits, and was again incapacitated. After a time he was saved the drive to Kensal Green through the kindness of Mr. George Howard, M.P., who gave him the use of a field in Palace Gardens. Spencer " arranged with the lodge- keeper for a room in which to work between games — good little room with fire." So runs the diary, in the keeping of which, be it noted, he was getting to be extremely lax. The "game cure," carried out in these more favourable conditions, hardly had a fair chance before it was given up in favour of an opposite regimen. On his return from a second visit to Brighton, he adopted the course of driving daily to the Athenaeum and back all the way in a cab ; thus taking no exercise and avoiding exposure. "/ greatly improved" (the italics are his own).
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
15 February, 1884.
" The New Toryism " [the first of the four political articles] has caused a considerable sensation here, and has brought a hornet's nest about my ears in the shape of criticisms from the liberal journals. . . . most of which make fun of me. Oddly enough I am patted on the back by the conservatives, which is a new experience for me ; and by the Roman Catholic organ, the Tablet. It is droll to see that whereas a few weeks ago the article on Religion was by it labelled u Dangerous," " the Xew Toryism " is quoted from with approbation. I am well
240 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvn.
forward with the third article, which will astonish people still more than the previous ones.
On the retirement of Mr. P. A. Taylor from the repre- sentation of Leicester in Parliament, Spencer was asked to allow his name to be put forward as a candidate. His mind having been for many years made up on the question of entering Parliament, there w'as no need to deliberate on the answer, which was in fact given the day following.
To REV. J. PAGE HOPPS.
21 February, 1884.
While I am gratified by the compliment, and by the manifestation of sympathy, implied in your proposal, I fear that I cannot respond to it in the way you wish. Several reasons, each of them sufficient, deter me.
In the first place, my health is such that discharge of Parliamentary duties would be impossible. . . . The labours implied by active political life, could I bear them, would make it impossible for me to do other work. As I regard such other work as by far the more important — as I think I can do more good by endeavouring to complete what I have undertaken than by occupying myself in listening to debates and giving votes ; I should not feel that I was doing right in exchanging the one career for the other.
Far too high an estimate is, I think, made of the influence possessed in our day by a member of Parliament. Now that he has come to be, much more than in past times, subject to his constituents — now that the House of Commons as a whole is more and more obliged to subordinate itself to public opinion — the implication is that those who form public opinion are those who really exercise power. It is becoming a common remark that we are approaching a state in which laws are practically made out of doors, and simply registered by Parliament ; and if so, then the actual work of legislation is more the work of those who modify the ideas of electors than of those who give effect to their ideas. So regarding the matter, I conceive that I should not gain influence, but rather lose influence, by ceasing to be a writer that I might become a representative.
But, apart from these general reasons, there is the more special ' reason that, if chosen by the electors of Leicester, I should prove a very impracticable member. My views on political matters are widely divergent from those of all political parties at present existing. That which I hold to be the chief business of legislation — an administration of justice such as shall secure to each person, with certainty and without cost, the maintenance of his equitable claims — is a business to which
1883-85] A 'Political Creed for Liberalism 241
little attention is paid ; while attention is absorbed in doing things which I hold should not be done at all. As I could not agree to be merely a delegate, voting as was desired by those who sent me, but should have in all cases to act on my own judgment, I should be in continual antagonism with my con- stituents ; most of whom, Liberal as well as Conservative, hold opinions from which 1 dissent, and who would wish me to support measures which I entirely disapproved of. Hence, even if elected, I should be quickly called upon to resign.
Nor have I even now enumerated all my reasons. There is a further one, which many will doubtless think more anomalous than the last. Not only should I object to the oath required on taking my seat, if elected, but I should object to make even the affirmation, were that allowed in place of it. Neither constituents nor their representatives appear at present to recognize any impropriety in being bound by the judgments of remote ancestors. They are quite ready to bind themselves not to change certain institutions which their great-great-great &c., grandfathers decided would be good for them. Were I called upon to make such a promise I shoufd refuse to do so ; holding myself free, as I should, to seek the change or abolition of such institutions if I did not think them beneficial. Quite irrespective of any opinion concerning the particular things to which the promise bound me, I should object on principle to being bound at all.
You will thus see that the choice of me as a candidate would be extremely impolitic, even had I no reasons of a personal kind for declining to stand.
The letter was published with the omission of the paragraph about the oath. There was a widely-expressed opinion that philosophers had not proved a success in the House of Commons, and a general agreement in thinking it of more importance that Spencer should continue his work than that he should enter Parliament. The soundness of his own characterization of himself as " a very impracticable member " was questioned by few. Curiously enough, about the time Spencer declined a proffered seat in the House of Commons, Lord Tennyson took his seat in the House of Lords. As one newspaper said : " We have secured our poet, but not our philosopher."
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
14 March, 1884.
There is quite a chorus of comment on my letter, and nearly
all of it is favourable. . . . To-day the Times, Spectator, and
Saturday Review have leaders, particularly dissentient. I will send
you that of the Times in a day or two along with my reply to it.
16
242 Life of Herbert Spencer- [CHAP. xvn.
20 March. — I did not, as I thought of doing, write a letter to the Times showing what I conceived to be the fallacy of the inference drawn in their article that costless administration of justice would immensely increase litigation, and arguing that were justice prompt, certain and costless, the result would be not increase but decrease ; since the larger amount of civil aggression results from the belief that it will not bring any penalty. My reason for changing my intention was that con- troversy with an editor is a bootless business and is sure to end unpleasantly ; since he has the advantage of stopping discussion when he pleases, and is sure to leave one apparently in the wrong.
An invitation to join the Liberty and Property Defence League was declined for reasons stated in the following letter :—
* To THE EARL OF WEMYSS.
1 March, 1884.
Were there none but the immediate issues to be considered, I should have pleasure in yielding to your request, but there are remoter issues, and consideration of these deters me.
I think it would be politic neither for the League nor for myself that I should join it. Rightly or wrongly it has acquired the repute of a Tory organization ; and as I have recently been exasperating the Liberal party by my criticisms, were I to join the League the inference which would be drawn, and appa- rently with very good ground, would be that I had turned tail. Now were this inference to be drawn and widely asserted as it would be, such effect as may be presently produced by papers I am now writing would be in large measure destroyed. The press of the Liberal party would have a seemingly valid reason for pooh-poohing all that I say.
Not only would this be a result I should greatly regret, alike on public and private grounds, but, as I have implied, in so far as it would tend to diminish what influence these forth- coming papers may have on the development of individualistic ideas and feelings, it would tell against the progress of the League, by causing men to turn a deaf ear to arguments against the meddling policy, which they would otherwise listen to.
The letters to New York about this time are concerned mainly with the political articles and the controversies arising out of the article on " Religious Retrospect and Prospect," Here are some of the references to the former : —
1883-85] A Political Creed for Liberalism 243
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
15 April, 1884.
The remaining article [" The Great Political Superstition"] ... is altogether revolutionary in its view, and will greatly astound people, perhaps even more in America than in England, since its essential principle is the denial of the right of the majority save within certain definable limits. The argument is working out even more satisfactorily than I expected ; and the whole politico-ethical theory is presenting itself in a more complete and harmonious form than I ever before perceived it could have. ... It is amusing to find myself patted on the back by the Tory papers. Had I been asked in times gone by whether such a thing could have happened I should have regarded it as quite impossible.
13 May.— This [the last of the articles —"The Great Poli- tical Superstition "] will, I think, end what I have to say about political matters. Beginning in 1842 and returning from time to time to the topic in the interval, with further develop- ments, I now in 1884 reach what seems to me a sufficiently completed view — the politico-ethical doctrine set forth in this article being a presentation in a finished form of the theory gradually developed during these forty-two years. It will, I think, eventually form a new departure in politics. The definite conclusions reached, alike concerning the legitimate powers of Governments and majorities, and the reason why, beyond a certain range, their powers cannot be legitimately exercised, and along with them the definite conception pre- sented of the nature of true Liberalism for the future, may, I think, serve presently to give a positive creed for an advanced party in politics. At any rate, I have now done all that I can to make the matter clear ; and what little energy remains I shall, I think, in future devote wholly in other directions. [He was disappointed with the reception accorded to the paper on "The Sins of Legislators," which had at first been intended to form part of the final paper.] A reason for dividing it was that I was anxious not to distract attention from the special group of facts it contained, showing that legislation was to blame for the immense evils that have, during the last six months, been a current topic — the evils set forth in the Bitter Cry of the Outcasts of London. I thought that the exposure of the causes of these evils would create a considerable sensation ; but one is habitually wrong in these cases. Next to nothing has been said about the fact that the whole mischief is of governmental production. I suppose in part it may be that the facts tell alike against both political parties ; and neither party consequently likes to say anything about them.
244 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvn.
15 May.— The Pall Mall Gazdic, which has taken the lead in emulating the American papers in introducing u interviewing," is apparently inclined to emulate them in unscrupulousness. The enclosed verses will show you what amount of conscience exists among journalistic leaders of opinion over here. . . -1
" Let Evolution fight its destined fight
Unchecked through Competition's strain and stress."
But there is a great demoralization in public life here. I could never have believed that in our clay political parties, and more particularly the Tories [the Liberals afterwards behaved as ill or worse. H. S.'2] would have behaved so vilely as they have done. I am beginning to feel a certain satisfaction in the thought that I shall soon be out of it all, and leave no posterity.
All through July, 1884, he was busy seeing through the press the political articles, under the title — The Man versus the State. A bust for which he had given sittings to Mr. Boehm in 1883, and replicas of which he was now presenting to his more intimate friends, furnished some dis- traction from the engrossing topics of politics and religion.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
6 October, 1884.
I am glad that you are pleased with the bust. It has been by most thought very good, though not by all. The Huxley family are pretty unanimous in their condemnation — Mrs. Huxley going so far as to say that she should like to take a hammer and smash it. One remark of theirs was that there was a want of character in it, and John Collier (the son-in-law) said that it looked more like the portrait of a speaker than a thinker. I incline to think that there is some truth in the remark made by Westmacott, a member of the Athenaeum and the son of the sculptor, who said to me that he thought it was too incisive. However, Boehm has a marble bust, which I commissioned him to do for me, in hand, and I may perhaps get him to some- what soften down this undue salience of traits.
14 November. — Having got rid of all my controversial botheration, I am now making preparations to go on with permanent work again quietly. ... I should already have
1 Pall Mall Gazette, 14 May, 1884, " Laissez Faire ! — A Sermon in Spencerian Stanzas."
2 Inserted by Spencer at a later period in a copy of the letter left among his papers.
1883-85] A Political Creed for Liberalism, 245
made some way with " Ecclesiastical Institutions " had it not been for the considerable amount of trouble consequent upon another piece of work [the revision of the first volume of the Sociology^. ... I am at the same time, while erasing some superfluous illustrations, adding here and there others ; espe- cially in chapters dealing with disputed questions — the chapter on Animal Worship, and that on Nature Worship, both of which are greatly strengthened.
At the beginning of 1885 he thought he had now entered upon smooth waters, and would speedily reach his next port. Little did he foresee the storm to be raised over the republication in the United States of the controversy with Mr. Frederic Harrison, nor had past experience taught him to make allowance for the many uncertain currents which might cause him to drift from his prescribed course, now in one direction, now in another. One of these side currents was due to Rev. T. Mozley's Reminiscences.1 Another arose out of Mr. Martineau's new book, Spencer being dissatisfied with the distinction drawn between his own and Mr. Darwin's presentation of the principle of evolution.3
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
23 March, 1885.
I hope you will be getting your breathing apparatus into better order down south. Why have you not let me know something of the results of the change ? I daresay you find it difficult to kill time away from your work ; but this is better than to let time kill you while at your work, as you will inevitably soon do if you go on without taking constant and great precautions. . . .
The Belgian economist M. Emile de Laveleye has written an article in the Contemporary Review under the title of " The State versus the Man, a reply to Herbert Spencer." The editor brought to me a proof the other day with the implication that I might say something in reply.
The following is from M. de Laveleye after seeing Spencer's reply.
FROM EMILE UE LAVELEYE.
LIEGE, 2 April, 1885.
I think the one really important point in our dissent is your opinion, borrowed from orthodox economy, that, under existing conditions, if free contract were but established, labour would
1 Autobiography, i., 44, Appendix K., p. 549. * Types yf Ethical Theory^ ii., 344.
246 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvn.
be equitably remunerated. I maintain what you demonstrate in your Social Statics (chap, ix.) that when primary rights are violated, i.e., when the labourer or the tenant, deprived of all property, is forced to choose between the wages offered him by his employer or the owner of the land and starvation, he is no more free than the traveller when requested to deliver up his money or his life.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
4 May, 1885.
I presume that you have seen Dr. McCosh's criticism on me. . . . The criticism, in parts which I have looked at, is of the loosest, and almost, in some cases, puerile kind. He has been justifying the name which was given to him in Scotland — Dr. McBosh.
21 July. — I have finished u Ecclesiastical Institutions "... and I shall take the whole of the remainder of the manuscript to the printer on Thursday before leaving town, which I do on Friday morning. After ten days or a fortnight with my friends the Potters, on the banks of Windermere, I shall probably go north, and try to get some fishing, as well as some bracing air in Sutherlandshire. Probably I shall be back about the be- ginning of September, or soon after.
31 August. — The result of my excursion to Scotland was disastrous instead of beneficial. Wear and tear of travelling, joined with some over-exertion the next day, knocked me down utterly — so utterly that I had to return home ; and not daring to undertake the worry of travelling by myself, had to telegraph to London for Mr. Hudson [his new Secretary] to come and take charge of me. However, by taking the journey home in short stages, and stopping here and there for a few days, I have got back greatly improved, and am now not so much below par as I expected £o be.
30 September. — What little I am now doing is devoted to the Essay, or rather Essays, which I named to you, in criticism of the Darwinian view. It is growing greatly in importance as I collect memoranda and material, and will, I think, tend to put a different aspect upon the whole question, which has at present been considered very partially. The Essays will I think produce some sensation, or even among some, consternation.
The new edition of the first volume of the Sociology was published soon after his return from Scotland ; and by the beginning of October "Ecclesiastical Institutions" was ready. He at once began the " Factors of Organic
1883-85] A Political Creed for Liberalism 247
Evolution." As setting forth his relation to Mr. Darwin, Mr. Grant Allen's little book, Charles Darwin, was oppor- tune, as well as welcome.1
The necessity of husbanding his energies was in itself sufficient reason for declining the presidentship of "The Sunday Society " in succession to the Duke of Westminster, as well as requests from Hull and Cork to lecture. Follow- ing on correspondence with Lord Dysart on Home Rule, a letter was sent to the Tunes on "Government by Minority," protesting against allowing the Irish Party in the House of Commons, by a system of organized obstruction, to stop all legislation until Home Rule had been granted. " Hither- to I have never said anything about the politics of the day," he told Dr. Youmans, " but I felt prompted to do so on this occasion. You will see that the leading article refers to the letter ; and the editor of the Quarterly yesterday told me that he had cut it out and sent it to one of his contributors, who was writing a political article ; so that the hour spent in writing it was not thrown away." A request from the Hon. Auberon Herbert for a brief summary of his attitude about the land, led to the writing of the following letter, a copy of which he came upon during the controversy on the land question in
To THE HOX. AUBEROX HERBERT.
13 October, 1885.
The views on land tenure set forth in Social Statics five and thirty years ago. were purely ethical in their derivation, and belonged to a system of what I have called absolute ethics, in contradistinction to that relative ethics which takes into account existing arrangements and existing men. When writing them I had no conception that the question of State- ownership would be raised in our time, or in any time near at hand ; but had in thought a distant future when a better adaptation of human nature to social life had arisen, and purely equitable social arrangements had become practicable.
The conclusion reached was forced on me partly when seeking a valid basis for private property (the ordinary basis alleged by Locke and others being invalid), and finding none that was satisfactory save one originating in contract between the individual as tenant and the community as land owrner,
1 Memoir of Grant Allen, p. 126. - Infra chap. xxii.
248 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvn.
and it was partly forced on me by the contemplation of such anomalies as that which we see in the Scilly Islands, the owner of. which may, if he pleases, make residence in them conditional on accepting his own religious creed, and conforming to any modes of life he dictates ; a state of things which ethically considered is indefensible.
That any economic advantage would be gained by such a change as that indicated is not obvious. All that can be said to belong by right to the community is the land in its original uncleared, unfertilized state. The value given to it during centuries of cultivation, which (excluding town lands) is nearly all its value, belongs to the existing proprietors ; nearly all of wrhom have either themselves paid for that artificial value, or are the representatives of those who did. The equivalent of this value would, of course, have to be given in compensation if the land were resumed by the community ; and the interest on the required purchase money would, at present rates, absorb as much as, or more than, the community would receive in the shape of rent from its tenants.
Moreover, there is the difficulty that administration of landed property by the State, would be bad administration, econ- omically considered ; since there is no reason to suppose that public machinery would work better in the land-managing department than in any other department. Whether future increments of increased value, which would accrue to the public, would compensate for the loss caused by inferiority of administration may be doubted.
As will be seen by any one who reads the chapter on property in " Political Institutions," my views respecting land tenure are by no means settled — there being a difficulty, out of which I do not see my way, in reconciling the ethical view with the economical view.
But as is shown in the last lines of the chapter, I regard communal proprietorship of land, if established at all, as a system to be established when the industrial type has reached its full development ; and I am distinctly opposed to the question being raised at present, because it is clear that any such change, if made, would be made in the interests of Communism.
A note of sadness pervades the letters to Dr. Youmans and Mr. Lott towards the end of the year. To the former he writes: "The fact is we are all beginning to break up in one way or other. Of the members of the X Club, which, in Huxley's phrase, reached 'its majority' yesterday, one is gone, and of the remaining eight, there are only two in good health. My poor friend Lott is in a bad way."
1883-85] A Political Creed for Liberalism 249
To EDWARD LOTT.
10 November, 1885.
Your letter has made me sad on various accounts — more especially of course on your own. . . . On my own account also it was a disappointment. For I had been cogitating over a scheme for taking a house on the South Coast in some salubrious place . . . where I might come at intervals and spend perhaps a third of the year with you. ... As it is, however, it is obvious that migration from Derby is out of the question for you ; so that my plan, from which I hoped all of us would benefit, is knocked on the head.
By a fortunate coincidence it happens that I am just revising my will, and perhaps it may not be amiss to say that I have left £300 to you, or to Phy [Mr. Lett's daughter] if you die before me. This may serve slightly to diminish your anxieties on her behalf.
Being at Brighton he could not attend the X dinner of 3rd December. Professor Huxley wrote next day.
We were very sorry to miss you yesterday — were reduced to five ; but we contrived to keep our spirits up and positively sat till after ten o'clock — all except Lubbock who had to go to the Linnoean. I don't think that anything of a very profound character was said — in fact, in your absence, I am afraid we inclined to frivolity.
To T. H. HUXLEY.
7 December^ 1885.
And so you sat till 10. Well, really, this is too bad. Con- sidering that I am always the one to protest against the early dissolutions that habitually take place, that you should seize the occasion of my absence for making a night of it, is adding insult to injury. It would really seem from the fact which you deliberately bring before me, that I have hitherto been the cause of the prompt breakings up of the party ! I shall have to bring the question before the next X, and ask what it is in my behaviour which leads to this obvious anxiety to get away as soon as possible when I am present.
I am very glad to hear of Lord Iddesleigh's letter, and the intimation conveyed in it. It is an immense point in life to have no anxieties about resources ; and now that you are free from these and all official cares of moment, we may look for a good deal of original work, joined with bouts of fighting, the occurrence of which goes without saying.
I got hold of the Nineteenth Century [for December] as soon as it made its appearance here, and chuckled over the article ;'
1 "The Interpreters of Genesis and the Interpreters of Nature."
250 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvn.
which, as usual, exemplifies the hand of iron in the glove of velvet.
Acting on a suggestion of Mr. Howard Collins, the Sociological Section of the Birmingham Natural History Society proposed to prepare indexes to Spencer's books — a proposal which was gladly accepted. As far as the carrying out of this proposal was concerned, that happened which usually happens when a duty is undertaken by several — the work before long lay entirely upon the shoulders of one man. Even such assistance in the way of criticism and suggestion as Mr. Collins had looked for from Spencer was not forthcoming. Former offers to index his books, made by the present writer and others, had not been taken advantage of " for the reason that all these things entail upon me business of one kind or other, and my energies are so narrow and are so continually being frittered away by tetter-writing and transactions with printers, &c., that I get scarcely any work done."
251
CHAPTER XVIII.
RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION : A SUPPRESSED BOOK.
(March, 1883— December, 1885.)
IN the foregoing chapter we have seen how Spencer thought he had arrived after forty-two years of meditation within sight of "a positive creed for an advanced party in politics." In the chapter we are now entering upon we shall be concerned mainly with what he intended to be "a kind of final expression" of his views on religion. Though the events about to be narrated coincided in point of time with those set forth in the last chapter, they have a special interest of their own which justifies a separate chapter being devoted to them.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
12 April, 1883.
I have just finished the first chapter of " Ecclesiastical Institutions." It deals generally with the religious idea, be- ginning by showing that it does not exist naturally, that there is no such intuition as theologians tell us, and then goes on to recapitulate in another form and briefly, with fresh illustrations, the argument elaborated in the first volume, winding up by drawing a detailed parallel between the origin and evolution of the present creed and those of other creeds, and showing how complete is their correspondence. It is dreadfully destructive.
Writing to Miss Beatrice Potter (October 8) he says : " If you should some day get hold of a book just published by a clergyman, the Rev. W. D. Ground, An Examination of ihe Structural Principles of Mr. Herbert Spencer's Philosophy, yon will be astonished to find it suggested that I am very possibly ' called ' to reconstruct the Church of Christ ! ! ! "
252 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvm.
To REV. W. D. GROUND.
12 October, 1883.
To meet with a work, which, like yours, deals with the doctrine of the Synthetic Philosophy as a whole, and with an obvious desire to deal justly, affords me pleasure. I quite agree with your statement that the general doctrine of Evolution is independent of these ontological views which I have associated with it ; and I am not sorry to have this fact insisted upon. . . . I may, however, draw your attention to certain passages, the full meaning of which I think you do not recognize, concerning the view I hold respecting the Ultimate Power.
In March, 1885, he drew the attention of Dr. Youinans to the work of another clerical author with similar aims.
There has just been published here a book entitled Can the Old Faith live with the Netv f by the Rev. George Matheson, D.D. — evidently a Scotch presbyterian, for he dates from Inellan, on the Firth of Clyde. It is a very remarkable book, having a drift something like that of Ground's book, but written in a way which will I think be more attractive to the mass and more appreciable. It is really a very clever attempt to show that the evolution doctrine is not irreconcilable with the current creed, ... I should think Beecher would rejoice over it and take its doctrines as texts.
During 1883 little progress was made with "Ecclesiastical Institutions." For months, however, he had been thinking over the concluding chapter, and in the autumn this was written and put in type, proofs being sent to Professors Huxley and Tyndall in November. Six months were to be allowed them for perusal and criticism; but within a day or two he changed his mind and decided on im- mediate publication. Hence a note to each of them with the remark : " It is absurd after giving you six months, to want your criticisms in as many days."
To E. L. YOUMANS.
13 Xovembei; 1883.
I enclose you a proof of a chapter entitled " Religious Retrospect and Prospect." which is the closing chapter of my next division, u Ecclesiastical Institutions." I began to write it in advance of the others some time during the summer and only recently finished it : the reason why I thus began having been at first simply that it was one I could dictate
1883-85] Religious Discussion 253
out of doors, because it did not involve reference to collections of materials. Having written it thus in advance, I thought it well a short time since to have it set up in type, so that it might be well considered and subject to the criticisms of friends before publication, seeing that it is a kind of final expression of my opinion ; and I lately sent copies to Huxley and Tyndall.
As implied, my intention was until recently to reserve it until all the other chapters of the Part were written, and then to let it appear for the first time along with the new volume. . . . Within this day or two, however, on re-thinking over the matter I have come to the conclusion that the ad- vantages of immediate publication are such as to more than counterweigh this consideration. In the lirst place, it is a long time since I have made any sign, and it is important to publish something. In the second place, the chapter, if published separately here and with you, will be far more widely diffused than if it were reserved for the volume and limited to the circulation that would attain. In the third place, the question is a burning o.ne, and one in respect of which it is desirable to be clearly understood.
17 November. — Knowles is going to publish this u Religious Retrospect and Prospect " in the Nineteenth Century. Hitherto he has always made the simultaneous publication in America a ground for refusal. But, as I wished to have the widest diffusion for the article here, I wrote to him asking whether he still maintained his interdict, telling him that simultaneous publica- tion in America is a sine qua non and that I must go elsewhere if he did not assent. He replied, the temptation is too great and he would yield.
22 November. — If this reaches you in time, please insert the note I enclose. It is to meet a possible criticism pointed out by Huxley. 1 Huxley has read the article twice and Tyndall three times, and both coincide. So that the argument may be taken as an expression of advanced scientific opinion.
19 January, 1884. — It is curious to hear that the American press has so generally shied at the article. . . . Here there has been a considerable amount of attention. . . . And various papers have been sent to me containing articles, mostly expres- sing interest, and in some cases " pain and disgust." There is, however, a marked absence of the bitterness which charac- terized such notices in years gone by. Knowles tells me that he had had quite a hailstorm of communications about it,
1 Principles oj Sociology, iii., 166, note.
254 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvm.
some being from clergymen who declined to take the Nine- teenth Century any longer ; and he tells me that Gladstone had a letter asking him how he could contribute to a periodical which contained such an article. I also have had a great many letters and books ; aiming to show me the error of my ways, but all without ill-temper.
Proofs of the article had been sent to France, Germany, Italy, Hungary, Russia, India and Japan, as well as to New Zealand, where Sir George Grey took steps to have it pub- lished without loss of time, wishing " that an independent public opinion should be formed on it before people would have had their judgments interfered with by the articles from Europe." In Australia, Mr. Caddy, one of Spencer's disciples, had great difficulty in getting an editor to look at it; one* of them saying "that he could not print Mr. Spencer's wild speculations in a paper which every week supplied one of Spurgeon's sermons." Of. America Dr. Youmans had to admit : " Evidently there is more religious independence of thought in England than here. For your critics, at any rate, take interest in the subject, while there is too much timidity here to venture upon either side of the discussion."
Meanwhile, the storm was beginning to gather, though as yet the cloud was no bigger than a man's hand. Mr. Frederic Harrison's article on "The Ghost of a Religion" appeared in the Nineteenth Century for March.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
6 March, 1884.
You see Harrison is aiming to turn my article on Religion to account in furtherance of the worship of Humanity. It is rather droll to see how, considering he sets out with the state- ment that he is not about to criticize my argument, he should end by what is practically a ferocious assault upon it. I sup- pose I ought to answer him ; but, if so, [I] must postpone it until these political articles are out of hand.
I feel prompted to answer him not only because he quite mistakes my view, besides making sundry other statements of a baseless kind, but also because I feel inclined now to make a trenchant criticism on the Religion of Humanity. As I think I told you I intended years ago to do this, and it was to form part of the article on " Religion : a Retrospect and Prospect," which I have published. But ... I thought on the whole it
1883-85] Religious Discussion 255
might be well not to arouse the animosity of the Positivists. Now, however, that Harrison's article practically challenges me, I feel very much inclined to have my say in the matter. What do you think ?
14 June. — Herewith I send you proof of the article on " Retrogressive Religion " which is my reply to Harrison, and in part as you will see by its last section, to the more recent attack of Sir James Stephen. . . .*
[It had not at first been his intention to hasten the reply.] When, however, there came out on the first of the month Sir James Stephen's criticisms on Harrison and myself, and when at the same time there was published a kindred attack in the Xdtional Review by Mr. Wilfred Ward,2 (which I have not yet seen, but which is referred to in the press, and especially in an article in the Saturday called "A Quadrangular Duel,")8 it seemed to me that it would not do to postpone longer the publication of my reply.
22 July. — I am glad you like the a Retrogressive Religion " It has done considerable service here, especially in making people understand better what the Agnostic attitude is. It is rather amusing to find myself patted on the back by sundry of the religious papers, as I have been — Church, Roman Catholic, and Dissenters. It will doubtless be serviceable in the same way with you.
Harrison has a reply in hand, but I gather that it is not likely to appear on August 1.
The controversy was viewed with concern by one, at least, of the Positivists.
FROM RICHARD CONGREVE.
9 July, 1884.
I have not read either the attack on you or your reply in the Nineteenth Century, which, I hear, is a strong attack on our religious system. But I hear also that you express yourself as not having wished to make that attack, but rather, from a friendly feeling, personally to have wished to put by your objection. In response to that friendly feeling, (I write, as you see, on hearsay), I wish to say that I regret the attack made on you. Better quietly work out our own work and leave it to time for the decision between them. I have no faith in such discussion on the highest subject of human interest. . . .
Nineteenth Century, June. - National Review, June.
3 Saturday Review, 7 June.
256 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvm.
May I add that for another reason I regret anything which tends to alienate you. Your utterances on social and, especially imperial questions have been of a nature to obscure other differences between us.
He left for Scotland on August i, having as his guests Miss Lott and her cousin, Miss Glover. After a few days at Kinloch Rannoch, they went by Kingussie and Fort William to Oban. London was reached early in September.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
9 September, 1884.
I inclose you something which will, I think, make you rub your hands and laugh. Harrison, evidently made revengeful by my treatment of the Religion of Humanity, has seized the occasion of the anniversary of Comte's death to deliver an address which he has sent to the daily papers. ... I inclose a report of his address, as well as my own reply. [Times and Standard^ 9 September.] Never was a man more completely u hoist with his own petard." He intended to do me an immense mischief ; instead of which he has done an immense mischief to himself and an immense benefit to me.
You will see that he has given me an occasion for bringing out incidentally, and quite naturally, a correction of the current notion respecting my relations to Darwin ; that he has afforded me the opportunity of giving an account of the genesis of the Synthetic Philosophy ; and further, that he has enabled me to publish Mill's testimony, which I could not otherwise have published. . . . Nothing more fortunate for me in the shape of rectification of errors could, indeed, have happened.
15 September. — Herewith I enclose you a second letter pub- lished this morning in the Times and the Standard in reply to a skilfully written letter of Harrison's.
I send it partly because you will be interested, and partly because you may find use for the second part of it, which gives a brief sketch of the origin and nature of the Synthetic Philosophy. This will serve to give people in small space a dim conception how the thing originated and what it is as a whole. It is a further piece of good fortune ; since it enables me to circulate among multitudes of people a general notion which would otherwise never reach them.
FROM RICHARD POTTER.
15 September, 1884.
I have just read your letter in to-day's Times and Standard. I congratulate you upon a complete success. You have proved your case, and, better than that, you have conquered your adversary by superior temper and by perfect courtesy. . . .
1883-85] Religious Discussion 257
Don't give him any further notice. ... If you add mag- nanimity to courtesy your victory is still more conspicuous. Now, you know full well, that I am a disinterested spectator and not a partisan of either Philosophy. I have a powerful affection for you and none for Harrison, and I have a deep interest in your good name and happiness, but I am not one of the disciples or believers in your Philosophy, nor in Comtism either. I am unable to accept either the one or the other as a substitute for the Christianity which I have been reared in.
Like several others, Dr. Youmans feared that the con- troversy as to his relation to Comte, coming as it did before the discussion on religion had died away, was going to cost too much, however advantageous it might be in some respects.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
6 October, 1884.
The Harrison business, as you say, has been a sad loss of time, and I almost regret having said anything about it. ... However, the thing is over now. . . .
The result of this second controversy on the back of the other, was that I was so far delayed in completing the article for the Nineteenth Century that it did not make its appearance this month. . . . The whole matter will in so far as I am concerned (and I think also in so far as Harrison is concerned) be ended by this next article.
The second controversy, affording as it did an oppor- tunity for giving an outline of the nature and origin of the Synthetic Philosophy, suggested the expediency of publish- ing the portion of the Autobiography dealing with his educa- tion and with the various steps that led eventually to the conception of evolution. The letter proceeds to weigh the reasons for and against present publication.
I feel more and more the difficulty of publishing the thing during my own life. . . . And yet, on the other hand . . . there are such strong reasons for not delaying the publication of the essential parts until after my death. There is first of all the educational effect. Now that the pestilent cramming system and the pestilent mechanical methods are becoming more and more organized and made universal by our State- system, which threatens to include all classes and put every- body under inspection, I feel more and more the importance
258 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvm.
of placing before people a picture of the opposite system and its effects ; and it seems to be a pity that the publication of such evidence as might modify their views should be postponed perhaps ten or fifteen years until I am gone. And then there is the better understanding of the general doctrine of Evolution which would result from placing its successive stages of growth before people in the biographical form. ... So that apart from the rectification of erroneous conceptions respecting supposed relations to Darwin and Comte, I feel that there are strong reasons for not delaying. And yet on the other hand, as I say, I neither feel that I can properly suspend other work, nor can I with satisfaction to myself publish a full Autobiography.
30 October. — In a day or two I shall send you a copy of the pamphlet I am re-issuing — u Reasons for dissenting from the philosophy of M. Comte." Under existing circumstances I have thought well to detatch this from the Essay on Classifi- cation. . . . Now that I have got through all my fights and worries — for my last words with Harrison are coming out in the Nineteenth Century just about to be issued — I am hopeful of being able to set to on my permanent work with tolerable vigour. I shall rejoice to get to it, for it has been standing idle and I am weary of distractions.
FROM E. L. YOUMANS.
11 November, 1884.
In regard to the Harrison controversy and his forthcoming book, it seems to me that your policy is to entirely ignore it from this time on. ... I recognize the force of all you say respecting the desirableness of bringing out .the full account of the genesis of the Evolution Philosophy, and to reinforce those views of education to which present tendencies give undoubted importance. Yet I think no question of a few years' advantage should be allowed a feather's weight against the far greater advantages of developing as far as possible, your main work. . . .
Every further step in the exposition of the Synthetic Philo- sophy will be a permanent gain to the world, and transient considerations should not be allowed to interfere with it.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
3 January, 1885.
I find lying for me the last number of the Popular Science Monthly. You make a telling presentation of the question between Harrison and myself ; as usual, seizing the essential points very clearly. . . .
1883-85] Religious Discussion 259
I enclose a leaf from the Journal of Education containing a paragraph which will amuse you. 1
13 January. — The long interval since I heard from you leads me to fear that you are ill, or at any rate suffering seriously from the cold weather. Pray go South. If it is a question of money, take possession of the half year's balance due to me. I do not want it.
On the same day the anxiously looked for letter came. In it Dr. Youmans broached the question of the republica- tion of the controversy \vith Harrison.
FROM E. L. YOUMAXS.
2 January, 1885.
And now we have something of a new embarrassment upon which I must consult you. There is a pretty sharp demand for the publication of your controversy with Harrison in a separate form, and the publishers favour it. The question is not simply whether it is desirable, for we cannot control it. There is danger that it will be done by others, and if that should occur it would be construed as a triumph of the Harrison party — the Spencerians having declined to go into it.
If I thought no one else would print the correspondence I should be in favour of our not doing it. In the first place, for general effect Rhetoric against Reason counts as about ten to one. The Comtists are reviving — Harrison is coming over to lecture in this country, and much will be made of his brilliant conduct of the controversy. In the next place, he has this advantage of you. Your main work bearing upon the issue is to be sought elsewhere, while Harrison had accumulated all the materials of his assault and gives his whole case, so that the popular effect could not fail to be much in his favour. To the narrower circle of readers, who can really appreciate the discussion, the republication would undoubtedly be an excellent thing, and I suppose after all it is only these that we should much care for. On the whole it may be politic to reprint — What do you think about it ?
To E. L. YOUMANS.
14 January, 1885.
After sending you off my note yesterday in some anxiety about your state, I was glad to get a letter from you this morning which relieved me a little, though not fully, for it
1 This referred to the award of a prize given by the Journal "for the best list of the seven greatest living English Educationists." Spencer heads the list to which the prize was awarded. He also had the highest number of votes, Professor Bain be'n^ next.
260 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvm.
appears that the winter is telling upon you, if not in a renewed pulmonary attack, still in other ways.
Why will you, against your better knowledge, yield to this American mania of sacrificing yourself in trying to do more work ? You accept in theory the gospel of relaxation ; why can you not act upon it ? What is the use of both abridging life, and making it full of physical miseries, all in the hope of achieving a little more ; and eventually being baulked of your hope by the very eagerness to achieve ? You have done quite enough already in the way of working for the public good. Pay a little regard to yourself and let things drift. . . . Excuse my plain speaking, but it is grievous to me to see you deliberately killing yourself.
I quite agree to the reprinting of the Harrison controversy. I have telegraphed to you to-day suggesting the announcement of the reprint forthwith, and saying that I will send you some notes. Many points in his articles, ... it is worth while to rectify now that there is an opportunity.
15 January. — I send herewith the chapters to be reprinted, with sundry notes to one of them — notes which are most, if not all of them, rectifications of Mr. Harrison's misstatements.
I presume that though you do not feel up to writing an introduction, yet you will think it desirable to affix a brief preface, stating the reasons for republication. I should like this to be done, because I do not want to let it be erroneously thought that the republication is at my own instance. If you say, as you tell me, that there has arisen a demand for the articles in a permanent form, and that, in the absence of a pub- lication by the Appletons, there would shortly have been an issue by another publisher ; if you say that, finding this to be the case, you applied to me for my assent, it will meet the requirement. Further, you might add that having agreed to the republication, I had furnished you with the materials for some notes to one of the chapters, rectifying sundry of Mr. Harrison's misstatements. 1 These notes I give you in such form as occurs to me ; leaving you to modify the form as you please. As I thus simply draw your attention to the errors and rectifications, you may, if you recast the notes, see well to put your initials to them.
I send you not only the article to which I have appended these notes, but also all the articles ; that they may be re- printed from the originals as printed here.
1 Note by Spencer. — " Because, though I had originally not noticed them, from lack of space, I did not agree to further diffusion of them in a permanent form without correction."
1883-85] Religions Discussion 261
21 January. — It occurs to me that in the absence of careful instructions, the printers may make some mistakes with regard to the order of the articles, and that therefore it is well just to put the contents of the proposed republication in what seems to me the proper order, with what I propose should be the prefixed and affixed portions.
FROM E. L. YOUMANS.
27 January, 1885.
I deeply appreciate your solicitude about my imperilled health, and your generous offer of means to go into safer conditions. But that is not my difficulty ; so long as I hang on to the Monthly my living is assured. ... I was very glad of your decision. In two hours after its reception, the articles were on their way to the printers. . . . We have letters in- quiring for them. I think it will be well to issue them at the end — on general grounds.
The volume was published by Messrs. D. Appleton and Co., under the title " The Nature and Reality of Religion," a copy being sent to Mr. Harrison, who forthwith wrote to Spencer (26 May) : "As I shall have something to say about this publication, I ought first to ask you, whether it has been made with your knowledge, or has your approval ; and in particular whether you know anything of the notes and matter appended to my articles, or if you now adopt them." In his reply next day Spencer stated the circumstances which led to the publication, and his own connexion with it and responsibility for it. Mr. Harrison could not see that there was anything in this explanation to justify Spencer in being a party to the reprint of his articles without his knowledge or consent. " May I ask if it is proposed to hand you the profits of a book of which I am (in part) the author, or are these to be retained by your American publishers and friend ? " This letter, appearing in the Times (29 May), made it necessary that Spencer should now publish the letter he had written to Mr. Harrison two days before. In doing so he referred to the imputation of mercenary motives. " Asking whether I have any share in the profits, Mr. Harrison, not only by this, but by his title — 'A New Form of Literary Piracy' — tacitly suggests that I have. ... If three gentlemen appointed in the usual way decide that under the circum-
262 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvm.
stances, as stated to me by Professor Youmans, I was not justified in the course I took, I will, if Mr. Harrison wishes it, request Messrs. Appleton to suppress the book and destroy the stereotype plates, and I will make good their loss to them." And on the 2nd June, on which date Mr. Harrison intimated in the Times that he would not pursue the matter further, nor would insist on Spencer's fair offer to submit it to arbitration, Spencer telegraphed to the Times from Clovelly : " Rather than have any further question with Mr. Harrison, and rather than have it supposed that I intentionally ignored his copyright claim, I have tele- graphed to Messrs. Appleton to stop the sale, destroy the stock and plates, and debit me with their loss." This was followed next day by a letter to the Times (4 June), in which he acknowledged that he was wrong in assenting to the republication. " My mind was so engrossed with the due presentation of the controversy that the question of copy- right never occurred to me. . . . Hence my error. But my error does not, I think, excuse Mr. Harrison's insult. By cancelling the rest of the edition and the plates, I have done all that remains possible to rectify the effects of my mistake."
On reading this Mr. Harrison disclaimed any intention of bringing against Spencer a charge of desiring money profit out of the reprint, and regretted the use of any words which produced that impression. Meanwhile Spencer wrote to Dr. Youmans, sending him copies of the correspondence.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
ILFRACOMBE, 2 June, 1885.
You were doubtless greatly astonished by my telegram to the Appletons telling them to stop selling the Harrison book. You will be less astonished after reading the enclosed. The thing as you see has had very awkward results here. I ought to have foreseen them.
8 June. — I have nothing further to say respecting the Harrison business, except that on the part of many it has produced a greater cordiality of behaviour to me than they have ever shown before.
• 9 June. — I returned home last night, and early this morning learnt that in the Standard of Saturday last, there was, in
1883-85) Religious Discussion 263
a telegram from New York, a statement to the effect that Messrs. Appleton decline to destroy the stock and plates of the reprinted controversy (as I had telegraphed them to do) on the score that the book would be reprinted by some other publisher. In this expectation they are probably right. . . .
One word respecting the proposal of the Appletons to share the author's profits between Mr. Harrison and myself. If any have at present accrued, or if, in consequence of refusal to do as I have above requested, any should hereafter accrue, then I wish to say that having been, and being now, absolutely indifferent to profit in the matter, I shall decline to accept any portion of the returns.
This last letter was sent to Mr. Harrison to be posted by him after perusal. A telegram from New York, stating that the book had been suppressed, was supposed by Spencer to be "the last act in this disagreeable drama." Mr. Harrison had also expressed the hope that " time may re-establish friendly relations."
To FREDERIC HARRISON.
13 J utie, 1885.
On Thursday night I received a telegram from America, containing the words — "Book suppressed on receipt of first telegram." Whence it appears that the correspondent of the Standard was in some way or other misinformed.
Referring to your note received on Thursday, I will do my best to think no more of what has passed, though I shall have considerable difficulty in doing this. You are possibly unaware of the chief cause of the feeling which was aroused in me last year, and has survived down to the present time. Most likely you have thought of it as an effect of controversial antagonism, which I have too persistently manifested. But this is not so. That you may understand the cause of alienation, I must set before you a series of facts.
After giving an account of the origin of the Descriptive Sociology, of the time and labour bestowed on it and the heavy financial loss involved — absorbing all the surplus proceeds of his literary work during fourteen years, and compelling him to deny himself comforts he could other- wise have afforded, the letter goes on to say :—
For all these sacrifices I got no thanks. . . . But I little foresaw that they would bring to me something very much the reverse of thanks. I little dreamed that the time, labour, health, and money I had expended for the benefit of others,
264 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvni.
would become the occasion of a reproach. When you spoke of this "medley" of tables as "a pile of clippings made to order " — when by this and by your comparison to the lawyer you conveyed the belief (a belief which was circulated in America) that I was dishonest enough to present the world with a garbled body of evidence, and foolish enough to suppose that I could in that way bolster up false conclusions, you gave me a deep wound. Such a wound, given even to one who had not in various ways injured himself for good ends, would be sufficiently severe ; but coming on one who, for so long a time, had suffered various evils to discharge an honourable obligation and achieve a public benefit, was too serious to be easily healed. The recent incident has of course not tended to further the healing, and you can hardly suppose that I can forthwith establish anything like cordial relations with one who has inflicted on me immeasurably more pain than has been in- flicted by any other man. But I will do my best ; and time may obliterate the impression produced by what has passed.
Mr. Harrison hastened to express regret that he had caused annoyance by his remarks about the Descriptive Sociology. " Nothing was further from my thought than that you had in any sense garbled the evidence, or had any object other than the honourable pursuit of truth. What I said referred solely to the philosophic value of a particular method of proof. . . . But where you have given so much to the cause of truth, I can reckon the ' Tables ' as amongst the least of your gifts."
The course adopted by Spencer was very disconcerting to his friends in New York. "All the newspaper demon- strations have been regularly cabled to us with tormenting incompleteness," wrote Dr. Youmans. " I am profoundly sorry about the transaction, and that any agency of mine should have got you into so annoying and disagreeable a position. I care nothing about it for myself, but I care something for the rights and justice of the case ; and as at present advised I shall not be satisfied to leave it where it is left by your order of suppression."
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
23 June, 1885.
The thing has been a series of blunders from the beginning. If instead of telegraphing you at once in reply to your letter in January, I had duly thought all round the matter, I might have known that something of the kind which has happened
1883-85] Religious Discussion 265
would be likely to happen. . . . The essential reason why I took the course I did was, that in consistency I felt bound to respect an equitable claim to copyright, and not to countenance a transaction which implicates me in disregard of that claim. As I have explained, I was so engrossed at the time by the thought of the correct presentation of the controversy, which threatened to be incorrectly reproduced, that the notion of copyright never entered into my head — so little did it do so that the publication of Harrison's letter, for the first time revealed this to me as a grievance. . . . But having been reminded that this was a ground of complaint, I admitted it ; since I cannot consistently contend for international copyright without myself recognizing the claim to international copy- right, even though the law does not ; and consequently I ought not to implicate myself in any transaction which ignores it. I therefore felt that I had made a mistake (quite unconsciously) in overlooking this claim, and that for that reason I ought properly to signalize the fact by suppressing the book.
On learning that Dr. Youmans was preparing a vindi- cation of the conduct of Spencer, the Appletons, and him- self throughout the transaction, he intimated that " it would be undesirable to let it be issued here — very undesirable. The matter has dropped through."
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
STOTT PARK, ULVERSTONE, 28 /H/V, 1885.
I got the proofs just as I was leaving town. . . .
I do not see why you are so dissatisfied with the article. I think it very clear and effective, and so do my friends here. When I wrote in reply to your previous two letters, and said that, however good it might be, its republication here would be impolitic, I was too egotistically occupied with my own share in the matter. I did not bear in mind that you and the Appletons have good reason to wish for the publication as a means of justifying yourselves to the English public.
If this can be done in such way as to leave me out of the question, I shall be glad ; but I continue averse to anything which may look like a revival of the matter in my interests. *
A cheque sent to Mr. Harrison for his proportion of profit on the sales made before the book was suppressed
1 Dr. Youmans's vindication appeared in the Popular Science Monthly for August, and has been reprinted in Edward Livingston Youmans, pp. 562-83. It includes the correspondence between Mr. Harrison and Spencer published in the Times.
266 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvm.
served to rekindle the dying embers of the controversy. In a letter in the Times (7 October) Mr. Harrison declined the cheque, while recognizing the honourable motives of Messrs. Appleton. Spencer thought the occasion a good one for a letter from Dr. Youmans. The aim of this letter, which appeared in the Times of i6th November, was to correct certain mistaken impressions and to point out difficulties experienced by fair-minded American publishers. " Until international copyright comes we cannot have its salutary fruits." In a more or less dissentient leader the Times thought that Dr. Youmans rather unduly enhanced the publisher's liability and effaced Mr. Spencer's.
As was expected, the suppressed book could not be suppressed. The first intimation Spencer had of its re- issue was towards the end of October, in a letter from Dr. Youmans, to whom he wrote: "Respecting the re-issued volume it is very well that you did not let me know any- thing about it, so I am left free from any kind of respon- sibility." A few days before Christmas he got a copy of The I nsuppressible Book, edited, with comments by Gail Hamilton, and published by S. E. Cassino and Co., of Boston.
With all this turmoil and vexation it is surprising that he was able to complete " Ecclesiastical Institutions," which was published in the autumn of 1885.
The death of "George Eliot" in December, 1880, re- vived the rumours, already heard occasionally in this country and frequently in the United States, that Spencer had been in love with her. These stories had for years caused him great annoyance. Feeling that he could not himself do anything to contradict these absolutely untrue state- ments, he laid the matter in strict confidence before his friends, Professors Huxley and Tyndall, Mr. Potter, and Dr. Youmans, in order that they, knowing the facts, should, if the rumour were repeated in their hearing, privately con- tradict it, leaving such private contradiction to have what effect it might in checking its further circulation. The forthcoming Life1 of " George Eliot " seemed to furnish a
1 Published early in 1885.
1883-85] Religious Discussion 267
suitable opportunity for giving an authoritative denial to the report, and he was anxious that a note to this effect should be inserted in the book. IVJr. Cross at first agreed, but eventually, after some correspondence, no such note was inserted. The reasons for its omission are thus referred to by Spencer :—
To E. L. YOUMANS.
4 February, 1885.
George Eliot's Life has just come out, and is being read by everybody — satisfactory enough in so far as concerns myself in many respects, it is unsatisfactory in that respect about which I wrote you some years ago — the report that I had been in love with her.
After consulting with friends here at the time I wrote you — Huxley, Tyndall and Potter, to whom, as to you, I told the actual facts of the case in strict confidence — I, acting on their advice, requested Cross, as the least thing that could be done, to put in a note denying this report. To this he assented, being able fully to do so, not on the basis of my authority only, but on the basis of her authority. When the time came, we differed with regard to the wording of the note : I wishing a simple denial of the report, and no- thing more ; he wishing to frame it in another way, but a way to which I was obliged to object, because it would imply something that was not true. Eventually, a note vaguely worded, repudiating all of whatever reports had been in cir- culation, was agreed to ; but ' when the book was passing through the press, and the proofs were seen by Lord Acton and Sir Charles Bowen (the judge), this note was objected to by them as one which was likely to cause gossip. Of course he [Mr. Cross] was master of the situation, and as he would not so far modify it as to make it simply the denial I wished, and as the form which he reluctantly would have assented to, was one which made the matter still more liable to the misinterpretation I wished to exclude, the note was finally abandoned.
Cross argued that the indirect evidence would amply suffice to refute the report. I think wrhen you come to look at the state of the case, and such extracts as are given from April 1852 onward, you will see that this is by no means the fact, and that any one who had previously accepted the report, would find nothing to dissipate his belief in it.
As I said to Cross in the course of a correspondence we had at the time when the note was finally cancelled, he had the opportunity of saying by a few words which he could give on double authority, that the statement, as it had been
268 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xvm.
current, was utterly unfounded ; and yet he deliberately has not done this, and has left it to remain current, if not even to be confirmed ; for it seems to me that some may take the facts as they stand rather as verification than otherwise. . . . Though he was able with facility to rectify the matter, I can- not do so ; and had no means of correcting such absurd mis- statements as those which you told me had been current in America, and, so far as I see, shall never have the means of doing this.
Spencer's relations with " George Eliot," and his very high appreciation of her character and mental endowments have been dealt with in the Autobiography (i., 394-9).
269
CHAPTER XIX.
THE FACTORS OF ORGANIC EVOLUTION.
(January, 1886— September, 1889.)
THE working out of what he regarded as his final addi- tion to the general doctrine of evolution was well advanced by about the middle of January, 1886.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
19 January, 1886.
The first of the Darwin articles, which will appear under the title of " The Factors of Organic Evolution," I expect to take to the printers to-day, and the other is commenced. As there will be a good deal of biological detail in it, I shall submit it for criticism to some experts — Flower and Michael Foster among others. Whether I shall ask Huxley and Hooker to look through it, I do not knowr ; for they are somewhat my antag- onists in the matter ; having always been opponents of the belief that there is inheritance of functionally-produced modifi- cations— or rather, having always slighted the belief as one for which there is no adequate evidence.
To his German translator he thus states the purport of the articles.
To B. VETTER.
19 January, 1886.
They will be in the main a criticism upon the current con- ception of Mr. Darwin's views ; showing that this conception is erroneous in ignoring altogether one of the beliefs set forth by Dr. Erasmus Darwin and by Lamarck — the belief that the inheritance of organic modifications produced by use and disuse, has been a cause of evolution. The thesis of the first paper will be that this cause has been all along a co-operative cause, and that in its absence, all the higher stages of organic evolu- tion would have been impossible.
The second paper will have for its object to point out that besides the factor of " natural selection," now exclusively
270 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xix.
recognized, and besides the factor previously alleged, which has of late been improperly ignored, there is yet a third factor, preceding the other two in order of time, and universally co- operative with them from the beginning, which has to be taken into account before all the phenomena of organization can be understood — a factor which has to be recognized before organic • evolution is rightly conceived as forming a part of evolution at large.
To T. H. HUXLEY.
26 January, 1886.
Here is something to exasperate you. There has never been any sympathy between us in respect of the doctrine defended in the accompanying article ; and I remember within this year an utterance of opinion which seemed to imply that there was not much chance of approximation.
Regarding you as in this matter an antagonist, I felt for some time a good deal of hesitation as to the propriety of submitting lucubrations of mine to your criticism. But I have finally concluded that to break through the long standing usage, in pursuance of which I have habitually submitted my biological writing to your castigation, and so often profited by so doing, would seem like a distrust of your candour — a distrust w?hich I cannot entertain. I therefore, as in times long gone by, beg of you such attention as is needed to glance through the inclosed proof, and let me benefit by any objections you have to make.
FROM T. H. HUXLEY.
31 January, 1886.
Mind, I have no a priori objection to the transmission of functional modifications whatever. In fact, as I told you, I should rather like it to be true. But I argued against the assumption (with Darwin as I do with you) of the operation of a factor which, if you will forgive me for saying so, seems as far off sufficiently trustworthy evidence now as ever it was.
To T. H. HUXLEY.
3 February, 1886.
Pray accept my apology along with my thanks for the benefit of your criticisms, sundry of \vhich I am utilizing to guard myself against objections.
You will see, however, from this admission that I remain substantially " a hardened unbeliever" — believer, I mean. And now see how good deeds bring their evils. Here is a batch of comments as long as, or longer than, your criticisms. How- ever, you are not obliged to read them unless you care to do so. I write them to show why on sundry points I still think the positions taken are defensible.
1886-89] Factors of Organic Evolution 271
With the first revise proof of the second of the articles he wrote to Dr. Yoiimans : " This, I suspect, will be my last addition to the theory of Evolution. After sixty-five one cannot expect to do more than write out one's ideas previously arrived at." He advised Professor Huxley when criticizing the second article to confine himself to marginal notes — suggesting that perhaps " there needs only one mar- ginal note." ]
To T. H. HUXLEY.
23 March, 1886.
Thank you heartily for your criticisms, " captious and can- tankerous," as you admit them to be. But what a lover of lighting you are ! Here you confess that you castigate my heterodoxies with a view to better fitting them to disturb the orthodox.
Various of your criticisms lead me to make alterations that shall shut the door to mis-apprehension ; and sundry alterations of more substantial kinds. While I make them, I jot down for my own satisfaction, certain comments which you may or may not read as you please.
When sending this article as finally revised he told Dr. Youmans (24 March) :
Flowrer made no objections at all ; Michael Foster none of any moment. Huxley has badgered me in detail a good deal, and hence most of the alterations contained in this proof. But, though he does not commit himself to my view, he has not said anything which tends to undermine it.
On reading the articles Dr. Arthur Downes was struck by the bearing on Spencer's views of some original work which he and Mr. Blunt had published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society in 1877 and subsequent years. Two or three of these papers were sent to Spencer.
To ARTHUR DOWNES.
10 May, 1886.
The marked passages, of course, were specially interesting to me as shewing experimentally and in a specific way, the occurrence of an effect wrhich I had inferred a priori.
The two articles as published in the Nineteenth Century
Life of Professor Huxley, ii. 127.
272 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xix.
were written with the intention of republishing them in a permanent form after such interval as the editor agrees to : and I should very well like to make an appendix of some of the passages contained in your two papers, as verifying certain parts of my argument.
In consequence of pressure of space, the editor of the Nineteenth Century induced me to abridge the articles. Among passages which I had to take out, were two in which I have commented upon a fact to which I see you in another way refer : namely that protoplasm is habitually found inside of a protecting envelope. . . . These passages I cut out will, of course, be restored in the permanent form of the articles. I name them now because otherwise it may seem to you that I have utilized certain suggestions contained in your papers without acknowledgment. I cannot send you as I should like to do, a proof of the article in its unabridged form : for, when the abridged proof came back from the Nineteenth Century, I threw it into the waste-paper basket as done with. But the printer has the type standing, and no doubt has also impres- sions at hand of the articles as they stood before abridgment. If you care to do so, I should very well like if you would some day when it is convenient^ call upon me at the Athenaeum, and go with me to the printers to see that this is so.
When sending the present writer a copy of the above, Dr. Downes remarked that it " seems to afford a curious proof of his careful attention to detail, and of a highly scrupulous and punctilious character. I was unable to call upon him and never saw him, but I wrote to thank him and to say how unnecessary was the proposed visit to the printer."
To E. L. YOUMANS.
19 March, 1886.
The copyright question is being revived here. There exists a body, . . . consisting of publishers and authors, for advanc- ing the question, and a few days ago it sent a deputation to Mr. Mundella. . . . Their aim is to get an international copy- right recognized in such form as that they can purchase the author's copyright here and with it include the copyright abroad. ... If this is allowed, the author will get scarcely anything more for his copyright than if there were no inter- national copyright. . . . The American bill should enact that no copyright, save one held by the foreign author, can be recognized in America, . . . and directly or by implication, enact that copyright negociations must be direct between the foreign author and the American publisher.
1886-89] Factors of Organic Evolution 273
Spencer's depression about this time was extreme. Many of his most intimate friends were, like himself, ill. Professor Tyndall was not far from the truth when he said : "It would seem as if we were all breaking up together." In a letter to Professor Huxley in March Spencer mentions that he had been to see Professor Tyndall.
In the course of conversation I suggested that yachting would be the thing — yachting about the coasts with the ability to go into port every night so as to get quiet rest. Afterwards thinking about this, it occurred to me that such a thing would be admirable also for you and for me. We all three of us want a lounging life in the open air, with just enough variety to keep us alive, and the exhilarating effects of a little pleasant company. I do not see, too, why the thing would not suit my friend Potter. What do you say to our chartering a yacht for a couple of months . . . and going hither and thither about the coasts of the English Channel, including Jersey, Guernsey, the Scilly Islands, &c.
Recalling the Nile expedition, one feels inclined to say that had the suggestion been carried out Spencer would have been the first to run away. When this idea had to be given up he took rooms near the Crystal Palace. But the move did him no good. Another project was unfolded to Miss Flora Smith. "A while since I had hoped to profit by taking up my abode at the Pavilion Hotel, Folkestone, and going backwards and forwards to France every day for the benefit of the sea air, motion and liveliness. But I was balked by the opening of the Folkestone Exhibition." His idea now was to get Mr. and Miss Lott to join him at some sea-side resort. This also came to nothing owing to the illness of his friend having taken an unexpected turn for the worse.
To EDWARD LOTT.
1 July, 1886.
MY DEAR OLD FRIEND, — When I saw you, the last Christ- mas but one, I little thought it would be the last time we should shake hands.
It is grievous to me to think of losing my oldest and best friend ; and now that I am myself very much invalided, the consciousness of the loss will make me feel that life, not very attractive to me now-a-days at the best, is made less attractive
18
274 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xix.
than before. It has been clear to me that for months past the pains you have had to bear, bodily and mental, have greatly outbalanced such small satisfactions as the days brought ; and now the sad accounts I receive of you, show me that your hours, passed in almost continuous suffering, must make life a great burden.
If as I fear, there is now no hope that I shall ever hear from you again, and have the pleasure of responding, pray accept this as the last good-bye of your sorrowing old friend.
[If in time, to be read to him or not, according as is thought best.]
Before this letter arrived Mr. Lott had breathed liis last. Beginning before Spencer's career as a writer was thought of by Mr. Lott, or was more than a vague possibility to Spencer himself, the friendship between them had never wavered during five and forty years.
While mourning the loss of one friend, lie was full of apprehension about another; who, with a loyal devotion rarely equalled and never surpassed, had stood by him for over a quarter of a century.
FROM E. L. YOUMAXS.
5 July, 1886.
All the indications are decisive, that I can hold on but a little longer and must leave things much as they are. I wish I could write you about many matters that have heretofore been of interest between us, but it cannot be, and is perhaps just as well. Good or bad, whatever is done is done. I was very much touched by the slip you sent me in your note of May 8, from your Autobiographic sketches,1 speaking so highly of the work I have done. The recognition is most gratifying, and I thank you for your kindness and generosity in making it. I have done nothing myself that will have any claim to survive ; but I shall be fully content to be remembered through this noble tribute from a man of justice, who knows the purposes by which I have been animated in my life-work.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
20 July, 1886.
I was much saddened yesterday to receive a verification of the fears I have been for some weeks entertaining, that your silence was due to illness. . . .
It is well, however, that you can take so calm a view of the matter as your description and reflections imply ; and it may
1 Autobiography, ii., 53.
1886-89] Factors of Organic Evolution 275
be that when life has to be carried on under the conditions you describe, the desire for continuance of it may fitly decrease. . . .
This is the view taken by the relatives of one who has just left us — my old and valued friend Lott. . . . You saw enough of him to know what a fine nature he had. . . .
However, I, like you, take a calm view of the matter. I value life for little else than my work ; and had I finished it, I should care little about the issue. . . .
Whatever comes, we may at any rate both of us have some satisfaction in the consciousness of having done our work con- scientiously, prompted by high motives ; and whenever it ends, the friendship between us may be looked back upon by the survivor, as one of the valued things of his life.
But more letters may still pass between us, my dear old friend ; and in that anticipation I continue yours with very affectionate regards.
The Autobiography was a godsend, giving him the neces- sary occupation without overtaxing him. When returning the proof of Chapter XXV. Professor Huxley wrote : —
I am immensely tickled with your review of your own book {Social Statics']. That is something most originally Spencerian. . . . How odd it is to look back through the vista of years ! Reading your account of me I had the sensation of studying a fly in amber. I had utterly forgotten the particular circum- stances that brought us together. Considering what wilful tykes we both are (you particularly), I think it is a great credit to both of us that we are firmer friends now than we were then.
By September he had made up his mind not to face the winter in town. The choice lay between Brighton and Bournemouth, the chief attraction of the latter being the presence there of Mr. Potter and several members of his family, "for I pine for lack of those I care for." Eventually, however, he decided in favour of Brighton. He was in- teresting himself about this time in an article Miss Beatrice Potter was writing, one of her points being that any theory of economics that overlooks pathology is useless.
To Miss BEATRICE POTTER.
2 October, 1886.
So far as I understand them the objections which you are making to the doctrines of the elder political economists, are a good deal of the kind that have of late years been made, and, as I think, not rightly made. ...
276 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xix.
Physiology formulates the laws of the bodily functions in a state of health, and absolutely ignores pathology — cannot take any account whatever of functions that are not normal. Mean- while, a rational pathology can come into existence only by virtue of the previously established physiology which has ignored it : until there is an understanding of the functions in health, there is no understanding of them in disease. Further, when rational pathology has been thus established, the course of treatment indicated by it is the course which aims as far as possible to re-establish the normal functions — does not aim to readjust physiology in such way as to adapt it to pathological states.
Just so is it with that account of the normal relations of industrial actions- constituting political economy properly so called. No account can be taken by it of disorder among these actions or impediments to them. It cannot recognize pathological social states at all ; and further, the understanding of these pathological social states wholly depends upon previous establishment of that part of social physiology which constitutes political economy. And, moreover, if these pathological states are due to the traversing of free competition and free contract, which political economy assumes, the course of treatment is not the readjustment of the principles of political economy, but the establishment as far as possible of free competition and free contract.
If as I understand you, you would so modify politico- economical principles as to take practical cognizance of patho- logical states, then you would simply organize pathological states, and things would go from bad to worse.
If he could not enter upon a controversy himself he would contrive to induce one or other of his friends to do so, as when he got Professor Huxley to reply to Mr. Lilly's article on " Materialism and Morality."1
To T. H. HUXLEY.
11 December, 1886.
I may be proud of what you called my " diabolical plot." Notwithstanding your characterization, I think that, considering the result, I may say contrariwise that it has succeeded divinely. I was greatly amused by your article, which was ad- mirably adapted to its purpose.
The friendship between Professor Huxley and Spencer had, during all these years, withstood the disintegrating
1 Life of Professor Huxley, ii., 144.
1886-89] Factors of Organic Evolution 277
effect of diversity of opinion on many subjects. Writing in January, 1887, the former mentions having been asked to become an honorary "something or other" of " a body calling itself the London Schools League (I think)," Spencer and Mrs. Fawcett being also honorary members. " Now you may be sure that I should 'be glad enough to be asso- ciated with you in anything — but considering the innumer- able battles we have fought over education, vaccination, and so on — it seemed to me that if the programme of the League was wide enough to take us both for figure heads — it must be so elastic as to verge upon infinite extensibility ; and that one or other of us would be in a false position." The body alluded to was the London Liberty Club. On learning that he " was about to be conspicuously bracketed with Mrs. Fawcett," he tells Professor Huxley, " I forthwith wrote to decline the honour, and as I cannot well give the cold shoulder to a body which adopts my own particular views of the functions of government, I have written to exchange my honorary membership for a paying membership."
The year 1887 had not gone far on its course when he was overtaken by a great, though not unexpected, bereave- ment.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
BRIGHTON, 1 January, 1887.
It is a long time since I heard anything about you and I am getting anxious to have a report. Pray let me know how you have fared during the cold weather. . . .
Though the day suggests it, it is absurd for me to wish you, or for you to wish me, a happy New Year. There is not much happiness remaining in store for either of us.
Pray dictate a few lines when you get this.
This letter reached Dr. Youmans on the i7th. Next day Miss Youmans wrote : "Yours of January ist reached us last night, and when I read it to him he spoke very tenderly of your case and said, ' I will dictate a few lines to Mr. Spencer to-morrow ' ; but before the morning had fairly dawned he had ceased to breathe." Thus ended one of the purest and most steadfast friendships the world of letters has ever seen. From the day on which his life came first into contact with Spencer's, Dr. Youmans devoted
278 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xix.
himself with rare unselfishness to the promulgation of evolution doctrines, which were identified in his estimation with the -highest good of humanity. An earlier American friend than Dr. Youmans was Mr. Silsbee ; but as far as one can form an opinion from the perusal of the corre- spondence, the help rendered by the latter in introducing Spencer to the American public was inappreciable. In the proof slip from the Autobiography (ii., 53), sent to Dr. Youmans on May 8, 1886, Spencer must have placed a higher value on Mr. Silsbse's efforts than is implied in the passing reference to him in the passage as finally adopted. A month or two after her brother's death, Miss Youmans endeavoured to correct Spencer's misappre- hension.
FROM Miss YOUMAXS.
13. April, 1887.
In getting the '86 letters for the copyist I came upon the slip concerning Edward, from your Autobiography, sent him with such tender forethought last summer. On reading it at the time, your statement about Mr. Silsbee's early efforts in your behalf surprised me. I afterwards spoke of it to Edward, and he confirmed my impression that you were in error, but when I proposed to tell you about it he said '' Oh, it's a very small matter," in a tone that discouraged the attempt. . . . The circular you sent to Mr. Silsbee, he gave to his towns- man Rev. Mr. Johnson, whom Edward shortly after met at Mr. Manning's in Brooklyn. Edward started the subject of your writings which had taken great hold of him, and being thus reminded of the circular in his vest pocket, Mr. Johnson at once gave it to Edward saying that Mr. Silsbee, who gave it him, knew Mr. Spencer personally. . . . Within a week from the time he met Mr. Johnson, he went to Salem to learn what he might about you. He found Silsbee, and he told me last summer that while Mr. Silsbee spoke admiringly of you, he manifested no enthusiasm about your ideas — did not seem acquainted with them, and up to the time of Edward's visit, had done nothing but hand your circular to Mr. Johnson ; and in Edward's opinion he would not of his own accord have made a movement in the matter. Influenced by Edward, he did take hold of the work, going to Boston and Cambridge to get influential names for the subscription ; but (and I mention it because it bears on the case) Edward said he was never able to undo the mischief Silsbee wrought in Boston and its suburbs by his unfortunate aggressive manner of approaching people.
1886-89] Factors of Organic Evolution 279
He said he never met Dr. Holmes afterward but that gentle- man alluded to the disagreeable experience — the way he was assailed by Mr. Silsbee in your behalf."1
This was Jubilee year. He was invited by Mrs. Jose, with whom his Aunt Anna lived, to contribute towards "a very mild feast for the Hintonians as a public com- memoration." This he was unable to do.
To MRS. JOSE.
BRIGHTON, 30 May, 1887.
Do not suppose, however, that ... I am unwilling to con- tribute towards the pleasures and, I hope, the benefits of the Hintonians. I presume the Hinton library still exists. If so, I will . . . send you a cheque for ten guineas to be spent in books (chiefly works of science, and voyages and travels) to be added to the Hinton library. On the inside of the cover of each of these books I propose to have pasted the following inscription.
IN REMEMBRANCE OF
THE REV. THOMAS SPENCER, M.A.
FOUNDER OF THE HINTON LIBRARY
AND OF OTHER INSTITUTIONS FOR THE BENEFIT OF HINTON
THIS VOLUME
IS PRESENTED BY
HIS GRATEFUL NEPHEW
HERBERT SPENCER.
Owing to circumstances over which he had no control, it was not till the beginning of 1895 that the gift was bestowed.
With improved health came the wish for change of surroundings. Yachting about the Channel was again thought of. He longed also for the company of children. In answer to his pleading, Mrs. W. H. Cripps not only sent him two of her own, but volunteered to get her married sisters to spare him one or two of theirs. In this way began a custom which continued for years — cementing still more closely the bonds of affection between him and the family of Mr. and Mrs. Potter. In November he went to Bournemouth. " I have got rooms in the same house as
1 See also Edward Livingston Youmans, p. 105.
280 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xix.
the Potters, where I shall have the occasional companion- ship of three generations."
To. T. H. HUXLEY.
1 December, 1887.
The black border on your letter of last week made me open it in hurried alarm, remembering what you had said respecting your wife a few days previously. To say that I was relieved on reading it seems strange considering that it announced the death of your daughter. But I coincide with the feeling that you expressed that, considering the hopeless state in which she has long been, and the probability of continued painful decay, it was better that the end should come as it did.
But it is sad to think of so promising a career so early blighted — much successful and enjoyable achievement, joined, as one may infer, with a great deal of domestic happiness, closing so early after so much suffering.
He returned to London on the last day of January, 1888, after eighteen months absence, greatly improved in health, though not perhaps coming up to Professor Huxley's de- scription of him — " as lively as a cricket." At the same time there appeared in the Nineteenth Centnrv an article on "The Struggle for Existence in Human Society," which Professor Huxley feared had " made Spencer very angry —but he knows, I think he has been doing mischief this long time."
To T. H. HUXLEY. 38, QUEEN'S GARDENS, 6 February, 1888.
I have nothing to object, and everything to agree to. In fact, the leading propositions are propositions that I have myself enunciated either publicly or privately. It was but the day before leaving Bournemouth that I was shocking some members of the circle upstairs at Kilclare by insisting on the non-moral character of Nature — immoral, indeed, I rather think I called it ; pointing out that for 99 hundredths of the time life has existed on the Earth (or one might say 999 thousandths), the success has been confined to those beings which, from a human point of view, would be called criminal.
So, too, with the equal readiness of Nature to retrogress as to progress : see my reply to Martineau and the first part of the Principles of Sociology.
Last spring I began to set down a number of leading thoughts, which I intended to incorporate in the Inductions of Ethics if ever I lived to write it, and in the course of it was
1886-89] Factors of Organic Evolution 281
pointing out that same progression from brute ethics to human ethics which you have well insisted upon.
The remaining dominant point in this first division of your article is one in respect of which I fancy you thought I had overlooked an important consideration. When, sometime ago, in a speech, or address I think it was, you referred to those who insisted on the evils of war, and the need for peace as a means to higher civilization, and when you pointed out that the war of the sword had to be followed by the war of the loom (as one might call it), I fancied that you had me in your thought. But, I have long ago insisted on the same truth, as you will see in the Study of Sociology (page 199), where after admitting that war of the primitive kind by killing off the inferior races produces a balance of advantage during the earlier stages, I have gone on to insist that later "the purifying process, continuing still an important one, remains to be carried on by industrial war."
But while I am at one with you in this preliminary argu- ment, I dissent from the conclusion drawn and from the corol- laries. So far from believing that there is more misery now than there has been, I think there is less, and that there is no pressing need for the measures you allege. The mere fact that the rate of mortality has been diminishing, seems to me alone sufficient proof of this. The current impression with regard to the distress of the lower classes reminds me of a number of other untrue impressions. During the time when the mass of the people were profoundly ignorant there was no recognition whatever of their ignorance ; but when they be-' came partially instructed there arose an outcry that the nation was perishing for lack of knowledge, and that State agency was needful to spread it. Similarly with drinking. While drunkenness was extremely general there were no protests, but when sobriety had made considerable advances, there came an outcry that drunkenness was the root of all evil, and that the State must step in to prevent it. So, too, with the position of women. While they were slaves and during the long ages when they were ill-treated, not a word was said about their rights, now that they have come to be well treated the screaming sisterhood make the world ring with their wrongs, and they scream loudest in America, where women are treated with the greatest regard. So, I say, is it with the matter of the distress. Now that the distress is far less than it used to be, there comes an outcry about its greatness, and predictions that things will come to a crash unless it is stopped.
From your proposed measures of course I dissent. I feel strongly tempted to write an essay under the title " The Struggle for Existence — another Programme." But I must resist the temptation, and economize what little power I have :
282 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xix.
a further motive for refraining being that my criticisms might cause a coolness between us which I should greatly regret.
10 February. — My anticipation of possible evils, referred not to some first stage of a controversy as to probable second stages ; for when once a controversy is commenced there is no knowing how it will end. We are both of us combative, and I regarded it as tolerably certain that to my criticism there would come a rejoinder from you, and again another from me. The danger of some disturbance of harmony might in such case become considerable. In oral controversy I have so often had reason to be vexed with myself for having said things which I had not supposed I should say at the outset, that I am getting a little cautious how I run the risk.
The improvement in health, begun in Bournemouth, was continued in London. Nevertheless when the X dinner for March came round he had to stay away. In reply to Professor Huxley's banter that " if young men from the country will go plunging into the dissipations of the Metropolis, nemesis follows," he wrote (10 March) : —
It was not that ''life in London" "came over" u the young man from the country " ; but he was come over by another u young man from the country." I had been dining at the Athenaeum with Galton, and had quite enough talking, when suddenly Masson made his appearance. I was very glad to see him. He joined us at the same table, and there followed half an hour's animated talking, laughing, and story-telling. . . .
Never mind your strength running to hair instead of to brains, so long as you are thereby kept out of mischief. If, following out the parallel of Samson (about whom you seem to think I know nothing), we could blind you for a while to all save novels, it might not be a bad thing — furthering at once your own welfare and the peace of mind of your antagonists.1
It was a curious coincidence that about the time he was submitting proofs of certain paragraphs of the Auto- biography containing criticisms on Art to Mr. Philip H. Calderon, R.A., and to Mr. John Brett, A.R.A.,2 the Archi- tect (27 January) had a reference to his opinions on Art. Hence a disclaimer in a letter to the editor (24 February). "In my published writings I have not anywhere expressed
1 Life of Professor Huxley, ii., 194. -Autobiography, ii., 195.
1886-89] Factors of Organic Evolution 283
either the opinions ascribed to me or any other. Neces- sarily, therefore, some utterances of mine, either to friends or to an amanuensis, must have originated the statement. In its general drift the statement is correct, but, as might be expected, it is incorrect in detail." When it was pointed out that the paragraph in question was reprinted from his own essay on " Precedent in Architecture," published in January, 1842, all he could say was : " I never dreamed that the reference was to a letter nearly fifty years old."
A proposal was made by Miss Beatrice Potter on behalf of an American gentleman that he should sit to Millais for his portrait. To this he at first consented, but next day drew back.
To Miss BEATRICE POTTER.
5 May, 1888.
Yesterday I quite forgot myself, or rather forgot one of my strong opinions, when I gave my consent to the project for a portrait.
The practice of getting up subscriptions for this and the other purpose has grown into a grave social abuse, against which I have of late years more and more protested. People are blackmailed for all kinds of purposes. Among other, sub- scriptions raised are those for testimonials and testimonial portraits ; and against such subscriptions also I protest.
On one occasion I voluntarily subscribed without being asked, because I felt under a personal obligation (the case of Sir Andrew Clark), but on sundry other occasions I have, when asked to subscribe for the painting of portraits, felt that I was under a kind of moral coercion, which I did not like. Having been asked I felt obliged to subscribe because of the feeling that would have arisen had I declined.
Now as I dislike being myself put under coercion of this kind, I dislike having other persons put under such coercion in respect of myself. I dislike the thought that any one should be asked to tax themselves with a view to raising a fund for painting a portrait of me. I feel that some might give willingly, but many reluctantly, and most would regard the thing as a nuisance. I therefore must decline agreeing to the project which you named to me.
The prospect of improved health and working power with which he had come to London at the end of January, became clouded before many months. By midsummer he had made up his mind that a radical change in his
284 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xix.
mode of life must be attempted. Hence an urgent request that Mr. and Mrs. Grant Allen should take him as a boarder, which, at considerable inconvenience to themselves, they consented to do. The move jto Dorking took place in June. But the bad weather, keeping him indoors, produced great depression of spirits. He was, in fact, getting confirmed in that state which became more and more pronounced as year succeeded year — a state of restless longing for society when it was away from him, and shrinking from it when it was within his reach.
His anti-aggression sentiments remained as pronounced as ever, though he had been compelled to stand aside from the public position he had occupied in 1882. Since then he had published " Ecclesiastical Institutions," in which the clergy are taken to task for their indifference to, or support of, the aggressive policy of the nation.
TO THE HOX. AUBEROX HERBERT.
DORKIXG, 30 September, 1888.
I wish you would instigate Mr. Bradlaugh (with whom I see you have been expressing sympathy) to commence a crusade against the abominable filibustering which is now disgracing us. Since the annexation of Burma we have had Zulu-land, New Guinea, North Borneo, East Africa, as well as the now current and pending aggressions in Sikkim and the Black Mountain, which doubtless will end by and by in annexations there. Now there is a talk too of Bechuana- land. To me the whole thing is atrocious and horrible, and so far from being likely to stop, it goes on faster day by day, resulting in a re-barbarization of the nation.
Bradlaugh would, I think, be a good man to initiate an agitation of a pronounced kind against the whole policy. There are several strong positions capable of conclusive proof and illustration which he might take up.
First, that the whole policy ends in national loss, since the alleged commercial advantages never compensate for the cost of perpetual wars joined with the cost of official administration, and that from this loss the working class, along with other classes, eventually suffers.
Second, that the whole process is utterly demoralizing, as a continual fostering of those sentiments which, joined with development of militant organization, end in destruction of free institutions and despotism.
Third, that it will inevitably result in an increased demand for increased armaments to defend the greater number of
1886-89] Factors of Organic Evolution 285
dependencies and also to make England safe against those dangers of war which increasing jealousy of the continental nations will produce.
Fourth, that this increasing demand for armaments, per- petually pushed as it will be by the governing classes, who have an interest in military extension and the extension of dependencies which give places for younger sons, will end in established conscription, which the working classes will above all others feel.
Fifth, that the organizations, established and dissenting, for teaching Christianity absolutely fail in their duty in check- ing these political burglaries everywhere going on, and that to their disgrace the preaching of justice and mercy has to be undertaken by rationalists.
I begin to see the meaning of that American senator who spoke of England as a " devil-fish among the nations," for here she is spreading out her arms all over the world and fixing her suckers perpetually in more and more places. There wants some one who, with a voice of thunder, will denounce all these abominations. And I wish you also would take part in such a crusade. It seems to me now more important than any- thing else. J
During the winter of 1888-9, when the Grant Aliens were abroad, he remained at Dorking, trying now this remedy, now that, to relieve the loneliness that weighed upon him. The social intercourse he considered good for him was not easy to get or to keep. Thus he wards off a visit the Tyndalls proposed making : " My friends are my worst enemies, and I have to be continually on my guard against them, and especially friends in whom I am most interested, and conversation with whom is most likely to become animated. Humdrum people I am not much afraid of." Nor was he afraid of children. For this unfailing source of happiness he was again indebted to Mrs. W. H. Cripps, who " lent " him two of her children for a fortnight. After their return home he sent their mother a letter which reveals his painstaking solicitude for what he considered the welfare of those with whom he had anything to do.
1 "The above was sent to Mr. Auberon Herbert unsigned along with a letter suggesting that he should hand it on in that form. I did not wish my name mentioned because it would give a handle against me and impede my usefulness in other directions." [Note by Spencer.]
286 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xix.
To MRS. W. H. CRIPPS.
17 December, 1888.
I was glad to get your letter saying that the children had arrived safely. I am glad that you found them so much better.
Do not put down the improvement to Dorking as a place. The hills around condense fog when it is fine elsewhere, and the climate is relaxing. . . .
The difference in their state is almost exclusively due to difference of regimen. I stopped the tepid bath in the morning and gave them hot. Chilling the skin, with their state of lungs, is very detrimental. They were, as you have seen, more thickly clothed both indoors and out, and they ought to have flannel next the skin all over. The bare or ill-clothed legs which the present fashion of children's dresses involves is the cause of no end of illnesses, and undermines no end of constitutions. Further, their necks should be clothed. With their delicate mucous membranes and liability to colds, the skin around the throat should be protected.
While with me they had animal food three times a day — substantial breakfast at half-past 8, including fish, egg or bacon, along with their bread and milk, and this enabled them to go on until dinner-time at 1, without anything between. At dinner they had as much meat and other food as they liked. Then there was a slight meal at half-past 4, and another substantial animal food meal at 7. Moreover they were checked in drink- ing so much water at meals. They had got into a morbid craving for water which was detrimental. This was very easily broken, and improved their digestions. I did not send them to bed so early as they commonly go. Sending children to bed before they are sleepy is a mistake, and too much bed lowers the action of the heart.
I found it undesirable that they should have all their morning exercise at once — their wralk after lessons was too long with their present state. I sent them out when the weather per- mitted for a quarter of an hour before they began their lessons, and then for a short time after their lessons.
Judy should not be allowed to read or tell stories in the evening, but should be occupied by some mechanical game or amusement. Her brain is excitable, and her occupations before going to bed should be quiet ones.
Pray do not regard my advice as that of a theorist. I think you will see that the results of my regimen have proved to be eminently practical.
To RICHARD POTTER.
7 February, 1889.
You speak of having been to Yew Tree. I well remember my visit there in 1848 — remember, too, my first meeting with you there, and further remember that I thought you the most
1886-89] Factors of Organic Evolution 287
gentlemanly young fellow I had ever seen. I have heard you speak disparagingly of yourself in early days, but your self- depreciation is all nonsense.
I should be very glad could I visit you at the Argoed in the summer, but I see little chance of doing so. ... However, there is no knowing what may happen.
About the middle of March, 1889, he returned to London. "Save some additions to the Autobiography," writes Mr. Troughton, " the nine month's stay at Dorking were barren of achievement in the way of serious work." Wishing to be near the Athenaeum, he stayed for a short time at a private Hotel in St. James' Place. Early in April he was back at Queen's Gardens worrying himself over a statement of Rev. Dr. J. Wilson's in the Aberdeen Free Press that in 1844, when on the staff of the Birmingham Pilot, he wrote articles for that paper on " Sociology." The reading of this gave him a " disagreeable shock," as bearing on his relation to Comte, and led to correspondence with Dr. Wilson, which left "the matter in a muddle" owing to Dr. Wilson's memory being " treacherous." In this emer- gency he turned for help to Mr. Frederic Harrison, who was requested to be good enough to send some one to the British Museum to examine the entire file of the short-lived Pilot, and make a copy of the titles of all the leading articles. Mr. Harrison thought such a search unnecessary. "Your contention is so clearly right, and Mr. Wilson's memory so obviously untrustworthy as against yours, that I should think your denial in a brief letter to the Pall Mall Gazette would be ample, and would satisfy every one." Spencer, however, repeated his request to have the file examined. On this being clone, a letter was sent to the Pall Mall Gazette, showing how unfounded Dr. Wilson's statements were.
On his 69th birthday he penned what he probably regarded at the time as the closing paragraphs of the Autobiography (ii., 413). In May he wrote the preface to Mr. Collins's Epitome, about which there had been corres- pondence during the previous ten months — correspondence showing how anxious he was to keep clear of all implica- tions of responsibility for that work. " You can adopt what size, style, and type, &c., you please. In respect of
288 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP.
binding, however, I should wish the independence of the volume manifest."
There came a pressing invitation from Mr. Manton Marble, that he would spend three months next winter with him and his wife on their dahabeah on the Nile. " We can offer you spacious, comfortable quarters (which implies solitude as much as you like), an excellent table, absolute freedom from cost or care, lazy days and quiet nights. . . . If you have a favourite tipple or a special food we will procure them ; if you have a favourite game we will learn it ; when you would be let alone we will ignore your existence ; when you would bestow your tediousness upon us we will give it welcome. . . . Were you to become dis- appointed in any way, or weary and prefer return, Cook and Son's steamers would always afford ea^y escape." Spencer could only regret that his health precluded accept- ance of this generous offer. He was about this time re- minded of the qualified answrer given in February to an invitation to come to the Argoed, in Monmouthshire.
To RICHARD POTTER.
28 May, 1889.
Would that it were possible for me to yield to your kind pressure and visit the Argoed, but unhappily it is quite out of the question. . . .
How likely I should be to visit you, if I dared, you may judge by the fact that I am at present advertizing for country quarters during the summer months. . . . Even did I find some place that met my requirements in other respects there would still be lacking that which I above all things want — the com- panionship of those I care about. You may judge then how gladly I would come to the Argoed if I could get there.
There was no lack of replies to his advertisement for summer quarters, but his numerous and peculiar require- ments were not easily met. Armed with a long list of points to be considered, his secretary was sent hither and thither, taking notes of the house and its inmates; the proximity of poultry, dogs, church bells, railways ; the salubrity of the air and the resources of the surrounding country for drives, &c. "Curiously enough," says Mr. Troughton, " after a series of disappointments, the last
1886-89] Factors of Organic Evolution 289
reply to the advertisements brought the desired haven of rest. At a place near Pevvsey, in Wiltshire, I found a habitat which answered almost perfectly to what ' was wanted." Meanwhile, tired of boarding house life, he was on the look out for a permanent house of his own in London. In due course he was introduced to the
Misses , with whom an arrangement was come to
and a house in Avenue Road, Regent's Park, was chosen.
To JOHN TYNDALL.
12 June, 1889.
I have found a place in Wiltshire which promises to serve me pretty well for my summer months ; . . . They asked for references and I ventured to name you as one. ... I end with a startling fact : — I have taken a house in St. John's Wood, and am going to have three maiden ladies to take care of me ! This is in pursuance of an idea I have contemplated for nearly a year.
While he was at Pevvsey there appeared Tenniel's cartoon in Punch of 17 August — " Out in the Cold," in which the First Lord of the Treasury, glancing over the Pension List, says to Unfortunate Genius : " Let me see ; Civil List — Literature, Science, and Art ! H'm ! I'm afraid, my poor friend, you're hardly eligible. You're not a Foreign Prince, nor a titled Poet, nor the relative of an Ambassador or Policeman — ." To this Spencer attached the following memorandum : —
I am rejoiced to see this cartoon. It ought to make Tennyson wince. To my thinking he has been disgraced for these many years past by continuing to receive a pension, when he had no longer any need for it — to receive it, too, out of a small fund intended for necessitous men of letters and science, and quite inadequate to meet the legitimate claims upon it, (if any such claims are, as a matter of public policy, to be regarded as legitimate).
The pension which Tennyson has continued to receive was given to him when a young man and before he met with much public recognition, and at a time when, as I was told, loss of nearly all he possessed in an imprudent speculation put him into difficulties ; so that, at that time, there was, if such pensions are to be given at all, a valid reason for giving him one. He has continued to retain this pension up to his 80th year, notwithstanding the fact that for these many years past
19
290 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xix.
he has been a comparatively wealthy man — so wealthy as to be able to have two country houses. I believe his works bring him in several thousands a year, which in fact, is implied by the style of his living. So that he has continued to retain this pension, when he was perfectly able to dispense with it, and has, by doing so, withheld it from some more or less meritorious person who was in real need.
What a contrast is afforded by the conduct of Harriet Martineau, who, although without other means than such as she obtained by hard work with her pen, and enabled by that hard work only to achieve a small income, nevertheless when a pension was offered to her, refused it — preferred rather to continue her hard work, and a moderate pittance, than receive any public money — probably disapproving of expenditure of public money for such purposes.
The antithesis is a strange one between this nobility of the political economist, who is supposed to be by nature hard and prosaic, and the meanness of the poet supposed to be by nature so noble in feeling.
My admiration for Tennyson has been, for these many years past, largely discounted by the consciousness of this conduct of his.
To T. H. HUXLEY.
28 September, 1889.
And so you are building a house at Eastbourne, I hear. I thought that even taking a house at my age was rather an eccentric proceeding, after having all my life lived in lodgings or in a boarding-house, but that you should be at your age building one suffices to make me feel that I am not so eccentric after all. . . .
How are you after your sojourn in Switzerland ? Though I heard of your call I did not hear of your health. I hope you profited as before, and that you have come back in good train- ing for another bout of fisticuffs with the theologians.
The progress of evolutionary ideas on the continent during the years covered by this chapter was not striking. To keep alive the interest in his philosophy, to say nothing of increasing it, new works from his pen were needed, but since the publication of " The Factors of Organic Evolu- *tion " early in 1886 there had been nothing to arrest the attention of foreigners, and to remind them that he was still a living force. But in 1888 he was embarrassed on hearing that, on the occasion of the eighth centenary of the University of Bologna, he had been made a Doctor of the
1886-89] Factors of Organic Evolution 291
Juridical Faculty. Replying to Signer Tullio Martello he said he was glad to thus receive a clear verification of the belief that his books had obtained considerable acceptance in Italy. The election had, however, placed him in an awkward position. Up to the present time he had habitually declined all honorary degrees and academic honours ; and from the position he had taken up it was difficult to retreat. On the other hand, the flattering manner in which the authorities of the University of Bologna had conferred the degree made it difficult for him to decline without appearing to slight this expression of their appreciation. "Thus, you will see, that between my feelings and convictions I am placed in a dilemma from which there appears to be no escape."
Early in the following year he found himself in a similar predicament, on learning that the Royal Danish Academy had elected him a member. With his letter to Professor Hoffding declining the honour, he sent a copy of his letter to the French Academy, which, he said, "will show the Council of the Royal Danish Academy what my reasons are, and that it is not from undervaluing the honour they have conferred that I take the course I do."1
* Supra, chap, xvii., p. 233.
292
CHAPTER XX.
IN DEFENCE OF FREEDOM AND JUSTICE.
(September, 1889— December, 1891.)
HE had looked forward to uninterrupted progress with the Ethics, and was disappointed to find how much of his time was used up by matters which did not advance his undertaking. Delay in getting the lease of his house drawn up and signed led him to write to the owner : " It seems to me that a lawyer who does business in this style ought to lose his clients." The turn of landlords for reproof came in a letter to his solicitor on observing that a clause restricting his liabilities for repairs had not been inserted. "The fact that there was not any such clause — and I suppose there is habitually no such clause — shows how abominably the interests of the landlord alone are con- sidered, and those of the tenant ignored." He began to accept invitations to evening parties — a thing he had not done for several years. His old interest in the affairs of the Athenaeum revived. Wishing habitual diners to be represented on the Committee, he urged a fellow member to take the matter up. " 1 don't like to raise the question myself. ... I am well known to the manager as a very candid critic, who is continually asking for his attendance to receive complaints, and I do not want to become more objectionable than I am." He was instrumental in getting Mr. (now Baron) Kentaro Kaneko, the Japanese statesman, made an honorary member of the Club in the spring of 1890. This was the beginning of their personal acquain- tance. Familiarity with Spencer's writings dated back some years, Count Ito and Mr. Kaneko having made a careful study of his books during the five years they were engaged in revising the Japanese Constitution. In the following year, after returning to Japan, Mr. Kaneko solicited
1 889-9 l] Freedom and Justice 293
Spencer's advice on the problem his country was trying to solve: — "Whether Asiatic nations can come into the circle of European Constitutional States."
When account is taken of the fever of excitement that overtook him at the end of iSSg,1 one can read between the lines of the following New Year's greeting and realize that it was not a mere form of words when he said that he envied the equanimity and cheerfulness of his friend.
To RICHARD POTTER.
29 December, 1889.
MY DEAR OLD FRIEXD, — I send you a New Year's greeting along with my best wishes for your recovery from the serious relapse you have been suffering under.
Letters from one or other of the family have from time to time given me news of you which, unsatisfactory in so far as the continuance of your feeble state is concerned, have yet been satisfactory in telling of your continued cheerfulness. It is an immense thing to have so happy a nature. To have so long preserved not only a state of equanimity and content, but to have found more pleasure during invalid life than most persons find during health, is an achievement not reached by one in a hundred or perhaps one in a thousand. In this respect I envy you your nature as well as your family surroundings.
FROM Miss YOUMAXS.
30 March, 1890.
Last Sunday [23 March] the New York Times published something like an attack upon you, and called attention editorially to the article. To-day your defenders have their say ; and I send you both series of articles. . . . There are various conjectures as to the reason of this start of the New York Times. Jay [her brother] thinks it is only a newspaper dodge to attract attention. Others imagine that there is a concerted movement to crush you over again. If this is the idea, it certainly looks discouraging for the attacking party.
Whether this was "a newspaper dodge" or a deliberate attack, Spencer thought it expedient to take notice of it, and wrote to Mr. Skilton, Secretary of the Brooklyn Ethical Association.
1 In/ra, chap, xxii., p. 329.
294 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xx.
To JAMES A. SKILTON.
8 April, 1890.
It is, I think, needful that the letter of " Outsider " and the editorial article upon it should be met. . . .
I enclose the draft of a letter which I think might fitly be sent to the New York Times. ... I presume you are acquainted with Dr. W. J. Youmans, and I think it would be well to consult him. Probably if he were to undertake the reply ... it would be the best. Standing as he does in closer relations to my affairs in the United States, through his intimate knowledge of all his brother has done, and being, therefore, publicly understood to be more fully in possession of the facts than any one else, the letter might with advantage issue from him, if he consents.
" Outsider's " letter was a revival of the question raised in the Nation twenty years before as to Spencer's reputation among specialists.1 Of the letters published up to 6th April, only one could be considered adverse. The editor felt constrained to ask : " Where are the foes of Spencer ? " " Outsider " intervened to say : " Let it not be supposed that I am attacking Spencerianism. ... At present I am only seeking light." Following upon other letters, mostly favourable, the issue of 2yth April — Spencer's birthday — was signalized by one from Dr. W. J. Youmans, giving " Outsider " the light he sought. Summing up the dis- cussion the editor remarked : " While Mr. Spencer's Syn- thetic Philosophy is still an ardent controversy, it may fairly be claimed by his adherents that his assailants have suffered more damage than he or his system in the contest that has raged around him during the last thirty years." In the issue of 4th May, " Outsider " admitted that Dr. W. J. Youmans's letter, " without of course sufficing to put his [Spencer's] philosophy beyond doubt, does satisfactorily answer the question to which I gave special prominence." With the discussion which thus closed on his seventieth birthday Spencer had no reason to be dissatisfied. A reso- lution passed by the Brooklyn Ethical Association also afforded him much gratification.
1 Supra, chap, xii., p. 150.
1 889-9 !] Freedom and Justice "295
To JAMES A. SKILTON.
10 May, 1890. .
Those who in the past have devoted their lives to the diffusion of ideas have usually had much to suffer and have met with little appreciation during their lives. Remembering the fates of such, I may regard myself as extremely fortunate. If, during the first half of my literary career, the losses were great and the encouragements small, yet the latter half has made amends ; and I may well be more than satisfied alike with the material results and the effects produced, as well as with the marks of appreciation which have been coming to me more and more frequently.
Of all his undertakings the most disappointing had been the Descriptive Sociology. But even that cloud was not without a bit of silver lining. From time to time he received from Mr. E. T. C. Werner, of H.B.M. Consular Service in China, encouraging reports of the progress of the Descriptive Sociology of the Chinese, which Mr. Werner had voluntarily undertaken to prepare, without cost to Spencer, as far as compilation was concerned. In carrying on this work1 Mr.. Werner had much to contend against: heavy and often vexatious official duties, an exhausting climate, ill-health, &c. — hindrances which would have led one less enthusiastic to have given up the self-imposed task as impracticable. Of Mr. Werner's unselfish devotion to the work Spencer often spoke with much appreciation. It was another of the things which he said cheered him at a time of life when cheering things were not very common.
During the spring he completed for Mind an article on " Space Consciousness," which had been lying over since 1883. In view of a final edition of the Essays, he also wrote a postscript to "The Origin and Function of Music," which appeared in Mind for October.
The receipt of a copy of the late Miss Constance Naden's Induction and Deduction afforded him an opportunity of reiterating his long-formed convictions regarding the intel- lectual powers of women.
1 Now (1908) nearing completion.
296 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xx.
To ROBERT LEWINS.
PEWSEY, 10 June, 1890.
Very generally receptivity and originality are not associated, but in her they appear to have been equally great. I can tell you of no woman save George Eliot in whom there has been this union of high philosophical capacity with extensive acquisi- tion. . . . While I say this, however, I cannot let pass the occasion for remarking that, in her case as in other cases, mental powers so highly developed in women are in some measure abnormal and involve a physiological cost which the feminine organization will not bear without injury more or less profound.
He was on what he thought more uncertain ground when consulted by Mr. Malabari, of Bombay, on the subject of early marriage in India.
To BEHRAMJI M. MALABARI.
20 July, 1890.
Although I have not studied Indian affairs to any extent, I can understand the difficulty felt by Anglo-Indian authorities in dealing with questions like that which you raise. Doubtless they are impressed, and in a large measure rightly impressed, with the belief that it is impolitic for one race to interfere with the customs of another race, the character and feelings of which are in a considerable degree incomprehensible to it. Certainly it is a mistake to assume, as many do, that the institutions found good for one people will be good for another, and it is the perception of this mistake that causes the inaction of the Indian Government. . . .
I incline to agree with you, however, that the passivity of the Government in relation to native usages may be carried too far. Marriage is rightly to be regarded as a contract. A con- tract implies unconstrained assent of the contracting parties, and it implies also that they shall be of such age as to be capable of understanding the responsibilities to which the con- tract commits them. ... In neither of these respects does the Indian usage fulfil the requirements. The union is not the result of a voluntary contract, and those who enter into it are not of fit age to make it even though voluntary.
It may be a question whether under such circumstances the State may not go to the extent of ignoring the contract, and declining to administer in all matters concerning it or growing out of it. ...
Whether this would or xvould not be too strong a measure can be decided only by those who know more of the conditions of things in India than I do.
1 889-9 l~\ Freedom and Justice 297
To PROFESSOR TYNDALL.
22 August, 1890.
Unless the Alps have been in an island of good weather amidst the ocean of bad weather which seems to have pervaded pretty nearly the whole of the northern hemisphere, or at any rate the eastern half of it, I fear you have had a great deal of monotonous indoor life in your Alpine chalet. . . . You have not, I fancy, that faculty for idleness which I have, and, if prevented from going out, are obliged to busy yourself about something, instead of lounging about and letting your nervous system lie fallow as I do. . . .
I recently had with me again for three weeks my little friends, the children of Mrs. [W. H.] Cripps. . . . One of them, a little girl of 10, is organically good, and like another of the same sex of whom I have heard, gives one hopes of the pos- sibilities of human nature.
A small society at Oxford being about to discuss what Dr. Arnold called " the best authenticated fact in history," — the Resurrection — and recognizing that their " Theological Bias" led them to underestimate the difficulties in the way of accepting it, they requested Spencer to put down the main reasons for honestly doubting the fact.
To W. A. H. C. FREEMAXTLE.
29 October, 1890.
Naturally I am interested in your letter telling me of the effects made by reading the Study of Sociology by your friend and yourself. Its aims were altogether social and political, and it never occured to me that it might have any theological influence. . . .
But though it is out of the question for me to furnish you with direct reasons for doubt, I can furnish you with some indirect reasons of a sufficiently weighty kind. I can give you from my own experience four instances which have occurred during the last twenty years, showing the extreme untrust- worthiness of human testimony. [The four unfounded state- ments were that he was present at the funeral of Mr. Odger, at the unveiling of the memorial statue to Mr. Fawcett, at the funeral of Lord and Lady Dalhousie, and that he had written articles on Sociology for the Birmingham Pilot.'] Here then are the testimonies of eye-witnesses, ordinarily to be regarded as conclusive evidence. And all this occurred within a period covering but a fourth part of my life, and in an age of the world when men are more critical and less credulous than they were two thousand years ago. As there is no reason for supposing that my experiences of the invalidity of testimony are peculiar,
298 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xx.
it is manifest that there must be multitudinous "cases daily occurring of apparent clear proofs which are not proofs. 1 If so, what are the probabilities respecting the testimony on which you rely for believing in these alleged breaches of the order of nature ?
The credibility of testimony was again touched upon the month following, on one of the numerous occasions when the " billiard story " was going the rounds.
To Miss BEATRICE POTTER.
20 November, 1890.
When you meet with a newspaper statement about me extract the square root and that will give you about the ratio of the fact to the fiction in it. I have not been in the Senior United Service Club for five years, and I never played any such game as that described, nor ever made any such remark a propos of one. The sole basis of truth in it is that I have occasionally repeated as the saying of a friend of mine, that to play billiards well is a sign of an ill-spent youth. All the rest is dressing.
The billiard story which year after year went the round of the press, with slight variations to suit the tastes of different classes of readers, is a striking example of the wonderful perversions these gossiping stories undergo. Some six or seven months before Spencer's death it ap- peared in T. P.'s Weekly (13 May, 1903), the scene being laid this time not in the United Service Club, but in the Athenaeum. At the request of the present writer Spencer dictated to his secretary the following :
One afternoon some ten years ago, when seated in the billiard room of the Athenaeum Club, it was remarked to me by the late Mr. Charles Roupell (an Official Referee of the High Court of Justice) that to play billiards well was a sign of an ill-spent youth. Whether there was or was not any game going on at the time I cannot remember, but I am sure he would not have a made a remark in any way offensive to any one in the room.
In the course of that autumn or a subsequent autumn, when we had our interchange of visits with the United Service Club
1 Such as the statement made to the present writer in 1898 by a Jesuit father who had been informed by a Jesuit priest who had recently been at St. Leonards and knew Spencer " that Herbert Spencer had become a strict ritualist."
1 889-9 T] Freedom and Justice 299
opposite, I repeated this saying of Roupell's — repealed^ I say, not giving any implication that it was an idea of my own, and most positively not making it in reference either to any game I was playing or had played, or in reference to games played by any one else : it was absolutely dissociated from anybody, and was simply uttered by me as an abstract proposition. This abstract proposition presently made its appearance in, I presume, one or other evening paper. In the first version, I think a young Major was the other party to the story. Then from time to time it went the round of the papers, and having dropped for a while, re-appeared in other papers (provincial included), always with variations and additions : the result being a cock-and-bull story, having no basis whatever further than the fact that I once repeated this saying of Roupell's apropos of nobody. l
The Liberty and Property Defence League claimed "his sympathy in virtue of the resistance it made to socialistic legislation. But, he informed the secretary in February, 1890 : "Though I am quite willing to aid pecuniarily, I am desirous that my aid should not be publicly interpreted into membership of the League." In succeeding years his faith in it was shaken, owing to its having become, as he thought, an organization for upholding property rather than liberty. In 1890, however, he still had faith in it, and sought to turn it to account in resistance to the growing burdens and encroachments of municipal bodies.
To THE EARL OF WEMYSS.
PEWSEY, 10 June, 1890.
I have for some time past been looking for signs of re- sistance to be presently made by the over-taxed citizens of London. . . . Both on the part of the School Board and the County Council the movements are going in the direction which Mr. Henry George indicates as the right one — not to turn out the landlords, but to tax them out. Let but the- existing
1 One of the most absurd editions of the story appeared in The Golden Penny of 29 April, 1899. The game had gone against him. " Mr. Spencer's brow clouded. ' Sir,' he said, as the marker hastily scrambled under the table to allow uninterrupted discussion, 'moderate proficiency is a sign of a good education of the eye, the nerve, the hand : but your mastership of the game could have been acquired only by an ill-spent youth.' The philosopher was quite calm and collected, and not at all angry ; he merely broke his cue to see whether it was made of elm or oak, and found, as he had expected, that it was neither." Truly, a wonderful growth of a myth !
300 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xx.
socialistic policy be carried further and further, as it seems likely to be, and the revenues from property will be gradually swallowed up by public demands.
I write to you, thinking that the Liberty and Property Defence]|League might very properly initiate a resistance to the extravagant measures daily taken by these local governing bodies.
A month or two later his help was sought for a pro- jected volume of anti-socialist essays. On the ground that the book was an attempt to apply his own principles, he was appealed to, through Lord Wemyss, to do " what would be the making of this volume." Yielding to the pressure put upon him, he promised to write an Introduction, but he in his turn was not so successful in getting Lord Wemyss to contribute.
To THE EARL OF WEMYSS.
14 November, 1890.
As you pressed me into the ranks of the anti-socialist demonstration and I have yielded to your pressure, I have a certain claim to similarly press you.
I should be very glad if you would wind up the discussion by a brief paper, . . . emphasizing the truth which people so persistently ignore, that every step away from individualism is a step towards socialism, and that by repetition of such steps, socialism must inevitably be reached. Habitually the supporters of each muddling measure, . . . persist in thinking only of that particular measure, . . . and shut their eyes to the fact that multiplication of such measures year after year brings us nearer and nearer to that result which they, in common with others, profess to look upon with dread.
While sympathizing with the Hon. Auberon Herbert's pro- ject for a newspaper — Free Life — to advocate individualism, he expressed the fear that it would "entail considerable loss, and abandonment after a very short life."
To THE HON. AUBERON HERBERT.
1 January, 1890.
Of course you will put down my name as a subscriber. I say this without committing myself to agreement in respect of all points in your programme. From Home Rule, for example, I utterly dissent. All nations have been welded together not by peaceful and equitable means, but by violent and inequitable means, and I do not believe that nations could
1889-9!] Freedom and Justice 301
ever have been formed in any other way. To dissolve unions because they were inequitably formed I hold, now that they have been formed, to be a mistake — a retrograde step. Were it possible to go back upon the past and undo all the bad things that have been done, society would forthwith dissolve.
16 June. — I am myself almost hopeless of any good to be done [towards promoting individualism]. The drift of things is so overwhelming in the other direction, and the stream will, I believe, continue to increase in volume and velocity, simply because political power is now in the hands of those whose apparent interest is to get as much as possible done by public agency, and whose desires will be inevitably pandered to by all who seek public functions.
5 October. — I regret to see that Free Life is assuming what seems to me an unattractive aspect. When you initiated your scheme and made a commencement I did not expect much result, though, of course, I sympathized in every effort in the direction of individualism. I feared, too, that your doctrine of voluntary taxation would go very much against success, and, indeed, prejudice the individualist doctrine in general. . . .
Still as you continue your efforts in your original form, it seems to me best that they shall be made as effective as possible, and I am prompted to write expressing my regret that your form of presentation is less attractive than it was. The last number of Free Life is comparatively uninteresting in appearance — lacking sub-divisions and proper headings. In fact, while our press generally has been Americanizing the mode of editing in, as I think, an improper manner, you seem to be going in the other direction and discarding all elements of attraction.
22 October. — I think you are writing, or probably have written, an essay on the Ethics of Liberty, to be included in this volume of anti-socialist essays. Remembering what you said in a recent letter concerning your views on voluntary taxation — that you should presently furnish me with your defence — it occurs to me that this defence will possibly be contained in this essay. I hope this is not the case. If your essay contains these special views of yours they are sure to be commented upon as impracticable, and will be used as a handle against the doctrines contained in the volume as a whole. . . .
Will you forgive me if I say that you do not sufficiently bear in mind the organic badness of existing human nature and the resulting organic badness of any society organized out of exist- ing human nature. As I have elsewhere said, you cannot get golden conduct out of leaden instincts ; and men's instincts are at present in large measure leaden. Year by year and day by day [events] convince me more and more that there
302 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xx.
is only a certain amount of liberty of which men having a given nature are capable, and if a larger amount of liberty is given to them they will quickly lose it by organizing for them- selves some other form of tyranny. This is what is now going on. They have got by sundry electoral reforms more liberty than they are capable of using, and the result is that they are organizing for themselves the tyrannies of trade-unionism, and socialism, and socialistic legislation, which will [end by] putting them as much in bondage as before, if not more than before. Such being their natures, it is to me clear that they are far from being good enough for any such regime as that which you advocate.
When men are good enough for a system of voluntary taxation they will be good enough to do without any govern- ment at all.
"From Freedom to Bondage" was the heading chosen for his Introduction to A Plea for Liberty, under which title the volume of anti-socialist essays appeared at the beginning of 1891. As to portions of the Introduction, wrote Mr. Gladstone, " I ask to make reserves, and of one passage, which will be easily guessed, I am unable even to perceive the relevancy. But speaking generally, I have read this masterly argument with warm admiration and with the earnest hope that it may attract all the attention which it so well deserves." The passage alluded to was that in which reference was made to "the behaviour of the so-called Liberal party." Spencer thought it " not unnatural that Mr. Gladstone should disapprove of the passage to which he refers, but it is curious that he should fail to see its relevancy." Spencer's share of the profits of the volume was returned to Mr. Murray to be spent in distributing copies to Free Libraries and Reading Rooms.
He had for some time been urging the formation of an association for the defence of the interests of ratepayers. To secure a really effective protest he urged the merging of existing local ratepayers' leagues in the larger and more powerful one he wished to see formed, the policy of which should be directed more especially to the choice of members of the County Council and the School Board. His efforts were at length crowned with success, " The London Rate- payers' Defence League" being formed in August, 1891. 1
1 Standard, August 20.
1889-9!] Freedom and Justice 303
Interferences with individual liberty, either by the State or by local authorities or associations, were detected in the most innocent-looking proposals, as when he was solicited by the Hon. Auberon Herbert to co-operate in a movement for ensuring better ventilation in dwelling-houses.
To THE HON. AUBERON HERBERT.
14 May, 1891.
My belief is that far more mischief in the shape of cold or rheumatism results from draughts than from the breathing of air that is not quite pure, and that these evils would be greatly increased by further use of any of the ordinary measures for ventilation — measures which are habitually used in such ways as to entail serious danger. . . . But whatever may be the truth of the matter, one thing is quite clear — that your movement will inevitably be used in furtherance of State meddling notwithstanding the protest you make. I regret that I cannot in this matter co-operate with you.
Scientific scepticism, as in the above instance, often came to the aid of political disapproval. Declining to sign a memorial regarding rabies in the spring of 1890, he expressed himself as " sceptical with regard both to the present scare about rabies and the alleged specific for it." So it was with regard to vaccination. "Compulsory vac- cination I detest, and voluntary vaccination I disapprove."
That one so fond of children should be made to appear as an opponent of measures for preventing cruelty towards them seems anomalous — but only so long as his thorough- going individualism is overlooked. A few remarks made by him at a drawing-room meeting at the house of the Dowager Lady Stanley of Alderley, in connexion with the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, were, to his great surprise, published in the Pall Mall Gazette. Had he anticipated that his unpremeditated remarks were to be made public he would, he wrote, have taken care to emphasize more strongly the dangers which are likely to arise — illegitimate interference with parents, and a very objectionable system of intrusion into the domestic circle.1
The questions involved (he wrote again) are far-reaching — touching, indeed, some ultimate problems of social life. . . .
1 Pall Mall Gazette, 16 May, 1891.
304 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xx.
More and more the tendency is to absolve parents from their responsibilities, and to saddle these responsibilities on the com- munity. . . .
It is surprising with what light hearts people are led to abrogate the order of Nature and to substitute an order of their own devising. . . . And now it has come to be thought that these strong parental feelings . . . may with advantage be replaced by public sentiment working through State- machinery ! . . .
Respecting the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, the question is — Will it work towards the enforcing of parental responsibilities or towards the undermining of them ? To bring punishment on brutal and negligent parents seems, on the whole, a beneficial function. . . . Unfortunately, very innocent looking germs are apt to develop into structures which are anything but innocent.1
To THE Hox. GEORGE C. BRODRICK.
10 May, 1891.
I am much obliged to you for the copy of your Collected Essays and Speeches. . . . They contain a great mass of inform- ation and much sound reasoning, and already they have sug- gested to me a useful thought.
I am giving some illustrations of the numerous unexpected effects which a social cause eventually produces, and one of your essays reminds me of an instance, namely the effect that has been produced by the endeavour of landlords to control the votes of their tenants. This, I conceive, was the cause of short leases, and short leases have disastrously affected the investment of capital in land, and by so doing diminished its productiveness ; and now it appears that this cause, joined with others, is initiating, through the farmers of land, the disastrous interferences with contract, which will itself bring on multi- tudinous evils. . . .
There is a kindred instance of the vitiating of social arrange- ments by illegitimate efforts to obtain political power in the effects of the rating clauses as they affect small tenements, the rates of which are paid by the landlords. The dissociation of political power from the conscious bearing of political burdens is working out most disastrous, and, indeed, revolutionary effects.
These were some of the chief lessons of the newly- published volume on "Justice."
In June he was the recipient of an unexpected gift.
1 Pall Mall Gazette, 28 May, 1891.
1889-91] Freedom and Justice 305
To ANDREW CARNEGIE.
20 June, 1891.
I was alike astonished and perplexed on entering my room yesterday evening to see placed against the wall a magnificent grand piano, which was not there when I left home. For some time I was too much possessed by the surprising fact to have any coherent thoughts about its possible source. . . .
Well, I cannot do more than thank you heartily for so splendid a gift, which, daily before my eyes, cannot fail to bring you often to my thoughts. I have all along sympathized in your view respecting the uses of wealth, but it never occur- red to me that I should benefit by the carrying of your view into practice. Leaving out all other considerations, what an immensity of satisfaction of a high kind is obtained by its distribution during life, as compared with the pleasure obtained by one who heaps up and bequeaths. You are much to be envied for having the opportunity of so often and so largely experiencing this pleasure.
I hear that there is presently coming a selection of classical music, for which also thanks.
The correspondence with Professor Tyndall during 1891 was very voluminous. The first of the extracts now to be given relates to a visit to Hind Head House, Haslemere, the residence of Professor and Mrs. Tyndall, which fell through ; and the concluding one to a visit which did take place, and was memorable also as being the occasion on which the two friends met for the last time.
To JOHN TYNDALL.
24 February, 1891.
Yesterday I wrote to the Station-master at Haslemere, ask- ing him to order a cab to meet the 1 o'clock train and carry me up to Hind Head House. But as I lay awake last night, contemplating the four carriage drives and two railway jour- neys, I became impressed with the probability that a serious relapse would result from the expedition if I undertook it, and so, this morning I telegraphed a countermand.
I have been shocked to hear from Hirst of your having again to take to your bed in consequence of a second illness. . . . Let me urge you not to confine yourself to mutton and chicken. It is getting rather late for game, but partridges and pheasants are still to be had, and then in default of these, there are prairie hens from America, and ptarmigan from Norway. Wild ducks, too, I find digestible ; and then there are pigeons and quails. Not only is variety in kinds of food desirable, but also in cooking.
20
306 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xx.
*
1 April. — There is a wide difference between physical precipices and physiological precipices, and a head that may be fully trusted among the first may not be quite so trustworthy among the last.
2 April. — Yesterday afternoon Hirst gave me your postcard to read, and we exchanged expressions of pleasure at the im- proved prospects : thinking that the change for the better was so marked that rapid recovery might be expected. Shortly afterwards I took a postcard and wrote upon it, half in jest, half in earnest, the warning. I have been several days thinking of doing this, because it seemed to me that you were running risks that should be avoided.
4 April. — I have all along been fearful that your habit, so long cultivated, of successful daring, would tend to make you do things that are not prudent.
A renewed intention of visiting Hind Head just before going to Wiltshire was defeated by " an accumulation of excitements which put me quite wrong." The chief cause of this was that " I had foolishly let myself be entangled by an American interviewer, and on Friday afternoon I had an hour and a half's sharp work in revising his report."1
To JOHN TYNDALL.
PEWSEY, 4 July, 1891.
I hope you have progressed sufficiently to be out of doors, and that you are enjoying the summer's day as I am doing now, with larks singing overhead — an umbrella to keep off the excess of sun — and a young lady playing the part of amanuensis.
1 September. — On the llth instant I leave this and, instead of going straight back to town, make a detour. I have promised to spend a week at Mottisfont Abbey, the country place of my friends the Meinertzhagens. . . . When I leave Mottisfont, somewhere about the 18th, I propose to try and see you wherever you may be. If, as I suggested, you have gone to the Isle of Wight, or shall have gone there before the 18th, then I can, from Southampton, easily pass over to see you there ; but if you continue at Hind Head, I can, by a somewhat
1 This refers probably to a report of an interview with Spencer, which was published in the New York Mail and Express of October 5, 1891.
1 889-9 1] Freedom and Justice 307
•
round-about journey get to you there, and, if it is convenient, spend a night at your house.
The promised visit was paid at Hind Head. The letters, from which the above extracts have been taken, throw light upon certain traits of Spencer's character, showing how erroneous was the impression that his solicitude about his own health had its root in selfishness. True it is that his own ailments are diagnosed, their causes investigated, and the action of remedies traced with a tedious minuteness and frequency. But it is precisely the same with regard to the illnesses of his friends. His concern about himself, when placed side by side with his concern for others, is seen to have its source in an intellectual dissatisfaction which gave him no rest until he had probed every question to the bottom, and a sympathetic impulse which compelled him whenever he saw anything wrong to try to put it right.
To ROBERT BUCHANAN.
7 October, 1891.
Only yesterday did I finish The Outcast. ... I read through very few books, so you may infer that I derived much pleasure. There are many passages of great beauty and many others of great vigour, and speaking at large, I admire greatly your fertile and varied expression. One thing in it which I like much is the way in which the story is presented in varied forms as well as under various aspects.
One thing I wish you had done, which I have often con- tended should be done, namely, make the mode of expression vary with the subject matter and feeling, rising from rhythmical prose up to the most concentrated lyric. Long poems to me almost always seem monotonous, and the monotony is in large measure due to the uniformity in the style and versification. In style you have in this poem been varied enough, but I should have liked to see greater variety of versification. As a matter of art, too, if you will allow me to make such a suggestion, I should say that there is a tendency to redundancy, especially in descriptive passages. Your fertile imagination I think needs controlling by a tighter rein. . . .
I wish you would presently undertake a satire on the times. There is an immensity of matter calling for strong denunciation and display of white-hot anger, arid I think you are well capable of dealing with the signs of our times. More especially I want some one, who has the ability to do it with sufficient intensity of feeling, *£o denounce the miserable hypocrisy of our religious world with its pretended obser-
308 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xx.
vance of Christian principles side by side with the abomina- tions which it continually commits and countenances abroad. It might very well be symbolized as "The Impenitent Thief," and I should like you to nail it to the cross.
In our political life, too, there are multitudinous things which invite severest castigation — the morals of party strife and the way in which men are, with utter insincerity, sacrificing their convictions for the sake of political and social position, careless of the mischief which they are doing. I wish you would think this over.
Some weeks before this on reading Mr. Buchanan's notice of " Justice," he had written to the same effect.
I am glad you have taken occasion to denounce the hypocrisy of the Christian world ; ceaseless in its professions of obedience to the principles of its creed, and daily trampling upon them in all parts of the World. I wish you would seize every occasion which occurs (and there are plenty of them) for holding up a mirror, and showing to those who call them- selves Christians that they are morally pagans.
When towards the end of 1889 the Hon. Auberon Herbert suggested a new issue of Social Statics, Spencer pointed out that " Justice" would be a revised and fully matured exposition of the systematic part of that book. As for the rest of the book, he proposed to select such portions of it as seemed worth preserving, and to publish this abridgement and The Man versus The State as one volume. In this revision of his first book two main considerations guided him — the omission or modification of passages that no longer expressed his matured con- victions, and the omission of parts treated more systemati- cally in the Principles of Ethics. Pari passn, therefore, with the writing of "Justice" had proceeded these alterations in Social Statics; and as soon as "Justice" was published, he took steps to bring out this composite volume.
At the beginning of the year, when Mrs. Craig-Sellar had recalled to his memory the old times at Ardtornish, he had said : " I am glad to think that among those who peopled past scenes I figure as one not unpleasantly re- collected. As the steamer brought me away for the last time in August, 1883, I remember looking with melancholy eyes on the Ardtornish cliffs and thinking that I should never again see them — a presentiment which has proved
lo
8
1889-9!] Freedom and Justice 309
true." Those delightful bygone days were again brought to his remembrance towards the close of the year.
To Miss FLORA SMITH.
22 November, 1891.
You could scarcely have found a present giving me greater pleasure than did the four framed photographs you sent me yesterday : partly because of their intrinsic interest and partly because they came from you.
I have got admirable places for them. The portraits, fixed on each side of the mirror in my bedroom, will remind me of my highly valued friends every morning when I wake ; and the two landscapes, displacing two chromo-lithographs in my study, will face me daily as I work— so recalling the scenes in which my happiest days have been passed.
To W. VALENTINE SMITH.
18 December, 1891.
About three weeks ago I was pleased to have the company of your sisters here : Mrs. Sellar and children came to luncheon and Miss Smith shortly afterwards. She came prepared to fulfil a promise which she had made some time since to sing to me once again Tennyson's u Farewell,"1 which I so well remember as having heard on the occasion of my first visit to Achranich.
His aunt Anna was now the only link connecting him with his boyhood and youth. Writing to her in August he mentions the state of extreme prostration to which Mr. Richard Potter had been reduced by his long illness, and looks forward with deep sorrow to the approaching ter- mination of a friendship that had remained without a jar for about half a century, and that was interwoven with most of the leading events of his life. It carried his thoughts back to 1842, when he first became acquainted with Mrs. Potter's father — Mr. Lawrence Heyworth — whose great-grandchildren were now contributing to his happi- ness. The friendship now nearing its close had all along rested on genuine human affection and mutual esteem- not on community of ideas ; for Mr. Potter cared nothing for speculative doctrines, and had no sympathy whatsoever with Spencer's religious opinions. Mr. Potter died on January i, 1892.
The year closes with reminiscences of very early days.
1 Set to music by Edward Lear. Spencer was very fond of the song, and often asked Miss Flora Smith to sing it to him.
310 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xx.
To HIS AUXT ANNA.
28 December, 1891.
The receipt of Mrs. Jose's letter suggested to me on Christ- mas day something which will perhaps interest you. Last summer a very fine piano was presented to me by Mr. Andrew Carnegie, the American millionaire, and it was utilized for reviving my first memory of you in a way which you would perhaps hardly guess. When you were over in Derby during your marriage tour, and when I was a boy of perhaps nine or ten, an evening was spent at the house of my uncle John, and you gave us on the piano one of Beethoven's pieces. I have remembered it ever since, and it has always been a great favourite of mine, and on Christmas day I had it played to me by Miss Baker as being my earliest remembrance associated with you.
The incident recalled the second title of the first of Scott's novels — Waverhy—" It is sixty years since." What a great deal has passed since then, and how the recollection of it seems to shrivel up into nothing !
311
CHAPTER XXI.
ALTRUISM AS A FACTOR IN SOCIAL EVOLUTION.
(January, 1892— June, 1893.)
THE several parts of the Principles of Ethics were not written with that adherence to the order laid down in the original programme which had characterized the earlier volumes of the series. " The Data " had been given to the world in 1879, under the fear that his health might give way completely before he could reach it in ordinary course. Ten years after he again turned aside from the Sociology to write "Justice." Many things had happened during the decade showing how crude and distorted were the ideas entertained on this subject. Moreover, coinciding as it did to a large extent with the more systematic part of Social Statics, respecting parts of which his opinion had changed, the publication of " Justice" was desirable, both in vindica- tion of his consistency, and as a corrective to the con- clusions which, rightly or (as he thought) wrongly, were being drawn from the earlier work. This Part being off his hands about midsummer, 1891, he set about writing the remaining Parts. "The Inductions of Ethics" and "The Ethics of Individual Life" were issued in June, 1892, thus completing the first volume ; "Negative Benefi- cence" and "Positive Beneficence " — the concluding parts of the second volume — being published by midsummer of the following year.
To guard himself " from those errors of judgment that entail mischievous consequences " he solicited the criticisms of married lady friends on whose judgment he could rely — Mrs. Lecky, Mrs. Leonard Courtney, Mrs. Lynn Linton and Mrs. Meinertzhagen.
312 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxi.
To MRS. LECKY.
18 February, 1892.
I want one or two ladies to act as Grundyometers, and I have thought of you as an appropriate one. Would you be kind enough to tell me what you think of the enclosed : bearing in mind that I am compelled by the scheme of my u Inductions of Ethics " to give a large amount of this detail, objectionable though it is.
28 February. — Thank you very much for your letter and its criticisms. I will attend to the points you name, and by so doing avoid giving handles against me. I am glad to find that you do not think the general presentation of the subject objectionable.
27 May. — Again I put your function of Grundyometer in requisition. Here are two chapters on "Marriage" and " Parenthood," in respect of which I should like the opinion of some ladies.
The Standard (i July) embraced the occasion of the appearance of the completed first volume to give an outline of the work he had accomplished during the past fifty years. Though during the past decade he had " been abso- lutely at issue on fundamental principles with what still describes itself as the Liberal Party," he would not, said the Standard, find much comfort in calling himself a Con- servative, " for there, too, he would find what he regards as the socialistic poison at work with undeniable, if not equal activity." Unqualified acceptance of his views he did not value very highly. As he said in March, 1892, when thank- ing Count Goblet d'Alviella for a copy of the Hibbert Lectures on L'Idee de Dieu : —
That there should be a considerable amount of community of thought between us is, of course, satisfactory to me, and that there should be also some points of difference is quite natural. One who adheres to a doctrine in all its details is commonly one who has not much independence and originality of thought, and whose adhesion therefore is of less significance.
The Ethics were laid under contribution for what he calls " a remarkable tribute of appreciation " — a calendar of quotations from his works for every day in the year, compiled by Miss Julia R. Gingell, and afterwards published as a volume of Aphorisms.
1892-93] Altruism in Social Evolution 313
The unauthorized publication of biographical details by those who came in contact with him in home life or in business was naturally looked upon as a breach of confi- dence. This will explain the earlier portions of the follow- ing letter to a former secretary.
To W. H. HUDSON.
27 May, 1892.
When some time since I saw in the Review of Reviews extracts from your article in the Arena, I felt inclined to write to you disapprovingly, expressing the opinion that you ought not to have published these biographical details, reproduced here, without my assent. I did not carry out my intention, however.
And now that I have met in the Popular Science Monthly with the report of your lecture delivered at Ithaca, I find myself called to write rather in the opposite sense ; feeling that what I had before to say in the way of disapproval is now more than counter-balanced by what I have to say in the way of approbation. ... I did not know, until I came to read this article, that you had so thoroughly grasped the Synthetic Philosophy in its nature and bearings. . . . You have decidedly done me a service in putting forward so clearly the origin and development of the doctrine of evolution, and by correcting, so far as correction is possible, the erroneous views that are current respecting my relations to Darwin.1
Notwithstanding a formal refusal to write a leaflet for the Ratepayers' Defence League he eventually yielded and prepared a short paper on " County Council Tyranny" in carrying out the Public Healtfi Act. The League had played an active and successful role in the School Board elections held towards the end of 1891. He himself was invited to allow himself to be nominated as an Alderman by the Moderate party in the London County Council. Though the invitation expressly stated that he was not to be asked "for any promise of regular attendance," he regretted that neither his work nor his health would permit of acceptance. " To sit out a debate, even were I to take no part in it, would make me ill for a month." The pro- posed nomination having been announced in the Press he wished equal publicity to be given to his refusal. The
1 See Hudson's The Philosophy of Herbert Spencer, chaps, i. and ii.
3 H Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxi.
publication of his letter in the Standard (March 14, 1892) afforded the text for a skit, headed, " The Philosopher and the Sufficient Reason," in the Saturday Reriezt'.
He was opposed to the extension through St. John's Wood of the Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire Rail- way (now the Great Central), unless safeguards were adopted to protect residents from the usual railway nuisances.
To THE EARL OF WEMYSS.
1 June, 1892.
I have decided to put down in writing the essential things I have to say apropos of this new line through St. John's Wood.
For a generation past the stupid English public have tamely submitted to the enormous evil inflicted upon them by railway companies at every large town in the kingdom — the evil of peace disturbed day and night by the shrieks of railway whistles. With their dull, bovine unintelligence they have let it be tacitly assumed that railway companies, and even private manufacturers, have a right to make noises of any degree of loudness, with any degree of frequency, at whatever times they please. . . . These daily aggressions on hundreds of thousands of people — to some serious and to all annoying — ought to be peremptorily forbidden, even had railway companies to suffer in consequence considerable inconvenience and cost. But they need suffer no inconvenience and no cost. This immense nuisance is wholly superfluous — nay more than that, it is con- tinued at the same time that there might be a signalling system far more efficient, while entailing relatively little annoyance.
In a note to Lord Wemyss (30 October, 1892) declining an invitation to preside at the annual meeting of the Rate- payers' Defence League, he refers again to the " dull, bovine unintelligence " of his countrymen.
I quite agree with you in your belief that little or nothing can be' done to check the increasing drift towards socialism, unless the ratepayers can be roused to action. But unhappily the English people, and perhaps more than others the middle classes, are too stupid to generalize. A special matter im- mediately affecting them, like the Trafalgar Square meeting, may rouse them to action ,£but they cannot be roused to action by enforcing upon them a general policy. The results are too remote and vague for their feeble imaginations.
His rooted objection to giving bodies of men powers that may be exercised to the detriment of individuals and
1892-93] Altruism in Social Evolution 315
ultimately to the injury of the public comes out in a letter to Dr. T. Buzzard, who had asked for his signature to a petition then being signed with a view to obtain a charter for what is now the Royal British Nurses Association.
To T. BUZZARD.
15 March, 1892.
I greatly regret that I cannot yield to your request, but I cannot do so without going contrary to my well-established beliefs.
If the proposed measure were likely to end where it is now proposed to end I should not object, but I feel a strong conviction that it will riot end there, but will be a step towards further organization and restriction, ending in a law that no hired nurse may practice without a certificate — a restriction upon individual liberty to which I am strongly opposed.
I have been for many years observing how changes, which it was supposed would stop where they were intended, have gone on to initiate other changes far greater than the first. . . .
The certificating of a nurse can insure only that she has a due amount of technical knowledge. It cannot secure sym- pathy and cannot secure unwearying attention. . . .
At the present time there is a mania for uniformity, which I regard as most mischievous. Uniformity brings death, variety brings life ; and I resist all movements towards uniformity.
Not only did he object to the obstruction by the Irish party of useful legislation until Home Rule had been granted,1 but he objected also to Home Rule itself.
To THE EARL OF DYSART.
27 May, 1892.
I regret to see by the papers that you have become a Home Ruler. In my early days I held the unhesitating opinion that self-government was good for all people, but a life passed in acquiring knowledge of societies in all stages has brought a decided change of opinion. The goodness of these or those institutions is purely relative to the natures of the men living under them.
3 June. — The political question I must leave untouched, but I enclose you some paragraphs recently taken from an American publication respecting the administration of justice in Chicago, which will serve to illustrate the truth I before
1 Supra, chap, xvii., p. 247.
316 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxi.
pointed out that political arrangements are of small value where there does not exist a character adapted to them.
A memorandum dated June, 1892, describes a project he had entertained since 1865, when he wrote the article on " Political Fetichism." It seemed to him " that immense advantage would be derived if the Acts of Parliament that have been tried and repealed during all these past centuries could be brought together in such wise as that any one could easily see what they were passed for, what evils they were to meet, what provisions were made, what effects were produced, and what are the reasons given for repeal, joined of course with the dates." Mr. Wordsworth Donisthorpe had already made an experiment in this way, but the thing could be done satisfactorily only if some one would furnish means of defraying the great cost. The matter fell through owing to the financial support Spencer had hoped for not being forthcoming.1 How reluctant he was to abandon it may be gathered from the following letters.
To W. DONISTHORPE.
30 May, 1892.
I should like to see these sample pages in a finished form, with the corrections and additions made as you have written them in red ink. I am quite prepared to be at any such extra cost as is entailed by making these alterations, for I am very desirous to preserve a finished sample of the proposed tables. I do not think I have named before what would be an essential part of the thing when completed — a Subject- Index, so drawn up as to make it easy to find, under each division and sub- division and sub-subdivision, all the various Acts of Parliament referring to any one particular topic. The enclosed sketch will show what I mean.
17 June. — Thanks for the final impression of the table. I think before the type is distributed you should certainly have a considerable number of extra proofs. ... I suggest this, because I have still hopes that something may be done. The thing is so manifestly important — would be so immensely instructive and so immensely useful, that I think if it is pro- perly put before those interested there may be the needful funds raised. ... It might be not amiss to send one of these
1 Various Fragments, p. 125.
1892-93] Altruism in Social Evolution 317
final copies with the additional columns to Mr. Carnegie, along with some explanation of the index and mode of reference. I wish you would speak to Lord Wemyss and the Earl of Pembroke, saying that you have been doing the thing at my suggestion and that I think it is supremely important. Pray let me have the printer's bill.
Life among the trees and the birds, and the companion- ship of Mr. and Mrs. Potter's grandchildren, had been looked forward to long before the time came for the annual holiday of 1892. From Pewsey he wrote to Miss Baker in July :—
I get a good deal of sitting out of doors under the trees bordering the croquet lawn, where I do the greater part of my work. . . . Yesterday, as I sat there, hearing from time to time the cooing of a wild dove which had a nest close at hand, I heard singing at the same time two skylarks, one woodlark, two chaffinches, a goldfinch, and a linnet, and at other times there are frequently singing blackbirds, thrushes, robins, besides other birds of which I do not know the names.
The return home of Mrs. Meinertzhagen's children, who had spent a few weeks with him at Pewsey, afforded an opportunity for setting forth one of the applications of what he regarded as an important, but neglected subject — the Physics of Physiology.1
To MRS. MEINERTZHAGEN,
PEWSEY, 20 August, 1892.
I was glad to get your note and to find from it that you all thought that the children were looking very well. We all thought here that they had greatly improved during their stay.
May I make a suggestion with respect to clothing ? . . . There is an enormous amount of mischief consequent upon the uneven circulation which is caused by uneven covering. The rationale of the matter is a very simple one. The vascular system constituted by the heart and by the ramifying system of blood vessels is a closed cavity having elastic walls. Of necessity, if you constrict the walls of any part of this cavity, the blood has to go somewhere, and it is thrust into some other
Supra, chap, viii., p. 96.
318 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxi.
parts of the cavity. If the constriction is great and extends over a considerable area, the pressure of blood throughout the unconstricted vessels becomes great and if any of them are feeble they dilate, producing local congestion. . . . This, if the cold and consequent constriction are long continued, is productive of mischief — in some cases extreme mischief. This is very well shown by the effects of wading among salmon-fishers when they are not extremely strong. I have myself experienced the result in producing increased conges- tion of the brain. ... A friend of mine, the late Prof. Sellar, also a nervous subject had to leave off wading when salmon fishing, because it forthwith produced palpitation of the heart. . . . The internal organs of the body are the parts which have their blood-vessels unduly distended by the pres- sure, and if any of them are feebler than the rest, more or less disturbance of function results. In one case, and a most common one, there may be congestion of the respiratory mem- branes and a cold or a cough, but in other cases the congestion is in the alimentary canal and some bowel attack results. . . . The thing to be aimed at in clothing is such a distribution of covering as shall keep all parts evenly warmed. . . .
Excuse my long lecture, but whenever I see what seems to me an evil I cannot avoid making an effort to rectify it.
Leading Japanese statesmen, resident in or visiting London, were wont to consult him on matters bearing on the changes their country was passing through. He was not without misgivings when he thought of the risks incident to the coming together of an oriental and an occidental civilization. As regards internal affairs he was impressed with the danger of granting political power at once to a people hitherto accustomed to despotic rule. With reference to external or international affairs, he coun- selled a policy, not of isolation, but of resistance to interfer- ence by foreigners. This, it must be remembered, was long before Japan had proved herself able to hold her own against a European power. What was present to his mind was the danger that, by means of treaties or other agree- ments Japan might give foreigners a foothold on her terri- tory, such as China had given.
On his way to a meeting of the Institut de Droit Inter- national at Geneva, Mr. Kentaro Kaneko sought to renew the intercourse he had enjoyed with Spencer two years before.
1892-93] Altruism in Social Evolution 319
To KEXTARO KANEKO.
PEWSEY, 21 August, 1892.
Probably you remember I told you that when Mr. Mori, the then Japanese Ambassador, submitted to me his draft for a Japanese Constitution, I gave him very conservative advice, contending that it was impossible that the Japanese, hitherto accustomed to despotic rule, should, all at once, become capable of constitutional government.
My advice was not, I fear, duly regarded, and so far as I gather from the recent reports of Japanese affairs, you are experiencing the evils arising from too large an instalment of freedom.
23 August. — Since writing to you on Sunday it has recurred to me, in pursuance of my remarks about Japanese affairs and the miscarriage of your constitution, to make a suggestion giving in a definite form such a conservative policy as I thought should be taken.
My advice to Mr. Mori was that the proposed new institu- tions should be as much as possible grafted upon the existing institutions, so as to prevent breaking the continuity — that there should not be a replacing of old forms by new, but a modifica- tion of old forms to a gradually increasing extent. I did not at the time go into the matter so far as to suggest in what way this might be done, but it now occurs to me that there is a very- feasible way of doing it.
You have, I believe, in Japan still surviving the ancient system of family organization. . . . Under this family or patri- archal organization it habitually happens that there exists in each group an eldest male ascendant, who is the ruling authority of the group — an authority who has in many cases a despotic power to which all descendants of the first and second genera- tions unhesitatingly submit. This organization should be made use of in your new political form. These patriarchs or heads of groups should be made the sole electors of members of your representative body. . . . Several beneficial results would arise. In the first place, your electorate would be greatly reduced in number, and therefore more manageable. In the second place, the various extreme opinions held by the members of each group would be to a considerable extent mutually can- celled and made more moderate by having to find expression through the patriarch who would in a certain measure be in- fluenced by the opinions of his descendants. And then, in the third place, and chiefly, these patriarchal electors, being all aged men, would have more conservative leanings than the younger members of their groups — would not be in favour of rash changes.
In pursuance of the principle for which I have contended,
320 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxi.
that free institutions, to which the Japanese have been utterly unaccustomed, are certain not to work well, and that there must be a gradual adaptation to them, I suggest that, for three or four generations, the assembly formed of representative men elected by these patriarchial heads of groups should be limited in their functions to making statements of grievances, or of evils or what they think evils, w^hich they wish to have remedied — not having any authority either to take measures for remedying them, or authority even for suggesting measures, but having the function simply of saying what they regard as grievances. This would be a function completely on the lines of the function of our own representative body in its earliest stages. . . .
After three or four generations during which this representa- tive assembly was powerless to do more than state what they thought were grievances, there might come three or four other generations in which they should have the further power of suggesting remedies — not the power of passing remedial laws, such as is possessed by developed representative bodies, but the power of considering in what way they thought the evils might be met, and then sending up their suggestions to the House of Peers and the Emperor.
And then, after this had been for generations the function of the representative body, there might eventually be given to it a full power of legislation, co-ordinate with that of the other two legislative authorities. Such an organization would make possible the long-continued discipline which is needful for use of political power, at the same time that it would at once do away with the possibilities of these quarrels from which you are now suffering.
The Japanese Constitution Mr. Kentaro Kaneko assured him, had been drawn upon conservative lines, owing largely to advice given by Spencer and others. While seeking permission to forward Spencer's two letters to Count Ito, Mr. Kaneko reminded him (24 August) that japan was now negociating with the Treaty Powers of Europe and America to revise the existing treaty. By the revision Japanese statesmen expected to open the whole Empire to foreigners and foreign capital, and there was much difference of opinion in regard to the restrictions to be put on foreigners (i) holding land, (2) working mines, and (3) engaging in the coasting trade. Mr. Kaneko then goes on to say :
One interesting question — viz., inter-marriage of foreigners with Japanese — is now very much agitated among our scholars
1892-93] Altruism in Social Evolution 321
and politicians. This question is one of the most difficult problems, and it falls within the scope of social philosophers ; therefore, your opinion will decide the case. Can I be per- mitted to have the privilege to know your opinion on this question ?
To KENTARO KAXEKO.
26 August, 1892.
Your proposal to send translations of my two letters to Count Ito, the newly-appointed Prime Minister, is quite satis- factory. I very willingly give my assent.
Respecting the further questions you ask, let me, in the first place, answer generally that the Japanese policy should, I think, be that of keeping Americans and Europeans as much as possible at arm's length. In presence of the more powerful races your position is one of chronic danger, and you should take every precaution to give as little foothold as possible to foreigners.
It seems to me that the only forms of intercourse which you may with advantage permit are those which are indis- pensable for the exchange of commodities and exchange of ideas — importation and exportation of physical and mental products. No further privileges should be allowed to people of other races, and especially to people of the more power- ful races, than is absolutely needful for the achievement of these ends. Apparently you are proposing by revision of the treaty powers \vith Europe and America u to open the whole Empire to foreigners and foreign capital." I regard this as a fatal policy. If you wish to see what is likely to happen, study the history of India. Once let one of the more power- ful races gain a point d'appni and there wrill inevitably in course of time grow up an aggressive policy which will lead to collisions with the Japanese ; these collisions will be re- presented as attacks by the Japanese which must be avenged ; forces will be sent from America or Europe, as the case may be ; a portion of territory will be seized and required to be made over as a foreign settlement ; and from this there will grow eventually subjugation of the entire Japanese Empire. I believe that you will have great difficulty in avoiding this fate in any case, but you will make the process easy if you allow any privileges to foreigners beyond those which I have in- dicated.
In pursuance of the advice thus generally indicated, I should say, in answer to your first question, that there should be, not only a prohibition to foreign persons to hold property in land, but also a refusal to give them leases, and a permission only to reside as annual tenants.
To the second question I should say decidedly, prohibit 21
322 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxi.
to foreigners the working of the mines owned or worked by Government. Here there would be obviously liable to arise grounds of difference between the Europeans or Americans who worked them and the Government, and these grounds of difference would immediately become grounds of quarrel, and would be followed by invocations to the English or American Governments or other Powers to send forces to insist on whatever the European workers claimed, for always the habit here and elsewhere among the civilized peoples is to believe ivhat their agents or settlers abroad represent to them.
In the third place, in pursuahce of the policy I have indicated, you ought also to keep the coasting trade in your own hands and forbid foreigners to engage in it. This coasting trade is clearly not included in the requirement I have in- dicated as the sole one to be recognized — a requirement to facilitate exportation and importation of commodities. The distribution of commodities brought to Japan from other places may be properly left to the Japanese themselves, and should be denied to foreigners, for the reason that again the various transactions involved would become so many doors open to quarrels and resulting aggressions.
To your remaining question, respecting the inter- marriage of foreigners and Japanese, which you say is " now very much agitated among our scholars and politicians," and which you say is " one of the most difficult problems," my reply is that, as rationally answered, there is no difficulty at all. It should be positively forbidden. It is not at root a question of social philosophy. It is at root a question of biology. There is abundant proof, alike furnished by the inter-marriages of human races and by the inter-breeding of animals, that when the varieties mingled diverge beyond a certain slight degree the result is invariably a bad one in the long run. I have myself been in the habit of looking at the evidence bearing on this matter for many years past, and my conviction is based upon numerous facts derived from numerous sources. This conviction I have within the last half hour verified, for I happen to be staying in the country with a gentleman who is well known as an authority on horses, cattle and sheep, and knows much respecting their inter-breeding ; and he has just, on inquiry, fully confirmed my belief that when, say of different varieties of sheep, there is an inter- breeding of those which are widely unlike, the result, especially in the second generation, is a bad one — there arises an incalculable mixture of traits, and what may be called a chaotic constitution. And the same thing happens among human beings — the Eurasians in India, and the half-breeds in America, show this. The physiological basis of this experience appears to be that any one variety of creature in course of many generations acquires a certain constitutional adaptation to its particular form of life,
1892-93] Altruism in Social Evolution 323
and every other variety similarly acquires its own special adaptation. The consequence is that, if you mix the con- stitutions of two widely divergent varieties which have severally become adapted to widely divergent modes of life, you get a constitution which is adapted to the mode of life of neither — a constitution which will not work properly, because it is not fitted for any set of conditions whatever. By all means, there- fore, peremptorily interdict marriages of Japanese with foreigners.
I have for the reasons indicated entirely approved of the regulations which have been established in America for restrain- ing the Chinese immigration, and had I the power would restrict them to the smallest possible amount, my reasons for this deci- sion being that one of two things must happen. If the Chinese are allowed to settle extensively in America, they must either, if they remain unmixed, form a subject race in the position, if not of slaves, yet of a class approaching to slaves ; or if they mix they must form a bad hybrid. In either case, supposing the immigration to be large, immense social mischief must arise, and eventually social disorganization. The same thing will happen if there should be any considerable mixture of the European or American races with the Japanese.
You see, therefore, that my advice is strongly conservative in all directions, and I end by saying as I began — keep other races at arm's length as much as possible.
I give this advice in confidence. I wish that it should not transpire publicly, at any rate during my life, for I do not desire to rouse the animosity of my fellow-countrymen.
P.S. — Of course, when I say I wish this advice to be in confidence, I do not interdict the communication of it to Count Ito, but rather wish that he should have the opportunity of taking it into consideration.
Though he did not wish this letter made public during his life, Spencer has endorsed on the copies of the corre- spondence— " My letters of advice contained in this batch should be read and published." Shortly after his death the letter of August 26 was sent from Tokio for publication in the Times (18 January, 1904), which wrote of it as giving " advice as narrow, as much imbued with antipathy to real progress, as ever came from a self-sufficient, short-sighted Mandarin, bred in contempt and hatred of barbarians."
The correspondence makes little mention of the Ethicsf the concluding chapters of which were being written before he left town in December.
324 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxi.
To FREDERIC HARRISOX.
4 December, 1892.
In your reply to Huxley1 I have just come upon a passage (p. 716) which startled me by showing a degree of agreement between your view and my own concerning certain ultimate questions much greater than I had supposed. . . .
I am in the middle of the last chapter of the Ethics. . . . I have been so ill that during the last fortnight I have been obliged to suspend work altogether, but when lying in bed have from time to time made memoranda of thoughts to be expressed in this closing chapter of the Synthetic Philosophy : the most significant of these sentences . . . belonging to the last section of this last chapter. Of the three relevant sentences here are copies : —
" A transfigured sentiment of parenthood which regards with solicitude not child and grandchild only, but the genera- tions to come hereafter — fathers of the future creating and providing for their remote children."
" May we not say that the highest ambition of the truly beneficient will be to have a share — even but an infinitesimal share — in the making of man."
u While contemplating from the heights of thought that far-off life of humanity never to be enjoyed by them, but only by a remote posterity, they will feel a calm pleasure in the consciousness of having aided by conduct or by teaching the advance towards it."
I send you these copies of memoranda, partly because, if I do not, you will, when the book is published, suppose that I have been plagiarizing on you ; and partly because they show, as I say, a degree of agreement greater than I supposed. The chief difference between us is evidently a matter of names. . . . I regard the ideas and sentiments contained as belonging to ethics. You regard them as belonging to religion. . . . You do not apparently recognize the fact that ethics and religion, originally one, have been differentiating from the beginning, and have become in modern times quite distinct ; so that ethics is being secularlized (as we see even in the teachers of Christianity, who more and more are unawares separating morality from religion), and you do not infer that they [ethics and religion] will never again be reunited. Nor do you admit that as religion originally implied belief in a supposed anthro- morphic power, it remains, when the anthromorphic character gradually disappears, as a belief in a Power as unknown and transcending knowledge. As I say, this difference is after all very much a difference of names, save, indeed, that while I
Fortnightly Review, December.
1892-93] Altmism in Social Evolution 325
consider that there will be a persistent recognition of this unknown Power, you apparently do not think the recognition of it will continue.
Just before Christmas he went to St. Leonards, and never afterwards spent a winter in London.
To SIR WILLIAM H. FLOWER.
ST. LEONARDS, 17 January^ 1893.
I am sorry that I cannot join the Committee of the Owen memorial. Two obstacles stand in the way.
For a long time past I have held that the getting up of testimonials and memorials is becoming an abuse and should be resisted. . . .
The second obstacle is that, large though Owen's claims may be in the way of achievement, he lacked a trait which I think essential — he was not sincere. He did not say out candidly what he believed, but tried to please both parties, the scientific world and the religious world. This is not my impression only, but that, I believe, of many.
After some reflection he changed his mind and wrote requesting his name to be added to the Committee.
As he grew older his dissatisfaction with the trend of political and social affairs at home and abroad became more acute.
To JOHN TYNDALL.
30 January, 1893.
You are doubtless looking forward with eagerness and anxiety to the opening of Parliament and the disclosure of this great scheme of national dissolution. What a state of the world we are living in, with its socialism and anarchisms, and all kinds of wild ideas and destructive actions ! The prophesies I have been making from time to time ever since 1860, as to the results of giving to men political power without imposing on them equivalent political burdens, are becoming true faster than I had anticipated.
3 April. — -I, in common with you, look at the state of the world in dismay ; but I have for a long time past seen the inevitableness of the tremendous disasters that are coming. . . . But you and I will not live to see it. Happily — I think I may say happily — we shall be out of it before the crash comes.
326 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxi.
To H. R. Fox BOURXE.
2 March, 1893.
Has anything been done by the Aborigines Protection Society in respect of this division of Queensland ? Surely some very strong protest should be made. It has been all along conspicuous enough that the proposals for division arise among sugar planters, who are anxious to be able to import Kanakas without any restraint, and to reduce them, as they inevitably do, to a state of slavery. As to any safeguards due to contract and appeal to magistrates for protection, the thing is simply absurd.
It seems to me that while we are pretending to be anxious to abolish slavery in Africa, we are taking measures to establish slavery under another name in Australia.
In his letter to Professor Tyndall of April 3, quoted above, mention is made of " a domestic crisis, due to the allegation made by the ladies of my household, that their means would not enable them to carry out our agreement any longer, easy as it is for them. This entailed on me dreadful worry, and an amount of both intellectual and emotional perturbation that knocked me down utterly, so that a few days ago I was worse than I had been these six years." This was a grievous upsetting of the arrangement entered into so hopefully in 1889. From the beginning he had made no secret that his reason for setting up a house of his -own was his craving for the social comforts and pleasures of domestic life. It is difficult, therefore, to understand how it could have been assumed by these ladies that in his own house he would live almost entirely by himself, leaving the other members of the household to go their own way. For such a solitary life there was absolutely no reason why he should have exchanged the conveniences-- and comforts of Queen's Gardens, saddling himself also with greatly increased expenditure. When the arrangement was first proposed some of his friends felt that unless carried out with more than ordinary prudence on both sides it would not work smoothly, there being so many points on which misunderstanding might arise. Instead of the household partaking of the unity of one family, there were really two family interests, and these two interests could not be counted upon to pull always in the same direction. Union of interests in certain things
1892-93] Altruism in Social Evolution 327
and separation of interests in others could only be carried on with the utmost forbearance on both sides and the most generous interpretation of the terms of the agree- ment. In both these respects it speaks well for those concerned that it worked so harmoniously as it did for some years. When differences at length arose his principal concern was to get at the facts, so that the ladies might be in a position to satisfy themselves as to whether it was or was not in their interests to continue the arrange- ment. While doing all he could to meet their views of economy and his own views of equity, and thus to allow of the arrangement being continued, he did not look upon its termination as a calamity that must be averted at almost any cost. There was a point beyond which he would not go in the matter of concession. " You and your sisters have to accept or reject my proposals — generous proposals, I think them. ... I do not wish any further letters or proposals or correspondence, and would willingly have given ^500 rather than suffer the illness which the business has brought upon me . . . and will have no more trouble about the matter. You have simply to say ' yes ' or ' no ' to the agreement I have proposed." After some hesitation his terms were accepted and a new agreement drawn up.
The settlement of this disagreeable matter enabled him to leave town with an easier mind.
To SIR JOHX. LUBBOCK.
PEWSEY, 18 May, 1893.
Thanks for your invitation, but you see by the address that I am out of reach. An old friend of mine went over to Brussels to make a morning call and came straight back, but you would hardly expect me to emulate him. ... I fear that now the X. is dead there is but little chance of our meeting, save by accident at the Club. I wish it were otherwise.
To JOHX HAWKE.
PEWSEY, 29 May, 1893.
Having, as you say, expressed myself strongly on the subject of gambling and betting, I feel bound to give some little aid to your society, which aims, if not to suppress it (which is hopeless), yet to diminish it, and herewith I enclose cheque. . . . As to giving my name as one of the Vice- Presidents, I should have no objection were it not that the association of my name
328 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxi.
with a body so largely clerical in its character would lead to adverse criticisms. It is not that I in the least object to such an association, and it may be that the clergymen named are sufficiently liberal to work with one whose religious opinions are so obviously at variance with their own. But experience in another case has led me to see that I shall be liable to adverse interpretation of my motives. Change in my opinions concerning land-tenure has been ascribed to a desire to in- gratiate myself with the land-owning class, and I doubt not that if I were, as you suggest, to accept the position of vice- president along with so many members of the Church, it would be ascribed to a desire to ingratiate myself with the clergy.
Neither imperialism nor athleticism found favour with him ; one reason for his objection to the latter being the vice of betting associated with it. An invitation to join the general committee being formed to carry out the Pan- Britannic Idea, expounded in Greater Britain was declined.
To J. ASTLEY COOPER.
PEWSEY, 20 June, 1893.
I fear I cannot yield to your suggestion, and for the reason that I entertain grave doubts respecting the aims of the organization to which Greater Britain points.
A federation of Great Britain with her colonies would in my opinion have the effect of encouraging aggressive action on the part of the colonies, with a still more active appropriation of territories than is at present going on, and there would be continued demands upon the mother-country for military and financial aid.
28 June. — Though your explanation serves to remove the objection I made, it does not remove another objection which I did not name.
I have long held that athleticism has become an abuse, and occupies far too much space in life and in public attention ; and I should be very much averse to any arrangement like that you propose which would tend to render it more prominent than it is already.
When I tell you that in the space of nearly 50 years spent in London I have never once been to see the University Boat Race, and have never witnessed a cricket match at Lord's, and that for many years past I have intentionally refrained from doing so, you will see that my views on the matter are such as to negative the cooperation you suggest.
329
CHAPTER XXII.
LATTER DAY CONTROVERSIES.
(November, 1889— October, 1895.)
(i.)
SOON after taking up residence in Avenue Road in the autumn of 1889 he was plunged into a controversy, which not only interrupted his work and embittered his life for several months, but broke up for a time an intimate and vajued friendship of nearly forty years' standing. This most unfortunate event had its origin in a meeting Mr. John Morley had at Newcastle with his constituents, one of whom urged the nationalization of the land, Spencer being quoted in favour of the resumption of ownership by the community (Times, November 5). In a letter to the Times (November 7) Spencer pointed out that the book referred to was published forty years ago, and that, while still adhering to the general principles, he now dissented from some of the deductions. The land question had been discussed in Social Statics in the belief that it was not likely to come to the front for many generations ; but it had been pointed out that when it did come up " the business of compensation of landowners would be a com- plicated one." "Investigations made during recent years into the various forms of social organization, have in part confirmed and in part changed the views published in 1850." " I have no positive opinion as to what may here- after take place. The reason for this state of hesitancy is that I cannot see my way towards reconciliation of the ethical requirements with the politico-economical require- ments." Nothing was said by Spencer in this letter about the opinion attributed to him at Newcastle that " to right
33O Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxn.
one wrong it is sometimes necessary to do another." He now (Times, November u) wrote to say that as he could not remember everything he had written during the last forty years, it would be unsafe to assert positively that he had nowhere expressed such an opinion. " But my belief is that I have not said this in any connexion, and I certainly have not said it in connexion with the question of landowner- ship." The only change of view was " that whereas in 1850 I supposed that resumption of landownership by the com- munity would be economically advantageous, 1 now hold that, if established with due regard to existing claims, as I have always contended it should be, it would be dis- advantageous."
Professor Huxley now entered the lists, writing (Times, November 12) "in the name of that not inconsiderable number of persons to whom absolute ethics and a priori politics are alike stumbling-blocks." " I have long been of opinion that the great political evil of our time is the attempt to sanction popular acts of injustice by antiquarian and speculative arguments. My friend, Mr. Spencer, is, 1 am sure, the last person willingly to abet this tendency." Professing himself unable to see in what respect his friend and he disagreed on the land question, Spencer, in his reply, took up the comments made by Professor Huxley on absolute political ethics. " However much a politi- cian may pooh-pooh social ideals, he cannot take steps towards bettering the social state without tacitly entertain- ing them. . . . The complaint of Professor Huxley that absolute political ethics does not show us what to do in each concrete case seems to me much like the complaint of a medical practitioner who should speak slightingly of physiological generalizations because they did not tell him the right dressing for a wound, or how best to deal with varicose veins" (Times, November 15).
Having intimated that the above letter was to be his last, he did not reply to the rejoinder from Professor Huxley (Times, November 18), in which reference is made to Spencer's " remarkable inability to see that we disagree on the land question," and to the physiological argument
1889-95] Latter Day Controversies 331
which " is hardly chosen with so much prudence as might have been expected." " Mr. Spencer could not have chosen a better illustration of the gulf fixed between his way of thinking and mine. Whenever physiology (including path- ology), pharmacy and hygiene are perfect sciences, I have no doubt that the practice of medicine will be deducible from the first principles of these sciences. That happy day has not arrived yet." And if at present it would be unsafe for the medical practitioner to treat bodily diseases by deduction what is to be said of the publicist who "seeks guidance not from the safe, however limited, inductions based on careful observation and experience, but puts his faith in long chains of deduction from abstract ethical assumptions, hardly any link of which can be tested experimentally ? "
On being reminded by Mr. Frederick Greenwood that he had not yet repudiated the doctrine that " to right one wrong it is sometimes necessary to do another," Spencer wrote (Times, November 19) : "It never occurred to me that, after what I said, this was needful. But as he thinks otherwise, I very willingly repudiate it, both for the past and the present. Even did I wish to continue my discussion with Professor Huxley, it would be ended by his letter. From it I learn that the principles of physiology, as at present known, are of no use whatever for guidance in practice, and my argument, therefore, collapses." A week later (Times, November 27) he wrote again : " I cannot allow the late controversy to pass without disclaiming the absurd ideas ascribed to me. . . . The suggestion that an ideal must be kept in view, so that our movements may be towards it and not away from it, has been regarded as a proposal forthwith to realize the ideal."
The breach thus brought about was a matter of much concern to their intimate friends, specially so to Professor Tyndall, Sir Joseph Hooker, Dr. Hirst, and other members of the X Club. It came as a surprise to Professor Huxley, who was not aware of having said anything sharper than he had said before, both privately and publicly.
132 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxn.
FROM JOHN TYXDALL.
25 November, 1889.
You may well believe that this newspaper controversy has been a source of mourning to my wife and me. Many a time since it began have I wished to be at your side or, better still, to have you and Huxley face to face. With a little tact and moderation the difference between you — if a difference exist at all — might have been easily arranged. When I read the con- cluding part of your first long letter, where you speak of state ownership as resulting in disaster, I exclaimed, " Bravo Spencer ! " ; but on reading the whole letter, it seemed to me that you were too anxious to prove your consistency. Relying upon merits which the whole world acknowledges, you ought, I think, to be able to say, " Damn consistency ! " in regard to these scraps and fragments of your views. . . . From a public point of view, and with reference solely to the questions dis- cussed, I thought Huxley's letters excellent. From another point of view, he might, I think, have kept more clearly in mind that he was dealing not with an ordinary antagonist, but with a friend who had such just and undeniable claims upon his admiration and affection. . . . It is a monstrous pity that you and he should appear to stand before the public as antagonists, to an extent far beyond what the facts would justify. You deal with political principles ; he deals with the problems of the hour — the problems, that is to say, that have to shape the course of the practical statesman. There is no necessary antagonism here.
The breach might have been repaired before the end of the year had Spencer talked the matter over with his friends, instead of shutting himself up and seeing no one. The friendly offices of the other members of the X Club were offered for the adjustment of the difference ; but instead of availing himself of these, he wrote a letter withdrawing from the Club — a letter which, on Sir Joseph Hooker's ad- vice, was kept back. Professor Huxley was quite ready to meet him more than half-way : intimating in a letter to Sir Joseph Hooker, intended for Spencer's perusal, that he had not the slightest intention of holding Spencer up to ridicule ; that nothing astonished him more and gave him greater pain than Spencer taking the line he did ; that his wish was, if needs be, to take all the wrong on his own shoulders and to assure Spencer that there had been no malice; and that if he had been in Spencer's estimation needlessly sharp in
1889-95] Latter Day Controversies 333
reply, he was extremely sorry for it. It is a pity that the olive branch thus held out was not accepted. In ex- planation of his attitude Spencer wrote to Professor Tyndall (9 December) : —
Doubtless you and others of the Club [the X] do not fully understand the state of mind produced in me, because you are not aware that almost everything said by Huxley [concerning my views] wras a misrepresentation more or less extreme, and in some cases an inexcusable misrepresentation. . . . The effect on me has been such that the thoughts and irritations have been going round in my brain day and night as in a mill, without the possibility of stopping them.
12 December. — I cannot let things remain in the state in \vhich the controversy in the limes left them ; and to put them in some measure straight, and rectify to a small extent the mischief done, I am preparing a short article for the Nineteenth Century.
With the new year the controversy entered upon a new phase.
To JOHN TYNDALL.
8 February, 1890.
I send you a copy of the Daily Telegraph [8 February] in which, as you will see, I have had to defend myself against another grave misrepresentation.
One would have thought that after having done me so much mischief and after having professed his regret, Huxley would at least have been careful not to do the like again forthwith, but besides a perfectly gratuitous sneer unmistakably directed against me in the opening of his article in the current number of the Nineteenth Century, there comes this mischievous characterization diffused among the quarter of a million readers of the Daily Telegraph.
In the Daily Telegraph of 23 January, Mr. Robert Buchanan had taken up "the criticism of the socialistic theories of Rousseau by Professor Huxley, in the Nineteenth Century." In a second letter (27th) he referred to Spencer as one of those who "are socialists only in the good and philosophical sense, and who are not, like mere com- munists, enemies of all vested interests whatsoever." In a third communication (3 February) he criticized letters from
334 Life of Herbert Spencer [CITAP. xxu.
Professor Huxley of the 29th and 3ist respectively. In the former of these Professor Huxley had animadverted on " the political philosophy which Mr. Buchanan idolizes, the con- sistent application of which reasoned savagery to practice would have left the working classes to fight out the struggle for existence among themselves, and bid the State to content itself with keeping the ring." If a man has nothing to offer in exchange for a loaf, " it is not I, but the extreme Individualists, who will say that he may starve. If the State relieves his necessities, it is not I, but they, who say it is exceeding its powers ; if private charity succours the poor fellow, it is not I, but they, who reprove the giver for interfering with the survival of the fittest." A keen contro- versialist like Professor Huxley could not fail to fasten on the sentence in which Mr. Buchanan classed Spencer with socialists in the good and philosophical sense. " I had fondly supposed, until Mr. Robert Buchanan taught me better, that if there was any charge Mr. Spencer would find offensive, it would be that of being declared to be, in any shape or way, a socialist." He wondered whether Mr. Buchanan had read The Man versus the State. " However this may be, I desire to make clear to your readers what the ' good and philosophical sort of Socialism,' which finds expression in the following passages, is like." Professor Huxley then gave quotations from, or references to, passages in The Man versus the State, pp. 19, 21, 22, 24, 27, 34, 35.1
To ROBERT BUCHANAN.
5 February, 1890.
Thank you for your last letter to the Daily Telegraph, received this morning. You have shown yourself extremely chivalrous in taking up the question in this and in the preceding letters.
In the course of our conversation on Sunday I did not to any extent enter upon the questions at issue. ... It seems to me, however, that candour requires me to say that I cannot entirely endorse the version you give of my political views. Unless understood in a sense different from that which will ordinarily
' The corresponding pages in the library edition are 297, 300, 300-1, 3°3. 3°6, 3'5. 3i6.
1889-95] Latter Day Controversies 335
be given to them, I hardly see how the words l> higher Socialism " are applicable. It is true that I look forward to a future in which the social organization will differ immensely from any we now know, and perhaps from any we now con- ceive. . . . But I hold that competition and contract must persist to the last and that any equalizations which interfere with their free play will be mischievous. The fact that from the beginning of my political life I have been an opponent of national education, and continue to be one, will show you that I cannot coincide in your view that it is the duty of society to prepare its individual members for the battle of life. I hold it to be exclusively the duty of parents. . . .
Sanguine of human progress as I used to be in earlier days, I am now more and more persuaded that it cannot take place faster than human nature is itself modified ; and the modifica- tion is a slow process, to be reached only through many, many generations. When I see the behaviour of these union men in the strikes we have had and are having ; when I see their unscrupulous tyranny and utter want of any true conception of liberty, it seems to me unquestionable that any new regime constituted in their interests Would soon lapse into a despotic organization of a merciless type.
Borrowing as a heading for a letter to the Daily Tele- graph (8 February) Professor Huxley's phrase " Reasoned Savagery," Spencer pointed out that " for nearly fifty years I have contended that the pains attendant on the struggle for existence may fitly be qualified by the aid which private sympathy prompts." " Everyone will be able to judge whether this opinion is rightly characterized by the phrase ' Reasoned Savagery.' "
To realize the bitterness of Spencer's feelings it is neces- sary to be reminded of the sense of injustice that rankled in his breast on reflecting that, notwithstanding the precept and example of a lifetime in denouncing every form of oppression and injustice, he should be charged with up- holding brutal individualism and his views should be branded as " reasoned savagery." One must also remem- ber that the ill-health and depression, which in recent years had kept him away from London and more or less in retire- ment, had induced a state of abnormal sensitiveness to criticism. Moreover, clinging to friendship so tenaciously as he did and entertaining such a high ideal of its obligations, he felt with special keenness an act which, rightly or wrongly,
336 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxn.
he regarded as unfriendly. Taking into account all the circumstances one can understand the difficulty he had in responding to the efforts of the friends of both to repair the breach. These efforts were after a time given up, and Professor Huxley's name, hitherto so frequently met with, almost disappears from the correspondence for some years. It was not till towards the close of 1893 that cordial relations were re-established.
And yet in the spring of that year the prospect of a resumption of friendly relations was by no means bright. Though alive to " the dangers of open collision with ortho- doxy on the one hand and Spencer on the other," Professor Huxley introduced into his Romanes lecture passages which Spencer understood to be directed against him.
To JAMES A. SKILTON.
PEWSEY, 29 June, 1893.
I am glad to hear that you think of taking up Huxley's u Evolution and Ethics." . . . Practically his view is a sur- render of the general doctrine of evolution in so far as its higher applications are concerned, and is pervaded by the ridiculous assumption that, in its application to the organic world, it is limited to the struggle for existence among individuals under its ferocious aspects, and has nothing to do with the develop- ment of social organization, or the modifications of the human mind that take place in the course of that organization. . . . The position he takes, that we have to struggle against or correct the cosmic process, involves the assumption that there exists something in us which is not a product of the cosmic process, and is practically a going back to the old theological notions, which put Man and Nature in antithesis. Any rational, comprehensive view of evolution involves that, in the course of social evolution, the human mind is disciplined into that form which itself puts a check upon that part of the cosmic process which consists in the unqualified struggle for existence.1
Spencer had made up his mind not to take the matter up himself, but his resolution gave way on reading a review of the lecture in the Athenceum for 22 July. The result was
1 With this description of Professor Huxley's views the reader may compare, besides the Romanes lecture itself, the Prolegomena published later (Huxley's Collected Essays, vol. ix. Also letter to Mr. Thomas Common in Life and Letters, ii., 360.
1839-95] Latter Day Controversies
a letter on "Evolutionary Bthics " in that Journal for 5 August. Towards the close of the paper he enumerated eight fundamental points of agreement between himself and Professor Huxley. " Obviously, then, it is impossible that Professor Huxley can have meant to place the ethical views he holds in opposition to the ethical views I hold ; and it is the more obviously impossible because, for a fortnight before his lecture, Professor Huxley had in his hands the volumes containing the above quotations along with multi- tudinous passages of kindred meanings." Learning that these words were taken to imply that Professor Huxley had adopted views set forth in the Ethics without ac- knowledgment, he sent a copy of "Evolutionary Ethics" on which he wrote "a few undated lines," signed " H.S." A reply in the third person "quite startled" Spencer, who had no thought of discourtesy in the form of his memo- randum, and no idea that the closing sentence of " Evolu- tionary Ethics" could be interpreted to imply a charge of appropriating ideas without acknowledgment. An exchange of conciliatory notes dissipated the stormy clouds and prepared the way for the final reconciliation.
FROM T. H. HUXLEY.
24 October, 1893.
I am very sorry to hear that you are ill and I would gladly do anything that might help to alleviate perturbations of either mind or body.
We are old men and ought to be old friends. Our estrange- ment has always been painful to me. Let there be an end to it. For my part, I am sorry if anything I have said or done has been, or has seemed, unjust.
To T. H. HUXLEY.
26 October, 1893.
Your sympathic letter received this morning has given me great satisfaction. We are both of ns approaching our last clays, . . . and to whichever of us survived it would have been a sad thought had forty years of friendship ended in a permanent estrangement. Happily by your kind expressions that clanger is now finally averted and cordial relations re- established.
22
Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxit.
(*.)
When examining Spencer's various utterances on the Land Question in A Perplexed Philosopher, Mr. Henry George went "out of his way to ascribe the changes of view to unworthy motives, alleging that the recantation of early opinions had been made with a view to curry favour with the upper classes. This attack upon his character Spencer felt very keenly. In a letter to Mr. Skilton of New York, dated 6 January, 1893, he says he would himself decline to take notice of such publication.
My American friends may, however, if they like, take the matter up, and may effectually dispose of its libellous state- ments. By way of aiding them in doing this, I will put down sundry facts which they may incorporate as they see well.
In the first place, irrespective of numerous utterly false insinuations, there are two direct falsehoods. . . .
The first of them is contained in the Introduction, p. 9, where he says I have placed myself " definitely on the side of those who contend that the treatment of land as private property cannot equitably be interfered with." I have said nothing of the kind. I have continued to maintain that the right of the whole community to the land survives and can never be destroyed ; but I have said . . . that the community cannot equitably resume possession of the land without making compensation for all that value given to it by the labour of successive generations. . . . The sole difference between my position in Social Statics and my more recent position is this : In Social Statics I have . . . tacitly assumed that such com- pensation, if made, would leave a balance of benefit to the community. Contrariwise, on more carefully considering the matter in recent years, I have reached the conclusion that to make anything like equitable compensation the amount required would be such as to make the transaction a losing one .... And ... I reached the conclusion that the system of public administration, full of the vices of officialism, would involve more evils than the present system of private administra- tion. . . .
The second falsehood is the statement on p. 201 that " the name of Herbert Spencer now appears with those of about all the dukes in the kingdom as the director of an association formed for the purpose of defending private property in land." ... So far as I know there is no such association at all. The only association which can be referred to is the Liberty and Property Defence League, . . . but I am not a member of that association. ... If he means the Ratepayers'
1889-95] Latter Day Controversies 339
Defence League, the ,xeply is that this is not an association for defending landed property, but for defending the interests of occupiers, and I joined it as a ratepayer to check the extravagant demands on ratepayers made by the County Council. . . .
As to the alleged cultivation of social relations with the landed classes, it is sufficiently disposed of by the fact that ever since my visit to America I have been so great an invalid as to be prevented from going into society. Not once in the course of the last ten years have I had any social inter- course with those of the classes referred to.
By way of meeting the various counts of Mr. George's indictment respecting motives, I will set down the facts, which prove motives exactly contrary to those he alleges.
The rirst concern pecuniary advantages. The first line of his motto from Browning is " Just for a handful of silver he left us." The facts of my career are these. For the first ten years, from 1850-60, I lost by every book published ; the returns not sufficing to anything like repay printing ex- penses. During a period of nearly ten years subsequently, the returns on my further books were so small as not to meet my necessary expenses, so that I had continually to trench upon my small property, gradually going the way to ruin myself, until at length I notified that I must discontinue altogether : one result of this notification being the American testimonial. When, some little time after, the tide turned and my works began to be remunerative, what was my course ? Still living as economically as possible, I devoted the whole surplus of my returns to the payments for compilation and printing of the Descriptive Sociology, and this I continued to do for a dozen years, until, year by year deliberately sinking money, I had lost between £3,000 and £4,000 (over £4,000 if interest on capital sunk be counted). I finally ceased, not only because I could no longer afford to lose at this rate, but because the work was altogether unappreciated. This was not the course of a man who was to be tempted by " a handful of silver ! "
The second line of his motto is " Just for a ribbon to stick in his coat." If, as it seems, this quotation is intended to imply my anxiety for honours, no allegation more absolutely at variance with well-known facts could be made. ... It is said that I seek political honours. Well, if so, I could not have gone about to achieve them in more absurd ways. . . . I have singled out Mr. Gladstone, at that time Prime Minister, as a sample of the unscientific mind ; and more recently . . . I have singled out the then Prime Minister, Lord Salisbury, to ridicule his reasoning. So that by way of achieving honours accorded by the State, I have spoken disrespectfully of the two men who had in their hands the distribution of such honours.
34-O Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxn.
To C. KEGAN PAUL.
10 January, 1893.
This morning announces the publication of a book by you entitled A Perplexed Philosopher by Mr. Henry George. Have you looked at it ? You need not look far : it will suffice if you read the quotation from Browning on the title page.
Probably you know enough about my career to judge what warrant there is for the implied parallel, and whether you think it desirable to identify yourself with the book as its publisher.
12 January. — My letter gave no indication of any objection I have to critical argument ; even the most trenchant. That, with my antecedents, you should assume that I have any objec- tion to an attack upon my views surprises me.
But I spoke of the book as a u laboured calumny," and I thought that you might not like to be instrumental in circulating libellous statements.
To JAMES A. SKILTON.
1 March, 1893.
You appear to look largely or mainly at the general question, whereas to me the general question is of no importance. The Synthetic Philosophy can take care of itself. . . . Similarly about the Land Question. I have never dreamed of entering into controversy with Mr. Henry George about that or anything else. . . .
The only thing about which I am concerned is the personal question — the vile calumny which the man propagates, and the only question is whether it is worth while to do anything in the way of rebutting this.
He was anxious that the authenticity of the facts com- municated to Mr. Skilton should be guaranteed by more than one name. The reply was accordingly prepared by a committee formed from among his New York friends, and published in the Tribune (November 12).
To JAMES A. SKILTON.
ST. LEONARDS, 25 November, 1894.
Thank you for all the trouble you have taken in the George business. There have been in the course of the arrangements sundry dangers which have now been happily avoided, and the final result is as good as I could wish. Whatever Mr. George may say, I do not think he will succeed in neutralizing this effective exposure. . . .
If you feel inclined now to make a Hank attack by dealing
1889-95] Latter Day Controversies 341
with Henry George and his doctrines, by all means do so, but if you do, please take care not to bring my name or my views into the matter. I do not wish to be in any way implicated.
13 December. — A few days ago I decided that by way of setting finally at rest this abominable business in America, it would be well if I published there the pamphlet referred to in the inclosed preface which I drew up for it — a pamphlet not at all in any direct way replying to Mr. George, but indirectly disposing of his allegations. I have, however, since come to the conclusion that this course may be of doubtful policy, since, conclusively disproving all he says as the pamphlet does, it will, nevertheless, furnish him with texts for further diatribes. I send over the preface to you and to your co-signatories to ask an opinion on this point. . . .
From the above you will see that I hesitate a little as to the propriety of giving Mr. George any further opportunities of carrying on the controversy, and for this same reason I hesi- tate respecting your proposed war with him carried on inde- pendently.
24 December. — I am again in two minds as so the best course to pursue. It does not matter how conclusive the case may be made against Mr. George, he will still go on arguing and asserting and multiplying side issues about irrelevant matters. The politic course, therefore, is to make one good point and there leave it.
If I am right in the inference that in Progress and Poverty he said nothing about my insisting on compensation, that should be the point made.
12 January, 1895. — Lies and treacheries are implements of war regarded as quite legitimate in actual war. I saw a while ago in some speech of a trade-unionist, that they regarded their relations with the masters as a state of war, and that their acts, ordinarily regarded as criminal, were legitimate. Doubtless Mr. George and the Land Nationalizes think the same thing and are prepared to abandon all moral restraint in pursuit of their ends. Hence this proceeding of his — congruous with all his other proceedings. Hence, too, similar proceedings over here. Though I interdicted the republication of the corre- spondence in the Daily Chronicle along with that pamphlet you have, yet they have now issued it separately without asking me. . . .
As to your proposals for a brief treatise on the Land Question at large from me in further explanation, I do not see my way. If I were to say anything more ... it would be merely in further explanation of the attitude I have taken. ... As to anything larger, such as you adumbrate — a general [conception] of the relations of men to the soil
342 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxn.
based on general sociological principles, I have got nothing to say.
The correspondence in the Daily Chronicle referred to in the last quoted letter arose out of the leaflet issued with Spencer's assent by the Land Restoration League, giving in parallel columns extracts from Social Statics and from Justice.
The matter might have ended here but for a lecture by Mr. William Lloyd Garrison, junr., delivered in New York on 6th January, 1895.
To WILLIAM JAY YOUMANS.
22 January, 1895.
The inclosed report of Mr. Garrison's lecture, which Mr. Skilton has sent me, opens my eyes to the fact that it is needful that the public should be disabused of the notion that I have changed my essential convictions. The whole of Mr. George's vituperation and the whole of this lecture proceed on the assumption that I have repudiated my views on the ownership of land, which I have not, having only changed my view with regard to the financial policy of a change. If this fact is made clear it takes the wind out of Mr. George's sails.
Inclosed I send the draft of a letter in which this is demonstrated, and unless you see strong reason to the con- trary, I should be glad if some one — either yourself, or Dr. Janes, or Mr. Skilton — would publish this letter in The Tribune or elsewhere ; if possible, in several places.
On the advice of Mr. Skilton and Dr. W. J. Youmans the letter was published as a preface to the parallel-column pamphlet on the Land Question.1
To JAMES A. SKILTON.
22 February, 1895.
Herewith I enclose the postscript for the pamphlet. In pursuance of the resolution which you intimate to me as agreed upon by friends, the pamphlet may now with its preface and postscript be issued without further delay. With its issue I must wash my hands entirely of the whole^[of the ^George business.
The correspondence continued in a somewhat desultory fashion into the following year. Into the merits of the
1 Mr. Herbert Spencer on the Land Question, published by D. Appleton & Co., New York, 1895.
1889-95] Latter Day Controversies 343
controversy it is unnecessary now to enter. It has already lost whatever interest it may have had for the general reader. The foregoing outline of a very lengthy corres- pondence seemed expedient, however, because it throws into relief two characteristics of Spencer — his morbid sensitiveness to insinuations against the purity of his motives, and the undue weight he attached to charges of intellectual inconsistency. To these two points all his letters in the correspondence are addressed. As for the aspersion on his moral character, it is easy for an out- sider to say that he might have treated it with silent contempt, but few persons, when their character is attacked, can adopt an attitude of callous indifference.
(iii.)
The earliest notice of Dr. Weismann to be found in the correspondence is in a letter to Mr. Howard Collins (26 February, 1890), in which reference is made to an article in Nature (6 February). A few days after this he wrote to Nature (6 March) that it would " be as well to recall the belief of one whose judgment was not without weight, and to give some of the evidence on which that belief was founded." " Clearly the first thing to be done by those who deny the inheritance of acquired characters is to show that the evidence Mr. Darwin has furnished . . . is all worthless." To this suggestion Professor Ray Lan- kester responded in Nature (27 March) that biologists had already considered the cases cited by Mr. Darwin. " It is extremely unfortunate that Mr. Spencer has not come across the work in which this is done."
To F. HOWARD COLLINS.
1 April, 1890.
I have sent to Nature (3 April) ... a short letter a propos of the question of inherited effects of use and disuse, or rather presenting a problem to those who assign "panmixia" as an adequate cause for decline in the size of disused organs.
I have taken the case of the drooping ears of many domesticated animals. . . . The point to insist on will be, first, as I have pointed out, in domestic animals no selection either natural or artificial goes on in such way as to make
344 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxn.
economy in the nutrition of an organ important for the sur- vival of the individual, and that in fact no individuals survive from economical distribution of nutriment such as would cause decrease in unused organs. Then, second, beyond that, the point to be insisted upon is that these muscles are of such extremely small size that no economy in the nutrition of them could affect the fate even of animals subject to the struggle for existence and profiting by economical distribution of nutriment.
With the view of emphasizing this last point, I should very much like to have it ascertained and stated what are the weights of the muscles which move the ears in a cow.
Against others than biologists he had to defend his position. In an address ?s Lord Rector of Glasgow Uni- versity in November, 1891, Mr. A. J. Balfour referred to the theory of the inheritance of acquired characters applied by Spencer "so persistently in every department of his theory of man, that were it to be upset, it is scarcely too much to say that his Ethics, his Psychology, and his Anthropology would all tumble to the ground with it." The expediency of replying to this and other points in the address and the form the reply should take were dis- cussed with Mr. Collins.
To F. HOWARD COLLINS.
30 November, 1891.
I have sent Mr. Balfour a copy of Factors of Organic Eroln- tion. Suppose you send him a copy of your pamphlet on the Jaw as bearing on the question of inheritance of acquired characters.
6 December. — Do not in your specification of points to be taken up versus Balfour do more than just give me the heads of them so far as to show your lines of argument.
7 December. — I hesitate about your article on Mr. Balfour. Various of the points are good, though you have omitted the two which I should myself have taken up. But it is un- desirable to have it done unless it is done in an almost unanswerable way, and I feel that a good deal of critical oversight from me would be needful. This would entail more labour than I can afford. . . . Moreover, the thing would be almost certain to entail controversy — probably Mr. Lilly would ugo for" you — and eventually I might be drawn into the matter. . . . The only safe way that occurs to me is that of setting down a number of " Questions for Mr. Balfour," which might be the title.
1889-95] Latter Day Controversies 345
12 December. — The temptation to do good has to be resisted sometimes as well as the temptation to do evil ; and I now illustrate this truth in having resisted the temptation to reply to Mr. Balfour. It is a strong temptation, and I should greatly enjoy a little slashing polemic after my two years of continuous exposition.
22 January, 1892. — Recently a member of the Athenaeum named to me certain investigations, made by a medical man, I think, showing that colour-blindness is more frequent among Quakers than among other people ; and thinking over the matter since, this recalled a vague recollection which I have that somebody — I think at Darlington — had found that a bad ear for music was more common among Quakers than among others. Now if these two things can be proved, they alone may serve to establish the hereditary transmission of effects of disuse. Here is a direction in which you may work.
Mr. Collins's pamphlet on " The Jaw as bearing on the question of Acquired Characters," mentioned above, had been prepared at Spencer's instigation. Before its issue a brief abstract was sent to Nature, which took no notice of it ; thus furnishing occasion for insinuations of bias, which were repudiated when the pamphlet was reviewed later (6 August, 1891). In October, 1892, Spencer again expressed his dissatisfaction with the conduct of Nature, adding : " I shall not let the matter drop ; and if this burking of evidence is persisted in, I will expose the matter be the cost what it may."
To J. XORMAX LOCKYER.
19 November, 1892.
I presume you have not read Mr. Collins's letter on " Use and Heredity " enclosed, and that it has been declined by your referee rather than by yourself. It is an important letter giving the results of careful inquiries, and the question on which it bears is the most momentous with which science is at present concerned, for it bears on our fundamental conceptions of human nature, of human progress, and of legislation.
For some time past it has been manifest that the conducting of Nature has been such as to favour those who take one side of the controversy on this question. . . .
Curiously enough, I am about to commence on Monday a letter setting forth a new kind of evidence bearing, as I think, in a conclusive way upon the matter, and I was of course
346 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxn.
intending to send this letter to Nature. As things stand, how- ever, it seems scarcely worth while to do this, and I may probably have to diffuse it among men of science in a separate form.
In a subsequent letter (23 December) he examined in detail the reasons assigned for rejecting Mr. Collins's letter, the principal one being the insufficiency of the data brought forward respecting the variation in the size of jaws in certain races consequent on a variation of function. The evidence was, in his opinion, sufficiently cogent to justify acceptance. Meanwhile he had taken steps to deal with the general question.
To THE EDITOR OF THE Contemporary Review.
21 November, 1892.
I have in contemplation an article, the object of which will be to raise, for more definite consideration, certain aspects of the doctrine of Natural Selection : the purpose being to show that Natural Selection taken alone is utterly inadequate to account for the facts of organic evolution. Two out of the three reasons I have already indicated, but I propose now to set them forth more fully and as a distinct challenge to those who think that Natural Selection alone suffices ; requiring of them to deal with these insurmountable difficulties, as I consider them to be. The third reason is an entirely new one, recently arrived at.
"The Inadequacy of Natural Selection," which appeared in the Contemporary Review, in February and March, 1893, was the occasion for the first interchange of letters between him and the late Duke of Argyll, who addressed him as an acquaintance on the strength of their having once met at, he thought, " one of Monckton Millies' breakfasts."
To THE DUKE OF ARGYLL.
8 March, 1893.
I am much obliged by your kindly expressed letter of the 4th, and am gratified to receive indication of your partial if not entire agreement.
I have an agreeable remembrance of the incident to which you refer, though my impression as to time and place is not the same. The occasion, I believe, was a dinner at the house of Mr. Gladstone, when he resided in Harley Street. My recollection includes a brief interchange of remarks respecting
1889-95] Latter Day Controversies , 347
a geological formation on the shores of Loch Aline, where I frequently visited friends owning the Ardtornish estate.
. . . The essay in the Contemporary, with sundry postscripts, I intend to republish next month for broadcast distribution throughout England, Europe and America. May I, in one of the postscripts, express my indebtedness to you for drawing my attention to the case of the negroes ? . . .*
One of the postscripts to which I have referred will be devoted to dealing with the points on which your letter com- ments, namely, the misapprehension current among biologists concerning the nature of the belief in natural selection, with the view of showing that they are proposing to overturn, by a fallacious inference from an inference, certain results of direct observation.
I quite admit the multitudinous difficulties which stand in the way of the doctrine of evolution as interpreted solely by the two factors named, but I hesitate to allege another factor, knowing how often it has happened that problems which appear insoluble are readily solved when the method is disclosed.
The controversy was also the means of renewing an acquaintanceship of very old standing. Seeking "a piece of information " for use in the Weismann controversy, he wrote to Dr. David Sharp, of the University Museum of Zoology, Cambridge, assuming him to be the David Sharp with whose father he had lived at 13, Loudoun Road, St. John's Wood, in 1857-58. " Some day when in London, if you would call upon me, ... I should be glad to renew old memories." 2
Spencer's article set the ball rolling. Dr. Chalmers Mitchell pointed out in Nature (15 February, 1893) that " in the matter of Panmixia, Mr. Herbert Spencer has mis- understood Weismann completely. Panmixia does not imply selection of smaller varieties, but the cessation of the elimination of smaller or more imperfect varieties." In the Contemporary Review for April Mr. Romanes noted that Spencer did not see the difference between the new doctrine of Panmixia, or cessation of Selection, and the old doctrine of Reversal of Selection ; both of which are causes of degeneration. Correspondence with Mr. Romanes followed
1 See pamphlet, p. 60. The Duke's name was omitted, he says, "lest some ill-natured people should regard me as a snob." - Autobiography, ii., 30.
348 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. XXTI.
during the next few months, " but without getting any ' forercler,' " as Mr. Romanes remarked in a letter to Mr. Thistleton Dyer in July.1
Meanwhile he was busy with another article — " Pro- fessor Weismann's Theories " — published in the Contem- porary for May, and circulated as a postscript to the previous articles. " It is a keen piece of controversy, but I wish you were well out of it," was Professor Tyndall's comment. Mr. George Henslow expressed cordial agreement ; sending also a copy of " two chapters in a work on which I am engaged in which 1 endeavour to prove that the peculiarities of plants residing in deserts, water, Alpine regions, &c., are in all cases due to the response of the plants themselves to their environments respectively, without the aid of Natural Selection as far as structure is concerned." Another corre- spondent— Sir Edward Fry — had arrived at the opinion that the various ways in which mosses are reproduced furnished a strong argument against Professor Weismann. A copy of his work on British Mosses was, therefore, sent to Spencer.
To SIR EDWARD FRY.
7 June, 1893.
I am much obliged to you for your note and the accom- panying volume. The facts it contains would have been of great use to me in writing the late articles in the Contemporary, had I known them. To me it seems that of themselves they suffice to dispose of Weismann's hypothesis, the wide accept- ance of which I think discreditable to the biological world.
The hypothesis of a u germ-plasm," as distinguished from the general protoplasm, seems to me a pure fiction, utterly superfluous, and utterly discountenanced by the facts ; and the phenomena presented by the mosses are among those showing in the clearest way that there is but one plasm capable of assuming the form' of the organism to which it belongs when placed in fit conditions : one of the fit conditions being absence of any considerable tissue-differentiation.
On the side of Professor Weismann, Mr. Romanes again came forward (Contemporary for July), the proof being sent to Spencer, who wrote a note to be printed with the article. Professor Marcus Hartog, in the same number,
Life of G. J. Romanes, p. 307.
1889-95] Latter Day Controversies 349
wrote against Weismannism, also criticizing Mr. Wallace. As to the views of the latter, Spencer had already been in communication with Professor Hartog.
To MARCUS HARTOG.
5 May, 1893.
Have you looked at Mr. Wallace's article in the Fortnightly ? I ... am astonished at the nonsense he is writing. He seems to be incapable of understanding the point at issue. On page 660 especially, he actually concedes the whole matter, apparently not perceiving that he does so. This ought at any rate to be effectually pointed out, since committing suicide as he thus does, there is one antagonist less to deal with.
Professor Weismann himself now intervened in an article entitled " The All-Sufficiency of Natural Selection," the first part of which — replying to Spencer — appeared in the Contemporary Review in September, and the second in October. Professor Hartog proposed to reply to Weismann's Part I. in case Spencer did not.
To MARCUS HARTOG.
BRIGHTON, 22 September, 1893.
Thanks for your proposal to take up Weismann in case I do not. I have, however, decided to respond to him myself, and am even now engaged in writing an answer1. . . .
It will, I think, be very well, however, if you will keep the matter in mind and be prepared with a paper setting forth the argument which you briefly indicate. . . .
P.S. — If you write such a letter, pray do not admit that Weismann has shown that the specializations of social insects can be interpreted only as due to natural selection. I am about to contend that they can be otherwise interpreted.
Another contribution from Spencer's pen appeared in the Contemporary for October, 1894, under the heading " Weismannism Once More."
FROM DAVID SHARP.
28 October, 1894.
Thank you very much for the separate copy of " Weis- mannism Once More " : containing the postscript on last page about Hertwig, which I had not seen before, and which I think very good and interesting.
Contemporary Review for December, 1893.
350 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxn.
The view that evolutionists will ultimately take as to the essential nature of reproduction is one exactly the antithesis of Weismann's, viz., that the best form of germ is that which accurately carries the processes of the parents, it being under- stood that the processes of the parents form part of a con- sensus with the processes of previous parents. This last qualification is very important, and explains why I have long felt it to be impossible to expect any considerable inheritance of mutilations.
I hope you need not now trouble yourself more about Weismann. I feel no doubt that his theory will before long pass into discredit. It had this of value that it endeavoured to substitute a genuine conception of that awful X we call heredity.
In my opinion what is most wanted to secure the symmetry and add to the permanent value of your work is not the upset- ting of Weismann, but that chapter on the relations of the inorganic and organic which in your original prospectus you pointed out ought to be written.
Professor Burdon Sanderson deprecated " the acceptance by outsiders of the scheme of doctrine of Professor Weis- mann as a safe basis for speculation, and still more, the way in which it is now dogmatically taught to students of what is called Elementary Biology.
To J. S. BURDON SANDERSON.
ST. LEONARDS, 10 November, 1894.
I was greatly pleased to have your sympathetic letter con- cerning the Weismann business. Coming from one whose judgment has so high a value as yours the general agreement implied was a source of much satisfaction to me.
I have been alike astonished and exasperated at the manner in which biologists at large have received Weismann's theory. Considering that it is so entirely speculative and cannot assign, so far as I know, a single fact which serves for proof, it is amazing that men who, perhaps more than most men of science, rely upon facts, should have so widely accepted it.
Of Sir Edward Fry's letter in Nature (i November, 1894), discussing the meaning of the word " acquired " as used in the Weismann controversy, Spencer writes : —
To SIR EDWARD FRY.
3 November, 1894.
I am glad you have taken up the matter and have brought your long-exercised judicial faculty to bear upon the definitions
1889-95] Latter Day Controversies 351
of the words used, and have brought to light the confusion of thought in which the matter is at present involved.
Until the introduction of the phrase " acquired characters " within these few years, I had myself always used the expres- sion " functionally-produced modifications," and all through 77/6' Principles of Psychology, published in pre- Darwinian days, the phenomena of evolution are ascribed (far too exclusively, as I now admit) to the inheritance of functionally-produced modifications. This phrase is, I think, the better one, as excluding various misapprehensions, and I regret now that I ever, for brevity's sake, adopted the recent phrase.
The controversy was now practically ended as far as Spencer was concerned. Professor Weismann's article "Heredity Once More" in the Contemporary Review for September, 1895, called forth a letter from Spencer under the same title 1 in which he agreed with Professor Weis- mann that further controversy would be futile — " especially so if new hypotheses are to be perpetually introduced to make good the shortcomings of the old. I willingly yield, therefore, to his suggestion to ask no more questions ; and I do this the more willingly, because 1 have failed to get any answer to the crucial question which I asked at the outset."2
It is not for a layman to express an opinion on a question that divides biologists into distinct schools, more especially when he takes into account the weighty names on each side of the controversy. At the same time, bearing in mind how frequently the charge of a priori reasoning has been brought against Spencer, one cannot help remark- ing on the hypothetical nature of Professor Weismann's premises and the a priori character of his arguments. The demands he makes on one's credulity are, to say the least, not less numerous or less astounding than those made by the opposite school. Professor Marcus
1 See Contemporary Review, October, 1895.
- Spencer's articles were afterwards reprinted in the new edition of the Principles of Biology, i., pp. 602-691, Appendix B. In Appendix C (pp. 692-695) a summary is given of the evidence in favour of " The Inheritance of functionally-wrought Modifications." His last public utterance on the subject is to be found in a short paper on " Some Light on Use-Inheritance," contained in Facts and Comments (pp. 92-6), published in 1902.
352 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxil.
Hartog's description of Professor Weismann's work on Amphimixis, may be applied to the theory as a whole. It is "a magnified castle built by the a priori method on a foundation of ' facts ' carefully selected, and for the most part ill-known, misinterpreted, or incomplete." One's con- fidence in professor Weismann's doctrine is apt to be shaken by the concessions he has to make : such, for example, as the admission that the germ-cells do not lead " a charmed life" uninfluenced by the body-cells, and the admission that the body-cells may carry with them some germ-plasm. "The New Biology" may, in course of time, help us to adjust the claims of the rival theories.
353
CHAPTER XXIII.
COMPLETING THE SYNTHETIC PHILOSOPHY.
(June, 1893— November, 1896.)
NEVER had a change from London been more welcome than in 1893. His domestic troubles had utterly unhinged him. His feelings found expression in a letter to Miss
Youmans from Pewsey. "My relations with the Misses
will hereafter, I fear, be not altogether pleasant. The fact that, after all my kindnesses to them, their return is to calumniate me to their friends and to some of my friends can hardly be forgotten, and I don't know exactly how we shall get on with that fact in my consciousness." To put the evil day off he went to Brighton for September. There was no lack of friends ever ready to extend hospitality ; but as he said in reply to an invitation from Lord Dysart : " I cannot keep well for long even when I am master of my own circumstances, and I am sure to go wrong in health when I attempt to conform my daily regime to the routine of any other house than my own."
Presentation copies of books afforded opportunities of enforcing one or other of his favourite doctrines.
To HORACE SEAL.
11 July, 1893.
I am much obliged by the copy of your little book on T/ie Nature of Stale Interference.
Will you excuse me if I say that you have I think, in the first place, identified two things which are not at all to be identified — social co-operation and State-interference ; and that you have in the second place not distinguished between the purposes for which State-interference is peremptorily demanded and those for which it is not demanded. Your illustrations of the advantages derived from what you rightly consider analogous to State-interference in the animal kingdom are
23
354 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
cases in which the organism has to operate on the environ- ment, and for this purpose unquestionably State-interference — that is to say, centralization of the powers of the aggregate — is essential ; but it is not called for, nor advantageous, for carrying on the processes of internal sustentation. . . . While societies, as chiefly in the past and partly in the present, carry on predatory activities upon other societies, subordination of the individual to the State is requisite, and is and must be the more extreme in proportion as the predatory activities are dominant ; but in proportion as societies become peaceful, and the lives they carry on become lives of internal activities only, the need decreases, and there remains only the need for that subordination of the individual to the State which is requisite for maintaining orderly or non-aggressive cooperation. Your tacit assumption that Individualism means the solitary life of the individual is an entire misapprehension. It may and does go along with an elaborate form of mutual dependence.
To MRS. ARTHUR STANNARD.
6 October, 1893.
I thank you for the copy of your novel, The Soul of a Bishop. . . .
I judge of the purpose of the book from the last few paragraphs. You will scarcely expect me to coincide with your view.
The current creed represents the power which is mani- fested to us in the universe as having created myriads of men of whom, according to the Christian theory, immensely the greater number must be condemned to eternal torment. If one man were to condemn another man to eternal torment, even for the most grievous offence, and calmly looked on at his sufferings, I should regard him with horror. I do not under- stand why my feeling must be changed when in place of a man a God is conceived, and in place of a single sufferer myriads of sufferers — rather would it be intensified.
Popular nostrums for the cure of social disorders he invariably tested by appeal to experience and by reference to underlying principles. There was no lack of sympathy with the unhappy lot of certain sections of society ; though his merciless exposure of visionary, sentimental remedies often caused him to be considered unsympathetic. He felt bound to give expression to his deep-rooted conviction that many of the proposed measures of relief were worthless or at best mere palliatives, and that some of them would intensify rather than diminish the mischief they were in-
1893-9^] Completing the Synthetic Philosophy 355
tended to remove. Again and again did he urge the Hon. Auberon Herbert to direct his energies to the exposure of the fallacious reasonings and useless remedies everywhere met with in connexion with social and political matters.
TO THE HON. AUBEROX HERBERT.
7 November, 1893.
You might write an article on " Experience does not make Fools wise." For this you may take as text the demand for a a living wage," as though that had not been tried and abandoned centuries ago. And again, under the same head the proposal to provide work for the unemployed, as though that had not been tried in workhouses from Elizabeth's time downwards and been a miserable failure.
January, 1894. — At present nobody is content with the natural rewards of his own efforts, but everybody wants to be better off at somebody else's expense. This is an ethical crime and will bring on the society throughout which it prevails the punishment of criminality.
To MOXCURE D. COXWAY.
12 December, 1893.
I have just been reading in the Open Court your first article on Liberty, and have read it with great satisfaction. ... As you rightly point out, people do not at all understand the principles of liberty.
But here there is, I think, a shortcoming in your conception. They have no true idea of liberty because they have no true sentiment of liberty. No theory is of much service in the matter without a character responding to the theory — without a feeling which prompts the assertion of individual freedom and is indig- nant against aggressions upon that freedom, whether against self or others. Men care nothing about a principle, even if they understand it, unless they have emotions responding to it. When adequately strong the appropriate emotion prompts resistance to interference with individual action, whether by an individual tyrant or by a tyrant majority ; but at present, in the absence of the proper emotion, there exists almost everywhere the miserable superstition that the majority has a right to dictate to the individual about everything whatever. . . . To dissipate the superstition that the majority has un- limited powers is of more importance than anything else in the field of politics.
His hopes of completing his work were about this time by no means bright — in fact he told a friend that its com-
356 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
pletion was scarcely probable. In such a frame of mind there could be but one answer to Mr. Romanes's enquiry whether he would give next year's Romanes Lecture. " If I were to attempt it I should probably die on the platform." The same was his feeling when invited by the members of the Oxford University Junior Scientific Club to deliver the next " Robert Boyle " Lecture. His doubts as to the probability of finishing his work were strengthened by the shock he received on hearing of the death of Professor Tyndall. He himself was to winter at St. Leonards and had hoped to persuade the Tyndalls to come there.
To MRS. TYXDALL.
6 December, 1893.
You will scarcely need to be told how shocked I was when yesterday morning there came the sad news of Dr. Tyndall's death. . . .
The consciousness that he had passed so weary and suffer- ing a life for a long time past must be in some sort a set off to the grief coming upon you, and that the ending has been so sudden and painless is a further set off.
In respect of his last hours he was in fact to be envied. Had I finished my task I should be very willing to promptly pass away in the same quiet manner.
But I well know that in these cases words of consolation are of no avail and only lapse of time .can bring mitigation.
A volume by Mr. Andrew Lang, dealing amongst other things with the Ghost Theory, had been announced.
To ANDREW LAXG.
21 February, 1894.
In their original forms Tylor's view and mine are distinctly antithetical. With him animism is original and the ghost-theory derived. . . . Tylor has insensibly abandoned his original view. It may, however, I believe, be shown that by more than one there had previously been suggested the belief that the Ghost- Theory is the root of religious ideas.
26 February. — By way of criticism upon your belief, or half- belief, Let me suggest to you that the great difficulty is in getting true evidence. People are so careless in their observations and so careless in their statements, and so careless in their repetitions ! . . .
I continually meet with paragraphs about myself, many
1893-96] Completing the Synthetic Philosophy 357
absurd and many utterly baseless. An American interviewer described me as always wearing white gaiters. I never wore any in my life. It was said that I invariably carry an umbrella, and a bulky one. For many years past I have not walked at all, and when I did walk I never carried an umbrella unless it was raining or obviously certain to rain. It is said that I take my meals alone and dislike dining with others. Abso- lutely the reverse is the fact. I dislike to take a meal alone. I was asked by a lady whether it was true that I lived chiefly on bread and coffee ; a statement absolutely baseless. I was asked whether I changed my occupation every ten minutes — a statement which had a certain slight basis, but an extremely small one. I saw a paragraph stating that on one occasion I could not manage my sister's children. The only sister I ever had died when two years old. . . . And so on, and so on, almost without end. . . .
Now with such multitudinous recklessnesses of statement as these, and even mistakes of identity, how is it possible to put any confidence in testimonies with regard to so-called supernatural occurrences ? . . .
Most people cannot state truly what they see, and most people cannot re-state truly what they have been told. Hence I hold it far more likely that in all these cases the testimony is bad than that the alleged phenomenon is true.
P.S. — Then there is the element of coincidence — an all- important element. Out of the tens of thousands of incidents occurring to individuals and the myriads occurring to the members of a community it is certain that some should have a strange congruity. These congruities are more frequent than we suppose. I can give you from my own life several most remarkable ones.
28 February. — A question of statistics, yes. A dreams he meets B ; does not do so, and thinks nothing about it. Ten thousand such cases occur nightly. After a million cases have occurred some A does meet some B ; thinks it supernatural and talks about it. Thus the non-coincidences leave no marks ; the coincidences survive.
To JOHN FISKE.
27 March, 1894.
Thanks for the sympathetic expressions of your dedication, [of the Memoir of E. L. Yoninans'] which took me by surprise. I had thought nothing about a dedication, but, if I had, I would have suggested that the sister should have been the honoured person, since her great devotion to him through so many years gave her a high claim. [The book] will doubtless do good service in bringing that posthumous honour to Youmans
358 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
which he so amply deserves. So self-sacrilicing a servant of humanity is rarely met with.
The " disasters and perplexities of things " had during the spring induced a condition of great depression. His friends and acquaintances were " disappearing at the rate of twenty a year." He was unhappy in his home life. His despondency was increased by " the atrocious weather " he experienced in Wiltshire. His intention had been that this, his sixth visit to Pewsey, should last till the end of Sep- tember, but by the end of June he was tired of it. The patience of his host and hostess was also showing symptoms of giving way, owing to his fastidiousness. He returned to town in the second week of July, and on the recommenda- tion of Dr. Buzzard went to Cliftonville, near Margate, for August and part of September.
To G. J. HOLYOAKE.
MARGATE, 10 September, 1894.
Profoundly averse as I am to State-socialism and State- meddling, I feel bound to aid all efforts to encourage the only type of industrial organization which holds out any hope of better things. I am not very sanguine of the results, for it seems to me that only a small proportion of men are good enough for industrial relations of a high type. But be this as it may, everything should be done to facilitate the experi- ment, and I therefore send you a subscription of two guineas.
17 September. — I dislike to be affichc, as the French say, and I have of late years suffered much from being thus placarded.
A while ago I attended what I supposed to be a private meeting in the interests of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, and a fe\v words which I was induced to say, were, to my great dismay, reported in the next day's papers, so that I had to explain that my remarks were made without much consideration.1
At the instigation of some Jewish periodical I expressed my detestation of the persecutions in Russia, thoughtlessly supposing that my letter would have no further circulation. But it got quoted in certain papers, not only here but on the Continent, and even in Russia, where, as Mr. Caine reported, it produced a howl — a result which I had never intended
Last year I was led to send a contribution to the Anti- Gambling League, feeling compelled to do so because of the
1 Supra, chap, xx., p. 303.
1893-96] Completing the Synthetic Philosophy 359
strong condemnation of gambling I had uttered in The Study of Sociology, and though I marked my accompanying note " private," its substance, or what professed erroneously to be its substance, was published in the evening papers.1
Then just recently, as you must have seen, my protest against the misrepresentation of my views about land-ownership has entangled me in a controversy in the Daily Chronicle*
. . . These various occurrences are liable to produce the impression that I want to pose as a philanthropist or as an aider in philanthropic undertakings. I shrink from any such interpretation.
You must therefore abide by my endorsement u private," and keep my note unpublished ; and you must please also not signalize the fact that I have contributed to the fund.
His German translator, Dr. Vetter, in whose intelligence and judgment Spencer had always placed the utmost reliance, had died early in 1893. Dr. Vetters's place was taken in the following year by Professor Victor Carus. One of his French translators, M. Auguste Burdeau, was also removed by death. This meant the loss of a friend for whose character and ability Spencer had a genuine regard.
To MADAME BURDEAU.
21 December, 1894.
There are condolences as a matter of form and there are condolences as expressions of real feeling. Those which I now offer you belong to the latter class. ' For these many years past I have admired M. Burdeau. ... At the time when he was preparing his version of my Essays I was struck by his conscientious care to ensure accuracy. . . . The traits of character then disclosed on small occasions have since been disclosed on large occasions, and joined with his intelligence and wide culture made him so valuable a servant of the State. I regret in common with his countrymen that his character and capacity, through which still greater things might have been expected, should have been prematurely lost to France.
He had never got over his disappointment at the futile result of the " Record of Legislation " he and Mr. Donis- thorpe had planned and begun in 1892. Circumstances at the end of 1894 seemed favourable for another attempt being made to rouse public interest.
1 Supra, chap, xxi., p. 327. 2 Supra, chap, xxii., p. 340.
360 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
To WORDSWORTH DONISTHORPE.
11 November, 1894.
You have no doubt seen in the papers notices of Mr. Ilbert's scheme for a comparative record of Laws of the English speaking peoples. This is so nearly allied to the scheme of a record of English laws from the beginning that I think it is desirable to make public the prior movement. . . . I think of writing a letter to the Times describing what you and I had done, and sending with it a sample of the im- pressions taken of the tables as drawn up, by way of showing what had been accomplished. ... I mean to embody in it some sarcastic criticisms upon the wealthy classes as to their utter lack of all initiative and lack of all conception of any but the most commonplace philanthropic undertakings.
18 November. — You are quite welcome to mention the fact you refer to, namely, that a long time ago I enunciated the doctrine that the State should administer civil justice gratui- tously. There is a passage in u Justice " setting forth this doc- trine and defending it.
23 November. — If the State became responsible for the administration of civil justice in the manner implied in the passage from the Principles of Ethics, I take it that an entire change of method would be a concomitant. The State would now not stand in the position of umpire, but would become an active investigator. On complaint being made to the local authority that some aggression had been committed or some non-fulfilment of an agreement, the first step might be that of sending an appointed functionary — an officer of first instance — to interview jointly the two disputants, and hear from them their respective statements, and explain to them the la\v affecting the matter. In nine cases out of ten the presence or absence of a wrong is clear enough, and the opinion of this official on the matter would suffice to effect a settlement. In cases where one of the disputants did not yield, or in cases where the official himself was in doubt, there would then be a reference to a higher legal authority, before whom, with the aid of this officer of first instance, the case would be set forth and who would himself cross-examine the parties in respect of the transaction. If, after his decision, there was still resistance on the part of one, any further appeal might be at the cost, or if not the whole cost then the part cost, of the persisting suitor : the distinction made being that where there was an evident breach of an obvious law the cost should be borne by the recalcitrant person, but not so where the interpretation of the law in the particular case might fairly be considered a matter of doubt,
1893-96] Completing the Synthetic Philosophy 361
I should add that along with any such change of adminis- tration it is implied that there should be such change in the law itself as to make it comprehensible and definite. A clearly and rationally organized body of law, comprehensible by the ordinary citizen, would itself exclude the greater pro- portion of aggressions, and when breaches of laws, clearly understood, were in some such way as that described promptly dealt with, without cost to the injured person, there would be very few such breaches.
25 November. — Please say nothing about my views on the administration of civil justice.
13 January, 1895. — Thanks for the copy of your new volume [a second series of individualist essays]. ... I regret that you have used the word " anarchist " or u philosophical anarchist." It has at present, and quite naturally, so bad an odour that use of it raises a preliminary prejudice against any conclusions which appear to be congruous writh anarchist doctrines. You cannot get people to distinguish. Moreover, the word seems to me broader than is appropriate to your meaning, since you recognize the need for some government.
I wish you would deal with Mr. Sidney Webb. I see by this week's Spectator, which partly reprobates and partly commends him, that he has in the Contemporary been setting forth the beneficial achievements of the County Council, which you and I regard as mischievous rather than beneficial. If you could contribute to the Contemporary an article showing the socialistic character of these achievements, and pointing out that the Spectator and others who approve are simply furthering the socialism which they condemn in the abstract, you would do good service.
A year before this, on the occasion of the bomb outrage by Vaillant in Paris, he thanked M. Jean Schmidt for an article in the Figaro representing his views as being " of the absolutely opposite kind" to anarchic.
To HENRY CHARLTOX BASTIAN.
MARGATE, 17 August, 1894.
There has been for some time a conspiracy afoot among retail booksellers and publishers, which is intended to have the effect of abolishing the present system of making discounts of 2d. and 3d. in the shilling. . . .
A generation ago I was one of those who took part in the agitation which abolished the then existing system of
J
62 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
retailer's discounts of 33 per cent., which were maintained by allowing no retailer to make an abatement and regarding as black sheep those who did, and preventing them from getting books if possible.
This system they are now quietly endeavouring to re- establish. I want to get full particulars of the proceedings before taking action.
He wished Dr. Bastian to ascertain from one of the large retail booksellers how the new system of marking books as " net " affected discount booksellers. " Do not mention my name. If I take public action in the matter it will be anonymously, for I do not want to set the trade against me." A communication in the form of a letter " From a Correspondent " appeared on 24 October. In this letter he gave an account of the negociations in 1852 which ended in abolishing the coercive regulation according to which a retail bookseller who sold books at lower rates of profit than those prescribed was prevented from obtaining supplies of books.
All know what has since happened, or rather all know what has been the usages for the last generation, though they may not know how they arose. The practice of allowing a discount of 2d. in the Is. from the advertised price of a book was quickly established, and after a time the discount was by many, and eventually by most, retailers increased to 3d. in the Is., or 25 per cent. That benefit has resulted cannot well be questioned. . . . Increased sales consequent on lower prices have thus made possible much of the best literature which would else have been impossible. These advantages are now being furtively destroyed. Some three years ago, in certain advertisements of books, the word u net " was inserted after the price, implying that no discount would be allowed. . . . Already coercive measures, like those which a generation ago maintained this system, are growing up. Booksellers who have allowed small discounts from " net " prices have received warnings that, if they do so again, supplies of books will be denied to them. . . . Doubtless we shall hear a defence of these resuscitated regulations. Some will say that retailers should be properly paid for their work, and that underselling by one another does them great mischief. Others will say that publishers benefit by giving retailers a sufficient stimulus to push their books. The authors, too, will be said to gain by the increased sales resulting. It will even possibly be urged that the public are benefited by having books brought under their notice better than they would otherwise be. To these
1893-96] Completing the Synthetic Philosophy 363
and other pleas there is a brief, but sufficient, reply. They were urged a generation ago, and a generation ago they were ex- amined and rejected.1
Professor Henry Drummond had for years acknow- ledged himself an admiring student of Spencer's writings. It was with no little surprise, therefore, said Professor Drummond's biographer, that his friends read Mrs. Lynn Linton's article in the Fortnightly Review for Septem- ber, 1894, in which she "made a furious onslaught on what she alleged to be Drummond's 'pseudo-science and plagiarisms/ overlooking, as her critics pointed out, his acknowledgments of indebtedness to Herbert Spencer and other writers on the very points with reference to which she made her serious charges." The prime mover of Mrs. Lynn Linton's article was Spencer himself.2
To MRS. LYXN LIXTOX.
6 June, 1894/
Professor Drummond. . . in his recently published work, The Ascent of Man, with the airs of a discoverer and with a tone of supreme authority sets out to instruct me and other evolutionists respecting the factor of social evolution which we have ignored — altruism.
... I do not, of course, like to undertake it [a reply] myself, but I should be very glad if somebody would undertake it for me, and on looking round for a proxy I thought of you. With your vigorous style and picturesque way of presenting things, you would do it in an interesting and effective way, at the same time that you would be able to illustrate and enforce the doctrine itself.
3 September. — When I returned you the MS. I thought your article vigorous and effective, and now that I have read it in print I see that it is still more vigorous and effective. . . .
The fact that the Standard devotes an article to you is sufficiently significant, and I join in the applause given by the writer to your denunciation, not of Professor Drummond only, but of the public taste which swallows with greediness these semi-scientinc sentimentalities.
He was not so successful in inducing any of his scien- tific friends to reply to Lord Salisbury's address as President of the British Association at Oxford.
1 Various Fragments, pp. 156-180.
2 Life of Mrs. Lynn Lin ton, pp. 310-12.
364 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxur.
To ALFRED R. WALLACE.
10 August, 1894.
If we differ on some points we agree on many, and one of the points on which we doubtless agree is the absurdity of Lord Salisbury's representation of the process of Natural Selection, based upon the improbability of two varying individuals meet- ing. His nonsensical representation of the theory ought to be exposed, for it will mislead very many people. I see it is adopted by the Pall Mall.
I have been myself strongly prompted to take the matter up, but it is evidently your business to do that. Pray write a letter to the Times explaining that selection, or survival of the fittest, does not necessarily take place in the way he describes. You might set out by showing that whereas he begins by com- paring himself to a volunteer colonel reviewing a regiment of regulars he very quickly changes his attitude and becomes a colonel of regulars reviewing volunteers, making fun of their bunglings. He deserves a severe castigation. There are other points on which his views should be rectified, but this is the essential point.
To T. H. HUXLEY.
LONDON, 1 October, 1894.
Is nobody going to give a dressing to Lord Salisbury ? Sometime ago I wrote to Wallace wanting him to take up in the Times the question of Natural Selection in respect of which the argument used is so absurd, but Wallace pleaded that he was busy with other things. Your mouth is, I suppose, closed by your position as seconder of the vote of thanks at the Association meeting.
The theologically-minded have been hurrahing and throw- ing up their caps, and it is, I think, needful that they should be sobered a little by being shown the fallacy, and indeed the folly, of his lordship's criticisms. Old and feeble as I am I feel strongly prompted to do it — the more so as there are various things of importance to be said incidentally.
FROM T. H. HUXLEY.
3 October, 1894.
I am writing something for the half jubilee of Nature in November next — in which I think I shall rub in Lord Salis- bury's surrender in essentials a little more strongly than I could do at Oxford ; but, as to his criticisms of Natural Selection and so on, I really doubt if they are worth powder and shot.
But if you think otherwise go ahead by all means — I earned the prize of virtue at Oxford, though I shall not get it. You may imagine how tempting it was to me to tear the thing to
1893-96] Completing the Synthetic Philosophy 365
pieces. But that was hardly the line for a seconder, and I restrained myself to such damage as I could do, by warmly praising all the concessions which that dexterous debater had left in shadow.1
Having failed to get any one to write, Spencer would probably have allowed the matter to rest, but for the circumstance that a translation of the address had been honoured by being presented to the French Academy. Hence his article on "Lord Salisbury on Evolution." This was generally regarded in France as victorious on all points, so M. Leon Say told Dr. Gazelles when they met at the funeral of M. Floquet. Thanks to the interposition of M. du Mesnil and M. Milne Edwards, it was laid on the table of the Academic des Sciences by Professor Perrier.
To MRS. TYNDALL.
LONDON, 23 October, 1894.
I am about to make arrangements for going again to St. Leonards, ... I want you to do me the great favour of coming to stay with me there as long as you can. I am thinking of asking as one to visit me Miss Cross, sister of Mr. John Cross who married George Eliot — a very amiable woman and intelli- gent, who wrote one charming story and ought to write others. Then, as another guest, I shall probably have Miss Gingell, a Gloucestershire lady, who compiled a volume of aphorisms from my writings, when unknown to me. Another I may probably ask is Miss Edith Hughes, daughter of an enthusiastic adherent of mine in Birmingham. . . . Last winter one of the two ladies who formed the circle was Miss Charlotte Shickle .... who did the housekeeping for me. . . . She is a good soul— good in a very unusual degree, I never met any one who, when a kind thing was to be done, rushed at it in the same way.
Soon after settling at St. Leonards he gave formal notice
determining the agreement between the Misses and
himself ; the reason assigned being the heavy expense en- tailed by being so much away from London. But as his plans were not yet matured he thought it might be con- venient for both parties if the actual termination were postponed, subject to a month's notice. " The remem- brance of times spent with you and your sisters during
1 Life of Professor Huxley, ii., 375-9.
366 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
1889, '90, '91, and '92 will always be pleasant to me." His plans were certainly not matured at the date of giving notice; for it was not till 1897 that the Avanue Road establishment was broken up.
To COUNT GOBLET D'ALVIELLA.
7 January, 1895.
Thanks for your letter and for the accompanying little volume Vie et (Euvre de Entile de Laveleye. . . . You comment upon the conflict between the opinions of M. de Laveleye and my own. The fact was, M. de Laveleye never knew what my views were. He, in common with many others, laid hold of some one portion and formed his conclusions from it without due recognition of correlative portions. Because I hold that the struggle for existence and the survival of the fittest should be allowed to go on in Society, subject to those restraints which are involved by preventing each man from interfering with the sphere of action of another, and should not be mitigated by governmental agency, he, along with many others, ran away with the notion that [my belief was that] they should not be mitigated at all. ... I regard voluntary beneficence as adequate to achieve all those mitigations that are proper and needful. M. de Laveleye did not see that that which he agreed with me in denouncing and fearing — the universal supremacy of the State — is the outcome of that policy of benevolent interference which it appears he advocated.
To J. A. SKILTON.
10 January, 1895.
If, as it would seem, you think that I have got a scheme for the future of society in my head you are altogether mis- taken. Your conception of applied sociology — a bringing to bear of evolutionary principles on social organization with a view to its improvement — is one which I do not entertain. The sole thing about which I feel confident is that no higher types of social organization can grow until international antagonisms and, consequently, wars cease. . . . You have faith in teaching, which I have not — you believe men are going to be changed in their conduct by being shown what line of conduct is rational. I believe no such thing. Men are not rational beings, as commonly supposed. A man is a bundle of instincts, feelings, sentiments, which severally seek their gratification, and those which are in power get hold of the reason and use it to their own ends, and exclude all other sentiments and feelings from power. . . . There is no hope for the future save in the slow modification of human nature under social discipline. Not teaching, but action is the requisite
1893-96] Completing the Synthetic Philosophy 367
cause. To have to lead generation after generation a life that is honest and sympathetic is the one indispensable thing. No adequate change of character can be produced in a year, or in a generation, or in a century. All which teaching can do — all which may, perhaps, be done by a wider diffusion of principles of sociology, is the checking of retrograde action. The analogy supplied by an individual life yields the true conception. You cannot in any considerable degree change the course of individual growth and organization — in any con- siderable degree antedate the stages of development. But you can, in considerable degree, by knowledge put a check upon those courses of conduct which lead to pathological states and accompanying degradations.
Any one who wishes to aid social advance should devote all his energies to showing, that no fundamental and permanent progress in social life can be made while warlike activities and the social organization appropriate to them continue.
2 February. — A true theory of social progress is not a cause of movement but is simply oil to the movement — serves simply to remove friction. The force producing the movement is the aggregate of men's instincts and sentiments, and these are not to be changed by a theory.
You think that I have got some message and that utterance of it might stave off impending evils. I have but one message — Be honest : regard the equitable claims of others while maintaining your own. The disregard of all save personal interests is the underlying cause of your present state and of impending disasters. As I said years ago a propos of American affairs, a fatal trait in your society is the admiration of " smart " men, and I believe I -said or implied that a people among whom there is admiration for u smart " men will come to grief. If you think that a healthier ideal can be established in American society by teaching, I entirely disagree. Under your present condition men could not be got to listen. Even if they listened, they would not be convinced. And even if they were convinced, their conduct would not be appreciably affected. When men are under the influence of pronounced feelings no amount of reason changes their behaviour.
To J. W. CROSS.
18 January, 1895.
While she was with me your sister named the opinion you had expressed that a crash is impending in the United States — a financial crash, I gathered from her statement. I too am expecting a crash, but have been rather contemplating a social than a financial crash. Probably either will be a factor in producing the other. That a dreadful catastrophe is coming
368 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
I do not feel the slightest doubt. The Americans are now beginning to reap the far-reaching and widely-diffused conse- quences of their admiration for smart prigs, and the general mercantile laxity.
To MRS. TYNDALL.
31 May, 1895.
Fundamentally regarded, the condition of things is this. Men within these few generations have become emancipated from the restraints which a strong social organization had over them. They are rapidly proving themselves unfit for the con- dition of liberty, and they are busy unconsciously organizing for themselves a tyranny which will put them under as strong a restraint as, or a stronger restraint than, before.
22 June. — We are coming to a maladministration of justice like that in Ireland.
Having been informed that the Italian socialist, Pro- fessor Ferri, had adduced his authority in support of socialism, he wrote (June 12, 1895) an indignant protest, which was published in La Riforma. In a letter (19 June) to the editor of La Riforma, Signor Ferri pointed out that Spencer was under a misapprehension.
No socialist has ever dreamt to include among the sup- porters of Socialism the greatest living philosopher. . . . But it is necessary to distinguish between the personal opinions of H. Spencer and the logical outcome of the positive theory of universal evolution, which he has developed better than any other writer, without however obtaining an official patent against the unrestricted expansion which is daily given to that theory by the work of other thinkers. In the preface to my book I stated that Spencer and Darwin had stopped midway, and consequently without reaching the logical con- sequences of their doctrine.
A copy of his article on " Mr. Balfour's Dialetics," published in the June number of the Fortnightly Review, was put aside with a view to its appearance in a permanent form in the next edition of the essays. But in a note written on this copy in November, 1897, he says that " in consequence of Mr. Balfour's noble behaviour in actively aiding the portrait presentation scheme, I have decided that I cannot with good taste republish it."
1893-96] Completing the Synthetic Philosophy 369
The Order " Pour le Merite " was offered him, but declined in a communication to the German Ambassador (i June, 1895).
Mr. Herbert Spencer presents his compliments to His Excellency the German Ambassador, and begs to acknowledge the receipt of his letter of May 31, notifying the fact that the German Emperor has conferred on Mr. Spencer the Royal Order " Pour le Merite " for arts and sciences. Naturally the fact cannot but be a source of satisfaction to him.
On various occasions during the last hve and twenty years Mr. Spencer has declined the honours that have been con- ferred on him ; and to accept the honour now conferred would not only be inconsistent with his convictions, but would imply a slight upon the learned bodies whose honours he has on past occasions declined. Though the fountain of honour is not in this case of the same nature as in previous cases, yet the reasons which prompted his course remain the same. What those reasons are may be seen from certain passages in a letter addressed to the French Academy in May, 1883, after Mr. Spencer had been elected a Foreign Associate of that body. . . >
Mr. Spencer, without undervaluing the distinction of inclu- sion in the Royal Order " Pour le Merite," feels compelled to pursue the course he has hitherto pursued and, therefore, to decline the accorded honour.
About a week later he was informed by Professor Theodor Gomperz of Vienna that the Imperial Vienna Academy had elected him a foreign honorary member. Having seen in the papers that Spencer had been declining as a matter of principle all honours, Professor Gomperz, who had taken the initiative in the election, hoped that the rumour was untrue.
But if it should be true (he wrote), I must request you, kindly to write a line as soon as you find time for it. For our act of election is only a preliminary ; the nomination belongs to the prerogative of His Majesty the Emperor. And if you should be firmly resolved to refuse such a nomina- tion, our election would (I suppose) not be submitted for sanction to His Majesty. You would then be spared the un- welcome necessity of meeting an act of respectful sympathy by a flat refusal, and we would be spared the still more unpleasant necessity of exposing our sovereign to such a refusal.
1 Supra, chap, xvii., p. 233. 24
370 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
Spencer was sorry to be unable to contradict the rumour as to his attitude towards honours, the reasons given being those with which the reader is now familiar. A similar course was followed when he was offered the membership of the Royal Lombardian Institute of Sciences and Letters, and the degree of Doctor of the University of Buda Pesth.
FROM MRS. TYXDALL.
5 June, 1895. Talking of your early life reminds me that I met yesterday
a Miss , who mentioned that she had heard her father
tell of a time in your engineering days when you were in the habit of eating tallow candles, the inference being drawn that your brain thereby became specially nourished. How such a ridiculous story came to be invented I do not know.
To MRS. TYNDALL.
6 June, 1895. Thank you very much for the amazing story you send
me. I could fill a small volume with absurd stories about myself, of some of which I can trace the origin, but others without any imaginable origin. This most absurd one which you send is one of the last class. It is the more remarkable as coming from one who might reasonably be supposed to know.
In place of Pewsey the summer resort for 1895 was Westerham, Kent, whither he went about the middle of June. He had not been there many days when a severe blow fell upon him by the death of Professor Huxley.
To MRS. HUXLEY.
WESTERHAM, 2 July, 1895.
If recovery had become hopeless, longer continuance of life under such suffering as has of late been borne was scarcely to be desired, and this thought may be entertained as in part a consolation in your bereavement. A further con- solation, and one which will be of long duration, is derivable from the contemplation of his life as having been model — exemplary in the capacities of husband, father, citizen and teacher.
The death of Lord Pembroke, whose character and aims he estimated very highly, removed one more from the ever narrowing circle of his friends and acquaintances.
1893-96] Completing the Synthetic Philosophy 371
Hitherto Lady Pembroke's correspondence with Spencer had for the most part related to political or scientific questions of general interest ; but after Lord Pembroke's death her letters took an entirely new turn : the nature of life and mind, the unimportance of matter, telepathy, a future existence, being among the subjects dilated upon. Occasionally, in discussing these subjects, she felt she was getting beyond her depth, as when she said : " I trust I am not writing presumptuous nonsense to the greatest philosopher of the day."
TO THE COUXTESS OF PEMBROKE.
26 June, 1895.
On the great questions you raise I should like to comment at some length had I the energy to spare. The hope that continually groping, though in the dark, may eventually dis- cover the clue, is one I can scarcely entertain, for the reason that human intelligence appears to me incapable of framing any conception of the required kind. ... It seems to me that our best course is to submit to the limitations imposed by the nature of our minds, and to live as contentedly as we may in ignorance of that which lies behind things as we know them. .My own feeling respecting the ultimate mystery is such that of late years I cannot even try to think of infinite space with- out some feeling of terror, so that I habitually shun the thought.
5 July. — The general question is too wide for discussion in a letter, but I may suggest the consideration of a fact which perhaps will throw doubt upon your assumption that life is a thing instead of being a process. It is well known among naturalists that certain minute forms of aquatic life, as, for example, the Rotifers, may be dried up until they resemble particles of dust, and that, though then dead in so far as absence of all vital manifestations is concerned, they, when duly supplied again with water, perhaps after years, absorb it, and recommence their lives. If we understand life to be a process this is comprehensible, but if we understand life to be a thing it is not comprehensible.
However, without pushing the argument further I may end up by saying that the whole thing is at bottom an in- soluble mystery, and I quite understand your attitude in entertaining what Tennyson calls the " Larger hope."
5 November. — Respecting your question concerning u con- jectures," I have ceased to form any, since the more the mystery of things is thought about the more mysterious it
372 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
becomes. As I said at the close of an essay written many years ago, u the Ultimate Power is no more representable in terms of human consciousness than human consciousness is representable in terms of a plant's functions." And, of course, what is here said respecting the Ultimate Power holds equally respecting the Ultimate Process.
The simple fact, that the endeavour to answer the question whether space is infinite or not infinite leads us to alternative impossibilities of thought, suffices to show that no conjectures wre can frame with regard to the reality of things can have any approach to the truth.
19 January, 1896. — I remember hearing Professor Owen say that it is given only to the man of science to know what a fact is, and my own experience endorses the saying. The mass of mankind are so uncritical that they do not distinguish between valid and invalid evidence. When in past years I looked into alleged non-natural phenomena I found the ideas of what constitutes proof so loose that I ceased to pay any attention to the matter. . . .
A special combination of qualities is required for an examiner in such cases : he must have both scientific know- ledge and definite ideas of causation, and also a knowledge of human nature and a quick perception of human motives and conduct. Most are deficient in one or other qualification. Being myself deficient in the last, I would not trust my own' conclusions were I to take part in a seance or in kindred testing of alleged abnormal manifestations. I am so wanting in quick observation of people's doings, feelings, intentions, etc., that I should be easily deluded. But my own experience is that remarkable coincidences occur with such comparative frequency as to be quite capable of accounting for the occasional instances of things apparently supernatural. I have myself sometimes had promptings to believe in a supernatural agency, caused by the repeated experiences of coincidences in various ways in- jurious. . . . And simple induction would I think almost have led me to believe in supernatural agency were it not that with me the conviction of natural causation is so strong that it is impossible to think away from it.
But I should have been more apt to accept a supernatural explanation had it not been for the many experiences I have had of meaningless coincidences, showing how frequent and how astonishing they are. ... If meaningless coincidences are thus frequent, there must occasionally occur coincidences that have meaning — coincidences of which the elements are related in some significant way, and when they do occur they attract attention from their resemblance and suggest a supernatural cause. It is this consideration which has joined in making me reject the supernatural interpretation above referred to.
1893-96] Completing the Synthetic Philosophy 373
21 January. — If I find myself obliged to hold that there are supernatural manifestations and a supernatural interference with the order of things, then my personal experience would force me to the conclusion that the power underlying things is diabolical.
Were I well enough, ... I should be pleased were you to honour me with a call on your way to Eastbourne, but unhappily listening tries me nearly as much as talking. ... I may however be considerably better by the time referred to and in that case should gladly listen to the experiences you name.
This -closes the correspondence so far as regards the supreme question discussed, with exception of a letter from Lady Pembroke in May, in which she says (probably with reference to the visit above referred to) : " After our last conversation I think you will believe that I have fallen away from the school of precise thinking."
While these lines are being written, the death of Lady Pembroke on August 31, 1906, is announced. Another of Spencer's friends — the Dowager Countess of Portsmouth — died on the same day. Lady Portsmouth had for years been unwearied in her kindnesses and unwavering in her admiration of his character. WThen sending him a copy of the reprinted essays, etc., of her brother, the late Earl of Carnarvon, she wrote : " It is possible you differed on some subjects. It is possible yoii agreed on many. It is quite certain that you stood together in a noble love of justice and truth."
In July, 1895, a proposal that he should sit for his portrait to Mr. McLure Hamilton was declined for the reasons given some seven years before when he was asked to sit to Millais.1 Later in the year, in connexion with Mr. Watts' gift to the National Portrait Gallery, a suggestion was made by Mr. Collins in the Times (December n) to have a portrait painted by Watts and added to the national collection.
To F. HOWARD COLLINS.
12 December, 1895.
I was startled by your letter in yesterday's Times. ... It is vigorously written, and its point artistically brought out.
1 Supra, chap, xix., p. 283.
374 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
It will greatly astonish most people by the claim it makes, which, I doubt not, they will think absurd.
I fear, however, that in respect of the result desired it is unlikely to succeed. Probably this gift made by Mr. Watts, if it does not mark the end of his career as an artist, marks the end of his career as a portrait-painter, and I should think that at his age he will probably object to undertake anything more.
A notice was also sent by Spencer to the Times, (December 14) to the effect that the letter " was written and published entirely without his knowledge, and that he must not in any way be held responsible for the suggestion contained in it." On the lyth he informed Mr. Collins : "Please take no further step in the matter of the portrait. I am no admirer of Watts and should have no desire to sit to him, even if he assented. As to any other plan that may be proposed, I know of none to which I should not raise objection." Mr. Watts was far from assenting. In a letter to Mr. Collins he expressed his feeling that any attempt he might make would be likely to end in failure.
A request from Mr. A. Mordan, of Reigate, that he would sit to Mr. Wells for a portrait to be presented to the National Portrait Gallery was also declined.
While at Westerham he sent a letter to Nature on " The Nomenclature of Colours," quoting a passage from the un- published Autobiography (i. 309).
To F. HOWARD COLLINS.
^September, 1895.
My objection to your proposed chart of colours is that, in the first place, it does not make the composition of each colour obvious, which is a primary desideratum, and in the second place, that it does n.ot give in juxtaposition with each colour its assigned name. Hence the memory is not in either way aided to the same extent, and further there is no such advantage as that given by the method of u boxing the com- pass " of colours, namely, that the mode of naming each colour and its relative position can be easily recalled when it has been forgotten, since the method of naming is easily recovered.
Reference to the above led him to bring to light a " Classification of Artistic Characters of Paintings," which
1 893*96 Completing tke Synthetic Philosophy 375
he had drawn up probaoly during or about the time of his visit to Italy in 1868, and of which he says : "These were drawn up at a time when I hoped I should one day deal with ^Esthetic Progress, and my intention was to go through Home and Foreign Picture Galleries to classify pictures in respect of these traits." The classification em- braced four heads : — Subject, Form, Colour, Shade.1
His loyalty to the memory of Dr. Youmans was shown by his letter to the Times in September, pointing out how unceasing had been his friend's efforts in the United States to uphold the interests of authors. The strength of this feeling was shown some two months later when invited by the London editor of McChtre's Magazine to contribute to that journal.
I have, in virtue mainly of my indebtedness to my old friend for all he did on my behalf in the United States, felt bound to make the Popular Science Monthly my sole medium for publication of articles in the United States, and the obliga- tion, which was peremptory during his life, remains strong after his death, since his brother occupies his place and has con- tinued his good offices on my behalf.
Copyright between the mother country and Canada had, about this time, assumed an acute form, in consequence of the Dominion Parliament requiring that to secure copyright a book must have been printed in Canada. Professor Goldwin Smith contended for the excision of this clause. In favour of its retention Sir Charles Tupper quoted a document signed many years before by fifty British Authors, of whom Spencer was one. Thereupon Spencer
1 R — religious C.P — colour primary
RW — religious worship C.Pu— colour pure
M — mythology C.St — colour strong
L — loyal C.S — colour secondary
P — political C.T — colour tertiary
C.M — colour mixed
S— symmetrical C.Im — colour impure
US — unsymmetrical
A.S — attitudes symmetrical N.S — no shade
A.US — attitudes unsymmetrical H.S — half shade
A. A — attitudes alike F.S— full shade
A.D — attitudes distorted S.S — strong shade
S.U — shading uniform S.C — shading contrasted
376 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
wrote to the Times (22 October) explaining the general purport of that memorial (which he had himself drawn up), pointing out that the inferences Sir Charles Tupper had drawn from it were not warrantable, and quoting Professor Goldwin Smith's opinion that the clause requiring a book to be printed in Canada must be " excised." This word "excised" appeared in the cablegram to Canada as "exer- cised." Professor Goldwin Smith naturally protested against this inversion of his meaning, which to Spencer looked like a deliberate falsification in Canadian interests. By way of counteracting any such purpose, assuming it to exist, he wrote to the Colonial Secretary. While not doubting that the Canadians had a keen eye to their own interests, Mr. Chamberlain did not think they differed from other people. Mr. Hall Caine had, he hoped, helped to make an arrange- ment possible which would be satisfactory to English authors.
Once more, and for the last time, he had to defend his independence of Comte.
To LESTER F. WARD.
19 September, 1895.
I have just received a copy of your essay on "The Place of Sociology among the Sciences," and on glancing through it am startled by some of its statements.
(1) You have not, I presume, read my essay on "The Genesis of Science," otherwise you would scarcely say that Comte's classification represents the genetic or serial order of the sciences. . . .
(2) But I am much more amazed by your statement respect- ing Comte's system that " Spencer himself, notwithstanding all his efforts to overthrow it, actually adopted it in the arrange- ment of the sciences in his Synthetic Philosophy." Now in the first place, if you will look at my essay on " The Genesis of Science," you will see that the first two great groups of sciences — the Abstract, containing logic and mathematics, the Abstract- Concrete, containing mechanics, physics, and chemistry —have no place whatever in the Synthetic Philosophy. . . .
Setting aside the fact that, as I have pointed out, the sciences which deal with the forms of phenomena and those which deal with their factors make no appearance whatever in the order of sciences forming the Synthetic Philosophy, there is the fact that even if the sciences as involved in the Synthetic Philosophy are compared with the system of Comte,
1893-96] Completing the Synthetic Philosophy 377
they are shown to be wholly incongruous with it. If you will turn to the original preface of First. Principles, in which an outline of the Synthetic Philosophy is set forth, you will see there, between the programme of First Principles and the pro- gramme of the Biology a note in italics pointing out that in logical order there should come an application of First Prin- ciples to inorganic nature, and that the part of it dealing with inorganic nature is omitted simply because the scheme, even as it stood, was too extensive. Two volumes were thus omitted — a volume on astronomy and a volume on geology. Had it been possible to write these, in addition to those undertaken, the series would have run — astronomy, geology, biology, psycho- logy, sociology, ethics. Now in this series those marked in italics do not appear in the Comtian classification at all.
(3) But now, in the third place, I draw your attention to Table III. in my u Classification of the Sciences." There you will see that the order of the works already existing in the Synthetic Philosophy, and still better the order in which they would have stood had the thing been complete, cor- responds exactly with the order shown in that table, and is an order which evolves necessarily from the mode of organiza- tion there insisted upon, and corresponds also to the order of appearance in time, if you set out with nebular condensation and end with social phenomena. The order of the Synthetic Philosophy does not correspond with that of Comte, and it does correspond with the order shown in my own u Classifica- tion of the Sciences."
On the appearance in the Review of Reviews for Novem- ber of Mr. Grant Allen's "Character Sketch," Spencer was again impressed with the weight of his obligations to that singularly able and generous champion.
To GRANT ALLEN.
18 Xovember, 1895.
You have, as always before, proved yourself a most out- spoken and efficient advocate — perhaps, in a sense, almost too efficient, since in some minds the large claims you make on my behalf may cause some reactive feeling. I say this partly because, even in myself, the reading of your exposition last night at the Athemeum oddly enough seemed to produce a kind of vague scepticism, as though it could hardly all be true. So you may judge how largely you have made me loom in the eyes of the general reader.
It strikes me that in one respect you have been crediting me at your own cost, for in the passage concerning the relation between growth and reproduction I recognize less of my own
378 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
views than of the views you lately set forth, in which there was very truly expressed the truth that the ultimate mystery centres more in the ability of the individual organism to per- petually reproduce its own structure than in its ability to reproduce like structures.
The earliest of all his friends — Mr. George Holme — passed away in the beginning of 1896.
To CHARLES HOLME.
8 February, 1896.
The last days of a long life when it has passed into decrepi- tude with all its miseries are not to be desired, and when there has been reached that limit after which nothing can be done and little save pain can be experienced, the cessation of life is scarcely to be regretted. You and your mother and sisters have this thought as a set-off against the feeling which must result from the breaking of the last link with your father.
You have, too, the permanent consolation of remembering that he led what may be characterized as a model life. . . . With energy and great natural intelligence he joined, in a degree far beyond that which is usual, the root of all high character — sympathy. ... It was to the existence in him of this predominant sympathy that I owe my life.
To HECTOR MACPHERSOX.
20 February, 1896.
On returning from Brighton last night, after an absence of three months, I found your little book on Carlyle. ... I see that it is written in a manner which might well be imitated by biographers — not with unqualified eulogy, but with qualified eulogy. It is curious that to one sympathizing with me as you do should have fallen the task of writing the life of one so utterly antagonistic — so antagonistic that on one occasion I saw that he called me an u immeasurable ass."
28 February. — I have read the greater part of your little book on Carlyle with interest. It is a very good combination of narrative, exposition, characterization, and criticism, and this union of elements gives in brief space a definite idea of the man.
You have been quite fair to him — more than fair, I think. You have not brought into prominence his less amiable traits. His extreme arrogance should, I think, have been more dis- tinctly indicated, and also the fact that his sympathy with despotic modes of dealing with men was the outcome of his own despotic nature.
1893-96] Completing the Synthetic Philosophy 379
20 March. — Thank you for your proposal [to write a book on Spencer]. I should of course very well like to see such a book written, and have no doubt that you would do it well.
I think, however, that in inferring from the success of your little book on Carlyle that a book of the kind you name would succeed, you are over sanguine. Biography and philosophy in respect of popular appreciation stand at the opposite poles. To the average mind the one yields much pleasure with no effort, the other yields no pleasure with much effort.
Spencer's dissatisfaction with the decimal system was of long standing.1 But occasion did not arise for taking the question up till January, 1895, when he wrote a long letter to Lord Kelvin, who had made a public pronounce- ment in favour of the metric system. After an interval of a little over a year he wrote four letters against the metric system, which appeared in the Times (4, 7, 9, 25 April, 1896) and were afterwards sent in pamphlet form to members of the British House of Commons and of the United States Congress.
FROM Miss YOUMANS.
MOUNT VERNON, 20 February, 1896.
You are Hearing the end of your peerless labour. What superhuman courage and persistence you have showrn ! You ought to be very proud of yourself. If Edward could only be here in this hour of fulfilment ! . . . How well I recall his tender solicitude about you, when in 1865 there was fear that you would not be able to go on with your undertaking. To some question of mine as to how you would bear it he answered " I think it would kill him." But no one except your parents could have been more interested in your success than Edward was. And sad to say, at his death your prospects in this regard were at the worst.
I send you some newspaper slips about the movement here toward arbitration. . . . May I publish what you wrote to Edward when you were trying to start the Anti-Aggression League ?
The reply must have been in the affirmative, for in the New York Evening Post of 26 March, the correspondence was published, along with a brief sketch of the origin and work of the Anti-Aggression League, and concluding with
Autobiography, i., p. 216, and Appendix E., p. 531.
380 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxm.
Spencer's letter read at the meeting in favour of Anglo- American Arbitration, held in the Queen's Hall, 3 March, I896.1
At length the end of the long path he had marked out for himself to travel \vas reached.2 The occasion is thus described by his Secretary, Mr. Troughton : —
Mr. Spencer was seventy-six years of age when he dictated to me the last words of " Industrial Institutions," with the com- pletion of which the Synthetic Philosophy was finished — to be precise it was on the 13 August, 1896. Rising slowly from his seat in the study at 64, Avenue Road, his face beaming with joy, he extended his hand across the table, and we shook hands on the auspicious event. u I have finished the task I have lived for " was all he said, and then resumed his seat. The elation was only momentary and his features quickly resumed their customary composure.
1 Times, Daily Chronicle, etc., of 4 March, 1896. Also Various Fragments, p. 128.
- Supra, chap, ix., p. 100.
CHAPTER XXIV.
CONGRATULATIONS.
(November, 1896 — January, 1901.)
THE publication of the concluding volume of the Synthetic Philosophy was the signal for an outburst of sympathetic appreciation such as falls to the lot of few men. Not from his own country alone, but from many lands; not from adherents only, but from those who did not accept the doctrine of evolution, came expressions of the highest admiration. It was not to his transcendent intellectual po\ver merely that homage was paid. To his moral character — to the high and indomitable purpose that had sustained him throughout these years, enabling him, in face of difficulties that seemed almost insurmountable, ever to keep sight of the goal — to this was offered a tribute as unstinted in its cordiality as it was catholic in its source. Generous testimony was borne to the value of his contribution to the treasure house of thought, but even more generous was the meed of praise called forth by what he had done to purify the aims and strengthen the moral fibre of mankind.
Gratified though he was by these tributes of esteem, he shrank from anything that might have the appearance of a bid for notoriety. He would not allow himself to be interviewed. To the editor of one of the London papers he wrote : " I am at present quite sufficiently affiche, and to take any steps which would have the appearance of intentionally making myself more conspicuous would be repugnant to me. Especially, talk concerning myself and my work, which I should hesitate at all times to enter upon, would at the present time be undesirable." Again, when Mr. Balfour and Mr. Morley visited him together early in
382 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxiv.
December, though he made no attempt to conceal the pleasure the visit had given him, he requested the members of his household not to speak about it, because he did not wish it to get into the papers.
Not disheartened by the failure of his suggestion some months before to get a portrait of Spencer for the National Gallery, Mr. Collins renewed it in a letter to the Times of 17 November, with the result that a committee was at once formed consisting of Sir Joseph D. Hooker (Chair- man), the Duke of Argyll, Mr. Arthur Jame*s Balfour, Dr. Charlton Bastian, Mr. Leonard Courtney, Mr. Francis Galton, Professor Ray Lankester, Mr. John Morley, Sir Frederick Pollock, Mr. Leslie Stephen, Professor James Sully, and Mr. Howard Collins (Secretary).
To F. HOWARD COLLINS.
2 December, 1896.
Hitherto I have said nothing concerning the proposal made in the Times, chiefly because I believed that there would be but little response. But Mr. Hughes tells me that you are cooperating with Professor Sully in getting together a com- mittee, but does not say to what end. Professor Sully was, as I understood ten days ago, taking steps with a view to a congratulatory address, and I am now in doubt whether the efforts you are kindly making in conjunction with him are in pursuance of that end or in pursuance of the end you suggested. If this last is the purpose, I ought I think to let you know what happened when a kindred proposal was made some eight years ago. . . .*
My delay in writing, consequent on the impression I have named, may I fear have resulted in the taking of bootless trouble, but I hope otherwise.
Without waiting till his scruples had been completely overcome, the Committee drew up and obtained signatures to a letter of congratulation, which was presented in little over a month after the day on which his concluding volume appeared.
FROM SIR JOSEPH DALTOX HOOKER.
16 December, 1896.
I am deputed to transmit to you the enclosed, and obey with unqualified satisfaction.
5 Supra, chap, xix., p. 283.
1 8 96 - 1 90 1 ] Congratulations 383
To HERBERT SPENCER, ESQ.
LONDON, 16 December, 1896. DEAR SIR :
We, the undersigned, offer you our cordial congratulations upon the completion of your "System of Synthetic Philosophy."
Not all of us agreeing in equal measure with its conclusions, we are all at one in our estimate of the great intellectual powers it exhibits and of the immense effect it has produced in the history of thought ; nor are we less impressed by the high moral qualities which have enabled you to concentrate those powers for so many years upon a purpose worthy of them, and, in spite of all obstacles, to carry out so vast a design.
To the many who, like us, have learned to honour the man while profiting by his writings, it would be a satisfaction to possess an authentic personal likeness of the author. It has therefore occurred to us that the occasion might be appro- priately marked by requesting you to permit us to employ some eminent artist to take your portrait with a view to its being deposited in one of our national collections for the benefit of ourselves and of those who come after us.
We hope that your health may be benefited by the leisure which you have earned so well, and that you may long continue to enjoy the consciousness of having completed your work.
W. DE W. ABNEY, R.E., C.B., D.C.L., F.R.S., President of the
Physical Society. ROBERT ADAMSON, M.A., LL.D., Professor of Logic, Glasgow
University. GRANT ALLEN, B.A. ALEXANDER BAIN, M.A., LL.D., Emeritus Professor of Logic,
Aberdeen University.
SIR GEORGES. BADEN-POWELL, K.C.M.G., M.A., M.P. RIGHT HON. ARTHUR JAMES BALFOUR, P.C., LL.D., F.R.S., M.P. SIR ROBERT STAWELL BALL, LL.D., F.R.S., Lowndean Professor
of Astronomy, Cambridge University. H. CHARLTON BASTIAN, M.A., M.D., F.R.S.,' Professor of
Medicine, University College, London. FRANK E. BEDDARD, M.A., F.R.S., Prosector to the Zoological
Society.
JOHN BEDDOE, M.D., F.R.S. SIR WALTER BESANT, M.A.
E. W. BRABROOK, President, Anthropological Institute. BERNARD BOSANQUET, M.A.
C. V. BOYS, F.R.S., Assistant Professor of Physics, R.C.S. T. LADDER BRUNTON, M.D., D.Sc., F.R.S. EDWARD CLODD.
F. HOWARD COLLINS.
SIR J. CRICHTON-BROWNE, M.D., LL.D., F.R.S, Wr. H. DALLINGER, LL.D., D.Sc., F.R.S.
384 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxiv.
FRANCIS DARWIX, M.A., M.B., F.R.S.
GEORGE H. DARWIX, M.A., LL.D., F.R.S., Plumian Professor of Astronomy and Experimental Physics, Cambridge Uni- versity.
W. E. DARWIX, F.G.S.
JAMES DOXALDSOX, M.A., LL.D., Principal, St. Andrew's Uni- versity.
RIGHT Hox. SIR M. E. GRANT-DUFF, P.C., G.C.S.I., F.R.S. EARL OF DYSART. SIR JOHX EVANS, K.C.B., D.C.L., LL.D., D.Sc., Treasurer of
the Royal Society. Sir JOSHUA FITCH, LL.D.
MICHAEL FOSTER, M.A., M.D., LL.D., D.C.L., Sec. R.S., Pro- fessor of Physiology, Cambridge University. EDWARD FRAXKLAXD, M.D., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S. RIGHT Hox. SIR EDWARD FRY, P.C., LL.D., D.C.L., F.R.S. SIR DOUGLAS GALTOX, K.C.B., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S. FRAXCIS GALTOX, M.A., D.C.L., D.Sc., F.R.S. RICHARD GARXETT, LL.D. SIR GEORGE GROVE, C.B., D.C.L., LL.D. ALBERT C. L. G. GUXTHER, M.A., M.D., F.R.S., President of
the Linnaean Society. FREDERIC HARRISOX, M.A. JAMES EDMUND HARTIXG. RIGHT Hox. LORD HOBHOUSE, P.C. HEXRY HOBHOUSE, M.A., M.P.
SHADWORTH HODGSOX, late President of the Aristotelian Society. SIR JOSEPH DALTOX HOOKER, K.C.S.I., C.B., M.D., D.C.L.,
LL.D., F.R.S.
WILLIAM HUGGIXS, D.C.L, LL.D., F.R.S. J. HUGHLIXGS JACKSOX, M.D., LL.D., F.R.S. WILLIAM KXIGHT, LL.D., Professor of Moral Philosophy, St.
Andrews University. AXDREW LAXG. E. RAY LAXKESTER, M.A., LL.D., F.R.S., Linacre Professor of
Anatomy, Oxford University. SIR TREVOR LAWREXCE, President of the Royal Horticultural
Society.
W. E. H. LECKY, M.A., LL.D., D.C.L., M.P. J. NORMAX LOCKYER, C.B., F.R.S., Professor of Astronomical
Physics, R.C.S. RIGHT Hox. SIR JOHX LUBBOCK, P.C., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S.,
M.P.
VERXOX LUSHIXGTOX, Q.C.
P. A. MACMAHOX, R.A., F.R.S., late President of the Mathe- matical Society.
JAMES MARTIXEAU, D.D., LL.D., D.C.L.
DAVID MASSOX, M.A., LL.D., Emeritus Professor of Rhetoric, Edinburgh University.
1 8 96- 1 90 1 ] Congratulations 385
RAPHAEL MELDOLA, F.R.S., President of the Entomological
Society.
C. LLOYD MORGAN, Principal, University College, Bristol. RIGHT Hox. JOHN MOKLEY, P.C., M.A., LL.D., F.R.S., M.P.
C. HUBERT H. PARRY, Principal, Royal College of Music. GENERAL PITT-RIVERS, D.C.L., F.R.S.
EDWARD B. POULTON, M.A., F.R.S. , Professor of Zoology, Ox- ford University.
SIR WILLIAM O. PRIESTLEY, M.D., LL.D., M.P.
LORD REAY, G.C.S.I., G.C.I. E.
RIGHT HON. LORD RAYLEIGH, M.A., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S., Professor of Natural Philosophy, Royal Institution.
DAVID G. RITCHIE, M.A., Professor of Logic, St. Andrew's University.
SIR HENRY E. ROSCOE, LL.D., D.C.L., F.R.S.
J. S. BURDON SANDERSON, LL.D., D.C.L., F.R.S., Regius Pro- fessor of Medicine, Oxford University.
GEORGE H. SAVAGE, M.D., F.R.C.P.
E. A. SCHAFER, F.R.S., Professor of Physiology, University College, London.
D. H. SCOTT, M.A., Ph.D., F.R.S., Honorary Keeper, Jodrell
Laboratory, Kew. HENRY SIDGWICK, M.A., Litt.D., D.C.L., Professor of Moral
Philosophy, Cambridge University. W. R. SORLEY, M.A., Professor of Moral Philosophy, Aberdeen
University.
LESLIE STEPHEN, M.A., Litt.D., LL.D. G. F. STOUT, M.A. JAMES SULLY, M.A., LL.D.
W. T. THISELTON-DYER, C.M.G., C.I.E., M.A., F.R.S. JOHN VENN, D.Sc., F.R.S. SYDNEY HOWARD VINES, M.A., D.Sc., F.R.S., Professor of
Botany, Oxford University. SIR WILLOUGHBY WADE, M.D., F.R.C.P. ALFRED RUSSEL WALLACE, D.C.L., F.R.S. BEATRICE WEBB. LADY VICTORIA WELBY. SAMUEL WILKS, M.D., LL.D., F.R.S., President of the College
of Physicians.
HAWARDEN, November 30, 1896.
MY DEAR SIR, — It has long been my rule to decline joining^ in groups of signatures, nor do I think myself entitled to bear a prominent part in the present case. But I beg that you will, if you think proper, set me down as an approver of the request to Mr. Spencer, whose signal abilities and, rarer still, whose manful and self-denying character, are so justly objects of admiration.
I remain your very faithful,
F. Howard Collins, Esq. W. E. GLADSTONE.
25
386 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxiv.
No time was lost before replying to these cordial con- gratulations.
2, LEWES CRESCENT, BRIGHTON,
19 December, 1896.
MY DEAR HOOKER, — If, as may fitly be said, the value of congratulations increases in a geometrical progression with the eminence of those offering them, I may, indeed, be extremely gratihed by the accumulation coming from men standing so high in various spheres. And an accompanying pleasure necessarily results from the good wishes expressed for my health and happiness during my remaining days.
The further honour offered has caused in me some mental conflict. Eight years ago, to the inquiry whether I would sit for a subscription portrait to be painted by Millais, I replied negatively, assigning the reasons that the raising of funds to pay the costs of conferring marks of approbation had grown into an abuse ; that the moral coercion under which contribu- tions were in many cases obtained was repugnant to me ; and that I objected to have my known and unknown friends asked to tax themselves to the required extent. These reasons sur- vived, and, swayed by them, I recently sent a copy of the letter in which they had been stated to the gentleman with whom the proposal now made originated, thinking thereby to prevent further trouble. I was unaware to how large an extent the proposal had been adopted and how distinguished were the numerous gentlemen who had given it their support. I now find myself obliged either inconsistently to waive my objection or else rudely to slight the cordially-expressed feelings and wishes of so many whose positions and achievements command my great respect. Between the alternatives there seems to be practically no choice. I am compelled to yield to the request made in so sympathetic a manner by signatories so eminent, and at the same time must express to them through you my full sense of the honour done me.
I am, my dear Hooker, sincerely yours,
HERBERT SPENCER.
The consent to sit for his portrait, thus reluctantly obtained at the moment when he was impressed with a sense of the kindness of those who proposed to honour him in so conspicuous a manner, was followed by mis- givings after a few days reflection. His scruples again came to the surface on being asked : " Have you thought over the question of the artist ? "
1896-1901] Congratulations 387
To SIR JOSEPH DALTON HOOKER.
30 December, 1896.
Your question is simple, but the answer is not so simple.
Some three months ago, before his departure for America, Mr. Carnegie pressed me to sit for a portrait to be presented by him to the Pittsburg Institution. ... I willingly yielded, and agreed to the suggestion that the portrait should be painted by Mr. Ouless. . . .
But now comes a question. These leading artists ask exorbitant sums for their work, and if the cost of a portrait is to be borne by those only who have signed the address, on each of whom the tax would then be considerable, I should decidedly demur. In that case the only fit course would be to commission Mr. Ouless to make a replica of the portrait he paints for Mr. Carnegie. The cost of this would not be excessive.
The painting of the portrait was entrusted to Mr. (now Sir) Hubert von Herkomer.
Some two days before receipt of the address he had written to Mr. Carnegie to the effect that he had stopped the action of those who were making preparations for a subscription portrait. He had now to explain his change of front.
To ANDREW CARNEGIE.
4 January, 1897.
I have had to yield. A few days after I wrote to you there came to me an address of congratulation bearing over eighty signatures, including those of men of eminence in various spheres, political, scientific, literary, etc., joined with a request that I would sit for a portrait. I had not anticipated anything so influential, and found myself in the predicament of having either to abandon my resolution or else to slight, in a marked and public way, numerous men whom I have every reason to respect, and bring upon myself condemnation as ill-mannered and perverse.
To F. HOWARD COLLINS.
8 January, 1897.
You have been victorious all along the line, as the phrase is — victorious over others and victorious over me. I did not expect to have my flank turned in such an irresistible way. However, though I have to recognize myself as in a manner defeated, there is of course, a satisfaction in the defeat, along with a small set-off the other way.
My feeling towards my fellow-countrymen (especially as contrasted with the Americans) has for years past not been a very friendly one, and my antagonistic attitude has been in
388 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxiv.
part due to this feeling. Honour long delayed loses the quality of honour. . . . However, the thing is now done and well done ; and having been initiated and largely urged on by you, let me offer you my hearty thanks. In you, at any rate, there has never been any tardiness of appreciation.
It is a pity that he dwelt so much on the tardiness of the honour, and so little on the cordiality and unanimity displayed in the bestowing of it. It is strange that he did not remember how for more than a quarter of a century he had persistently, and at times almost un- graciously, declined every honour that had been offered him. The warmth with which the press also supported the step his friends had taken ought to have gone far to remove any lingering feeling of bitterness for supposed past neglect. Such commendable despatch had been shown with the address that many who would have signed it came to know of it only when the report of the presenta- tion appeared in the newspapers. The absence of their names was more than compensated for by the cordiality of their private expressions of regret at having missed the opportunity of joining in the public testimonial. As noted in a previous chapter (xx., p. 295), the letters in which he complains of neglect on the part of his countrymen have to be read along with those in which he acknowledges the sympathetic appreciation his writings had secured at home.
To THE RIGHT Hox. ARTHUR J. BALFOUR.
3 February, 1897.
From Mr. Howard Collins ... I learn that I am indebted to you for much more than is implied by your signature to the address of congratulation, etc. — indebted for active aid which, noteworthy as it would have been in one having leisure, is much more noteworthy in one so much pressed by public business, and noteworthy in a still higher degree as given by one who in important matters differs in belief. And that this aid should have been given unobtrusively, too, so divesting it of any possible motive other than that of genuine sympathy, renders it still more remarkable. Pray accept the thanks which I find it imperative to offer.
My appreciation is made the greater on considering what I might myself have done under like conditions. A passive assent, would, I think, have been the limit of my adhesion. I doubt whether my generosity would have been sufficient
T 896- 1 90 1 ] Congratulations 389
to prompt active co-operation. Could I ascribe this difference in action to difference in creed, the • belief would do much towards shaking some of my general views. But innate supe- riority of nature I take to be the true cause.
The first part of this letter was written in his own hand, but the effort was too much, and the rest had to be dictated.
To JAMES SULLY.
6 February, 1897.
Among the things which should have been done, but have not been done, is the writing to you a letter expressing my indebtedness for the efforts you have made in furthering the recent manifestation of sympathy and approval. I say " in furthering " ; but remembering the steps which you took to initiate an address of congratulation — steps taken I think in- dependently at the time when Mr. Collins proposed a por- trait— the word is scarcely adequate. ... I must not let the matter end without offering you my hearty thanks for all you have done.
As you doubtless know by experience, a writer's chief grati- fication is in the consciousness of work satisfactorily done, but second only to that is the manifestation of approval from the select.
Among the manifestations of approval from "the select" was the offer of the degree of D.Sc., from the University of Cambridge, and that of LL.D. from the University of Edinburgh. Both were declined. A proposal was made by the municipal authorities of Derby to mark the house of his birth with a tablet, but for reasons unknown it was not carried out.1 As for the portrait, there were many appointments and disappointments, so that nothing was done till almost the end of the year.
To F. HOWARD COLLINS.
BRIGHTON, 6 December, 1897.
Who is silly enough to say that I decline to sit ? I have not left this room for these six weeks. It is hard to have my misfortunes used as weapons. Herkomer was here three days ago, and would have taken photographs of me sitting in bed had the light been good. He comes again next week.
1 A marble tablet was put up by the Derby Spencer Society in 1907.
390 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxiv.
23 December. — Mr. Herkomer was to have been here last week, but wrote me that an attack of influenza was keeping him indoors. Yesterday he came and took live photographs ; and he comes again to-morrow to take more. He talks of making the portrait wholly from photographs, but I cannot assent to this ; there must be some sittings to finish from.
Who is the unfriendly friend who takes the attitude which your letters seem to imply ? . . . A wrhile ago you spoke of my " declining " to sit according to promise. . . . And then, after all, the supposition that I alone am responsible for the delay is an utter mistake. During a considerable part of the late summer months when I could have sat, had circumstances permitted, Mr. Herkomer was on the Continent, and, when I returned to town about the middle of September, I believe was still away, for I had no replies in answer to letters I wrote. . . .
Your letter reached me last night just as I was going to bed, and the irritation it caused kept me awake a good part of the night.
To SIR JOSEPH DALTON HOOKER.
27 December, 1897.
Inquiries and remarks which have come round to me during the last three months, imply that the long delay in the execu- tion of the portrait has caused some adverse feeling : the delay being ascribed to perversity on my part. . . .
I dislike obligations of the kind implied by a subscription- portrait, and if there is, in any of those concerned, a lack of cordiality, my dislike becomes something stronger. . . . My present desire is that Mr. Herkomer shall be paid by me, and that the subscriptions shall be returned : each being accom- panied by a copy of this letter.
Sir Joseph Hooker hastened to set his mind at rest, telling him that he was mistaken in supposing that there was any want of cordiality among the subscribers to the portrait. On receiving this assurance he wrote again.
To SIR JOSEPH DALTOX HOOKER.
30 December, 1897.
Your letter received. Very many thanks for it. It relieves my fears and I gladly accept your assurances, and now desire that you should keep my letter to yourself.
Mr. Collins has said on several occasions things which, it seems, I had misinterpreted.
1896-1901] Congratulations . 391
The artist was working in circumstances of extreme difficulty, never having had a proper sitting. At length, however, in February the portrait was finished. •
To SIR JOSEPH DALTOX HOOKER.
2 March, 1898.
Mr. Collins wrote to me a few days ago saying that the portrait is " splendid and admirable " and expressing the feeling that, as having been so largely influential in getting it done, you ought to be congratulated ; if for no other reason than for the reason of having acquired for the public so fine a work of art, for he speaks of it especially as a work of art which has its interest under that aspect irrespective of any interest it may otherwise have. I coincide in his feeling and gladly on public as on private grounds join in the congratulation.
Oddly enough it seems likely that I shall never see it. ... I must be content with seeing a photograph.
When the Herkomer photogravure reproduction of the portrait was sent him he wrote : —
To HUBERT* VON HERKOMER, R.A.
18 April, 1898.
Of course the judgments of my friends with regard to the portrait are to be accepted rather than any judgment of mine, since the looking glass, inverting the two sides, does not rightly show a man his own face, and since moreover it is impossible for him to see his face in the position you have chosen.
There is, however, one point in the face which strikes me, namely, the aquiline outline of the nose is somewhat too pro- nounced— perhaps not too pronounced for the position in which the head was placed, but too pronounced in respect of the average shape of the nose — I say u average " because the nose is not quite the same shape when seen from the two sides. . . .
The secret of it is that when a little child my nose was cut with a carving knife by a little sister. The wound did not leave a scar, so far as appears, but the result was that on one side the outline is more protuberant than on the other, and this gives from certain points of view an aquiline character, which is not manifest from other points of view.
I wish I had remembered this fact when the photograph was taken, for I should then have suggested an attitude giving a straighter outline, for I do not like the aquiline outline. Of course it is a considerable element in the character of the face. ... If I had seen the photograph earlier I should have suggested a slight alteration. . . . However, though it is too
3Q2 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxiv.
late before the Academy exhibition (unless yon can do it on varnishing day) it is not otherwise too late, and I should much like a sligRt rectification (in a double sense).
Yon have it seems to me succeeded well in an essential point, namely the expression. There is a far-off ga/e appro- priate to a thinker, and it is an understanding ga/e, which of course I consider is not inappropriate. . . . Success in this respect is an essential success.
One other criticism occurs to me. Unfortunately I wore the dressing gown over a morning coat, and an impression was thereby given of bulkiness of body. This impression, moreover, is strengthened by the way in which the shoulder and right arm extend very much. The total effect of this large expanse of body and dress is somewhat to dwarf the head. To me the impression given is that of a small-headed man. Though my head is not at all specially large, still it is 22 inches round, and I think a spectator would guess a smaller size.
There, you see I have again illustrated my inveterate habit of fault-finding. However I suppose you would prefer to have my candid remarks rather than unmeaning applause. You may at any rate be quite content with the opinions of my friends.
The Times (30 April, 1898) notice of the Royal Academy Exhibition was severe on both Mr. von Herkomer and Spencer. Of the artist it was said : " Perhaps it is hardly his fault if that which ought to have been a masterpiece, ... is very much the reverse." And of the sitter : "To get proper sittings from him was an impossibility ; neither the wishes of illustrious admirers, nor thoughts of posthu- mous fame, nor any similar consideration, had any effect whatever."
To HUBERT vox HERKOMER, R.A.
30 April, 1898.
I cannot allow myself to remain under the implied stigma which the Times1 report of the Academy Exhibition contains, wrhere I am described as practically disregarding u the wishes of " my " illustrious admirers," expressed though they were in so gratifying a manner and accompanied by their contributions. The utterly undeserved reflection upon me must be in some way dissipated. Will you do it, or must I ? ... I should of course prefer that you should rectify this misapprehension by distinctly specifying the causes and incidents, but if you decline I must do it myself.
Mr. von Herkomer being in Italy, Spencer himself wrote to the Times (5 May) pointing out that the art critic had
PORTRAIT OF HERBERT SPENCER BY SIR HUBERT VON HERKOMER, R.A.
1896-1901] Congratulations 393
been misled by rumour. " I feel obliged to make this statement out of regard for the feelings of the many dis- tinguished friends and others who, having expressed their wishes in so gratifying a manner, would feel slighted did I let them suppose that those wishes had been so little regarded by me."
The portrait by Mr. Ouless for Mr. Carnegie had still to be painted. First one thing prevented a beginning being made, and then another. When the artist was ready, Spencer was too ill to sit ; and when Spencer was well enough, the artist had other engagements. He was also worrying himself over the thought of what people would say if he sat to Mr. Ouless after having been unable to sit for Mr. von Herkomer. " Explanations could not easily be given, and even were they given would be in- sufficient." This difficulty disappeared in an unexpected way. After more than twelve months of fruitless attempts to arrange for sittings, he wrote to Mr. Ouless that the painting must be abandoned altogether.
FROM WALTER W. OULESS, R.A.
.13 October, 1899.
I am indeed sorry that, after all, the portrait has to be abandoned, but, besides other circumstances you mention, I recognize the difficulties for the sitter and the painter. The sittings could hardly fail to be a severe strain and fatigue for you, and, if that were so, it would be almost hopeless to make the portrait a success. Therefore, considering all things, I cannot but acquiesce in your view that the portrait must be finally given up, but I do so with very deep regret.
He wavered from time to time in his opinion of the Herkomer portrait, being influenced greatly by the judg- ments now favourable, now unfavourable, expressed by his friends. Several letters passed between him and Mr. von Herkomer about suggested alterations, but to no purpose. Being unwilling that the portrait should go into the National Gallery, he wrote to Mr. Sargent about a portrait on his own account; but the terms were too high. He then bethought him that the portrait by Mr. Burgess would be suitable for the National Gallery, and asked Mr. Ouless whether he could recommend an artist to make
394 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xiv.
a copy of it for presentation to his native town. On Mr. Ouless's recommendation the work was entrusted to Mr. f. Hanson Walker. How far Spencer's mind was even at this late date from being settled about the Herkomer portrait is shown by a remark in January, 1901, to Dr. Charlton Bastian, who thought that it rather than the Burgess portrait, should go to the National Portrait Gallery. " Thank you, too, for your opinion respecting the Her- komer portrait. It is probable I shall adopt it, but I will take the opinion of some other friends." ]
1 During the last year of his life, Mrs. Meinertzhagen induced him to allow Miss Alice Grant to paint a portrait of him mainly from the photo- graph he had taken for Mr. Sargent in 1898.
395
CHAPTER XXV.
REVISION OF BIOLOGY AND FIRST PRINCIPLES.
(October, 1895— April, 1900.)
FOLLOWING his usual practice of looking well ahead, he had in 1895 ordered copies of the Principles of Biology to be interleaved and sent to young biologists, recom- mended as being familiar with recent developments of the science, with instructions to scrutinize the alleged facts and to see whether the inferences drawn from them were justified, leaving untouched the scheme of the work as well as its general principles. By the time the last volume of the Sociology was issued, each of the collaborators had gone through his assigned portion.
His interest in biological questions had been kept smouldering since 1867 when he completed the Biology. Now and again during these years the latent fire had burst into flame, as in the Weismann controversy. At other times it merely flickered. The revision for which he was now preparing furnished opportunities for giving expression to opinions of long standing, respecting the methods to be followed in biological enquiries and the attitude frequently adopted by scientific men towards them. Biologists chiefly were in his mind when he wrote to Dr. (now Sir) William Gowers that "the immense majority of writers in the special divisions of science have a horror of wide views, and prefer to limit themselves to their details and technicalities." The largest share of adverse criticism was, however, reserved for mathematicians.
To F. HOWARD COLLINS.
BRIGHTON, 3 December, 1895.
[Lack of judgment] is a very common trait of mathema- ticians. Their habit of mind becomes such that they are incapable of forming rational conclusions when they have to deal with contingent evidences. . . .
396 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
I wish you would make . . . an inquiry bearing upon the question of the limitation of heredity by sex. It occurred to me lately that this, for which there is so much evidence, may be statistically tested by inquiries concerning longevity in families. If inquiry shows that in a certain marriage the husband belongs to a family of which the members on the average die earlier that usual, while the wife belongs to a family of which on the average the members have lived to a good age or a great age, then if there is limitation of heredity by sex, the daughters of that marriage will be long-lived and the sons short-lived. This is an inquiry quite practicable, and might or might not serve to verify conclusions derived from other evidence.
5 December. — The mathematician in dealing with contingent matters does not go wrong in reasoning from his premises, he goes wrong in his choice of premises. He continually assumes that these are simple when they are really complex — omits some of the factors. His habit of thought is that of dealing with few and quite definite data, and he carries that habit of thought into regions where the data are many and indefinite, and proceeds to treat a few of them as though they were all, and regards them as definite. Lord Kelvin has furnished re- peated illustrations of this.
9 December. — I am desirous in all cases to exclude super- fluities from my environment. Multiplication of books and magazines and papers which I do not need continually annoys me. As you may perhaps remember, I shut out the presence of books by curtains, that I may be free from the sense of complexity which they yield. [This had reference to an interleaved copy of the Biology Mr. Collins had sent].
It had been suggested that Mr. Darwin's house at Down should be acquired for a biological station, where questions relating to heredity might be rigorously tested by experiments carried out under the supervision, as it would seem, of a committee of the Royal Society. The first intimation Spencer had of this was from Professor Adam Sedgwick in December, 1896, and soon after it was again brought to his notice by Mr. Francis Galton.
To FKAXCIS GALTOX.
16 January, 1897.
The courses suggested seem to me impolitic. Everything is on too large a scale.
The purchase of Darwin's house seems appropriate as a matter of sentiment, but as a matter of business very inappro-
1 8 9 5 - 1 900 J Revision 397
priate. The whole undertaking would be handicapped at the outset by heavy expenditure to little purpose. I should be disinclined to co-operate were any such imprudent step taken.
The thing should be commenced on a small scale by the few who have already interested themselves in it — say three or four acres with some cheap wooden buildings. . . .
Co-operation with breeders would I believe be futile. You could never get them to fulfil the requisite conditions, and selection would be certain to come in and vitiate the results.
Your last question, concerning my contribution and its applicability to the committee of the Royal Society, I do not understand. I do not know what you mean as to any action of the Royal Society. If it refers to the purchase of the Darwin house I should distinctly say No.
To G. H. DARWIN.
27 July, 1900.
Respecting the establishment for biological purposes ... I agree with you that there is little hope of anything being done. . . .
I have never, however, myself approved of the project in the form originally suggested, commencing with purchase of the Down estate. I do not believe in big things to commence with, . . . But the management is, in fact, the chief difficulty — how to elect a fit governing body and how to ensure that they shall carry on their inquiries and report the results in a thoroughly unbiassed way. Nearly all the men available in respect of their biological knowledge are partisans, and if there were a balanced representation of the two sides, it is very probable that the administration would come to a dead- lock. If otherwise, the verdict would be in large measure a foregone conclusion.
Direct references to the revision of the Biology are few. He had correspondence with Professor Marcus Hartog, on biological questions during 1897-98. Of a note by the latter, about to appear in Natural Science, Spencer says (May, 1898) : "At present, being unfamiliar with the set of facts to which you refer, I had some difficulty in following the statement. I may remark, however, that there may be a marked distinction between the process of multiplication of successive generations of cells and the sudden breaking up of cells in spores." It was probably this that suggested the sending to Natural Science the relevant passages of a new chapter in the Biology on " Cell-Life and Cell-Multipli-
398 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
cation," containing certain new interpretations of recent facts, which he thought it well to publish beforehand. Later in the year he sent to Nature a letter on " Stereo- Chemistry and Vitalism," and another on "Asymmetry and Vitalism," with reference to Professor Japp's address to the Chemical Section of the British Association. In the second of these letters he says that neither the physico-chemical theory nor the theory of a vital principle explains life, the ultimate nature of which is incomprehensible.
The congratulations on the completion of the Synthetic Philosophy stirred up criticism, sometimes in a fair, enquiring spirit, sometimes in a spirit hostile and captious. During December a correspondence was carried on in the Times.1 Mr. Bramwell Booth having accused him of incon- sistency, Spencer pointed out that his ideas, in common with other things, had undergone evolution. In a letter to Mr. Collins, Mr. Booth maintained that Spencer's funda- mental changes of view " have been so frequent, and so radical, and if one may say so, so violent, that they totally differ from such gradual and natural developments as are, as you point out, common to all processes of thought."
To F. HOWARD COLLINS.
25 January, 1897.
Tell Mr. Booth that his contention is utterly beside the mark. My change from Theism to Agnosticism, to \vhich I suppose he more especially refers, took place long before the evolutionary philosophy was commenced, and long before I ever thought of writing it, and the change had nothing what- ever to do with the doctrine of evolution. There has been no change whatever in that respect since 1860, when the writing of the philosophy was commenced. . . .
My change of opinion on the Land question, which is the other change on which he insists, is but remotely related to the doctrine of evolution, and even then is a change not in principle, but only in policy.
At a meeting of the Brooklyn Ethical Association, towards the end of 1896, he was said to have been largely influenced by the teachings of the Vedanta, through the writings of Sir William Jones. This he called a "wild
1 Times, 2, 8, 15, 17, 18, December, 1896.
1895-19°°] Revision 399
idea," seeing that he did not even know the name Vedanta, and had never read any of Sir William Jones's writings. But " there are always some people who find that a man's ideas are not his own, but somebody else's."
When translating the last part of the Principles of Sociology, Dr. Gazelles had encountered an unforeseen diffi- culty. In § 849 M. Hanotaux, the French foreign minister, is represented as having made a statement " on the need there was for competing in political burglaries with other nations." Unable to take the responsibility of spreading this throughout France, Dr. Gazelles, who, during the thirty years he had been engaged in translating the " Synthetic Philosophy," had retained Spencer's highest esteem, felt compelled to relinquish the work, to his own deep regret no less than to Spencer's.
To E. GAZELLES.
6 December, 1896.
I greatly regret the decision expressed in your letter just received — regret it alike on personal grounds and on public grounds. All things remembered, however, I do not greatly wonder that your attitude is that which you describe.
But, in the first place, let me point out to you that, in a preceding paragraph, England's dealings with native peoples in all parts of the world are condemned quite as strongly and much more elaborately. In the second place, let me point out that, if I remember rightly (I have not the book here), I speak of France " vying " in " political burglaries " with other civilized nations : the obvious implication being that all are chargeable with the same offence. Then, in the third place, let me point out that I have, if not in this last volume, yet in another volume (the Study of Sociology) used the expression u political burglary " in reference to our own doings especially ; and I may add that, in characterizing our invasion of Afghanistan as a " political burglary," I gave grievous offence to Lord Lytton, who was then Viceroy and to whom I was known personally. You will see, therefore, that my implied condemnation does not refer to the French more than to the other European peoples, and that I could not very well have omitted to condemn the one without in- justice to the other.
The truth is that, of all the feelings I entertain concerning social affairs, my detestation of the barbarous conduct of strong peoples to weak peoples is the most intense. . . . To my thinking the nations which call themselves civilized are no
400 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
better than white savages, who, with their cannon and rifles, conquer tribes of dark savages, armed with javelins and arrows, as easily as a giant thrashes a child, and who, having glorified themselves in their victories, take possession of the conquered lands and tyrannize over the subject peoples. . . .
Elsewhere- I have spoken of the nations of Europe as a hundred million pagans masquerading as Christians. Not (infrequently in private intercourse I have found myself trying to convert Christians to Christianity, but have invariably failed. The truth is that priests and people alike, while taking their nominal creed from the New Testament, take their real creed from Homer. Not Christ, but Achilles is their ideal. One day in the week they profess the creed of forgiveness, and six days in the week they inculcate and practice the creed of revenge. On Sunday they promise to love their neighbours as themselves, and on Monday treat with utter scorn any one who proposes to act out that promise in dealing with inferior peoples. Nay, they have even intensified the spirit of revenge inherited from barbarians. For, whereas the law between hostile tribes of savages is life for life, the law of the so-called civilized in dealing with savages is — for one life many lives. Not only do I feel perpetually angered by this hypocrisy which daily says one thing and does the opposite thing, but I also feel perpetually angered by it as being diametrically opposed to human progress ; since all further advance depends on the decline of militancy and rise of in- dustrialism. . . . But what the great mass of the civilized peoples in their dealings with the uncivilized regard as glory, I regard as shame.
I have not hesitated to offend my own countrymen by frequent expressions of the feelings thus indicated, and I do not at all hesitate to offend the French in the same way. If, however, it is a question of translation or no translation — if no one will venture to offend French susceptibilities by publishing in France the passage in question, then, I may remark, that the difficulty may be practically overcome by omitting the sentence and putting a number of asterisks in in its place.1
To mark the completion of the Synthetic Philosophy the editor of the Nineteenth Century was desirous to have an article, and consulted Spencer as to the choice of a writer. Spencer at first thought of Professor Masson, about whom he wrote as follows to Mr. Knowles : —
1 M. H. de Varigny undertook the translation of this Part, as well as of Professional Institutions.
1 8 9 5 - 1 900] Revision 401
The only difficulty which I see is that which arises from our friendship, which has lasted nowr for live and forty years and from which some bias may naturally result, or may naturally be supposed to result. In fact, however, I think that both he and I are quite prepared to say what we think of one another's opinions and to accept expressions of dissent without the least ruffling of feeling. Indeed I am quite prepared for marked divergences from my views in some directions. He may, for instance, fitly comment on my ex- treme disregard of all authority (a trait without \vhich, indeed, I should never have done what I have). Again he may say with truth that I undervalue the products of ancient thought and the products of ancient life in general. Then, too, there is the fact that I ignore utterly the personal element in history, and, indeed, show little respect for history altogether as it is ordinarily conceived.
To DAVID MASSOX.
17 January, 1897.
The more I think of it the less I like it. It is clear to me that you would be continually hampered by the thought of saying too much or too little ; and it would be disagree- able to me to have things said under either an actual or a supposed bias. All things considered, I think it would be best if you will regard the suggestion as not having been made.
The name of Alfred W. Benn has occurred to me as that of a fit man. He is entirely unknown to me, and, judging from what I have seen of his writing in the Academy and Mind, is quite competent.
The editor acquiesced in the suggestion as to Mr. Benn on condition that Spencer would look through the article when it was finished, and if satisfied, would give it a sort of formal approval, to be printed with it. This Spencer refused to do. The editor then gave way. But, when in the spring of 1899 the article was finished, he raised objections on the ground that it did not fulfil the condition of being " understanded of the people," and notwithstanding repeated remonstrances from Spencer, declined to publish it. Spencer was greatly annoyed : all the more so seeing that the proposal for an article had emanated from the editor and not from him. Had he been told at the very outset that the article must be written so that the man in the street could understand it, and that it must bear on its face some mark of his approval, 26
4O2 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
Spencer would not have recommended Mr. Benn or any other person. " But then," says Mr. Benn in a letter to the present writer, " I should never have known Mr. Spencer's good opinion of me nor have had the advantage of his personal acquaintance." l
When informing Spencer that the article was finished Mr. Benn raised some questions that had occurred to him in the course of his writing.
To ALFRED W. BENN.
27 March, 1899.
The unanswerable questions you raise are, I think, further illustrations of the muddle which results when we attempt any solution of ultimate questions.
The idea of Cause is itself an entirely relative idea, and being so, is in the last resort inapplicable to the relation between phenomena and that which transcends phenomena, however needful it may seem to us to use the word in that relation. Cause in our conception has for its ultimate symbol the relation in consciousness between the sense of effort and any change which we produce by effort ; and we use that subjective rela- tion as a symbol for all objective relations of Cause, and when attempting to pass the limit, thought rushes out to form a rela- tion between phenomena and that which transcends them, and inevitably carries with it this same conception of Cause. But inevitably it is a symbolic conception, and much as it seems needful for us to think of the Unknowable as Cause, yet clearly our conception of Cause, being in its origin subjective and symbolic, is essentially inapplicable.
But there is even a still deeper reply, namely, that the very idea of explanation is out of place. I have repeatedly, when dwelling on the matter and feeling at once the need for explana- tion and yet the conviction that no explanation is possible, ended in the thought that the very idea" of explanation is irrelevant. For what is explanation ? That, too, is a purely relative conception, which, if we analyze it, implies in every case the interpretation of a more special truth in terms of a more general truth ; and the making of explanation behind explanation ends in reducing all special truths to cases of the most general truth. But now, what happens if we carry out this definition of explanation into the relation between the Knowable and the Unknowable ? The explanation of that relation would be to include it along with other relations in a more general relation ; but where is there a more general
1 Though Spencer wished to see the article published elsewhere, it has, in point of fact, never appeared.
1895-1 9°°] Revision 403
relation than that between the Knowable and the Unknowable ? There is none. That is to say, the idea of explanation is excluded.
When the Trustees of the British Library of Political Science, connected with the London School of Economics and Political Science, requested him to present his works to the Library he not only embraced the opportunity of repeating his well-known views about Free Libraries, but took occasion to call in question the soundness of the policy pursued in the British Library of Political Science.
To W. A. S. HEWINS.
24 March, 1897.
From time to time I have had various applications akin to the one you make and have in all cases declined compliance. I disapprove of free libraries altogether, the British Museum Library included, believing that in the long run they are mis- chievous rather than beneficial ; as we see clearly in the case of Municipal and local Free Libraries which, instead of being places for study, have become places for reading trashy novels, worthless papers, and learning the odds. I no more approve of Free Libraries than I approve of Free Bakeries. Food for the mind should no more be given gratis than food for the body should be given gratis. The whole scheme of public instruc- tion, be it in Free Libraries or by State Education, is socialistic, and I am profoundly averse to socialism in every form.
Moreover, through the prospectus you send me there obviously runs the idea that political science is to be based upon an exhaustive accumulation of details of all orders, derived from all sources — parliamentary papers, reports of commissions, and all the details of administration from various countries and colonies. I hold, contrariwise, that political science is smothered in such a mass of details, the data for true conclu- sions being relatively broad and accessible.
The institution will be used by those who have in view the extension of State agencies. Alike from what I know of its inception and from what I now see of it, I am convinced that it will be an appliance not for the diffusion of political science but for the diffusion of political quackery.
When a similar request was made in 1898 on behalf of the Ruskin Hall, Oxford, he declined under a misappre- hension as to the aims of the Hall. " I am profoundly averse to the teachings of Ruskin alike in social affairs in general and even to a large extent in art. I must decline
404 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
doing anything that may directly or indirectly conduce to the spread of his influence."
Misconceptions with respect to isolated opinions of such a voluminous writer as Spencer were to be expected, but the general drift of his doctrines ought to have been well understood by this time.
To M. W. KEATIXGE.
13 April, 1897.
I fear I cannot give you any dictum to serve your purpose, for my opinions are directly at variance with those you suppose.
There is a mania everywhere for uniformity ; and centralized teaching of teachers is manifestly in the direction of uniformity. Throughout all organized existence variety tends to life, uni- formity tends to death. Competition in methods of education is all-essential and anything that tends to diminish competition will be detrimental.
Your notion of restrictions put upon the teaching profession is absolutely at variance with the views I hold. It is trade- unionism in teaching — it is a reversion to the ancient condition of guilds. It is a limitation of individual freedom. It is part of a general regime which I utterly detest.
If, as you apparently indicate, raising the status of teachers and giving them better pay implies increase of taxation, general or local, then you may judge how far I approve of it when I tell you that, from my very earliest days down to the present time, I have been a persistent opponent of all State-education.
That he no longer looked upon his London house as his home may be gathered from the following.
To Miss .
1 April, 1897.
For practical purposes, as at present carried on, the establishment is much more yours than mine. During my long absences, now covering half the year, the house is occupied by the - - family, yourselves and relatives ; and when I am at home the social intercourse and the administra- tion give the impression that 64, Avenue Road is the residence
of the Misses , where Mr. Spencer resides when he is in
town. . . .
All things considered I do not desire any longer to maintain our relations. . . . On estimating the advantages I derive from the presence of yourself and your sisters in the house, I find them but small — not by any means great enough to counter- balance the disadvantages.
Please therefore accept this letter as an intimation that the
1895-1 9°°] Revision 40 5
residence of yourself and your sisters with me will end on the first of July next.
A good deal of correspondence passed in May and June between him and a lady at whose house he spent rather less than a fornight as a " paying guest." Through the medium of an advertisement what seemed like a rural paradise had been discovered. Things went on fairly well for a week, save for an occasional murmur ; but within a few days he left. This experience as a " paying guest " seems to have prompted the following letter.
To MRS. LYNX LIXTOX.
15 June, 1897.
Let me suggest to you a work which might fitly be the crowning work of your life — a work on u Good and Bad Women."
You have rather obtained for yourself the reputation for holding a brief for men versus women, whereas I rather think the fact is that you simply aim to check that over-exaltation of women which has long been dominant, and which is re- ceiving an eclatante illustration in a recent essay by Mrs. J. R. Green, which is commented upon in this week's Spectator.
The flattering of women has been, one might almost say, a chief business of poets, and women have most of them very readily accepted the incense with little qualification ; and this has been so perpetual and has been so habitually accepted by men as to have caused a perverted opinion. . . .
The natures of men and women are topics of continual dis- cussion, but entirely of random discussion, with no analysis and no collection of evidence and balancing of results.
If you entertain my proposal I should like very well by and by to make some suggestions as to modes of enquiry and modes of comparison.1
In July he went to Boughton Monchelsea, near Maid- stone, where he stayed till September. On returning to town he took chambers in Park Place, St. James's, to be near the Athenaeum, where he had not been since November of the previous year, and " to acquire by a more enjoy- able life, the requisite strength for driving backwards and forwards from Avenue Road." After three days he broke down, went home to Avenue Road, and did not
1 The suggestion apparently led to nothing. See Life of Mrs. Lynn Linton, p. 329.
406 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
again leave the house until he started for Brighton in October. Considering how little he had been in London, and how little happiness he had enjoyed there during recent years, one may wonder why he continued to keep up a house in town. The explanation lies partly in that hopefulness which always led him to anticipate a change for the better, and partly in his reluctance to sever his connexion with the scene of his literary struggles and successes — with the great city in which had been kept up the closest friendships of his life. At length, however, the final step was taken. "The prospect of passing my last days monotonously in Avenue Road has become a dread to me, and- I have decided that they may be passed much better here in front of the sea and with plenty of sun." He moved into 5, Percival Terrace, Brighton, soon after the beginning of 1898, hoping, as he wrote to Mr. Lecky, that his London friends would use his house as an hotel, so that he might see them as often as possible. His first concern was to get two ladies to complete his small domestic circle, musical ability being an essential qualifi- cation in one of them. His advertisement for either two sisters, or a mother and daughter, resulted in adding one more to the list of coincidences mentioned in the Auto- biography (i., 334, 453 ; ii., 360). Two orphaned sisters of the name of D replied to his advertisement. Pre- viously to this Mrs. Briton Riviere had recommended two
sisters, also named D ; and he naturally concluded that
the ladies who had answered his advertisement were the same as those recommended by Mrs. Riviere. " I should fear that these young ladies being orphans may have tended rather to the melancholy than to the joyous." Mrs. Riviere then informed him that the ladies she had recommended were not orphans, both their parents being alive.
To MRS. RIVIERE.
29 January, 1898.
In reply to a recent advertisement there came a letter from certain two Misses D— - proposing to accept the position I offered. Remembering that you had recommended certain two Misses D — — , the conclusion was drawn without hesita- tion that they were the same two. It turns out to be otherwise. The two who replied to my advertisement are daughters of a
1895-19°°] Revision 407
stockbroker and are orphans. The name is by no means common. Who would have supposed that there should be bearing that name two pairs of sisters both wishing to under- take similar positions ? The thing would be considered in a fiction as absolutely incredible.
Throughout 1898, and well into the Spring of 1899, his domestic circle underwent many changes, owing partly to his wanting "a combination of qualities which is not very common," as several of his friends told him. With the help of Airs. Charlton Bastian he was fortunate in the spring of 1899 in meeting with Miss Key, a skilled musician, whom he engaged for the special duty of playing the piano, which he liked to hear played several times a day ; the piece he wished to be played being usually selected by himself. A month or two later Miss Killick took over the duties of housekeeper. These two ladies remained with him till his death, contributing in no small degree by their thoughtfulness and sympathy to the comfort and happi- ness of his closing years.
During the year 1898 he had on more than one occasion to clear up " misrepresentations." One of these was con- tained in a paragraph in Literature for January, announcing that a forthcoming work by Mr. W. H. Mallock would point out " how Mr. Spencer embodies and gives fresh life to the fundamental error of contemporary ' advanced ' thinkers in defining the social aggregate as a body ' com- posed of approximately equal units.'" Spencer was at a loss to know where Mr. Mallock had found "a passage authorizing this representation."
To W. H. MALLOCK.
30 January, 1898.
After much seeking I have discovered one of the passages to which you refer, but it seems to me that its context affords no justification for the way in which you interpret it. It is a passage on p. 5 of the Principles of Sociology, in which, as a pre- liminary, the social aggregate formed by social insects is dis- tinguished from a human society, because it is in reality a large family and because it is " not a union among like individuals substantially independent of one another in parentage, and approximately equal in their capacities." If here there is an implied conception of a human society, the interpretation of
408 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
the words is to be taken in connexion with the contra-dis- tinguished society : the words used should be understood in the light of this distinction. A society of ants, for example, consists of several classes — perfect males and females, workers, soldiers — and these classes differ from one another very greatly in their structures and concomitant capacities. Obviously the intention is to distinguish the markedly unequal capacities pos- sessed by units of a society like this and the approximately equal capacities of the units forming a human society ; and surely it is undeniable that, in contrast with these enormous differences in capacity among the classes of ants, the differences in capacity among human beings become relatively small ; as compared with the extremely unlike capacities of queens, males, soldiers and workers among ants, the capacities of human beings may fitly be called " approximately equal." I should have thought that it was clear that only when drawing this contrast was the expression " approximately equal " used, and that the word " approximately " is in that relation quite justifiable.
That your interpretation is unwarranted is clearly enough indicated by passages in the Study of Sociology accompanying those you refer to, and is quite definitely excluded by large parts of the Principles of Sociology. In the Study of Sociology, in the chapter entitled u The Nature of the Social Science "... [the exposition] sufficiently implies recognition of the effects of superiority and inferiority among the units, for how can there be established the differences referred to unless because the more powerful and more intelligent rise to the top ? So that even here your interpretation is tacitly negatived ; and then if you will turn to the Principles of Sociology, Part V., treating of " Political Institutions," you will find an elaborate exposi- tion still more rigorously excluding it. ...
So too in the Principles of Ethics you will see, in the division entitled "Justice," a variously-emphasized assertion that superiority must be allowed to bring to its possessor all the naturally-resulting benefits, and inferiority the naturally-result- ing evils. Moreover, you will find condemnation of the socialistic ideal, with which, apparently, your representation indicated in Literature implies my sympathy.
Apparently this did not convince Mr. Mallock, who thought the great man theory "shows itself only acciden- tally and incidentally, in the body of your work. I am well aware that your sympathies are not with the Socialists; but I confess, that I think your method of merging the great man in the aggregate of conditions that have pro- duced him, has furnished socialistic theorists with many of
1 8 9 5 " 1 9°°] Revision 409
their weapons." He returned to the charge in the Nine- teenth Century for August ; maintaining that in the non- recognition of "the inequality of individuals as a cardinal social fact " " we have the secret of Mr. Spencer's defect as a sociologist. This great fact of human inequality, instead of being systematically studied by him, is systematically and ostentatiously ignored by him." To these criticisms Spencer replied in the same review the month following.
Another "misrepresentation" had reference to the doc- trine of animism, Literature representing him as an adherent. This he repudiated, in the issue of February 5, showing how in the Data of Sociology " instead of accepting the doctrine of animism, I have not only avowedly rejected it, but have, throughout the successive parts of a long argument, supplied what I conceive to be direct and indirect disproofs of it." In the same periodical (19 February), he endeavoured to remove the perplexity in which Mr. Andrew Lang was involved in The Making of Religion. Under the name of Animism or Fetichism "there is an alleged primordial tendency in the human mind to con- ceive inanimate things as animated — as having animating principles or spirits. The essential question is : has the primitive man an innate tendency thus to conceive things around ? Professor Tylor says Yes ; I say No. 1 do not think it requires any ' revised terminology ' to make this difference clear." The matter had to be taken up again in July. The Spectator had classed him as one of those who believed that superstitious ideas arose from " the universal conviction or feeling that all things in Nature are endowed with the sentient vitality and the unruly affections of mankind." " I entertain no such belief," he wrote to the editor. " This ascription to me. . . of a belief which I have emphatically rejected, is one of many examples showing me how impossible it is to exclude misunderstanding."
The war between the United States and Spain was weighing heavily on the consciences of many thoughtful Americans, among whom was Mr. Moncure.Conway, who asked Spencer whether it would not be possible to form a concert of eminent men, who, whenever a peril of war
4io Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
arose, should meet as a " supreme court of civilization " and determine the right and wrong, before any declaration of war took place.
To MOXCURE D. CON'WAY.
17 July, 1898.
I sympathize in your feelings and your aims, but not in your hopes. ... In people's present mood nothing can be done in that direction.
Now that the white savages of Europe are overrunning the dark savages everywhere — now that the European nations are vying with one another in political burglaries — now that we have entered upon an era of social cannibalism in which the strong nations are devouring the weaker — now that national interests, national prestige, pluck, and so forth are alone thought of, and equity has utterly dropped out of thought, while rectitude is scorned as " unctuous," it is useless to resist the wave of barbarism. There is a bad time coming, and civilized mankind will (morally) be uncivilized before civiliza- tion can again advance.
Such a body as that which you propose, even could its members agree, would be pooh-poohed as sentimental and visionary. The universal aggressiveness and universal culture of blood-thirst will bring back military despotism, out of which after many generations partial freedom may again emerge.
The reader will remember how, when the Anti-Aggression excitement was on him in 1882, he had endeavoured to in- duce Miss Bevington to put the indignation he felt into verse. The idea occurred to him again this year.
To WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.
1 October, 1898.
For some years I have been casting about for a poet who might fitly undertake a subject I very much want to see efficiently dealt with. At one time I thought of proposing it to Mr. Robert Buchanan, who in respect of vigour of ex- pression and strength of moral indignation seemed appropriate, but I concluded that the general feeling with regard to him would prevent a favourable reception — would in fact tend very much to cancel the effect to be produced. Afterwards the name of Mr. William Watson occurred to me as one who had shown feelings of the kind I wished to see expressed. But, admirable as much of his poetry is, the element of power is not marked : he does not display a due amount of burning sarcasm. Your recent letter in the Times, and since then a review in the Academy in which there were quotations from
1895-19°°] Revision 411
your poem " The Wind and the Whirlwind," lead me to hope that you may work out the idea I refer to.
This idea is suggested by the first part of Goethe's " Faust" — The Prologue in Heaven, I think it is called. In this, if I remember rightly (it is now some 50 years since I read it), Mephistopheles obtains permission to tempt Faust — the drama being thereupon initiated. Instead of this I suggest an inter- view and dialogue in which Satan seeks authority to find some being more wicked than himself, with the understanding that, if he succeeds, this being shall take his place. The test of wickedness is to be the degree of disloyalty — the degree of rebellion against divine government.
6 October. — Thank you for your letter. I am heartily glad to find you entertain my suggestion. . . .
My beliefs are pretty much as pessimistic as those you express — in respect at least of the approaching condition of mankind ; but holding though I do that we are commencing a long course of re-barbarization from which the reaction may take very long in coming, I nevertheless hold that a reaction will come, and look forward with hope to a remote future of a desirable kind, to be reached after numerous movements of progress and retrogression. Did I think that men were likely to remain in the far future anything like what they now are, I should contemplate with equanimity the sweeping away of the whole race.
5 November. — How to put the greatest amount of feeling and idea in the shortest space is the problem to be solved by every writer, more especially by the poet, for rightly con- ceived (not as by Browning) poetry is a vehicle in which the friction is reduced to a minimum, and of course everything which is superfluous adds to the friction. I have often thought that nearly all our poets would have greatly benefited by restriction to one-fourth the space. Works of art in general would in nearly all cases profit by restraint. Much architecture and much internal decoration is spoiled by excess, and nearly every painter puts too much into his pictures. Composers, too, even the highest of them, as Beethoven, often spoil their works by needless expansion. To the artist each new idea seems so good that he cannot make up his mind to leave it out, and so more or less sacrifices the effect of the whole to the effect of the part.
Before the appearance of Satan Absolved — the title chosen for his poem by Mr. Scawen Blunt — Spencer wrote : —
412 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
To WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.
23 June, 1899.
I rejoice to hear that the poem is finished, and that its publication is not far off.
Of course I feel honoured by your proposal to preface some words of dedication to me, and accept with pleasure. Please do not, however, in any introductory words, indicate the origin of the idea which the poem elaborates. You will perhaps be surprised by this request until you understand my reason.
Already my general views, touching as they do in many places upon religious opinions, have from time to time ex- posed me to vilification both here and in America, and have, in consequence, raised impediments to the wider diffusion of the general philosophical views which I have set forth, and have in various ways diminished both the circulation and the influence of the books. Such being the case I do not want to again rouse, even more strongly than hitherto, the oiiinin theologicum and to give it a further handle for attacks, not only upon my declared religious opinions, but also upon the system of thought associated with them, but which is in reality inde- pendent of them. It is this contemplation not of the personal, but of the impersonal effects, which makes me wish not to arouse still greater antagonism than I have already done. A further obstacle to the spread of evolutionary views would, I think, be a greater evil than any benefit to be gained.
On receiving a copy of the poem, he wrote in haste to beg Mr. Blunt to omit a passage on the first page. The description of the ante-chamber of heaven " savours too much of the earth earthy, . . . and puts the poem in too low a key."
To WILFRID SCAWEX BLUXT.
28 October, 1899.
Let me first apologize for my brusquely-expressed letter written immediately on receipt of Satan Absolved. . . ,
I did not at first recognize the fact that, by calling the poem a u Victorian Mystery," you intended to suggest some analogy to the mysteries of Medieval days, and that you had adopted •a mode of treatment implied by this analogy. Hence that assimilation of the divine and the human, which characterized the mystery- plays, had not been understood by me as sequent upon the adoption of the earlier mode of thought, and as a result gave me a sense of incongruity. Though I now see that the adoption of this ancient mode of thought gives consistency to the work, yet it seems to me that we (or at least cultured people) have so far travelled away from that mode of thought
1 8 9 5 - 1 9°°] Revision 4 1 3
that the revival of it will be apt to excite in many readers an internal protest.
My chief difficulty, however, in forming a judgment arises, as I now see, from the wide difference between the general conception as embodied by you and the conception which I had myself formed and suggested. . . .
This much, however, I can say with all sincerity — that I like it much better on a second reading than on the first ; and this I think is a marked evidence of its goodness. Unquestionably, Satan's description of Man and his doings is given with great power, and ought to bring to their senses millions of hypocrites who profess the current religion. I wish you would emphasize more strongly the gigantic lie daily enacted — the contrast be- tween the Christian professions and the pagan actions, and the perpetual insult to one they call Omniscient in thinking that they can compound for atrocious deeds by laudatory words.
During the winter of 1898-99 he wrote two postscripts to Part VII. of the Psychology : one on Idealism and Realism ; the other in reply to a criticism of the late Professor Green, whose article in the Contemporary Review for December, 1877, had recently been republished.1 In addition to these he wrote a chapter on "The Filiation of Ideas," which he stereotyped and put away for future use.2 A renewed attempt to introduce the metric system suggested the expediency of issuing a second edition of the brochure, "Against the Metric System," and again distributing it among members of Parliament. Under the name "A Citizen " he wrote to the Times four letters, which were included in the pamphlet.
With all his disregard for public opinion as far as con- cerned his philosophical doctrines — notwithstanding the indifference or even satisfaction with \vhich he contem- plated the shocks he occasionally gave to current orthodoxy, whether scientific or religious — he was extremely sensitive to criticism of his character, and had a rooted dislike to his private life and conversation being treated as public property. He assumed that those who enjoyed the privilege of his intimacy would respect the unwritten law of private intercourse by scrupulously refraining from making public
1 Principles of Psychology, ii., 505-20, Ed. of 1899.
2 Reprinted in this volume as Appendix B.
414 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
the trivial no less than the important matters of his daily life. Himself taking little interest in personalities and gossip, he never dreamt that unpremeditated remarks made in the hearing of those living under the same roof, might be pub- lished abroad, or that the petty details of domestic life might have their pettiness intensified by being taken out of their appropriate setting and held up as a public spectacle. He had a rude awakening in the spring of 1899. Soon after the announcement of his forthcoming book on Spencer, Mr. Hector Macpherson received from a lady quite un- known to him, an offer of " Reminiscences of Herbert Spencer." She and her father had lived at 38, Queen's Gardens during part of the time Spencer was there, and had been in the habit of taking notes of Spencer's sayings and doings, and these notes she now offered for ten guineas, adding that if they were not accepted she could readily find a publisher later on. On hearing of this, and on the advice of his solicitors that he had no power to stop the publica- tion of statements concerning himself, he requested Mr. Macpherson to offer ten guineas for the MS., provided the lady would undertake not to publish any other version of the reminiscences. A legal minute of agreement and sale was drawn up and signed, and in due course Spencer obtained possession of the manuscript.
To HECTOR MACPHERSON.
25 April, 1899.
You bargained better than you knew. There are many absolutely false statements — false to the extent of absurdity. Here is a quotation: — "Often (!) invited to dine at Marl- boimigh House, but would never go." Imagine the Prince of Wales often repeating his invitations after being declined ! The statement is absolutely baseless. Another statement is : — " Gladstone very often came to breakfast, but this was before the Ht)me Rule affair ; also George Eliot, Darwin, Tyndall." Again absolutely false. With no one of the four did I ever exchange breakfast civilities save Mr. Gladstone, and instead of his often breakfasting with me I some three or four times break- fasted with him. . . . Some of Mr. 's quotations from his
diary are, however, of a libellous kind.
Spencer's first idea had been that the lady should be informed by the firm of lawyers who had the matter in hand
1895-1 9°°] Revision 4 1 5
that the publication of these reminiscences would render her liable to prosecution. But in the end he took a view of the matter which it seems a pity he did not take at the outset — to treat the proposed publication with indifference, seeing that it contained its own antidote.
The health of Mr. Grant Allen was giving Spencer much concern, his sympathies as usual leading him to try to trace the evil to its source. A visit of some duration from his friend afforded opportunities for earnest entreaties. These were afterwards enforced by appeals to Mr. Grant Allen's scientific knowledge.
To GRANT ALLEX.
BRIGHTON, 2 June, 1899.
I am glad to hear that your wife thinks that you have profited by your stay here. I hope that the corner may be by-and-by turned completely.
That it may be turned completely it is clear that you must improve your mastication. ... If I had to teach children I should give them among other things a lesson on the import- ance of mastication, and should illustrate it by taking a small iron nail and weighing against it some pinches of iron filings till the two balanced ; then, putting them into two glasses, pouring into each a quantity of dilute sulphuric acid, leaving them to stir the two from time to time, and showing them that whereas the iron filings quickly dissolve, the dissolving of the nail would be a business of something like a week. This would impress on them the importance of reducing food to small fragments. That you, a scientific man, should not recognize this is to me astonishing.1
When Mr. Grant Allen died in October following, Spencer lost one of his ablest and most chivalrous allies. Writing in June, 1900, to Mr. Edward Clodd on receiving a copy of the Memoir, he said :
I was often surprised by his versatility, but now that the facts are brought together, it is clear to me that I was not sufficiently surprised. One of the traits on which I should myself have commented had 1 written about him was his immense quickness of perception. He well deserved this biography.
1 Mastication formed the subject of a brief essay he began to dictate a few weeks before his death, but did not finish.
4i 6 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
The correspondence that follows with Mr. (afterwards Sir) Leslie Stephen regarding the formation of an Ethical Lecturers Fund has an interest apart from its immediate purpose. It throws light upon the question how, with his professed dislike to reading, he was able to amass the immense amount of information contained in his earlier books. This profusion of exemplification and illustration seems inconsistent with his own repeated statements that he was constitutionally, and as a matter of fact, idle — that he was an impatient reader, and actually read little. In one of the following letters to Mr. Leslie Stephen he says that when preparing to write he read up in those directions in which he expected to find materials for his own general- izations, not caring for the generalizations of others. Under the guidance of a generalization he picked out the relevant material, ignoring the irrelevant ; as a lawyer restricts his reading in preparing his brief. That he lost by this restricted reading cannot be doubted. It gave colour to the not ill-natured remark of one of his friends : "Scratch Spencer, and you come upon ignorance." But, taking all in all, it may be said that what he lost through lack of diligence in acquisition he made up for, or more than made up for, by the continuous exercise of his wonderful gift of organization. If the word industrious can be so applied, then, as a thinker Spencer was pre-eminently industrious, his mind was incessantly occupied with the logical relations of things. It was the firm grasp he had of these logical relations that enabled him to retain complete mastery over the details, marshalling them at his bidding ; giving, perhaps, also the impression of having unfathomable sources of information from which to draw. His literary industry was untiring. Not only were his published writings volu- minous, but his correspondence was very great. The limit imposed on the writer of this volume has rendered it impos- sible to reproduce more than a small fraction of his letters.
To LESLIE STEPHEN.
28 June, 1899.
When I received the circular asking for aid in raising the Ethical Lecturers Fund I at once decided to contribute. On re-reading the prospectus, however, I was brought to a pause
1895-! 9°°] Revision 4 1 7
by the paragraph requiring a University Honours degree as the minimum intellectual equipment. If John Mill had been alive and a young man, his candidature would have been negatived by this requirement. And were I a young man and proposed to adopt the career of ethical lecturer, my candidature also would be negatived.
30 June. — The expression which you underline does not seem to me to change the essential meaning of the passage I referred to. It implies that there shall be a standard of educa- tion substantially like that which a university gives.
I do not know what might have been the case with Mill. I can only say that were I young and a candidate, the regula- tion would rigorously exclude me. Not only could I have shown no education equivalent to a university honours degree, but I could have showrn none equivalent to the lowest degree a university gives. . . .
Naturally, such being my position, I demur to the test specified. Moreover, not on personal grounds only, but on general grounds, I demur to the assumption that a university career implies a lit preparation.
FROM LESLIE STEPHEN.
1 July, 1899. You say that when you were young you could not have
shown an education " equivalent to the lowest degree a uni- versity gives." It is not for me to dispute that statement. I am, however, sure that when you first published books upon ethical questions, you had somehow or other attained an amount of knowledge upon such topics very much superior to that of the average " honour man," who satisfies the examiners in his department of study. . . . We never thought of suggest- ing that candidates should have passed any particular course, but that their general hold of intellectual culture should be equal to that implied by capacity to fulfil the ordinary con- ditions of university success.
To LESLIE STEPHEN.
2 July, 1899. Your assumption is a very natural one, but it is utterly
mistaken. When Social Statics was written I had none of that preparation which you suppose.
When with my uncle, from thirteen to sixteen, my acquire- ments were limited to Euclid, algebra, trigonometry, mechanics, and the first part of Newton's Principia. To this equipment I never added. During my eight years of engineering life I read next to nothing — even of professional literature. Then as always, I was an impatient reader and read nothing continu- ously except novels and travels, and of these but little. I am
27
4i 8 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxV.
in fact constitutionally idle. I doubt whether during all these years I ever read any serious book for an hour at a stretch. You may judge of my condition with regard to knowledge from the fact that during all my life up to the time Social Statics was written, there had been a copy of Locke on my father's shelves which I never read — I am not certain that I ever took it down. And the same holds of all other books of philosophical kinds. I never read any of Bacon's writings, save his essays. I never looked into Hobbes until, when writing the essay on " The Social Organism," I wanted to see the details of his grotesque conception. It was the same with Politics and with Ethics. At the time Social Statics was written I knew of Paley nothing more than that he enunciated the doctrine of expediency ; and of Bentham I knew only that he was the promulgator of the Greatest Happiness principle. The doctrines of other ethical writers referred to were known by me only through references to them here and there met with. I never then looked into any of their books ; and, moreover, I have never since looked into any of their books. When about twenty-three I happened to get hold of Mill's Logic, then recently published, and read with approval his criticism of the Syllogism. When twenty-four I met with a translation of Kant and read the first few pages. Forthwith, rejecting his doctrine of Time and Space, I read no further. My ignorance of ancient philosophical writers was absolute. After Social Statics was published (in 1851) I made the acquaintance of Mr. Lewes, and one result was that I read his Biographical History of Philosophy. . , . And, shortly after that (in 1852), a present of Mill's Logic having been made to me by George Eliot, I read that through : one result being that I made an attack upon one of his doctrines in the Westminster.
Since those days I have done nothing worth mentioning to fill up the implied deficiencies. Twice or thrice I have taken up Plato's Dialogues and have quickly put them down with more or less irritation. And of Aristotle I know even less than of Plato.1
If you ask- how there comes such an amount of incorporated fact as is found in Social Statics, my reply is that when preparing to write it I read up in those directions in which I expected to find materials for generalization. I did not trouble myself with the generalizations of others.
And that indeed indicates my general attitude. All along I have looked at things through my own eyes and not through the eyes of others. I believe that it is in some measure because I have gone direct to Nature, and have escaped the warping
In a letter to Prof. Brough, of Aberystwith, in 1895, he said, "I never at any time paid the least attention to formal logic, and hold that c or all practical purposes it is useless."
i895-I9°°] Revision 419
influences of traditional beliefs, that I have reached the views I have reached. . . .
My own course — not intentionally pursued, but sponta- neously pursued — may be characterized as little reading and much thinking, and thinking about facts learned at first hand. Perhaps I should add, that my interest all along has been mainly in the science of Life, physical, mental and social. I hold that the study of the science of Life under all its aspects is the true preparation for a teacher of Ethics. And it must be the science of Life as it is conceived now, and not as it was conceived in past times.
If you ask me what test you are to establish, I cannot answer. I simply raise the question — Is it necessary to estab- lish any test ? May not the choice be decided by the evidence furnished in each case apart from any specified standard ?
While he was at Oakhurst, South Godstone, in July, Mrs. Leonard Courtney sent him an account of visits she had had from two of his admirers — Mr. Hector Macpher- son and the Chinese Ambassador, Sir Chih Chen Lo Feng-Luh, whom he had entertained at lunch in June. " Of course," he replied, " I am interested in your account of Mr. Macpherson and the Chinese Ambassador. The hitter's opinion that I am a resurrected Confucius is amus- ing, as is also his opinion that I ought to be a Duke." Writing late in the year to another friend — Mr. Carnegie — acknowledging a present of grouse, he remarks : —
Doubtless it is one of the advantages of being a highland laird that you can thus give gratifications to your friends ; but I can quite believe, as you hint in your last letter, that along with advantages there are increasing responsibilities. It is not only true, as Bacon says, that when a man marries he gives hostages to fortune, but it. is also true that he does this when he increases his belongings of every kind.
The letter that follows, written to a lady in Geneva, contains nothing with which the reader is not familiar. But, besides putting the evils of governmental interference and control very clearly, it bears witness to Spencer's life- long consistency with regard to fundamental opinions. It was translated into French and German and read at a Congress in Switzerland.
420 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
To MRS. JOSEPHINE BUTLER.
3 September, 1899.
I learn with pleasure that you and some others are opposing the adoption of coercive methods for achieving moral ends.
Briefly stated my own views on such matters are these : —
Nearly all thinking about political and social affairs is vitiated by ignoring all effects save those immediately contemplated. Men, anxious to stop an evil or obtain a good, do not consider what will be the collateral results of the governmental agencies they employ, or what will be the remote results. They do not recognize the fact that every new instrumentality established for controlling individual conduct becomes a precedent for other such instrumentalities, and that year after year philan- thropists with new aims urge on further coercive agencies, and that so little by little they establish a type of social organization — a type which no one of them contemplated when he was urging on his particular plan.
The highest aim ever to be kept in view by legislators and those who seek for legislation is the formation of character. Citizens of a high type are self-regulating, and citizens who have to be regulated by external force are manifestly of a low type. Men, like all other creatures, are ever being moulded into harmony with their conditions. If, generation after genera- tion, their conduct in all its details is prescribed for them, they will more and more need official control in all things. . . .
The final outcome of the policy in favour with philan- thropists and legislators is a form of society like that which existed in ancient Peru, where every tenth man was an official controlling the other nine ; where the regulation went to the extreme of inspecting every household to see that it was well administered, the furniture in good order, and the children properly managed ; and where the effect of this universal regu- lation of conduct was the production of a character such that the enfeebled society went down like a house of cards before a handful of Spaniards.
On completing the revision of the Principles of Biology towards the end of 1899, he at once took in hand the preparation of a final edition of First Principles. Owing to the number and importance of the alterations, he was desirous that the existing translations should be replaced as soon as possible by translations of this final edition. When the German version was completed, Professor Victor Carus wrote : " And now once more, allow me to repeat my most cordial thanks that you allowed me to translate your work anew. It was a very great treat to
1 8 9 5 - 1 900] Revision 4 2 1
me." Below this Spencer has written : " This is the highest compliment I ever received, considering Professor Carus's age and position." It was with no ordinary satis- faction that, towards the end of his eightieth year, he gave the finishing touches to the system of philosophy, on which he had been engaged for forty years. His gratifica- tion was enhanced by the cordial greetings from all parts of the world which poured in upon him on his birthday — greetings which he acknowledged in a circular written by his own hand and lithographed : —
Letters and telegrams, conveying the congratulations and good wishes of known and unknown friends, have reached me yesterday and to-day in such numbers that, even were I in good health it would scarcely be practicable to write separate acknowledgments. I must therefore ask you, in common with others, kindly to accept this general letter which, while expressing my thanks to those who have manifested their sympathy, also expresses my great pleasure in receiving so many marks of it from my own countrymen and from men of other nationalities.
No one will deny that Spencer was entitled to look forward to the enjoyment of undisturbed serenity now that the task, for w which he had sacrificed so much, was completed. But, ere the work of revision had been fully accomplished, events were taking place that were to cause him anxiety and vexation during the remaining years of his life. Some time before the outbreak of hostilities in South Africa he had denounced the policy that was drifting the country into war. Whatever one's opinion may be as to the right or the wrong of the war, one must admit that Spencer's attitude towards it was in complete harmony with the principles he had throughout life professed. He was invited to sign a protest.
To JAMES SULLY.
10 December, 1899.
Who are the " we " ? I should not like to give my name in such a case without being made aware with whose names mine would be joined.
Further, I think that the protest is not sufficiently strong, and not sufficiently concise. . . . Among the facts which should be emphasized are (1) that the outlanders were a swarm of unwelcome intruders and had no right to complain of the social regime into which they intruded themselves,
422 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxv.
since nobody asked them to stay if they did not like it. (2) They were proved traitors trying to overturn the government which gave them hospitality, and, as Lord Loch's evidence shows, were long contemplating a rising and a seizure of the government of the country. Traitors cannot put in a claim to political power. (3) The Boers have done no more than would inevitably have been done by ourselves if similarly placed, and in doing which we should have regarded ourselves as patriotic and highly praiseworthy. (4) The advocacy of annexation is nothing more than a continuance of our practice of political burglary. (5) We are rightly vituperated by other nations, as we should vituperate any one of them who did similar things, and as we are now vituperating Russia for its policy in Finland, carried out in a much milder manner.1
To MARK JUDGE.
2 January, 1900.
During the last week I have been in communication with the Secretary of the Anti- Vaccination League, and also with the Chairman of the South African Conciliation Committee, and this morning I have a request from the Editor of the Speaker to express my sympathy with the course which they are pur- suing. In all these cases I am making a favourable response.
I am now nearly eighty, and it is more and more clear to me that I must cut myself off from these various distractions as much as possible for I have still something I want to do, and thinking this, I decide it will be better for me to decline taking any part in this League for Licensing Reform, even in the posi- tion of Vice- President. ... I wish you success in your efforts.
While approving of the attitude of the Speaker towards the war, he declined to become a regular subscriber because its political views were "distinctly socialistic or collectivist, if you choose so to call them, and much as I abhor war I abhor socialism in all its forms quite as much." On 5 February the Morning Leader had a letter from him protesting against the spirit shown by those who shouted to the departing troops : "Remember Majuba."
To SIR EDWARD FRY.
6 February, 1900.
Popular passion, excited by political and financial agencies, has gagged all but one of those morning papers which ex- pressed opposition to our war policy in South Africa. The
1 Spencer was one of the signatories of the memorial to the Czar on behalf of the people of Finland, which His Majesty declined to
1895-1 9°°] Revision 423
Morning Leader is the only one that remains to give voice to those who reprobate the war and desire that the two republics shall maintain their independence. You will see by a copy of the paper, which you have by this time received, that, by the expression of sympathetic opinions, efforts are being made to support this organ of views properly to be called Christian, in opposition to the views of those properly to be called Pagan.
It is not to be expected that much can be done towards checking the war fever, but it may be hoped that by spreading so far as may be sympathy with equitable sentiments and repro- bating those who sneer at u unctuous rectitude," something may be done towards preparing the way for a settlement not so utterly inequitable as is now threatened.
Could you help by adding some expression of your opinion to the expressions of opinions already published ?
A similar letter was sent to Dr. Edward Caird, Master of Balliol College, Oxford.
TO THE Rl£HT HON. LEONARD COURTNEY.
24 February, 1900.
I daresay you will think me rather absurd in making a suggestion respecting your attitude towards your constituents.
There has grown up the altogether unwarrantable assumption that a man represents that particular part of the constituency which has elected him, and when that part of the constituency — some Conservative or Liberal Association, or what not — through whose instrumentality he was elected disapproves of his course, it seems to be thought by them, and by the public at large, that he is thereupon called upon to resign. But where is there any indication, either in the constitution or in the theory of representation, that a member of parliament repre- sents any particular section of his constituency, any party ? So far as I know, the idea of party is not recognized in the representative system at all. A member of parliament repre- sents the constituency and the whole constituency, and not any particular section of it. ... Hence it results that, if any Liberal or Conservative Association, or any other kind of caucus, calls upon him in a case like the present, to resign, his fit reply may be that as a representative of the whole constituency he cannot even entertain the proposition to resign, until it is shown to him that a majority of the whole constituency wishes him to do so.
I do not know that in your case the assumption of such an attitude would be of any advantage, since, probably, the re- mainder of the constituency is more against you than the part which elected you. Still, I suggest this as a general course of conduct applicable to all cases.
424
CHAPTER XXVI. INORGANIC EVOLUTION.
IN the preceding chapters little has been said as to the application of evolution to inorganic Nature. This division was passed over in Spencer's programme "partly because, even without it, the scheme is too extensive ; and partly because the interpretation of organic Nature ... is of more immediate importance." While most will admit the cogency of these two reasons, many, after reading the earlier volumes of the series, will agree with Mr. J. S. Mill in desiring to see the working out of the principles of evolution in the omitted division of the programme. Some may even think, with Dr. David Sharp, of Cambridge, that the application of evolution to inorganic Nature was of more importance than the attempt to upset Professor Weismann's theory. Be this as it may, it would be a very perverse judgment that would regard the absence of this division as telling against Spencer's work as a whole. Objection may be made if a writer fails to accomplish what he undertook to do. But, it can hardly be urged against the value of what he has accomplished that he has not done something which, for sufficient reasons, he announced at the outset he did not propose to under- take. To discredit Spencer's teaching, as has been done, now because he attempted too much, and now because he did not attempt more, does not help those who honestly wish to arrive at a just estimate of it.
It is, however, a mistake to assume that Spencer did not apply the principles of evolution to inorganic Nature. Not only was the subject frequently in his thoughts throughout the thirty-six years when he was writing the Synthetic Philosophy; but even before his programme
1838-58] Inorganic Evolution 425
was issued he had made two important excursions into inorganic Nature — excursions that had no small share in suggesting and developing his system of thought. The purpose of this chapter is to gather together the corre- spondence bearing upon evolution in its application to the inorganic world. In this way a better idea will be gained of what Spencer accomplished in this domain, than if the subject had been dealt with incidentally, and in piece-meal fashion, in the course of the narrative.
The scientific topics (other than professional ones) that first and chiefly interested Spencer, during the earlier engi- neering period, were Astronomy and Geology — the two departments of knowledge which, when he issued his programme in 1860, he decided to pass over, or not to treat in detail. Letters to his father during the years 1838 to 1841 contain frequent discussions of astronomical questions. Geology was taken up seriously in 1840, and, during the years he was engaged on railway surveys, he had many opportunities of acquainting himself with it at first hand. Speculation as to the change in the Earth's atmosphere consequent on the abstraction from it of carbon during the deposition of carboniferous strata, took shape in 1843-44 in a paper in the Philosophical Magazine.1 In the same periodical for 1847 he had a paper on "The Form of the Earth no proof of original Fluidity."2 A theory about nebulous matter was being worked out by the middle of 1851. He had written to Sir John Herschel and Professor Airy, inquiring " whether it had been shewn why nebulous matter must take up a rotatory motion in condensing." Their replies, so he told his father, show " that my idea is new, so I think I have made a discovery worth publishing. I shall write a paper for the Philosophical Magazine." He was in no hurry, however, to rush into print ; for, though he told his parents in 1852 that he hoped to complete it shortly, it was laid aside for several years, owing to the writing of the Principles of Psychology, and subsequent ill-health. But by the spring of 1858 it began to assume a definite shape.
1 Autobiography, i., 532. • Autobiography, i., 313, 546.
426 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvi.
To HIS FATHER.
May, 1858.
The Nebular Hypothesis works out beautifully. The article will contain a great deal that is new, and will, I think, render the argument conclusive. I have had a long talk with Dr. Tyndall on the sundry novelties, which were based upon principles in physics. He endorses all my conclusions : though not prepared wholly to commit himself to them, he thinks them rigorously reasoned, and well worth promulgating.
Some months after the publication of the article1 he mentions that it " had been very favourably received every- where. It was ascribed to Baden Powell." The early part of 1859 was taken up with a paper for the Universal Review, under the title " Illogical Geology."2 As the primary purpose of " The Nebular Hypothesis " was to prove that the inferences drawn from the revelations of Lord Rosse's telescope were illegitimate, so that of " Illogical Geology " was to direct attention to the inconsistency of the reasonings of geologists. The writing of these two articles, which touched upon the two divisions of Inorganic Evolution as he conceived it, played an important part in the evolution of the scheme of philosophy, which had gradually been growing in extent and definiteness. In the outline sketched during the early days of 1858, the first volume is represented as including, after Parts I. ajid II., dealing respectively with "The Knowable" and "The Unknowable," Part III., Astronomic Evolution, and Part IV., Geologic Evolution.
Another outline of this first volume, of what he calls the Deductive Philosophy, presents the contents of Parts III. and IV. with more detail.
Part III. The Principles of Astrogeny.
Chap. I. Primitive Cosmogonies.
,, II. A Priori Probabilities of Evolution.
„ III. Where are the Nebulae ?
„ IV. What are the Nebulae ?
„ V. The Comets.
„ VI. Motions of the Sun and Planets.
„ VII. Specific Gravities of the Sun and Planets.
x ^Autobiography, ii., 21. - Autobiography, ii., 43.
1858-73] Inorganic Evolution 427
Chap. VIII. Temperature of the Sun and Planets.
,, IX. Our Sidereal System.
X. The Future.
Part IV. The Principles of Geogeny.
Chap. I. Igneous Development.
„ II. Aqueous Development.
,, III. Geographic Development.
„ IV. Meteorologic Development.
„ . V. Chemical Development.
The omission of Astronomic and Geologic Evolution from the programme issued two years later did not mean that the inorganic world was to be entirely passed over, but only that it would not receive the detailed treatment accorded to Life, Mind, Society and Morality. Readers of First Principles are aware of the course followed in the exposition. " The Transformation or Equivalence of Forces," "The Direction of Motion," and "The Rhythm of Motion" are each exemplified, firstly, in astronomical and secondly, in geological transformations, before their operation in organic and super-organic transformations is discussed. The same course is followed in the exposition of "The Law of Evolution," "The Instability of the Homo- geneous," "The Multiplication of Effects," "Segregation" and " Equilibration." When treating of " Dissolution " the exposition naturally follows the reverse order. Putting all these expositions together one may obtain a general idea of what the Principles of Astrogenv and the Principles of Geogeny would have been like had time, energy, and know- ledge sufficient been vouchsafed to him.
What he described as "a further development of the doctrines of molecular dynamics " appeared in the Reader (19 November 1864) under the title — " What is Electricity ? " Nine years later, when writing to Dr. Youmans (12 Novem- ber, 1873) he said :
Since I began this letter there has dawned upon me, after this long delay, an extension of that theory of electricity set forth in the Reader and published in the Essays. I am busy writing a postscript which, when it is in print, I shall submit to Tyndall and other authorities, and, if they do not disprove it, will send you a copy for addition to the American ^volume.
428 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvi.
FROM JOHX TYXDALL.
ATHENAEUM CLUB [1873].
I have glanced over your paper, rather than read it critically. It shows the usual penetration ; hut will you bear with me if I advise you not to publish it as it now stands. Its aim is ambitious, and I frankly think it fails in its aim. If you publish it as a speculation, not as an u explanation," no harm can accrue. But I think harm would accrue if it were published in its present garb.
I often wished to say to you that your chapters on the Persistence of Force, etc., were never satisfactory to me. You have taken as your guide a vague and to me, I confess, al- together unsatisfactory book. The greater part of your volume I consider to be of such transcendent merits, putting one's best thoughts into the clearest language, that I feel all the more the transition to the chapters to which I have referred. I ex- pressed, I think, the opinion to you some time ago that they ought to be rewritten.
If you have considered how the disturbance of molecules can generate attraction and repulsion at a distance, you ought to state the result of your thought. If you have not thought of this question, then I think you have omitted the fundamental phenomenon of electricity.
I am hard pressed, and therefore write briefly. You will excuse my frankness. I certainly should grieve to see any- thing with your name attached to it that would give the enemy occasion to triumph.
To JOHX TYXDALL.
22 December, 1873.
I quite agree with you as to the undesirableness of pub- lishing this postscript as it stands : indeed, I sketched it out with the expectation that criticism would probably oblige me to remodel it. I quite intended (but I see that I must make the intention more clear) to put forth the hypothesis simply as a speculation : apparently having such an amount of congruity with physical principles as made it worth considering — es- pecially in the absence of anything like a satisfactory ex- planation.
I have had another letter from Clerk Maxwell, which con- siderably startles me by its views about molecular motion. I should like to talk to you about them. They seem to me to differ from those which I supposed you to hold, and which I supposed were held generally.
Thank you for your reminder respecting the chapter on the " Persistence of Force." I hope to make it worthy of your approval. I am now remodelling it, and the two preceding chapters.
1873] Inorganic Evolution 429
When sending the paper to Professor Clerk Maxwell reference seems to have been made to a remark made to Professor Kingdon Clifford regarding Spencer's views about nebular condensation.
FROM J. CLERK MAXWELL.
5 December, 1873.
I do not remember the particulars of what I said to Pro- fessor Clifford about nebular condensation. The occasion of it was I think a passage in an old edition of your First Principles, and having since then made a little more acquaint- ance with your works, I regarded it merely as a temporary phase of the process of evolution which you have been carrying on within your own mind. Mathematicians by guiding their thoughts always along the same tracks, have converted the field of thought into a kind of railway system, and are apt to neglect cross-country speculations.
It is very seldom that any man who tries to form a system can prevent his system from forming round him, and closing him in before he is forty. Hence the wisdom of putting in some ingredient to check crystallization and keep the system in a colloidal condition. Candle- makers, I believe, use arsenic for this purpose. . . . But you seem to be able to retard the crystallization of parts of your system without stopping the process of evolution of the whole, and I therefore attach much more importance to the general scheme than to particular statements.
After describing several experiments, which he would not say were inconsistent with Spencer's theory, but which were very important and significant, Professor Clerk Max- well continues : " As I observe that you are always im- proving your phraseology I shall lay before you my notions on the nomenclature of molecular motions." One of the terms defined was " the motion of agitation of a molecule," namely " that by which the actual velocity of an individual molecule differs from the mean velocity of the group."
On receipt of some remarks by Spencer on the word "agitation," Professor Clerk Maxwell wrote again (17 December, 1873) : —
The reason for which I use the word " agitation " to dis- tinguish the local motion of a molecule in relation to its neighbours is that I think with you that the word u agitation " conveys in a small degree, if at all, the notion of rhythm.
430 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvi.
If motion is said to be rhythmic when the path is, on the whole, as much in one direction as in the opposite, then all motion is rhythmic when it is confined within a small region of space.
But if, as I understand the word rythmic, it implies not only alternation, but regularity and periodicity, then the word " agitation " excludes the notion of rhythm, which was wrhat I meant it to do. ... A great scientific desideratum is a set of words of little meaning — words which mean no more than that a thing belongs to a very large class. Such words are much needed in the uudulatory theory of light, in order to express fully what is proved by experiment, without connoting anything which is a mere hypothesis.
To J. CLERK MAXWELL.
30 December, 1873.
I must confess that I was taken somewhat aback by the statement that you deliberately chose the word agitation because it negatived the notion of rhythm. For I had hardly anticipated the tacit denial that the relative motions of mole- cules as wholes have rhythm. I feel fully the force of the reason for supposing that, when molecules are irregularly aggregated into a solid, the tensions due to their mutual actions will be so various as to produce great irregularity of motion ; and I have, indeed, in the first part of the speculation concerning electricity, indicated this as a possible cause for the continuity of the spectrum in solids. But, admitting this, there seem to me two qualifying considerations. If, as shown in the lecture you were so kind as to send me, molecules of different weights have different absolute velocities in the gaseous state ; then, must it not happen that when such differently-moving molecules are aggregated into solids, their constitutional differences of mobility will still show themselves ? Such constitutional differences cannot well disappear without any results ; and if they do not disappear, must there not result characteristic differences between their motions of agitation in the two solids they form — must not the two agitations differ in the average periodicities of the local motions constituting them ? The second qualifying consideration which occurs to me is this. Though molecules, irregularly aggregated into a solid, may be expected to have motions more or less confused by the irregularities of the tensions ; may we not say that, when they are regularly aggregated into a solid (as in a crystal), they will be subject to regular tensions, conducing to regular motions ? Do not the formation and structure of a crystal imply that its units are all so homogeneously con- ditioned that they must have homogeneous motions ?
1873-74] Inorganic Evolution 431
The original draft of the postscript to the article "What is Electricity " ? was amended in the light of the criticisms, oral and written, to which it had been subjected at the hands of Professor Tyndall, Professor Clerk Maxwell, and others. Admitting that the hypothesis had received no endorsements, he held that it had not been proved unten- able. He published it, therefore, as a speculation only, adding to the postscript another postscript containing suggestions arising out of the criticisms.1
The constitution of the Sun, which had formed the subject of a paper in the Reader early in 1865, came up again in 1874.
To E. L. YOUMAXS.
16 October, 1874.
Proctor, in the last number of the Cornhill, has been drawing attention to the conclusions of your astronomer Young that the sun is a hollow sphere. ... His reasonings are in great measure the same as those set forth in my essay on the " Constitution of the Sun " — reasonings which I have been for the last year past intending to amend, in respect of the particular process by which the precipitated matters form the molten shell. There are mechanical difficulties, named to Clifford by Clerk Maxwell, to the mode of formation as originally described. But, on pursuing the results of the process of precipitation into vapour and then into metallic rain, perpetually ascending and perpetually thickening as concentration goes on, I reached a conclusion respecting a formation of the shell, to which no objection has as yet been made by the authorities with whom I have discussed it. Apart however from this particular portion of the hypothesis which needs amendment, Professor Young's conception of the Sun's constitution and the progress going on in the Sun, are essentially those which I set forth.
He at once set about amending his reasonings " in respect of the particular process by which the precipitated matters form the molten shell." A slip proof of the amended hypothesis was sent to Professor Clerk Maxwell, who, admitting that he did not " quite understand the principal features " of the hypothesis, adduced reasons to show that "a liquid shell supported by a nucleus of less density than itself, whether solid, liquid or gaseous,
1 Essays^ ii., 176-187.
432 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. XXVL
is essentially unstable." On Professor Clerk Maxwell's letter (December 17, 1874) Spencer has pencilled: "This argument at first convinced me that my hypothesis was untenable. But subsequently the corollaries from Andrews's investigations concerning the critical point of gases, imply- ing that a gas might become denser than a liquid and yet remain a gas, led me to readopt the hypothesis."1
This point with others is touched upon in correspond- ence with his French translator.
To E. GAZELLES.
12 May, 1875.
I inclose impressions of some passages which will be substituted hereafter for certain parts of the essay on the u Nebular Hypothesis." [One of the alterations] is made as an abandonment of an hypothesis which Professor Clerk Maxwell has clearly proved to me is not tenable.
Respecting your question concerning the calculation of Tait, or rather of Sir William Thomson, I will write to you shortly, when I have refreshed my memory about it. Meanwhile I may say that I believe it to be wholly untenable ; for the reason that it sets out with assumptions that are not only gratuitous, but extremely improbable.
20 July. — I sent you the other day Huxley's address in which he controverted the conclusions of Sir William Thomson respecting the age of the Earth and of the Solar System. I meant before now to have written to you, giving my own further reasons for rejecting the inference drawn from his assumptions rather for rejecting his assumptions.
8 March, 1876. — I referred the other day to Sir William Thomson's paper on the solar heat, published in Macinillans Magazine for March, 1862. The aim is to show that the Sun cannot have been radiating heat at its present rate for anything like the time required by the inferences of geologists. The fallacy in his argument, which I remember to have observed when reading, I find to be this : — the calculation which lands him in his conclusion that radiation at this rate cannot have gone on for the required period, tacitly assumes the bulk of the sun to have been something like what it is now ; whereas, on the hypothesis of nebular condensation, the implication is, that for vast periods before the Sun reached his present degree of condensation, he was slowly contracting from a larger size, and was all the while radiating heat. Helmholtz has calculated that
1 Essays, i., 164.
1874-7^] Inorganic Evolution 433
since the time when, according to the nebular hypothesis, the matter composing the Solar System extended to the orbit of Neptune, there has been evolved by the arrest of sensible motion, an amount of heat 454 times as great as that which the Sun still has to give out. Now since a considerable part of this concentration and radiation must have taken place during the period in which the Sun's mass was receding inwards from the limits of the Earth's orbit ; and, as during all the latter stages of this period (say from the time when the Sun filled the orbit of Mercury) we may assume that the Earth has reached its concentrated form ; it is clear that, during all the remaining period of the Sun's contraction, the Earth must have been receiving its radiations, though in these remote periods the radiations must have been far less intense, yet since they emanated from a relatively enormous surface subtending at the earth a relatively immense angle, the total amount of radiation received by the Earth may have been as great or greater. Remembering that, were the Sun double its present diameter, it would need to radiate at but one-fourth its present rate to give us the same amount of heat, and that, did it subtend an angle of 5^ degrees, one hundredth of its present radiation for a given portion of surface would suffice ; we see it to be not only possible, but on the nebular hypothesis quite certain that the Earth has been receiving light and heat from the Sun, adequate for purposes of life, for a period immensely greater than is inferable when the calculation is made on the assumption that the Sun's bulk has been during the time something like the same.
The dispute between the physicists and the geologists as to the age of the Earth and the Solar System has changed its aspect during recent years. Until a few years ago the temperature of the Sun was supposed to be due solely to concentration of gaseous matter and the fall of meteoric stones. Sir William Thomson estimated that the Sun has been giving out heat for a period of some twenty or thirty millions of years, and that geologists must limit their time demands accordingly. But recent discoveries in regard to radio-activity point to the possession by the Sun of other sources of heat. The duration of the solar heat may therefore be indefinitely extended — extended at any rate as far as is necessary to satisfy the geologist, with his indefinite, and, some think, not very modest, claim of from one to five or six thousand millions of years, as the period during which the Earth has been sufficiently cool to permit of the appearance of living things on it. 28
434 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvi.
Across a correspondence with Dr. Charlton Bastian, Spencer has written : " This refers to the fact that Lockyer's speculations concerning the compound nature of the ele- ments, as shown by the changes of the spectra, were pur- suant on a remark I made to him expressing that belief."
To H. CHARLTON BASTIAN.
25 November, 1878.
One Sunday afternoon some four or five years ago, you and I called together upon Lockyer. . . . We chatted with him for some time in his laboratory, and our conversation turned upon Spectrum Analysis. . . . Have you any recollection of this con- versation ? and can you recall any opinion which I expressed respecting the implications of spectrum phenomena — what I thought was to be necessarily inferred from the more or less numerous lines contained in the spectrum of each element, and what I thought was to be inferred from that transformation in the spectrum of an element, which takes place under certain physical conditions ? ... As we walked away something passed respecting the bearings of what I had been saying upon the views contained in that work [Bastian's Beginnings of Life, recently published], leading to the remark that had you enter- tained the view, you might have begun your exposition some- what further back.
FROM H. CHARLTOX BASTIAN.
27 November, 1878.
I recollect the walk quite well to which you refer, our call upon Lockyer, and that there was a conversation in his labora- tory in reference to the different spectra yielded by so-called elements, under different conditions of temperature, etc. I know that Lockyer told us about some of his recent results, and that you expressed some opinions in interpretation of the evidence, and concerning the transformations of the spectra to which he referred — but, unfortunately, beyond that I cannot go. The details have slipped from my memory.
I recollect the conversation afterwards to which you refer, and know that the general conclusions from the conversation with Lockyer favoured the view that the so-called elements were themselves products of evolution.
This view of the elements came up again some twelve years after.
FROM H'ENRY CUNYNGHAME.
30 May, 1891.
A short time ago, being in the company of Mr. Crookes, he was good enough to explain to me his theory as to the com- position of the elements, which he thinks have been formed
1878-91] Inorganic Evolution 435
by a process of evolutional segregation. He has devoted some years to experiments upon this question, and the behaviour of the rare earths, such as yttrium under the spectroscope, strongly confirms these views. For by long continued fractiona- tion, different sorts of yttrium seem to present themselves, differing, as different breeds (say) of cows differ from one another. Of course the persistence of type, when once deve loped makes it practically impossible to transmute metals, just as, to use his own simile, you cannot, without returning to some primitive type, make a cow into a horse.
I said that I thought these experiments would be highly interesting to you as, in one of your works this view had been clearly foreshadowed. Mr. Crookes said that was so, and he had quoted your words in several of his lectures.1
On looking through Mr. (now Sir William) Crookes's pamphlets, Spencer wrote of them to Mr. Cunynghame as " yielding verifications of the view I have long entertained, and as tending to show how much more completely evo- lutionary the genesis of compound matter has been than I supposed. It is marvellous to trace in this field a parallel to the genesis of varieties and species." And to Mr. Crookes he wrote (8 June) : "Your views — especially in respect of the development of varieties and species — carry out the evolutionary idea in this field very much further than I have ever dreamt it could be carried." It is doubtless true that if First Principles were to be written in the light of recent advances in physics and chemistry, it would in many important respects differ from the book as we know it even in its final form. At the rate of progress of recent years a book on physics, it has been said, cannot appear " that is not already out of date a week after the author returns his proofs." Spencer was aware that his outline of Inor- ganic Evolution, had reference to the knowledge of the time and was subject to modification with every increase in our knowledge. Granted that "he did not fully nor always rightly utilize the chemistry and physics of his time " (and who has ever done so ?), he has the incontestible merit of having foreshadowed some of the most striking chemical and physical discoveries of recent years. The theory that the so-called elements are products of evolution was both
1 Also in his address as President of the Chemical Section of the British Association of 1886.
436 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvi.
novel and startling in the seventies. Now-a-days it may be said to be an accepted doctrine. Not only are the atoms no longer considered indivisible, but estimates are made of the number of corpuscles or electrons contained in a so-called atom ; and descriptions are given of the struggle for existence continually going on among the communities of corpuscles, ending in the overthrow of the unstable and the continuance of the stable. Like species in the organic world, the atoms are evolutionary products, the result of competition and survival of the fittest.
Writing in July 1880, to Dr. Youmans, he mentions having met Mr. Moulton.
He told me that there had lately been made a discovery which tended to verify my hypothesis with regard to the interior constitution of celestial bodies : the discovery being that made by a Professor Ramsay of Bristol,1 who, it turns out, is a very competent experimenter. He contributed a paper to the Royal Society, giving results respecting the transition from the gaseous to the liquid state, in which he made it manifest that, at the stage of pressure in which the gas becomes equally dense with the liquid, the line of demarcation of the two gradually becomes hazy and vanishes into a fog, and that, eventually, the liquid and the gas mingle so as to be no longer distinguishable. And Moulton drew7 my attention to the fact that this makes quite feasible, and in fact almost necessary, my supposition with regard to the gaseous nuclei of the Sun and planets. The result of this will be that I shall have to alter afresh that passage in the essay on the nebular hypothesis which I erased, and shall have to re-instate part of it and modify the remainder so as to incorporate with its arguments* this revelation.
No article of Spencer's was subjected to so many revisions as that on "The Nebular Hypothesis." During January and the first half of February, 1883, he embraced the opportunity of a new edition of the Essays being called for to subject it to further revision.
To E. L. YOUMANS.
8 March, 1883.
At length I send you the portions of the revision of the article on the " Nebular Hypothesis." They have given me
1 Now Sir William Ramsay, of University College, London.
1880-90] Inorganic Evohition 437
an immensity of trouble, and I am heartily glad they are out of hand.
The trouble has been in part caused by the fact that I have subjected them to various criticisms, and on minor points have taken advantage of these. As a result I feel quite safe as to the legitimacy of the speculation. Of course it is a case of Speculation versus Speculation ; and the physical arguments being admitted to be tenable, the thing has as good a basis as can well be given to it.
Towards the end of 1889 he again revised and added to the article, before incorporating it in the final edition of the Essays, being assisted by Mr. W. T. Lynn, of the Greenwich Observatory. Copies were sent for criticism to Lord Rayleigh, Sir William Thomson, Dr. Isaac Roberts, Lord Crawford, Mr. Huggins, and to Professors Dewar, Darwin, Williamson, Frankland, and Tyndall. Writing in reply on January i, 1890, Sir William Thomson said that he felt quite lost when he tried " to think of anything that can be imagined as a primitive condition of matter. Of antecedent conditions we may freely reason, and with fairly sure judgment. But of a condition which can come, under known law, from no antecedent, or of a chaos which existed through infinity of past time till a declension of atoms initiated the evolution of kosmos, I can form no imagination. Yet we seem to require a primitive condition of matter." Whenever he had thought of it, he had " been led to think of uncombined separate atoms as the primitive condition of matter." " But assuming this to be the case, we see by perfectly definite calculations, that the heat of chemical combination from the condition of detached atoms to the actual state of matter ... is very small in comparison with that due to gravity."
To SIR WILLIAM THOMSON.
3 Jan tuny, 1890.
I am very much obliged by your letter of yesterday, giving me your criticism in such clear detail. Let me, while thanking you, express my regret that I should have entailed upon you so much trouble. I had not supposed that you would write so fully, or my conscience would scarcely have let me write to you at all, for I should not have liked to intrude so much upon the time of one to whom time is so precious, knowing
43^ Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvi.
as I do by experience how terribly correspondence displaces matters of much importance.
I quite follow and fully appreciate the drift of your remarks, and more especially perceive that which I have not before recognized — the relatively small amount of heat evolved by chemical combinations among the ultimate units of matter, in comparison with the ' heat evolved by gravitation. It is clear that the amount of molecular motion possessed by each of such ultimate units must be transcendently great, before the quantity of motion lost by unions among them can be com- parable in amount to the quantity of motion lost in the course of the journey to their common centre of gravity. Still, I sup- pose, one may infer that, if preceding unions of such kind had generated a high temperature in the nebulous mass, at a time when it filled the orbit of Neptune, a considerable increase in the time required for concentration into the present solar mass would be implied.
I am much obliged by the copy of the paper which at your request was sent to me by your secretary. I perceive that it contains much matter of interest to me. A good part of it will I fear lie out of the sphere of my comprehension ; my mathematics, never very extensive, having become rusty.
Some years before he had urged Professor Tyndall, by way of change of work and scene, to " take up the general question of the condition of the Earth's interior. Recently, the numerous earthquakes and eruptions in various and remote parts of the Earth, sundry of them nearly or quite simultaneous, seem to me to be quite irreconcilable with the Thomsonian view that the Earth's interior is as rigid as steel. Further contraction of this rigid mass, the only possible cause assignable by Thomson, appears to me to be one quite incapable of explaining the facts."
To J. W. JUDD.
23 June, 1890.
I recently read with much interest the report given in Nature of your lecture to the Chemical Society on the " Chemical Changes in Rocks under Mechanical Stresses." Especially was I struck by the paragraph which states that the " volcanic glass known as uiarekanite" "will, when heated, swell up and intumesce," and that " the brown glass ejected from Krakatau, during the great eruption of 1883, if heated, increases to many times its original bulk, and passes into a substance which, macroscopically and microscopically, is indis- tinguishable from the pumice thrown out in such vast quantities during that great eruption."
1890] Inorganic Evolution 439
I am reminded, by this, paragraph, of certain conclusions concerning volcanic eruptions which I reached after an excur- sion up Vesuvius during the eruption of 1868. Inclosed is a passage written some years ago, briefly setting forth these conclusions. Though not named in this interpretation (which is simply a note appended to the account of the excursion)1 the character of pumice-stone had occurred to me as one of the evidences, since the liberation of water and its assumption of the gaseous state under diminishing pressure would, besides producing the effects above described, produce in many cases masses of vesicular substance. It matters not to the hypo- thesis whether the contained water is mechanically distributed only, or whether it is water of crystallization, or water chemi- cally combined. In any of these cases, if it assumes the gaseous state the effects will be of the general nature described.
But my more immediate purpose in writing to you is to ascertain what is now regarded as the most feasible interpreta- tion of such vast catastrophes as that of which Krakatau was the scene. On glancing at the summary of conclusions con- tained in the report of the committee appointed to investigate it, I find to my surprise that the eruption or explosion \vas ascribed to the intrusion of the sea : the implication being that action of a large body of water on a large body of lava would generate an adequate force. Is this probable ? Such a co-operation would be limited to the surface of contact of the water and the lava. How could the evolved steam, quickly checked in its genesis by the chilling and solidification of the adjacent molten matter, move so vast a mass. In the first place how is the entrance of sufficient water to be accounted for ? Its entrance could be effected only by a pressure greater than the pressure of the body of the lava, part of which extended above sea level. Considering the relative specific gravities of the two, such an intrusion would be unaccount- able, even in the absence of greater hydrostatic pressure on the side of the lava. In the second place, apart from mechanical obstacles, I cannot see how intrusion and spread of the water, taking an appreciable interval of time, could have the consequence supposed. The probability appears rather to be that, by the steam first generated, local fissures would be formed, allowing of escape and preventing the requisite accumulation of steam, even could a sufficient quantity be evolved.
If, on the other hand, we suppose a state of things like that implied by the above hypothesis and implied, too, by certain results of the researches you have summarized, we have a force that is both adequate and of the kind required
1 Autobiography, ii., p. 181, nole.
44O Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP- xxvi.
to account tor the various effects. On this hypothesis, the molten matter within the volcano, forming in the midst of its cone a column of, say, several thousand feet high, contains water which can assume the gaseous state only towards the upper part of the molten column, where the pressure is relatively moderate. Suppose that, at some place towards the lower part of the cone, some considerable area of its side has been thinned away by contact with the contained lava ; and that, instead of emitting through a fissure a small stream of lava, as commonly happens, it suddenly gives way and collapses over, say, many acres, what must happen ? Everywhere throughout the lava which rushes forth, the water and carbonic acid, relieved from pressure, become gaseous. The column of lava, extending high up the cone, suddenly falls perhaps a thousand or two feet, and relieves, from the greater part of the immense pressure it was subject to, the entire body of lava which filled the lower part of the volcano. The water and carbonic acid, imprisoned in every part of it, are liberated ; and a mass of matter, of perhaps half-a-mile cube, suddenly explodes.
All the effects produced appear to be natural consequences. Once being ruptured, the sides of the cone, subject to the tremendous force of the escaping gases, would be likely to collapse and be in large measure blown away. Those parts of the molten matter which, not being very far below the crater, had parted with considerable portions of their water and carbonic acid in the shape of ascending and exploding bubbles, would, when wholly freed from pressure, expand in but moderate degrees, and so would form vesicular masses of pumice-stone, which, ejected in large quantities, would cover neighbouring regions, as the sea was covered round Krakatau. Further, the lower portions of the lava, which, subject to high pressure, had, until the moment of the explosion, retained all their water and carbonic acid would, when these were suddenly changed into gases, explode in such a manner as to dissipate their solid substances in small fragments, down to minute particles. Whence would result enormous volumes of dust, such as were produced by the Krakatau eruption and so widely pervaded the atmosphere.
Probably had not other occupations prevented me from being au conrant with geological speculation I might have learnt that kindred interpretations had been given ; but not having met with such, I am prompted by the bearings of your late lecture to inquire what is the present state of opinion on the matter.
In answer to the enquiry as to the present state of opinion, Professor Judd wrote (25 June, 1890) :
1890-95] Inorganic Evolution 441
While a few geologists still maintain that Volcanic Eruptions are produced by the penetration of masses of water to highly heated rocks — many, and I think the majority — following the late Mr. Poulett Scrope, hold that the gradual disengagement of water-gas and other gases in the midst of a molten mass (as the pressure is continuously relieved by each ejection) are the really efficient cause in a volcanic outburst.
In 1894 he thought of again calling in question the calculations as to the age of the Earth, made by Sir William Thomson (afterwards Lord Kelvin).
To T. H. HUXLEY.
1 October, 1894.
Has anything of late been said apropos of the controversy between yourself and Lord Kelvin concerning the age of the Earth ? I am about to send for his volume of republished essays, but my impression, though a vague one, is that some of his data are inadmissible. I fancy that he is rather famous for reasoning mathematically from assumptions which are of a questionable kind, and then affirming positively the truth of his conclusion ; and the world at large have that super- stition in regard to mathematicians that they accept as a matter of course a conclusion mathematically reached, forgetting that its validity depends upon the truth of the data.
FROM T. H. HUXLEY.
3 October, 1894.
Kelvin and I have made no progress that I see. It is as much as I can do to get him to understand that the fact of evolution being proved by fossil remains, the time it may have taken is a question of quite secondary importance.
This information was asked for in view of a letter for Nature on "The Cooling of the Earth," which he wrote in the beginning of 1895, Mr. (now Sir) George H. Darwin being consulted. The letter, which was immediately with- drawn lest it should provoke a controversy, was as follows : —
One who is quite incompetent to criticize a chain of high mathematical reasoning may be not incompetent to form an opinion concerning the validity of the premises from which the reasoning sets out. Such premises may be entirely non- mathematical, and, if so, the mathematician cannot claim special authority for them : his assumptions remain open to criticism
442 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvi.
by others than mathematicians. Thus looking at the matter, I venture to make a suggestion respecting the calculation of Lord Kelvin and the question at issue between him and Professor Perry.
The reasoning of the one and the criticism of the other are concerned exclusively with processes which have gone on within the body of the Earth. In the one case, a certain interior con- stitution is assumed, and from the rate of increasing tempera- tures at increasing depths below the surface, an inference is drawn respecting the time which has been occupied in cooling. In the other case, a question is raised as to the validity of the assumptions in regard to the Earth's interior constitution, and a consequent scepticism about the inferences drawn is ex- pressed. But, in both cases, it appears to be assumed that the condition of things outside the Earth's body has all along been the same as no\v. It is assumed that whatever may have been the past temperature of the Earth's mass and of its solid or liquid surface, there have been the same facilities for the escape of its heat into space as there are at present. Must this assumption be accepted as beyond doubt ? Are we not warranted in demurring to it ? May we not even conclude that it is far from being true ?
Since the existing heat of the Earth, and that much greater heat which the argument supposes it once to have had, are not otherwise accounted for, it might be contended that the nebular hypothesis (or the hypothesis of dispersed matter in some form), which alone yields an explanation, is tacitly as- sumed ; and it might be fairly held that, if we are to go back upon the nebular hypothesis (or the hypothesis of dispersed fragments) at all, we must go back upon it altogether. Passing over, as not immediately relevant, the early gaseous state (either primordial or produced by collision), and coming at once to the condition in which the elements now mainly composing the Earth's crust were unoxidized, the inference might be that the uncombined oxygen and other gases must at that time have constituted a very voluminous atmosphere, and that the escape of heat through such an atmosphere, especially if it contained any compounds having the form of condensed vapours, must have been extremely slow. But without going back thus far, sufficient reason may be found for a demurrer to the current conclusion.
Let us grant the assumption made that the Earth's body has all along consisted of solid matter, if not such as we now know, yet akin to it in respect of density and conducting power. Evidently the inference drawn from the observed gradient of increasing temperature as we descend, itself implies the belief that the matter of the surface was once, if not at as high a temperature as the interior, still at a high temperature.
1895] Inorganic Evolution 443
Suppose \ve go back to a time when its temperature was 152°C. At that temperature water boils under a pressure of live atmospheres (four plus the normal). The implication is that maintenance of the Earth's water, or rather part of it, in a liquid form on the Earth's surface, necessitated the existence of a quantity of aeriform water equivalent to more than a hundred feet of liquid water : that is to say, assuming the mean pressure of 2\ atmospheres, the stratum of steam must have been over 70,000 feet deep, or more than 13 miles — an estimated depth which, taking into account the great expansion and indeiinite limit of the outer part, would be much less than the actual depth. Even supposing this vast mass of water to have existed as transparent gas, the escape of heat into space must have been immensely impeded : the absorption of radiant heat by the vapour of water being so great. But the _ water could not have wholly existed — could not have mainly existed — as a transparent gas. It must in large measure have existed as a dense cloud of vast depth. The implication seems to be that, next to the heated surface of the Earth, there was a transparent stratum, but that above it came an opaque stratum of far greater thickness, at the outer limit of which went on condensation into rain. Under such circumstances the escape of heat must have been effected by convection-currents, ascend- ing, expanding, falling in temperature, precipitating at the peri- phery, and there parting with heat into space. Must we not conclude that during this period the cooling of the Earth went on at a rate relatively small ?
During stages thus exemplified the changes in the Earth's crust, at first of igneous origin only, would begin to be com- plicated by others of aqueous origin ; and the geological pro- cesses which have brought about its present state would be initiated. But, manifestly, throughout the enormous period required for the tolerably complete deposition of the water, and the clearing of the air from its vast stratum of cloud, the rate of escape of heat would be still relatively small, and it would go on only slowly increasing, until there there was reached some such escape as that which now takes place through an air often cloudless, and at most times only moder- ately charged with water. During this era, the geologic changes would be actively proceeding, and there would be time for the deposit of a vast series of azoic strata — a time to which the present gradient of internal temperature gives no clue.
A long and complicated series of biologic changes would become possible after the temperature had fallen to 100° C. It is true that though some forms of Protozoa can exist at that temperature, or even a little above it, we may not infer that therefore life might then have commenced, for the agency of light may have been lacking. Though, with seas at a tern-
444 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvi.
perature of 212° F., the stratum of cloud may not have been so dense as to prevent the passage of some light — though the darkness may not have been as great as that which exists at the bottom of the ocean, where nevertheless there is a large amount of life, not only of Protozoa, but of Mctasoa considerably elevated in type — yet it may be contended that, as the life at the bottor of the ocean is dependent on nutritive matter present in sea-water, which has somewhere and at some time resulted from the decomposition of carbonic acid by chlorophyll with the aid of light, we cannot assume that light was not essential. Still the inference may fairly be that when the process of cooling from 212° u own wards had gone so far that the universal cloud allowed a certain amount of light to pass, life became possible, and that biologic changes might have commenced at a time when the cooling process was not going on at anything like its present rate, and might have gone through many of their earlier stages before anything like the present rate was reached.
If it should be said, as seems possible, that the inference from the gradient of internal temperature stands by itself, and may be held valid without regard to changes in the Earth's atmosphere, this reply may be made : — Let us assume that the mass of the Earth once had an absolutely non-conducting envelope. Its temperature would then be the same at the centre and the surface, and there would be no thermal data from which its age could be inferred : nothing would negative the inference that it had so existed for an infinite time. Now, suppose the absolutely non-conducting envelope taken away and the Earth left bare. The cooling then commenced would, in course of time, produce a gradient of temperatures analogous to that which is found existing. But the data furnished by this gradient would give no clue whatever to the duration of the pre-existing period, throughout which the escape of heat was prevented. Any inference drawn as to age would be delusive. And if this must be admitted in the case of a sudden change from absolute prevention of radiation to absolute permission of it, then it must be admitted that a gradual change from great prevention to small prevention will also vitiate the inference. The observed gradient when the obstacle to radiation is small will be delusive, if supposed applicable to a time when the obstacle to radiation was great.
To state the case briefly in figurative language — the Earth had once a very thick blanket ; its blanket has in the course of immense epochs gradually thinned away ; and hence it would seem that an estimation of its age from thermal data, which assumes its present thin blanket to have always existed, is open to grave doubt — to say the least.
Inorganic Evolution 445
His last contribution to the Nebular Hypothesis was made in 1900, when preparing the final edition of First Principles. When writing section 182^ [p. 484] he was in correspondence with Dr. Isaac Roberts, whose Photographs of Stars, Star-clusters, and Nebula; he found very instructive. A month or two after the issue of this edition of First Principles he returned to the subject in a short paper on " The Genesis of Gaseous Nebulae," which he intended to be added as Appendix D.1
In a short letter to the Editor of the Fortnightly Review (April, 1900) on " Professor ^'Ward's Rejoinder," Spencer thus refers to the criticism arising out of the omission of Inorganic Evolution from detailed treatment in the Synthetic Philosophy : —
He continues to harp upon the fact that the two volumes treating of Inorganic Evolution were omitted by me ; insisting that the fabric of conclusions drawn is vitiated by the omission. Observe the alternatives implied by him. Execution of the works dealing with Organic and Super-organic Evolution was thought by most to be impossible, and if preceded by works dealing with Inorganic Evolution would have been quite impossible. But in the absence of the part dealing with Inorganic Evolution the rest, according to Professor Ward, lacks "adequate foundations" and is valueless. Thus, it was useless to try the one course ; it was useless to pursue the other ; therefore, nothing should have been attempted. It was not allowable to leave the earliest stages hypothetical ; and, beginning with the chemical elements as we know them, to trace out later stages of evolution as conforming to one law. And then, when it was pointed out that the gap was not wholly vacant, but that (in addition to the sketch of Inorganic Evolution in First Principles) five sets of evidences I had given implied that the chemical elements have been evolved [Essays, i., 155-9], these are cavalierly passed over as having been set forth in three pages of a u fugitive essay." 2
' See edition of 1904, p. 473.
2 Fugitive, in the sense of being a review-article, but not otherwise : — not fugitive, since it contained disproofs of the belief then current among astronomers, but now abandoned, that the nebulae are remote galaxies (see Proctor's Old and New Astronomy, p. 726) : — not fugitive, since the conclusion drawn respecting the Sun's photosphere (at variance with conclusions then held) was, two years after, verified in chief measure by the discoveries of Kirchoff and Bunsen.
446
CHAPTER XXVII.
HIS LAST BOOK. (July, 1900— April, 1902.)
AT the age of eighty, and with the purpose of his life achieved, Spencer had established an indisputable claim to complete mental repose during the few remaining years. But, as had been his wont, ere the work was completed on which he was engaged, he was planning another book. In September, 1899, he wrote to Mr. Appleton, of New York, that he wished to have the revision of First Principles out of hand " because I want to devote myself to some further work. I have still a little energy left, and still some things to write, which will, I think, make a volume not unlikely to be popular." As he wrote to a correspondent in the following year, mental occupation had become a second nature. " It is difficult after fifty years of writing to emancipate oneself from the habit. Life would be too dreary were the setting-down of ideas brought to a sudden rest."
Had he reflected he would have seen that there was little ground to fear that time would hang heavy on his hands. The widespread, varied, and prolonged influence he had exerted afforded a guarantee that the remaining years of his life would be well filled with the interests his writings and his personality had created or fostered. His characteristic impatience with intellectual error, moral delinquency, or remediable physical evil, would, despite good resolutions to keep out of the fray, continue to plunge him unwittingly into the thick of the fight. Correspond- ence, never ligfyt, had also to be reckoned with. Many of his correspondents were personally unknown ; and not a few of them, though ostensibly anxious enquirers for
I9OO-O2J His Last Book 447
information, were in reality only common-place autograph hunters. Besides begging letters and applications for inter- views, there was a continuous stream of requests for photo- graphs, autographs, mottoes, sentiments ; for advice in the bringing-up of children, on the organization of schools, on the management of debating societies ; for expressions of his matured opinions on all manner of topics, ranging from the industrial situation in New Zealand to divorce in Italy. The octogenarian was expected not only to favour authors with an authoritative judgment on their books, but to justify this doctrine and to explain that doctrine contained, or sup- posed to be contained, in one or other of his own writings, extending over half a century. Mr. Andrew Lang says that bores fall into well-defined categories, and that a general lithographed reply should be framed for each category. Spencer had for years adopted some such measure of relief : his lithographed or printed forms having in some cases a space at the end for a sentence dealing with any special feature of the communication replied to. But Mr. Lang admits that it is not so easy as it seems to devise proper replies to some correspondents without employing profane language. From help of this kind Spencer was constitutionally and on principle debarred.1 To certain requests the only suitable course was to make no reply. What could he say, for example, to the members of a literary institution in India, who asked for a present of all his books ? How was it possible to write a satisfactory answer to a Hindu, absolutely unknown to him, and with- out credentials, whose business had been ruined by the famine, and who asked for a loan of ^200 ? How could he, with his dread of visitors, give a favourable reply to a young Syrian who wished to spend the summer with him : " To accompany you in your daily walks, to hear what you speak, to observe how you act in all the common affairs of life " ? While ignoring without compunction the general autograph hunter, he was always willing to send his autograph or photograph to friends. The claims of kinship, even though distant, were responded to, as in the case of a great-granddaughter of his uncle John, to whom, though he had never before heard of her, he sent three
1 See however, Autobiography, i., p. 486.
448 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvu.
autographs for her three children. Even bearers of the same name, without any bond of kinship, were occasionally favoured by these small attentions.
In addition to the customary requests from editors for articles, or paragraphs, he had in these later years to meet special requests suggested by special events. For example,
to send " some brief message of congratulation and
counsel for the Federating Colonies " at the opening of the first parliament of Federated Australia ; to write on " The Guiding Principle of Mankind in the Twentieth Century;" " to rewrite for the common people these two quotations from your admirable works ; " to answer the question : " What is the chief danger, social or political, that confronts the coming century ? " to send " a brief New Century mes- sage to English-speaking women " ; to name his favourite author, which of this author's books he liked best, and his reason for the choice ; to join in a symposium dealing with the ultimate settlement in South Africa ; to write for a Fourth of July number " something in the way of an expres- sion of your opinion regarding Peace amongst men " ; to contribute towards a review of the year 1901, an article on " The Parliament of Man, the Federation of the World— to what extent do the Events of the year 1901 foreshadow the Realization of this Ideal in the Twentieth Century"; to express his opinion on " Lord Rosebery's letter announc- ing his ' Definite Separation ' from the Liberal Leader." Not only did the infirmities of age negative compliance with such requests, but the very idea of writing on a text pre- scribed by others was one which he never could entertain.
The place selected for the summer was the Rectory at Bepton, just under the Downs, to the south of Miclhurst in Sussex. " It was," writes Mr. Troughton, "a most charming spot, just the sort of place, in fact, to appeal to a man so passionately fond of the country as Mr. Spencer was. It was here, amid this delightful Sussex scenery that he pondered over ' Ultimate Questions ' and put into words the reflection which had more than once occurred to him as old age crept on apace — ' Shall I ever again be awakened at dawn by the song of the thrush.' " l
1 Facts and Comments, p. 202.
1900-02] His Last Book 449
Letter writing was easier for him than personal discus- sion : for this, if for no other, reason that he could choose his time better. Animated conversation, as years went on, more and more upset him. Insomnia became more per- sistent ; yet, so sound was his constitution, that his medical attendant remarked that "old age had scarcely touched him." The restrictions on personal intercourse made him all the more keenly alive to written expressions of sym- pathy. Thus he acknowledges congratulations .from the South Place Ethical Society in July, 1900.
Declining years have their pleasures as well as their pains, and among the pleasures may be named expressions of sym- pathy, such as those contained in the address you send me on behalf of the South Place Ethical Society. Many, who have spent their lives in the development of their ideas, have not had the satisfaction of meeting with recognition. Only after their deaths have their ideas been appreciated. I have been more fortunate, and, having lived long enough to complete my work, have also lived long enough to see that it has not been without its effect. Thank you for your kind words, and for the expression of your good wishes.
The book he was writing clearly shows how deeply his soul had been stirred by the war in South Africa and the policy that led to it. Probably no political event in the whole course of his life moved him so profoundly. " I am ashamed of my country," was his frequent remark. Liberals equally with Tories were, in his opinion, respon- sible for the deplorable condition into which the country had drifted. For this, as well as for other reasons, he declined to join the League of Liberals against Aggression.
To A. M. SCOTT.
26 July, 1900.
I do not desire to be classed among those who are in these days called Liberals. In the days when the name came into use, the Liberals were those who aimed to extend the freedom of the individual versus the power of the State, whereas now (prompted though they are by desire for popular welfare), Liberals as a body are continually extending the power of the State and restricting the freedom of the individual. Every- where and always I have protested against this policy, and cannot now let it be inferred that I have receded from my opinion.
29
45O Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvu.
Nor did he desire to be classed with the party that had seceded from the Liberals. In June, 1901, he instructed his secretary to write to the editor of one of the London papers :
When the Liberal Unionists seceded they were never weary of declaring that in all questions save one — the Home Rule question — they remained Liberals ; and so long as this question was prominent they were entitled to stick to the name. But things have changed since then, and their raison d'etre as ' Unionists ' has long since disappeared. . . . They have now nothing in common with the Liberals and everything in common with the Tories. Then why not . . . invariably call them Conservatives or Tories ?
TO MONCURE D. CONWAY.
15 August, 1900.
Waves of human opinion and passion are not to be arrested until they have spent themselves. You appear to think, as I used to think in earlier days, that mankind are rational beings and that when a thing has been demonstrated they will be convinced. Everything proves the contrary.1 A man is a bundle of passions which severally use his reason to get grati- fication, and the result in all times and places depends on what passions are dominant. At present there is an unusual re- surgence of the passions of the brute. Still more now than a generation ago, men pride themselves, not on those faculties and feelings which distinguish them as human beings, but on those which they have in common with inferior beings— pride themselves in approaching as nearly as they can to the character of the bull-dog.
To WILFRID SCAWEN BLUXT.
5 September 1901.
When is this dreadful state of things to end ? I hope that there may come a severe financial crisis, for nothing but the endangering of their personal interests will' open the eyes of the war party.
7 October. — You are doubtless rejoicing, as I am, that the aspect of affairs is black for the Government and for the country. A little pressure on the market, a bank failure or two and a consequent panic, may open people's eyes and make them repent. However heavy the penalty they may have to bear, it cannot be too heavy to please me.
1 To Spencer might have been applied the words of the Times regarding a Russian statesman : " His has been that untimely fate — the unhappiest that can befall a reformer — to sit helplessly by while reaction triumphs."
1900-02] His Last Book 451
About this time he wrote (by way of suggestion, not for publication) to the editor of one of the London papers.
A strong point might be made against our proceedings in South Africa by quoting a passage from the charge of the Grand Jury, delivered by Lord Chief Justice Cockburn in the case of Governor Eyre and the Jamaica business. In that charge he emphatically asserted that the English constitution knows no such thing as martial law ; saying that martial law has no independent basis whatever, but is an agency which comes into action only when the ordinary agency for main- taining law has broken down — is, in fact, nothing else than an armed servant of the ordinary law, which is called in when the ordinary servant is not strong enough to carry out its injunctions. This passage should, • I think, be continually emphasized.
To THE RIGHT HON. JOHN MORLEY.
10 November, 1901.
I enclose you a copy of a letter written a little time ago, which had not the intended effect.
I enclose it because I see that in your speech the other day you quoted another distinguished lawyer on the question of martial law ; and it occurs to me that if, as I see stated, you propose to bring up the question before Parliament this next session, it will be desirable to add Cockburn's opinion to Campbell's. . . . Martial law as properly understood ought to be nothing more than the calling in of the soldiery, with its accompanying discipline, when the police fails : the whole thing being done under command of the civil power, and ceasing when the civil power withdraws its command.
An interchange of letters took place with Dr. E. B. Tylor touching the controversy of 1877. l Spencer had drawn attention to a passage in First Principles (chap, ii., § 14, para. 2) in which occur the words " be it in the primitive Ghost-theory, which assumes a human personality behind each unusual phenomenon " — words showing conclusively that his own ideas had been formed before the promulga- tion of Dr. Tylor's opinions. Soon after, however, his secretary discovered that the passage cited was not in the earlier editions of First Principles, having been first intro- duced as late as 1890. Dr. Tylor was at once informed of this, and a long letter was afterwards written giving an
Supra, chap, xiv., p. 190.
452 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvu.
account of the genesis of his beliefs, going back to 1853 and concluding thus : —
. I feel bound to recall these evidences, as already said, because I cannot leave you under the impression that I accept your version of the matter, but I do not suppose your opinion will be altered. An idea fixed for thirty years is not easily changed, and it is impossible to change my own conviction, conscious as I am of what the facts were ; so the matter must now drop.
Professor Knight's article in the Bookman for January, 1901, was a welcome introduction to the new year. Its very sympathetic and appreciative utterances he prized all the more as coming from one who was in antagonism on more than one point. "In England (though not else- where) manifestations of approval have usually been so tepid that yours, being so exceptional, give me much pleasure." In May he was both " surprised and gratified " by an application from Mr. Brant-Sero (an Iroquois) for permission to translate Educaiion into the Mohawk language. As if in answer to his complaint that manifestations of approval in England had. been tepid, there appeared an article " On the Last of the Great Victorians," in Black and White (18 May, 1901) — on article pervaded by a tone of " deep and heartfelt sympathy."
Incidents like these belong to the bright side of 1901. On the dark side were not only the war and the alleged national degeneration ; there was also the continued shrink- ing of the already narrow circle of his friends : death having recently removed Dr. W. J. Youmans, Mr. John Fiske, Dr. Lewis G. Janes, and Mr. Robert Buchanan.
Occasionally one comes across a letter which shows how he was progressing with his last book.
To SIR ROBERT GIFFIX.
17 May, 1901.
Is it possible to state in a rough way — of course in a very rough way — what is the amount per head entailed on pro- ducers by £100,000,000 of national expenditure in terms of working days ? . . . I have in view the extra work entailed on those who are either manually occupied or are necessary regulators of those manually occupied, and on whom extra
1900-02] His Last Book 453
taxation entails so much the more labour. I want to state how many extra days work in the year £100,000,000 of ex- penditure entails on these.
20 May. — I am immensely obliged to you for your note and memorandum. It tells me all I wanted. Nothing more than a rough estimate is possible or is requisite for my argument — an argument directed towards showing people that, as in all cases throughout history, those who enslave other peoples enslave themselves.1
To RIGHT HON. ARTHUR JAMES BALFOUR.
PETWORTH, 19 June, 1901.
I believe it has been announced that you propose to drop the Copyright Bill. It is now 24 years since I gave evidence before a Royal Commission which sat in 1877, and among the recommendations agreed upon was one that the duration of copyright should be for life and 30 years after death, instead of being as now ; and I believe the report of the Commission recently sitting endorsed that recommendation, omitted in the Bill now before Parliament. . . .
Would it not be possible to introduce a short bill doing nothing more than change the duration of copyright, leaving all detailed matters to be hereafter dealt with ?
The matter is very important to needy authors who have families, since it is very much a question of leaving a good provision for children or leaving very little.
To me it is a matter of no personal interest, but only of public interest. I have bequeathed my property for the purpose of carrying on the Descriptive Sociology after my death. The returns from my books will form part of the revenues which will be available for the undertaking. Under the existing law a large part of these revenues will lapse seven years after my death.2
I have, however, a further reason for being anxious that
1 Facts and Comments, p. 1 20.
- In his Will Spencer provided that the residuum of his estate should be devoted, under the direction of Trustees, to carrying on the publica- tion of the series of volumes of the Descriptive Sociology, commenced in 1867 and stopped in 1881. Mr. H. R. Tedder, Secretary and Librarian of the Athenaeum, was appointed general editor of the series. The following volumes are now in preparation : — Chinese, compiled and abstracted by Mr. E. T. C. Werner, H.M.'s Consul, Kiu Kiang, China ; Hellenic Greeks, by Dr. J. P. Mahaffy and Prof. W. A. Goligher ; Hellenistic Greeks, by the same; Romans, by Mr. E. H. Alton, F.T.C.D., and Prof. Goligher. Arrangements are also being made for a volume on the Ancient Egyptians.
454 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvu.
the present law respecting duration should be changed, namely that as the law now stands it will be possible seven years after my death for anybody to publish the imperfect versions of my books of which the copyright has expired, though the perfect versions are still copyright. . . . This I should regard as a disaster.
To SIR JOSHUA FITCH.
PETWORTH, 1 July, 1901.
In something I am writing I want briefly to enumerate the various ways in which the militant spirit is infusing itself into our teaching institutions of all grades — military discipline, military teaching. . . .
I want to indicate also the way in which the tendency to unification in teaching has been growing. Tt was shown in the medical profession some years ago by an agitation for some uniform system of examination, but I do not know how that ended. Then there is the present Government's Educa- tion Bill, dropped for the time being, which takes away such small variety as arose from school-board management. And there is the endeavour to unify by introducing the ecclesiastical element more widely or, indeed, universally. Private schools are being put more and more to disadvantage, so that they are in course of being crushed out, and there results an increase of uniformity. Moreover, I remember a while ago there was a meeting of Head-masters of public schools, at which some- thing like an appeal was made to the Government to bring them all under some kind of State control — again to unify the system. I wish to illustrate the universal tendency towards regimentation.1
He returned to Brighton early in 'September, feeling so much stronger that he contemplated taking a fortnight in London — an idea which, however, he had not strength to carry out.
A letter from Mr. Leslie Stephen (September 1901), introducing Dr. Stanton Coit, the editor of Ethics, induced Spencer to subscribe towards the Ethical Lectures Fund, while adhering to the view expressed in 1899 as to the qualifications of the lecturers.2 He even assented to allow
1 Facts and Comments, p. 134. In April following he wrote to several London papers, recalling a saying of Lord Salisbury's that "their aim must be to capture the Board Schools." " That which was then set forth as an aim is being now carried out."
2 Supra, chap, xxv., p. 416.
1900-02] His Last Book 455
his name to be given to one of the lectureships. His mis- givings about the scheme presently re-appeared in another form, as one learns from a letter to Dr. Coit in November.
The drift of the articles in your periodical, Ethics . . . opens my eyes to the certainty that there will be no sufficient agreement in the ethical views to be propagated by ethical societies. ... So clearly do I see that some of the views enunciated will be views from which I profoundly dissent, that I must ask you for an abandonment of the proposal to give my name to a lectureship.
In another letter to Dr. Coit (i March, 1902) he says: " I cannot without self-stultification continue to co-operate in any way, and I must therefore request that my name may be erased from the list of subscribers to the fund." But he was careful to add that his "dissent from the social ideals, which the Ethical movement, as now directed, will diffuse, must not be taken as evidence of contentment with present social arrangements."
His impatience as a reader, to which he so frequently alludes, was sometimes traceable to intellectual dissent, as in the case of Kant's Critique, sometimes to emotional or moral aversion, as in the case of Carlyle. In whichever of those two ways his further acquaintance with a book was put a stop to, the result, as far as concerned his estimate of the author's works, was the same. Instead of keeping his judgment in suspense, he was apt to form a very decided opinion, which in after life he seldom reconsidered. This trait was exemplified when Mr. Collins asked what he thought of Robert Louis Stevenson.
To F. HOWARD COLLINS.
18 October, 1901.
Your question about Stevenson I answer just after having listened to a review of his life in the Times. I have read very little of him. I began to read many years ago Travels with a Donkey in the Cevennes, but was so disgusted with his treatment of the donkey that I gave it up quickly and never looked into another of his books for many years.
His opinions as to the value of learned Academies had long been well-known. Is was, therefore, from a feeling of the courtesy due to an author of distinction, rather than
456 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvu.
from any expectation of receiving a favourable response, that he was invited to join the movement for the institution of a British Academy of Letters.
To SIR E. MAUNDE THOMPSON.
20 November, 1901.
I am obliged by the invitation made by the sub- committee you name to be one of those to receive the charter of the pro- posed British Academy of Letters. I must be excused, however, if I do not accept the invitation. ... I have, in contesting the views of Mr. Matthew Arnold, who wished for an English Academy, given expression to sundry objections, and I still hold those objections to be valid.
Sir Joseph Dal ton Hooker, Lord Avebury, and Spencer were the sole survivors of the X Club ; but they rarely met in these years. Occasionally letters passed between them.
To SIR JOSEPH DALTOX HOOKER.
16 November, 1901.
It is a long, long time since any news passed between us — a year and a- half, I think. Superfluous letter writing is at your time of life, and even at mine, a thing to be avoided ; but still, I should like to have a few lines telling me how you fare in your contest with the inevitable. ... I am taking my daily drives and doing a fair amount of work.
A sentence in Sir Joseph Hooker's reply — "You have held, and still hold, a big grip on my life " — shows how strong the bond of their friendship was.
FROM LORD AVEBURY.
25 January, 1902.
You may have seen that the Committee of the Society of Authors, over which I have the honour of presiding, have suggested your name as the one we should put forward from England for the Nobel prize.
The suggestion I may add has been cordially received.
As one of your oldest friends it has been a great pleasure to me to take a part in endeavouring to secure for you this well merited recognition.
Spencer's name was forwarded to the Swedish Academy, but the prize was not awarded to him.
He was trying to answer the question, " What should the Sceptic say to Believers ? "l
Facts and Comments, p. 200.
1900-02] His Last Book 457
To MRS. SIDNEY WEBB.
14 February, 1902.
My special motive for writing is to ask whether you did not once tell me that your girlhood was often made miserable by your religious convictions — by the thoughts of hell which had been instilled into you. And my reason for asking this is that I am just now about to say a little upon the difficulty of the agnostic in dealing with others — when to leave them alone and when to attempt to change their convictions. There are various cases, and I want to say a little about each kind. There is, I believe, a good deal of religious despondency, and not a little religious insanity, and all this evil has to be set off against what may be said on the other side.
Facts and Comments was published in London and New York on April 25, 1902.
To ALEXANDER BAIN.
25 April, 1902.
I bait my hook with a book in the hope of catching a letter. You either have received or will shortly receive a copy of Facts and Comments, which is my last book, written during these two years at the rate of ten lines a day.
I have heard nothing of you for a long time save the accounts which Duncan has given me on the occasions of his visits down here. You, too, as I gather, are much invalided, but are still able to take a drive daily. This unfortunately I cannot do. . . .
I not unfrequently think of the disgust you must feel at the fate which has overtaken Mind. That you, after establish- ing the thing and maintaining it for so many years at your own cost, should now find it turned into an organ for German idealism must be extremely exasperating. . . . Oxford and Cambridge have been captured by this old-world nonsense. What about Scotland ? I suppose Hegelianism is rife there also.
As friend after friend was removed by death, Dr. Bain, like Spencer, cherished all the more warmly tokens of fellowship from those that survived. " I never saw such a beaming smile on Dr. Bain's face as when he showed it [the above letter] to me," said his wife to the present writer. " He was evidently extremely pleased to hear from Mr. Spencer, and Mr. Spencer's sympathy in connection with Mind was most highly valued."
Next day Spencer wrote to Professor Masson in a similar strain.
458 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP, xxvn
I suppose Hegelianism is rife in Edinburgh as it is in Oxford and Cambridge. This is one of those inevitable rhythms which pervade opinion, philosophical and other, in common with things at large. But our Hegelianism, or German Idealism in England, is really the last refuge of the so-called orthodox. As I have somewhere said, what could be a better defence for incredible dogmas than behind unthinkable propositions ?
In December previous he had written to the Editor of Mind, with reference to the promise made to Professor Sidgwick at the time Mind changed hands, guaranteeing his financial support.
Since that time Mind has been becoming more and more conspicuously an organ of the Hegelians, or of German Idealism. The result was that, just before my first annual subscription became due, I wrote to my bankers to erase my name as a subscriber. Of course I should regard it as quite appropriate that each school of philosophic thought should have its say, but of late one school has been having very much more say than the rest. It cannot be expected that I should aid the survival of a periodical so largely devoted to the expression of views diametri- cally opposed to my own.
The appearance of his last book just two days before his eighty-second birthday lent additional meaning and fervour to the annual greetings.1 Thus Lord Hobhouse wrote : —
Though, alas ! the generation is fro ward ; and some of your good seed has been devoured by fowls of the air ; and some fallen on barren rock ; and some choked by thorns ; a great deal has fallen on good ground, and has brought forth fruit manifold, and will assuredly bring forth more in more favourable seasons.
To LORD HOBHOUSE.
4 May, 1902.
Among the many congratulations received on the occasion of my eighty-second birthday I can say very sincerely that none have been so appropriate, and therefore so pleasurable to me, as that for which I have to thank you.
1 Among the greetings from abroad was the usual letter and birthday gift from M. Geza Schulek, of Buda Pesth. Three years before this date he and his wife had come to England expressly to see Spencer for a few minutes.
1900-02]
His Last Book
459
It is, as you say, doubtful whether the event itself is one to be rejoiced over, but you express my own feeling fully, when you say that it is a matter of rejoicing to me that I have lived long enough to complete the work, which half a century ago I conceived and soon after definitely undertook. Some small aims of no great moment remain unfulfilled ; but, passing these by, I have the satisfaction, which I suppose is rare, of having done what I proposed to do ; and it adds to this satisfaction to receive this expression of your sympathy.
You too have been working towards ends which the course of things is thwarting, and we must both be content with con- templating a remoter time when good efforts made now will have some effects, though they may be infinitesimal.
An envelope, containing a lock of his hair, encloses also a note, of which the following is a facsimile : —
^-7^
460
CHAPTER XXVIII.
THE CLOSE OF LIFE. (April, 1902— Decent her, 1903.)
Facts and Comments had been definitely announced as his last book. This circumstance, together with the varied nature and contentious character of the work, tended to excite more than the usual interest. Professor Masson thought it "eminently readable and interesting — none the less that much of it is provocative of dissent, and is sure to be protested against in various quarters. I refer espe- cially to the questions concerning the war and other present-day questions. If I say that here and there I am among the dissenters in this department, that will not, I am sure, distress you much." Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker was a dissenter, or at least a partial dissenter, about the war. Professor Bain thought the " showing up of Matthew Arnold's absurd claim for the State-Church as the exclusive nursery of men of genius was a very deserved and impor- tant correction. But perhaps the part of the book that aroused my deepest interest was your concluding remarks on Ultimate Questions." While recognizing it as " the conclusion of strenuous, honourable, consistent work," the Times noted in these " slight, sketchy, and imperfect " utter- ances " a tone of persistent egotism," too great to be quite excusable. The essay on "Some Light on Use-Inheritance," " has the charm of copious and felicitous illustration in which Mr. Spencer is unsurpassed." " We should have liked the latest words of one who has deeply influenced his generation to be measured, calm, equitable, peaceful. In some of these essays are present these qualities .... But in too many of the Facts and Comments is a tone of acerbity." The New York Saturday of May 17 was gracious enough to excuse this " excursion into the domain of fads,"
1902-03] The Close of Life 461
on the ground that " a man of eighty-two is too old to work and may play if he likes. If in setting his desk in order he comes across scraps of disconnected literary output, which did not fit anywhere in his earlier books, and he chooses to gather them into a haphazard collection . . . why should he not do so ?" Readers in the United States were naturally interested in "A Few Americanisms," and were not unwilling to avail themselves of the invitation, conveyed in the last paragraph of the article, to expose deteriorations in the English language as spoken in Great Britain. Among the causes that contributed to create more than the usual demand for the book on the Continent, not the least were its denunciations of the South African War : these denuncia- tions seeming to afford a justification for the general dislike to Great Britain during those years. So popular was it in France that three translations were offered. In Germany more than one version was proposed ; but, instead of trans- lating the whole book, selections were made from it and from Various Fragments. At one time it looked as if there would be no Italian translation, Spencer having intimated that rather than tolerate the persistent repudiation of an author's rights he would prefer to let the book remain un- translated. "It is not that I care about the actual amount receivable. In proof of this he handed over to the trans- lator his own share of the amount paid by the publisher. Russia, so long in the front rank, had years ago fallen behind. Spencer's books continued to be objects of suspi- cion to the Russian authorities, whose blundering ignorance is shown in the Times of July 28, 1903. A student, on being examined for admission to the University, was charged with being a socialist, on the ground that he had been seen in the street at the age of 15 with Spencer's Sociology under his arm ! Nevertheless, Facts and Comments appeared in a Russian dress before it was published in French or German.1 In May, 1902, he went on what was to be his last visit
1 Since the year 1865, when proposals to translate his books were first thought of, most of Spencer's principal works had been rendered into Russian, French, German and Italian. Portions of them had also been translated into almost all the other languages of Europe, as well as into the chief languages of India and into Japanese and Chinese. During his last years translations of Education into Arabic and Mohawk were mentioned.
462 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvm.
to the country, Leith Vale, Ockley, in Surrey, being the place selected. How he enjoyed himself was thus described at the time by Mr. Troughton : " Above all he is delighted with the multitude of song-birds hereabouts. Listening to the birds the other day, while sitting outside under the verandah during a short spell of sunshine, Mr. Spencer said, ' This is what I have been looking forward to for the last six months.'" His absence from Brighton deprived him of the pleasure of meeting one with whom he had corre- sponded a great deal, but whom he had never seen — the Dowager Countess of Portsmouth, who first became interested in him through her brother, the Hon. Auberon Herbert.
To THE DOWAGER COUNTESS OF PORTSMOUTH.
6 June, 1902.
I am very unfortunate. Some years ago you honoured me with a call at Avenue Road, and I was out. And now that you are about to visit Brighton I am away from there. . . .
The contretemps is very provoking, since I should have been greatly pleased to see one from whom I have received so many kindnesses. I fear I thus lose my last chance, for being now eighty-two, the probability that you will again visit Brighton during my life is but small.
To Mrs. BRAY.
6 June, 1902.
Allow me at eighty-two to shake hands with you at eighty- eight ! I say shake hands rather than offer congratulations, since you know as well as I do, or better, that the infirmities and weariness of advanced years are such as render continuance of them not a cause for congratulation. . . .
I managed three weeks ago to get to this place, which is in all respects charming, and I am on the average profiting by the change.
The requests for contributions from his pen were varied and numerous. He was invited by the Danish Minister of the Interior, through Mr. Goschen, the British Minister, to write a short article for a journal which was to be issued weekly during the Exposition Historique de la Presse Danoise, the subject prescribed being an inquiry as to the direction in which social development was tending — \vhether towards socialism or individualism. This invita-
1902-03] The Close of Life 463
•
tion was declined "because the amount of thought required would be too great a tax." The approaching Coronation brought many such appeals. A few lines "on the subject of the Trust in Atlantic Steamships" were solicited by one of the London daily papers. The Neuc Freie Presse was eager to get a contribution 'for its Christmas number — "Anti- semitism " being suggested as a topic. Mr. Spielmann begged for a few words on the condition of the Jews in Roumania. The Giornale d' Italia sought his opinion about the suppression of the Religious Orders in France. " A few words of sympathy and support " were sought by a small number of people in Melbourne, who were forming a society bearing his name.
Peace had been proclaimed and there had now to be faced the consequences of the war. The condition of the sufferers, whether Boers or Britons, aroused the active sympathy of all parties. Among those who had suffered most \vas Ex-President Steyn, whose fortune and health were completely shattered by his heroic efforts to save the independence of his State. While Mr. Steyn was on his way to Europe, to obtain the best available medical assist- ance, Spencer was asked to give his name to a movement to send some token of the sympathy and admiration of well-wishers. He readily assented on condition that the matter would be kept entirely private, and that the secre- tarial work would be done by the friend who had made the suggestion.
The gift was transmitted with the following letter : —
To EX-PRESIDENT STEYN.
10 August, 1902.
A few friends in England have paid me the compliment of making me the medium for transmitting to you the ac- companying testimonial of their sympathy and high admiration. They believe, as I do, that nowhere among historic characters is there to be found one whose persistence in upholding a cause he belieX'ed to be right has been more conspicuous. Even enemies must admit that sacrifices of position, property, and health, which have ended in a prostration so extreme as that which you now suffer, imply a heroism rarely to be found among men. To emphasize their belief and accompanying admiration, they beg your acceptance of this proof of their great regard, joining to it the hope that with care, and the attention of sympathetic friends, you may yet recover.
464 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP, xxvin.
9
Needless to say, this spontaneous recognition of his honesty of purpose and of the self-sacrificing devotion with which he had pursued the course he believed to be right, was gratefully appreciated by Mr. Steyn. The value of the gift was enhanced by the medium through whom it was transmitted, Spencer's having been an honoured name in South Africa, long before the outbreak of the war.
Spencer was eagerly waiting for public intimation of some centre of co-operation for the collection of subscrip- tions to the Boer Fund, and represented to General Botha and his colleagues, who were then in London, the impolicy of delay.
To GEXERAL Louis BOTHA.
24 October, 1902.
I have been both astonished and greatly annoyed by the way in which the Boer Relief Fund has been managed in England. We have a maxim, " Strike while the iron is hot " ; whereas the course pursued seems to have been " Wait till the iron is cold " !
If, immediately after your interview with Mr. Chamberlain, there had been an advertisement, naming a committee of some three or five, with an indication of the bank to which sub- scriptions might be paid, there would at once have been a response from a great many who now have become almost in- different from mere lapse of time. Two months have passed, and the feelings of the sympathetic have been allowed to die away before anything practical has been done. . . . The whole thing, in my opinion, has been dreadfully bungled. Pray have the thing put in such business form as is always taken by any body which proposes to raise subscriptions.
General Botha shared Spencer's regret that so much precious time had been lost. But being without experience in circumstances entirely new, he and his brother delegates had to be guided by the advice of their friends.
A request made by the Rationalist Press Association for permission to publish a cheap reprint of the first part of First Principles was declined for reasons stated in the following letter.
To GEORGE J. HOLYOAKE.
26 August, 1902.
Two mischiefs are apt to arise from reading separately the first part of First Principles : (1) Those who are opposed to its views conclude that the second part, being as they think based
1902-03] The Close of Life 465
upon the first, must be equally opposed to their views, and even when they have the whole volume before them they read no further. I have direct evidence that this happens. (2) Those who read sympathetically are liable to draw the utterly erroneous conclusion that in Part I. is contained the substance of the Synthetic Philosophy, and that having . read it they need read no further.
There is a mischief of another kind from presenting the " Unknowable " apart from the general system of things set forth under the title of u The Knowable." Those who are led to abandon the current creed, and whose lives have given them no knowledge of the natural order of things to fill the gap left, remain in a state of unstable equilibrium, and are apt to lapse back into one or other kind of superstition — Roman Catholicism usually. I personally know two instances of this.
A month or two later he assented willingly to the issue of a sixpenny edition of Education. The Northumberland Society for the Liberation of Education from State Control, was also permitted to reprint the chapter on " National Education " in Social Statics.
The quantity of miscellaneous correspondence got through during the three months spent in the country is astonishing, when one remembers his increasing in- firmities— aggravated by the "unsummerly summer," as he calls it : " winter " is the term by which he describes it to Mr. Carnegie. " During this sojourn at Leith Vale," writes Mr. Troughton, " it became more manifest than it had been before that he was breaking up, physically, certainly, and also mentally; but the decay of mental faculty was less marked than the bodily decrepitude, which seemed now to be advancing with rapid strides."
Points of resemblance between Spencer's views and those of Rousseau had been touched upon in the past more frequently than Spencer liked, owing to the sugges- tion conveyed that he had borrowed some of his charac- teristic doctrines about man, society, and education from the French writer. With regard to education he had been at pains to point out to M. Gabriel Cotnpayre in October, 1901, that he had never read Emile, and owed none of his ideas on education to it. And, now, when Mr. Hudson sought permission to dedicate a forthcoming book on Rousseau to him, he felt constrained to refuse.
50
466 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP, xxviil.
To W. H. HUDSON.
7 January^ 1903.
I regret to say " No " to any proposal you make, but I cannot consent to the dedication of your book on Rousseau to me. There are several kindred reasons for this.
You probably remember the controversy with Huxley in the Times ten years ago or more. . . . One of his letters contained the assertion that I had adopted my political views from Rousseau. Such a dedication as you name would tend to verify this wholly baseless assertion. . . . His cardinal political princi- ple, so far as I know it at second hand, I reject.
He is said to have taught the primitive equality of men. This I hold to be absurd, and my own doctrine implies no such belief, which is quite inconsistent with the evolutionary doctrine — the struggle for existence and survival of the httest.
Not the equality of men, but the equality of their claims to make the best of themselves within the limits mutually pro- duced, has all along been my principle. . . .
The equality alleged £in Social Statics'] is not among men themselves, but among their claims to equally-limited spheres for the exercise of their faculties : an utterly different proposi- tion. Huxley confused the two and spread the confusion, and I am anxious that it should not be further spread. Pray, if you have occasion to refer to my views, take care to emphasize this distinction.
His interest in affairs of public moment withstood to the last the advance of the infirmities of age.
To FREDERIC HARRISON.
5 March, 1903.
Doubtless" you remember the meeting held many years ago a propos of the disestablishment and disendowment of the Church,1 and doubtless you remember that you were commis- sioned to draw up the heads of a bill setting forth the aims of those represented by the meeting, among whom, by the way, was Mr. Chamberlain (!).
I presume you have a copy of this draft bill in printed form. The question is again coming to the front, and this meeting of Free Churches at Brighton may be the occasion for bringing it to the front. Would it not be well for you to put before the leaders this same document as indicating what were, and are still, I believe, the aims of those who moved in the matter. . . .
My distinct impression is that all property accruing to the
1 Autobiography, ii., 258-260.
1902-03] The dose of Life 467
Church after the Reformation \vas to remain with the Church ; but that all property, existing as its property before the Refor- mation, was to revert to the State ancj to be used for such secular or other purposes as might be generally or locally decided.
The occasion is a good one for dissipating the injurious error, which is widespread, that those who seek to disestablish desire possession of the whole of the Church property, old and new.
The final occasion on which he was offered an academic title was in the spring of 1903, when the University of London sought to confer on him the honorary Degree of Doctor of Literature. It was intimated to him that the degree was to be conferred on the Prince and Princess of Wales, himself, and on not more than two others.
To SIR A. W. RUCKEK, PRINCIPAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
LONDON.
March, 1903.
I greatly regret that acceptance of the honour, which so distinguished a body as the Senate of the University of London proposes to confer upon me, should for any reasons be excluded.
In the first place, my state of health has prevented me from leaving the house since last August. . . .
Even should the Senate, prompted by kind consideration on my behalf, dispense with my presence, there would still remain an insurmountable difficulty. For a third of a century, during which honorary titles, home and foreign, have from time to time been offered to me, I have, in pursuance of the belief that, though apparently beneficial to literature and science, they are;in the end injurious, declined the offers. Were I now to accept the distinction which the Senate of the University of London is so good as to hold out to me, these bodies, including sundry British and foreign universities and various continental academies, which have proposed to accord me doctorships and memberships, would be thereby slighted ; and an act, which would manifestly inflict upon them something approaching to an insult, is one which I naturally cannot bring myself to do.
Of course, my regret that I am thus prevented from accept- ing the honour offered by the eminent men constituting the Senate is increased by the consciousness that the occasion is quite a special one.
Though unwilling to accept honours for himself, he was always ready to join in proposals to do honour to those
468 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP, xxvin.
who deserved it. When it was proposed to give a reception to Mr. Holyoake on his eighty-sixth birthday, he wrote :
To C. FLETCHER SMITH.
28 March, 1903.
I have not been out of doors since last August, and as Mr. Holyoake knows, it is impossible for me to join in the reception to be given to him on his 86th birthday. I can do nothing more than express my warm feeling of concurrence.
Not dwelling upon his intellectual capacity, which is high, I would emphasize my appreciation of his courage, sincerity, truthfulness, philanthrophy, and unwearying perseverance. Such a combination of these qualities it will, I think, be difficult to find.
Though unable to write anything which the Industrial Freedom League might distribute as a leaflet, with a view to combat the growing tendency of municipalities to embark on business undertakings, he wrote to Lord Avebury : " I need hardly say how fully I sympathize with the aims of the Council and how energetically I should have co- operated had it been possible. I shall willingly contribute to the funds, if some fit form is sent to me." The state of his health probably prevented him complying with the request to send to Le Matin a message of good will to the French on the eve of the King's visit to Paris ; but a similar request, made before M. Loubet's visit to London in July, was responded to :
All advocates of peace (he wrote) — all who believe that future civilization is bound up with the friendship of nations — will rejoice in the visit to England of a Frenchman who represents France ; and I, in common with them, hope that his reception will prove that the general feeling in England expresses something more than the official ceremonies of the occasion.
With an effort he roused himself to send a message of encouragement to the Young Scots Society, "which seeks to revive Liberal ideals at a time when Liberal ideals have been forgotten."
Most of his acknowledgments of birthday congratula- tions this year included the refrain : " I feel now that the prolongation of a feeble old age is not a matter for con-
MR, SPENCER'S SITTING-ROOM AND BEDROOM at 5 Percival Terrace, Brighton.
1902-03] The Close of Life 469
gratulation — rather for condolence." All through the winter he had hardly ever stirred from his room ; and although the return of spring brought back thoughts of the country, once and only once did he express the hope of getting there.
He had a strong prejudice against professional nurses (writes Mr. Troughton), and it was not until it became abso- lutely necessary that he consented to have one to look after him. Feeble and emaciated as his frame now was, he had lost little of that strength of will which had always been a marked trait with him, and both nurses and doctors found him a by no means easy patient to deal with owing to this. No less emphatic was the assertion of scepticism in j-egard to the treatment ordered by the doctor. He could not put himself entirely in the hands of another ; he wanted to know the reason for this, that, or the other, mode of treatment recom- mended ; the contents and ^obable effects of the prescribed medicines would be discussed at length, and if the use of them did not conform- to his ideas he ignored them.
Marked symptoms of aphasia manifested themselves during the second week of May, along with hallucinations. While he was in this condition Dr. Charlton Bastian, in response to a telegram from Mr. Troughton, came to see him ; but, under the impression that the visit was for the purpose of discussing some biological question, he became excited and begged to be left alone. A day or two after, when he began to get better, he had only a vague recol- lection of the brusque reception he had given to his friend. When his secretary quietly hinted at the purpose of the visit, he was filled with remorse ; and dictated an apology " for the rude way in which I met your request for a little conversation." A day or two after he wrote again : " It was a great relief to me to receive your kind note, for I had been dwelling in the fear that you would be offended, and justifiably offended." In a similar vein he apologized on one occasion to his medical attendant : " Please erase from your memory sundry manifestations of my explosiveness and lack of judgment which you saw last night."
His recuperative power was wonderful. Before many days he was again able to undertake correspondence with
470 Life of- Herbert Spencer [CHAP, xxvm.
his more intimate friends. Miss Flora Smith had sent him flowers grown at Ardtornish, with the message : " I thought it might be a pleasure to you to have them from the place where we have with you spent so many happy days." This touched a responsive note. " The scent of flowers coming from Ardtornish hills had a double pleasantness — the general pleasantness of flowers from the hills, and the special pleasantness of flowers from the Ardtornish hills. To me, as to you, they are reminders of long past pleasures, and I am glad to hear that you and your sisters value them in that way, and pleased to think that my presence in those past times was not a disagreeable accompaniment in the thought of these pleasures."
To SIR JOSEPH DALTOX HOOKER.
6 June, 1903.
It was extremely gratifying to receive through Mr. Scott your kind inquiry. As one's links with life become fewer and fewer each becomes relatively more valuable, and the indication that it still exists excites relatively increasing pleasure.
I am very glad therefore once again to feel the pulse of my still-surviving small circle of friends, and glad especially to feel the pulse of one who had been so good a friend so many years.
I should like to have a few lines giving me indications of your own state, and will excuse you, as you will excuse me, from writing at length.
Sir Joseph Hooker was also extremely gratified to receive this "evidence of abiding fellow-feeling. . . . The dear old X Club is rapidly, with us, I fear, approaching the vanish- ing point. How curious it seems, that we who were, I think, considerably the oldest members, should be amongst the three survivors."
To MRS. SIDNEY WEBB.
29 June, 1903.
Friends when talking to me about myself have often re- marked, a propos of my state of health, that I have the conso- lation of remembering all that I have done, and that this must be a great set-off against all that I have to bear. This is a natural mistake, but a profound mistake. Occasionally, past achievements may be said to fill my mind — perhaps once a week, and then perhaps for ten minutes or a quarter of an
1902-03] The Close of Life 471
hour ; but they do not form components of consciousness to a greater extent than this. Practically, the bygones are bygones, and the bygones of a large kind do not play much greater parts in memory than those of a smaller kind.
Your wish has recalled a conversation we had some years ago — I think when you had come down to see me in Arundel Terrace. Something led us to talk about meaningless coinci- dences, which might be thought full of meaning ; and I was prompted to give you examples, two of them being known to you personally. Further, by way of making the results very striking, to each successive case as I narrated it you put down what you considered a rational estimate of the probabilities for and against such a thing occurring to the same person within say twenty years ; and on compounding the numbers the chances against seemed astounding.
Thoughts of this kind are much more apt to intrude them- selves than are thoughts of the kind you refer to ; and the average colour of the whole consciousness produced is grey.
How pleasant it would be if you were living so close at hand that you could come in frequently for a few minutes ! But that is one of the things not to be hoped for.
FROM ALEXANDER BAIN.
8 June, 1903.
I have heard with deep regret, of your continued feeble health and confinement to bed. You have never been so dependent upon exercise as I am, still you must feel very weak and depressed. I earnestly hope you have no actual pain, and can take some interest in passing events. ... I send my long- delayed volume of reprints. . . . Accept my deep sympathy.
To ALEXANDER BAIX.
13 June, 1903.
Very many thanks for your most kind and sympathetic letter, and thanks also for your wishes for my freedom from pain. Until recently I could have said yes, but of late spasms have from time to time made my life difficult to bear.
Knowing that your expressions of fellow-feeling are genuine I shall excuse myself from running further risks by writing at greater length.
This was the last exchange of letters between them. Pro- fessor Bain died on i8th September. In intimating this to Spencer, at Mrs. Bain's request, Professor W. L. Davidson added : " I should like to say from myself that you were
472 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvm.
much in his thoughts of late, and that he frequently expressed his sympathy with you in your illness. His kindness of heart showed itself to the very last in his thoughtful ness for others."
To WILLIAM L. DAVIDSON.
22 September, 1903.
On the loss of a companion one may, of course, fitly condole with Mrs. Bain, but otherwise I do not see that the event is much cause for regret. He had done his work and lived his life, and such portion of it as remained could be little more than continued tolerance. My feeling may be judged when I say that I envy him.
I have on sundry occasions recognized the sympathetic nature on which you remark, and, I think, manifestations of it had become more pronounced in the latter parts of his life.
" You come to me every day in thought," wrote Mr. Carnegie (14 September), "and the everlasting 'Why?' intrudes. . . . Mr. Morley comes in a day or two and you will, as usual, I am sure, be the centre of many talks."
To ANDREW CARNEGIE.
18 September, 1903.
The Why ? and the Why ? and the Why ? are questions which press ever more and more as the years go by. . . .
If means of locomotion sufficed to carry me to Skibo without jolts — if Mr. Spencer's air-ship had been sufficiently perfected, which one may dream of, but nothing more — I should have liked to join John Morley iri seeing your feudal strong- hold (!) . . .
You have forbidden thanks for grouse : but some words expressing thanks for those which arrived the other day must be added to the above : to which must be joined thanks for the beautiful sea-trout, which I think are more highly coloured in their flesh than any I can remember — more highly coloured than those I have myself habitually caught at Ardtornish.
To THE RIGHT HON. JOHN MORLEY.
16 September, 1903.
When I tell you that a few days ago I consulted with one of my executors respecting details of my funeral, you will see that I contemplate the end of this descent as being
1902-03] The Close of Life 473
not far off — an end to which I look forward with satisfac- tion. The contemplation of this end prompts me to ask a favour of you.
I have directed that my remains shall be cremated, and I have as you will naturally suppose interdicted any such ceremony as is performed over the bodies or ashes of those who adhere to the current creed.
At the same time, I do not like the thought of entire silence, and should be glad were there given a brief address by a friend. On looking round among my friends you stand out above others as one from whom words would come most fitly ; partly, because of our long friendship, partly, because of the kinship of senti- ment existing between us, and partly, because of the general likeness of ideas which distinguishes us from the world at large. . . .
Will you kindly undertake this service for me ? Should you assent, the consciousness that words of farewell would come from one so wholly appropriate would be a satisfaction to me during the short interval between now and my death.
25 September. — Since writing there has occurred to me an obstacle to your assent which may possibly prove fatal. Your next election may be endangered, and .if you think so, pray do not run the risk.
FROM THE RIGHT Hox. JOHN MORLEY.
26 September, 1903.
I need not tell you with what feeling I received your letter. The occasion for it and the purpose of it both alike moved me deeply. That I should comply with your wish, if I survive you, is indeed most certain, and I am grateful to you for mentioning our long friendship and our general community of ideas. I shall always cherish the recollection of your friend- ship, and I shall never depart" from the spirit of your ideas.
Your letter found me at Carnegie's. He desired me, if possi- ble, to ascertain from you one or two objects which you might choose by way of memorial, and he would authorize me when the time comes, to call upon him for the financial means of carrying out whatever among those objects should seem to be most desirable.
I thank you, my dear Spencer, for this high mark of your confidence.
26 September. — It is most considerate of you to think of this obstacle. But I do not suppose that my good friends, though staunch presbyterians, could have any notion of cur- tailing my freedom, and if they had, I should resist it without much fear.
474 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvm.
To THE RIGHT HON. JOHN MORLEY.
27 September, 1903.
I thank you most heartily for your assent, and the more so because it is expressed in such a way as to leave me in no doubt respecting the willingness with which it is given. . . . Nothing suggests last words at present. But should there presently come a time when life is obviously ebbing, your face is one of those I should be most anxious to see.
P.S. — If my second letter, which an oversight in the first made needful, should give you the least reason for changing your reply, pray do it. That some speeches of yours in Parliament should be possibly lost is an evil which I recognize as im- measurably greater than the alternative.
P.S. 2. — Mr. Carnegie's request I hope to fulfil in a way that will be satisfactory to him.
The hope expressed, that he might be able to fulfil Mr. Carnegie's request to name one or two objects that he might choose by way of memorial, appears not to have been realized, owing, probably, to his rapidly diminishing strength. He was feeling too heavily the burden of years to take up any important matter. He could do little more than wish success to School — a magazine which it was proposed to start in January, 1904.
To LAURIE MAGNUS.
12 October, 1903.
A periodical which is to adopt the conception of education I have so long entertained, and which is everywhere implied in my writings at large, cannot fail to have my hearty good wishes. The only passage in your programme which calls for comment and suggests a fundamental doubt is that which commits me to the belief that the " training of citizens and the preparation for life " should be undertaken by the State. Now, as from the beginning I have, and do still, maintain that the State has no such functions, and have further maintained that it is not for a government "to mould children into good citizens, using its own discretion in settling what a good citizen is, and how the child may be moulded into one," it appears to me that my approval just given is practically cancelled. Only if the word u State " is omitted from the passage in question, so reducing the proposition to a self-evident one, can I endorse it.
The death of Mr. Lecky severed one more of the few remaining links between him and his old life.
1902-03] The Close of Life 475
To MRS. LECKY.
25 October, 1903.
The praise of those \vho are gone very generally contains insincerities, but among the many things which, were I physically able, I might dictate from my sick bed, I can think of none that are not laudatory.
Intellectually clear and judicial, Mr. Lecky was morally sincere in an extreme degree, and his devotion to the setting forth of historic truth has been conspicuous to me as to every one.
The pains incident upon the breaking of a long companion- ship must necessarily be great. Pray accept my sympathy, now as heretofore.
For some time his more intimate friends had ceased arranging beforehand to come and see him, as the mere anticipation of a visit perturbed him, and he was sure to wish to postpone it. Symptoms similar to those shown in May again made their appearance. By November he was seldom well enough to answer letters, and took little interest in what was going on. In replying to Mr. Shaw Lefevre (now Lord Eversley), who had congratulated him " on the honour conferred on you by the Nobel Trustees," he made no reference to the Nobel Prize. Nor does he appear to have taken any notice of the paragraph in Dcr Tag, of Berlin (November 12), describing him as a candi- date for the Nobel Prize for Literature for 1903. Dcr Tag, unfortunately, instead of his portrait gave that of Earl Spencer, with the subscription — " Ein Anwarter fur den literarischen Nobelpreis vom Jahre, 1903 : Lord Herbert Spencer." This was not the first instance of the confusing of Spencer with Earl Spencer by continental writers. In 1885 Earl Spencer apologized for having opened a note from M. Hoguet, addressed " Earl Herbert Spencer, 27, Saint James' Place." " I cannot claim to have any works worthy of the attention of M. Hoguet," he wrote, " though I am proud to bear the same name as one so distinguished in letters as yourself."
In response to a repeated request he dictated a note on November 20 to M. Coutant of Paris : " I assent to the addition of my name to the list of those who approve
476 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP, xxvin.
of the aims of the Bibliotheque Pacificiste Internationale." After this only one more letter was signed by him, namely, one on the 26th to Mrs. Courtney, who had forwarded a letter addressed to him by Mrs. Steyn, giving an account of the improvement in Mr. Steyn's health and their hope of being able to return to South Africa. " Even when there," Mrs. Steyn wrote, "we will not forget to think with love and reverence of you as the great Englishman who, in the hour of our deepest suffering, shed so bright a ray on our path and made us again take hope for the future." Surely there was a singular fitness in this that the two last letters he signed should have been connected with one of the main purposes of his life — the promotion of peace on earth and goodwill among men.
During the last week of November he took a decided turn for the worse. He had expressed a wish that Mrs. Sidney Webb should be present when he passed away. She came to see him on the 4th December, but by that time he seemed to have ceased to care to see anybody, only desiring to be left alone. Now and again his indomitable will asserted itself, as when a day or two before he died, after several ineffectual attempts to convey a pill to his mouth, he declined the assistance Miss Killick offered, saying, " I hate to be beaten." On another occasion, when signing a legal document, he remarked to Mr. Troughton, who had moved the paper so as to get the signature at the proper place : " What are you doing ? Do you think I am a dying man?" When bidding him good night on the Sunday before he died, Mr. Charles Holme said : " I shall see you to-morrow morning," and was rather sur- prised by the prompt question : " Why not ? "
"All through Monday," Mr. Troughton writes, "he was either unconscious or semi-conscious ; and it was during a semi-conscious interval that he motioned me to his bedside, and, holding out his almost fleshless hand, uttered the last words he ever spoke — characteristic in syntactical "expression, but apparently meaningless, though it is possible that some definite purpose prompted them. The words were : ' Now I take this step for the benefit of those who are to be my executors ; my intention being that after death this my body shall be conveyed by sea
1902-03] The Close of Life 477
to Portsmouth.' " In the evening he became unconscious, remaining so till 4.40 on the morning of Tuesday, 8th December, 1903, when he passed peacefully away. His end was such as his friends desired and he himself wished.
His executors, Mr. Charles Holme and Mr. Frank Lott, found the instructions for the disposal of his body most explicit and detailed. He had forbidden " the now usual display of wreaths and the use of a hearse with open sides for the purpose of display." It was also his wish that those present should not wear mourning. In the event of Mr. Morley not being able to be present, he had left directions that Mr. Leonard Courtney should be invited to take his place. Being at sea on his way to Sicily, Mr. Morley was unable to fulfil his promise to say a few words at the funeral of his friend. Mr. Courtney, who was in Edinburgh engaged in a political campaign, promised to come, if no one else could be found. Lord Avebury found it impossible to come, and Mr. Balfour greatly regretted that official engagements of pressing importance compelled him to decline. Putting aside his own convenience, therefore, Mr. Courtney hastened south.
On the morning of Monday, December i4th, the remains were removed from Percival Terrace, the Mayor of Brighton in his official capacity, and the President of the Brighton and Hove Natural History Society, following the hearse to the railway station. At Victoria station a few friends had assembled. A plain close hearse followed by three carriages constituted the funeral procession through London. As it passed along the streets, few were aware that this was the last journey of one of the greatest thinkers of this or any age. The assemblage at the crematorium at Golder's Green included, in addition to relatives, the members of his house- hold, the executors and two of the trustees, many intimate private friends, distinguished representatives of literature and science, with most of whom Spencer had long been associated as a fellow-worker, and several foreign friends and disciples. A few of his dearest friends were, to their deep regret, unable, owing to the infirmities of age, to pay their last tribute of respect.
The following impressive address WHS delivered to the
47 8 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvm.
assembly of mourners by Mr. Leonard Courtney (now Lord Courtney of Pen with) :
I am not worthy to be called to the most honourable duty which has this day fallen upon me. So much I am bound to confess in all simplicity and sincerity at the outset of the few Words I may utter. I cannot claim to have been in any fit sense a student of Herbert Spencer's works. I cannot plead for recognition as one of the great company of his disciples. You know, indeed, that Herbert Spencer's first desire was that another man, known and honoured of us all, should speak on this occasion. His consent had been sought and obtained, and his words would have been fitting memorial of the work and worth of the dead. But four years of unremitting and, towards the end, of exhausting toil, have induced John Morley to seek recovery of health and strength by the Mediterranean Sea, and the news of Herbert Spencer's death overtook him as he reached the Sicilian shores of imperishable memories and ever- renewed beauties. His weariness has passed away, his normal vigour is re-established, but it would have been impossible for him to return here to-day had it been right to make the attempt, and it was represented to me that Herbert Spencer had ex- pressed the wish that I should take the place of John Morley if he could not be present himself.
' This message was sent to me four days since, .when I Avas in the Northern capital. I was immersed in another sphere of action and occupied with far other thoughts, but to such a call I could not be disobedient, and I am here to-day, craving all forbearance if I fail to satisfy the unspoken desires which attend this office. I am indeed borne down when I think how Vast a concourse of learners and workers in all lands are, in spirit, if not in body, attending here to-day to testify with gladness and gratitude the -depth of iheir debt to the departed. .Yet I must not shrink from adding a few more words of a personal and private character.
It is many years since I first became acquainted with Herbert Spencer, and more than a score since our acquaintance became more intimate and my opportunities of intercourse more frequent and more fruitful by my entering into a family of which he had been an habitual guest and honoured friend. Women of that family are here to-day in whose earliest recol- lection Mr. Spencer's personality dwells, who passed from childhood to girlhood, from girlhood to womanhood, under his eye, and to whom his death is the passing away of the last survivor of the grown-up people into whose society they were born. Their memories have in some measure become my own, and upon the advantage thus secured friendship grew and sympathy increased, a sympathy in respect to public affairs
1902-03] The Close of Life 479
never so great, so animated, and so helpful as in the years which have quite recently passed.
The first thought of every one musing over the life of Spencer must be that of admiration for the vastness of the work he planned for himself and of gratitude and even joy that he lived to see his self-ordained task completed. Rarely or never in the history of thought have we seen so vast a conception carried forward by a single man into execution. The syllabus which he issued in the year 1860, inviting support to his undertaking, must have appeared to many readers a dream that could never be translated into reality. A thousand chances, apart from a failure in the pertinacity or resolution of the planner, might be counted against the fulfilment of his plans. We know, indeed, that such evil chances soon asserted them- selves. A delicacy of constitution of which, having regard to his long years, Spencer himself was, perhaps, too sensible, threatened to interfere with, if not to arrest altogether, the progress of his work.
The support he received was inadequate to meet the charges of his undertaking, and his means were being consumed at a rate which would soon exhaust them. This second hindrance was more easily set aside than the first. A circular, intimating that the work must be suspended, quickly brought a sufficiency of help. Spencer had already obtained more readers and more disciples than he knew, and friends across the Atlantic united in offering aid substantial enough to remove anxieties. As the result proved, a continually growing sale of his books quickly afforded all needful support, and the special response to his appeal was scarcely necessary.
Indifferent health proved a more lasting difficulty. He was reduced to working very few hours a day, and sometimes to abstaining altogether from work for considerable intervals. The wonder is that with the moderate allotment .that was possible so much work was done. Thirty-six years did indeed pass from the first announcement of the undertaking before the final volume was issued. But what a range of inquiry, what an accumulation of illustrations, what a width of generalization do the volumes of the series not cover.
All history, all science, all the varying forms of thought and belief, all the institutions of all the stages of man's progress were brought together, and out of this innumerable multitude of data emerged one coherent, luminous, and vitalizing concep- tion of the evolution of the world. It is this harmony issuing out of many apparent discords, this oneness of movement flowing through and absorbing endless eddies and counter- streams and back currents, that constitutes Spencer's greatest glory and caused the multiplying army of readers of Spencer's successive volumes to feel the joy of discovering a great and ennobling vision of progress hitherto unrealized.
480 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP, xxvin.
If, in later years, some sense of the limitation of the inquiry has supervened, if some feeling has arisen of the insufficiency of the explanations offered, of some steps in the proof, some apprehension of gaps uncovered in the synthesis, there still remains throughout all the varied populations of the civilized world the abiding, undiminished conviction of a great gain realized, of a new plane of thought surmounted and mastered, new footholds of speculation secured which will never be lost in the education of man and the development of society.
Admiration of the range of his inquiry, of the vigour of his analysis, of the scope and comprehension of his great theory, must be our first impression in reviewing Spencer's work, yet must it never be forgotten that his one overmastering and dominant purpose was practical, social, human. Let it be noted that when it seemed too probable that his life would not endure to complete his design in all its parts, he broke off the sociological analysis to reach forward to the right deter- mination of the bases of individual and political ethics. To lay the foundation of these on bed-rocks of truth had always been his ultimate purpose. It was indicated in the first sketch of his proposed labours, and when preparatory clearances threatened to overwhelm him, he left these works to achieve the essential purpose of his plan. The leading principle of his previous inquiries gave him the clue to the solution of this final problem.
The self-adjustment of forces, which he had found explaining all cosmic -movements, had a parallel in the self-adjustment of the forces through the working of which has been developed the society of man. In Spencer's vision it seemed inevitable that this should lead him to the highest exaltation of the worth of individual freedom, and to contest with all his energy the interference of the rules of the many with the growth of the one. We may be permitted to cling to the faith that this conception presents a true aspect of ultimate evolution ; and yet it must be admitted that not many of us could accompany Spencer in all the thoroughness of the immediate application of his principles to society as it is. If we know but imperfectly what we are, and know not yet what we shall be, we may still believe in the ultimate realization of a perfect order without coercion, and of the service that shall be perfect freedom ; and we may be bold to insist that meanwhile the presumption is against interference, the justification of which is a burden to be discharged.
Spencer, indeed, in his late years sadly took note of move- ments apparently in contradiction to the leading principles of his doctrines, and here I may recall a conversation within a week of his death between him and a friend who had once been wholly with him, but had latterly leant to Collectivist action. " We have been separated," said Spencer, " but if we have been moving along different lines, I know we have both
1902-03] The Close of Life 481
been moving to the same end." u Yes," she replied — it was a woman who showed that divergence of opinion could not detach her from offices of tenderness and of love — " and it may be that in time some other method of attacking the great problem will be adopted, which will be neither wholly yours nor wholly ours." " Yes, it may be," said Spencer, thus reveal- ing in the last week of his life a mind open to receive new suggestions and to accept new proposals of change.
Standing here by these poor remains so soon to be reduced to " two handfuls of white dust," we are irresistibly drawn on to accompanying Spencer in his last brave effort to scrutinize the implacable facts of life. The last chapter of his last book grapples with ultimate questions and propounds his final judg- ment on the " Riddle of the Universe." No record can be more candid, no confession more striking than that in which he is even appalled by the thought of space with its infinite extension and everlasting laws enduring before evolution and creation, declared things as they are. What is the place of man in this great vision ? The brain so full and so powerful has ceased to act. There is no longer any manifestation of con- sciousness. Can consciousness survive after the organ on which it depended has ceased to be ? Is the personality that dwelt in this poor frame to be admitted as in itself indestructible ? Or must we acquiese in its reabsorption in the infinite, the ever-abiding, the ineffable energy of which it was a passing spark ? If indestructible in the future, must it not have been as incapable of coming into existence as it is incap- able of ceasing to be ? Our master knew not. He could not tell.
The last enigma defies our question. The dimensions of the unknown may be reduced through successive ages, but com- pared with our slender discoveries, estimated at the best, a vastness that remains must ever overawe us. Some fringes of the unknowable may yet prove to be capable of being known, but the great central secret lies beyond our apprehension. Yet two thoughts remain. If the night cometh in which no man can work, we may work while it is day. If we can work, it is somehow within our power to work for what is noble, for what is inspiring, for what is broadening, deepening, and strengthen- ing the life of man. We may devote our lives to the service of supreme goodness. Looking back on the years of Spencer we may say that he thus worked, he thus dedicated himself as truly and as bravely as any man enjoying the solace of a more definite creed. To this spirit, then, whose work survives, whose words yet speak, the wave of whose influence can yet pass from generation to generation, we may say in all the fulness of interpretation which the phrase can bear— u Farewell."
4$ 2
Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP, xxvul.
In the afternoon of the same day the ashes were con- veyed to Highgate Cemetery and deposited in the sarco- phagus which he had kept in readiness for some years. The stone, in accordance with his directions, bears only his name, the dates of his birth and death, and his age.
The sense of loss was widespread and profound, as was evident from the letters that came from all parts of the world. Societies at home and abroad vied with one another in their eagerness to pay a tribute to his memory. From Italy condolences were sent by both the Government and the Chamber of Deputies. The Italian Ambassador telegraphed : —
I have been instructed by the Minister of Public Instruction to express the profound regret of the Italian nation for the death of Mr. Herbert Spencer, whose noble life, entirely devoted to the highest aims of philosophy and science, has been an object of deep admiration for all Italian students.
The resolution of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, which was communicated to the Marquess of Lansdowne, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, by His Majesty's Ambassador at Rome, and by the Italian Ambassador in London, expressed the condolence of the Chamber with
1902-03] The Close of Life 483
the British Government and the great and friendly nation on the death of Herbert Spencer.
In accordance with an announcement made at the cremation a sum of _£i,ooo was presented to the University of Oxford, by Mr. Shyamaji Krishnavarma to found a Herbert Spencer Lectureship. Three annual lectures have already been delivered — by Mr. Frederic Harrison in 1905, by the late Hon. Auberon Herbert in 1906, and by Mr. Francis Galton in 1907. A movement was also made for the purpose of raising some fitting memorial, national or international, to be placed, if permission were granted, in Westminster Abbey. The following is the correspondence that took place on the proposal.
I.
To THE VERY REV. THE DEAN OF WESTMINSTER.
30 May, 1904. DEAR SIR,
We beg to place in your hands herewith a memorial letter addressed to yourself and bearing the signature of those whose names are given in the accompanying list. The original signatures to the form of memorial circulated for this purpose are also enclosed.
In asking you to give consideration to the matter referred to in the memorial, we desire to point out that those who have attached their names have done so in their individual capacities, and not as representatives of any .public body or office.
We are, dear Sir,
Yours obediently, (Signed) R. MELDOLA,
GEOFFREY S. WILLIAMS.
II.
To THE VERY REV. THE DEAX OF WESTMINSTER.
DEAR SIR,
A number of the friends, admirers and disciples of the late Mr. Herbert Spencer, being of opinion that some fitting memorial should be raised in this country in recognition of his lifelong devotion to philosophical studies and of his influence upon contemporary thought throughout the world, have come to the conclusion that Westminster Abbey would be an appro- priate place for the reception of such a memorial.
In view of the important and stimulating effect of Mr. Spencer's writings in the domains of Philosophy, Science, and
484 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxvm.
Education, we whose signatures are appended feel justified in approaching you with the request that, in the event of an inter- national fund being raised for this purpose, you would grant the necessary space in the Abbey.
We are, Sir,
Yours obediently,
List of Signatures lo the Letter to the Dean of Westminster.
His Grace The Duke of DEVONSHIRE, K.G., Chancellor of the
University of Cambridge.
The Rt. Hon. Lord AVEBURY, P.C., D.C.L., LL.D.. F.R.S. The Rt. Hon. Lord HOBHOUSE, P.C., K.C.S.I., C.I.E. The Rt. Hon. Lord REAY, G.C.S.I., G.C.I. E., LL.D., etc.,
President of the British Academy ; President University
College, London.
S. ALEXANDER, M.A., Professor of Philosophy, Victoria Univer- sity, Manchester. T. CLIFFORD ALLBUTT, M.D., F.R.S., Regius Professor of
Physic, University of Cambridge. The Rev. T. G. BONNEY, D.Sc., LL.D., F.R.S., Honorary Canon
of Manchester, Emeritus Professor of Geology, University
College, London. THOMAS BOWMAN, M.A., Warden of Merton College, Oxford.
E. CAIRD, LL.D., D.C.L., etc., Master of Balliol College,
Oxford. EDWARD CLODD, Esq.
F. HOWARD COLLINS, Esq.
The Rt. Hon. LEONARD H. COURTNEY, P.C.
A. W. W. DALE, M.A., Vice-Chancellor of the University of
Liverpool. The Rev. C. H. O. DANIEL, M.A., Provost of Worcester College,
Oxford. FRANCIS DARWIN, Esq., M.A., M.B., Foreign Secretary of the
Royal Society.
G. H. 'DARWIN, LL.D., D.Sc., F.R.S., Plumian Professor of
Astronomy, University of Cambridge. The Rt. Hon. Sir MOUNTSTUART E. GRANT DUFF, G.C.S.I., P.C.,
F.R.S. The Rev. A. M. FAIRBAIRN, M.A., D.D., LL.D., Litt.D., etc.,
Principal of Mansfield College, Oxford. Sir MICHAEL FOSTER, K.C.B., M.P., V.P.R.S., late Professor of
Physiology, University of Cambridge. The Rev. THOMAS FOWLER, D.D., LL.D.. President Corpus
Christi College, Oxford ; formerly Professor of Logic in
the University. The Rev. J. FRANCK BRIGHT, D.D., Master of University College,
Oxford. FRANCIS GALTON, D.C.L.. F.R.S., etc.
1902-03] The Close of Life 485
The Rev. T. H. GROSE, M.A., Registrar, University of Oxford. The Rt. Hon. R. B. HALDAXE, K.C., M.P., LL.D. The Rev. D. HAMILTON, D.D., President of Queen's College, Belfast.
C. B. HEBERDEX, M.A., Principal of Brasenose College, Oxford. ALEX HILL, M.A., M.D., J.P., Master of Downing College,
Cambridge. Sir JOSEPH DALTOX HOOKER, G.C.S.I., C.B., D.C.L., LL.D., etc.,
Past President of the Royal Society. A. HOPKIXSOX, K.C., LL.D., Vice-Chancellor of the Victoria
University, Manchester. Sir WILLIAM HUGGIXS, K.C.B., O.M., F.R.S., etc., President of
the Royal Society. H. JACKSOX, Litt.D., LL.D., Fellow and Praslector in Ancient
Philosophy, Trinity College, Cambridge. The Rev. B. W. JACKSOX, D.D., Rector of Exeter College,
Oxford. The Very Rev. J. H. LAXG, D.D., Vice-Chancellor and Principal
of the University, Aberdeen. G. D. LIVEIXG, M.A., D.Sc., F.R.S., Professor of Chemistry,
University of Cambridge. Sir J. NORMAX LOCKYER, K.C.B., F.R.S., etc., President of the
British Association. The Rev. J. R. MAGRATH, D.D., Provost of Queen's College,
Oxford. A. MARSHALL, M.A., LL.D., Professor of Political Economy,
University of Cambridge. The Rev. W. W. MERRY, D.D., Rector of Lincoln College,
Oxford.
HEXRY A. MIERS. D.Sc., F.R.S., Waynflete Professor of Minera- logy, University of Oxford. The Rt. Rev. J. MITCHIXSOX, D.D., D.C.L., Master of Pembroke
College, Oxford ; Canon of Gloucester, formerly Bishop of
Barbadoes.
D. B. MOXRO, LL.D., etc., Vice-Chancellor, University of
Oxford ; Provost of Oriel College. C. LLOYD MORGAX, LL.D., F.R.S., Principal of University
College, Bristol. JOHX H. MUIRHEAD, M.A.. LL.D., Professor of Philosophy, the
University, Birmingham.
J. PEILE, Litt.D., Master of Christ's College, Cambridge. HEXRY F. PELHAM, M.A., F.S.A., LL.D., Camden Professor of
Ancient History and President of Trinity College, Oxford. EDWARD B.'Poui/rox, D.Sc., F.R.S., Hope Professor of Zoology,
Oxford ; President of the Entomological Society, London. H. R. REICHEL, M.A., LL.D.. Principal of University College,
Bangor. J. S. REID, M.A., LL.M., Litt.D., Professor of Ancient History,
University^ of Cambridge.
486 Lije of Herbert Spencer [CHAP, xxvni.
JOHN RHYS, M.A., Litt.D., Principal of Jesus College, Oxford. F. F. ROBERTS, M.A., Principal of University College, Aberyst-
with. W. R. SORLEY, M.A., LL.D., Knightsbridge Professor of Moral
Philosophy, University of Cambridge. The Rev. W. A. SPOONER, M.A., Warden of New College,
Oxford. The Rev. J. E. SYMES, M.A., Principal of University College,
Nottingham. Sir WILLIAM TURNER, K.C.B., D.C.L., Vice-Chancellor and
Principal of the University, Edinburgh.
JAMES WARD, M.A., D.Sc., LL.D., Professor of Mental Philo- sophy, University of Cambridge. W. ALDIS WRIGHT, M.A., LL.D., D.C.L., Vice-Master, Trinity
College, Cambridge. The Rev. P. A. WRIGHT-HENDERSON, M.A., Warden of Wadham
College, Oxford.
III.
To PROFESSOR MELDOLA.
DEANERY, WESTMINSTER.
17 June, 1904. DEAR SIR,
When you first approached me privately with reference to a proposal to commemorate the late Mr. Herbert Spencer in Westminster Abbey, I replied in accordance with precedent that, if a formal request reached me stating the grounds on which the application rested and signed by a few weighty names, it would be my duty to give it grave consideration. I added for your guidance that it would be necessary that I should satisfy myself upon the two following questions : —
(1) Whether Mr. Herbert Spencer's contribution to English thought is of such importance as to merit the assignment to him of one of the very few vacant spaces which are now avail- able in the Abbey for the commemoration of the most dis- tinguished of our countrymen ; and
(2) Whether Mr. Herbert Spencer's attitude towards Chris- tianity, as expressed in his writings, may be rightly described as one of suspense rather than hostility, and one which does not make it inappropriate that his memorial should be placed in a Christian church. I said further, that on coming to a decision on these two points I should not be guided entirely by my own judgment, but should seek the aid of persons who would be recognized as experts.
The letter which has now reached me refers to Mr. Herbert
Spencer's "lifelong devotion to philosophical studies and his
influence upon contemporary thought throughout the whole
' world," and proceeds to base the request upon the stimulating
1902-03] The Close of Life 487
effect of Mr. Spencer's \viitings in the domains of Philosophy, Science and Education. With these expressions of apprecia- tion of Mr. Spencer's work I think that there would be a very general agreement, especially in view of the service which he rendered in familiarizing the public mind with the general con- ception of Evolution, and in applying that conception with great courage to various departments of human thought and activity. But I observe that the memorialists do not claim that Mr. Spencer has or will have a high place as a philosophical thinker. When I ask with what important achievement in philosophy or in natural science, or with what permanent contribution to thought his name is destined to be connected, I meet with no satisfactory reply. His philosophical system has called forth the severest criticism, and his views in various branches of knowledge, physical as well as metaphysical, are severely challenged by experts. Eminent he was in his own generation, and stimulating in a high degree. But these charac- teristics, apart from the enduring quality of work, do not con- stitute the highest claim to a national homage which is now necessarily restricted to a very few ; and I have failed to find evidence that the results which Mr. Spencer has achieved are such as are certain to command recognition in the future.
After what has been said it is unnecessary to enter into the question whether Westminster Abbey as a place of Christian worship could appropriately receive the monument of a thinker who expressly excluded Christianity from his system of thought. It may be right that I should say that this question is answered in the negative by some thoughtful men who differ very widely in religious opinion. At the same time I should wish to recog- nise the notable softening of his earlier asperity towards reli- gious systems which marks the closing pages of Mr. Spencer's Autobiography.
For the reason which I have given above I am compelled to decline the proposal, notwithstanding the distinguished signatures by which it is commended. In doing this I would plead for forbearance on the part of those who will think my decision to be wrong, on the ground that if I have erred it is on the side of caution in the discharge of a great responsibility, and that a mistake of refusal in matters of this kind can be honourably repaired by a future generation.
I beg that you will be good enough to convey this reply to the signatories of the letter.
I remain, your obedient servant.
(Signed) J. ARMITAGE ROBIXSON,
Dean of Westminster.
Bearing in mind Spencer's sensitive and high-minded nature and his well-known views on the subject of honours,
488 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP, xxvin.
the present writer would have preferred to pass over in silence the refusal of Dean Robinson to admit any memorial of Spencer into Westminster Abbey — a refusal, be it said, couched in perfectly courteous and dignified terms. But silence might be interpreted as acquiescence in the Dean's judgment upon Spencer's position in the world of thought. On the question whether Spencer had "a high place as a philosophical thinker," it seems enough to say that it may reasonably be assumed that the many very distinguished men of science, philosophy, and letters mentioned above were fully aware of the exceptional nature of their request, and that they deliberately, honestly, and without any mental reservation, subscribed their names to the opinion " that Westminster Abbey would be an appropriate place for the reception" of the memorial. If it was difficult to understand the Dean's decision at the time, it has been rendered much more difficult since. In May, 1904, the Dean refused to a philosopher recognition of " the highest claim to a national homage which is now necessarily restricted to a very few"; in October, 1905, he conceded that recognition to an actor. This incident alone would justify Hegel's famous taunt about the value set upon philosophy in England.
Whether memorials in Westminster Abbey should be con- fined to " those who profess and call themselves Christians" is a question which it would be out of place to discuss here ; but the readers of this volume will recall some of the many occasions on which Spencer felt called upon to suspend his work in order to try to convert Christians to Christianity.
4S9
CHAPTER XXIX.
CHARACTERISTICS AND PERSONAL REMINISCENCES.
OXE of the most striking features of Spencer's character was the small weight he attached to authority or, to be more exact, his utter disregard of it. The same trait was possessed by his father, but in a less marked degree ; and though his mother displayed the opposite temperament, he himself was inclined to think that a strain of nonconformity had been inherited by him from her recusant ancestry. As he grew up to manhood, the constitutional proneness to set authority at defiance became less an instinctive impulse and more a matter of principle. The tendency for those in power to abuse their position became a settled conviction. Authority had therefore to be jealously watched. When it attempted to restrict his individual liberty, it was firmly resisted, and when it encroached on the liberty of others, their efforts to withstand it claimed his sympathy. Without waiting to acquaint himself with the rights and wrongs of a dispute between those in authority and those subject to it, his first impulse was to take the part of the latter.
In his thinking as well as in his acting, he set authority at naught. Unlike Mr. Gladstone, of whom Mr. Morley
NOTE i. — This chapter is largely based upon contributions from many of Spencer's personal friends — not always distinguishable in typo- graphical arrangement from the biographer's own narrative. This will explain a certain amount of unavoidable repetition.
NOTE 2. — For published reminiscences of Spencer written by three men who knew him intimately, the reader is referred to the following : —
"Personal Reminiscences" by Grant Allen, written in 1894 and published in the Forum for April — June, 1904.
"A Character Study" by William Henry Hudson, Fortnightly Review for January, 1904.
"Reminiscences" by James Collier, forming a chapter in Josiah Royce's Herbert Spencer. Fox, Duffield and Co., New York, 1904.
49° Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxix.
says (i., 202) that "in every field of thought and life he started from the principle of authority," Spencer never began by attempting to learn what had already been said. His aversion from reading, which he himself attributed to constitutional idleness, was probably due largely to indif- ference to other men's opinions. " All my life long I have been a thinker, and not a reader, being able to say with Hobbes that ' if I had read as much as other men I should have known as little'."
His disregard of authority, human or divine, was dis- regard of personal authority only, and was accompanied by whole-hearted fealty to principles. His profound respect for the impersonal authority of principles in human affairs had its complement in a reverence for Divine impersonal authority. State ceremonial and ecclesiastical ceremonial were alike distasteful. To pay homage to royal persons while showing little respect for the principles that underlie human society, drew from him the reproof : " It is so disloyal." To bend the knee and utter praise to a Divine person, while ignoring the principles of religion and morality, met with a similar condemnation : " It is so irreligious." One of his most cherished sentiments found expression in what he wrote for the album of autographs and sentiments to be published in Italy at the fourth centenary of the discovery of America : " Be their rank or position what it may, from Emperors and Kings downwards, those who have done nothing for their fellow-men I decline to honour. I honour those only who have benefited mankind, and as one of them I honour Columbus."
Though the moral imperative had not to array itself with the adventitious insignia of personal authority, before it was obeyed, he recognized that personal authority was necessary at a certain stage in the development of the individual and the race. He himself outgrew this stage between his eighteenth and twenty-first year. Referring to the change that took place in his own character during these three years, he says in a memorandum :
This transformation was, I doubt not, due to the falling into conditions more appropriate to my nature. There are those to whom life under • authority, with more or less of
CHAP, xxix.] Characteristics and Reminiscences 491
coercion, is both needful and wholesome, and in whom there is produced by it no distortion of moral attitude. There are others better fitted for self-regulation, less needing control, and to whom control is proportionately repugnant, and in whom by consequence, control is the cause of perpetual charing and restiveness and a more or less abnormal state. All through my boyhood and up to the time I left home this was the case with me ; and as soon as the restraints and the irrita- tion consequent upon them were removed, a more healthful tone of feeling arose, and a beneficial change began, which had, it seems, at the date I name, become very marked. This trait of nature is evidently the same trait which I have just indicated in the description of my religious, or rather irreligious, condition of mind, as also in the tendencies above described to criticize the doings of those in authority, and to originate new plans or invent new appliances. Emotional nature is an all-important factor in the direction taken by intellectual activity. To discover, or to invent, implies a relatively large amount of self-confidence, and therefore a relatively smaller respect for authority ; and this relatively small amount of reverence, which runs throughout the conduct towards human beings, is shown also in aversion to that current theory of the universe which makes it the product of a being who demands incessant homage.
The habit of seeking for a cause for every phenomenon was being formed by the time he was thirteen. And as the idea of the universality of natural causation became confirmed, the idea of the supernatural, as ordinarily con- ceived, became impossible to be entertained. The current theological creed insensibly grew to be alien to his con- victions. As his father wrote in 1860 : " It appears to me that the laws of nature are to him what revealed religion is to us, and that any wilful infraction of those laws is to him as much a sin, as to us is disbelief in what is revealed." At what time the change took place Spencer could not say, as it had no marked stages. It was unobtrusively going on during the Worcester life. Though in Facts and Comments there are indications of a fuller recognition of the reason- ableness of religion as a factor in human life, there are no indications of any return to his boyhood's acceptance of a personal Providence intervening in the affairs of the world. His position was frankly agnostic, negation being as unwarranted as affirmation. The mysteries of existence remained mysteries to the last. Though he did not accept
492 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxix.
the dogmas of any creed, he was, in the truest sense, religious. " In private life," says Mr. Trough ton, " he re- frained from obtruding his heterodox views upon others, nor have I ever known him give utterance to any language which could possibly be construed as ' scoffing.' . . . The name of the Founder of Christianity always elicited his profound respect." Mr. Troughton recalls more than one occasion on which Spencer strongly condemned language which appeared irreverent.
He had an abundant share of self-confidence. The possible failure of any of his many inventions was seldom taken into account. His doctrines were from the outset deemed secure against attack, notwithstanding repeated experiences of having to modify, or enlarge, or restrict, his previous expositions. More reading and less thinking — more observation and experiment, and less speculation — would have shaken his confidence in some of his conclu- sions ; but would also have caused him to tread with a less firm step the long road he marked out for himself. Self- confidence, however, is natural to all, diffidence comes only with experience of obstacles. Most of us are so familiarized with objections, prohibitions, and troublesome facts, that the idea of another side to what we think, no less than to what we do, is never altogether absent. On Spencer, accustomed to think and act for himself, " the other side " did not obtrude. Hence occasional dogmatism ; hence also proneness to treat critics and criticisms in a somewhat cavalier fashion.
He was slow to form a friendship ; but, once formed, it \vas not likely to be broken through disregard on his part of even the least of its claims. Several of his closest friend- ships were with those who had little or no sympathy witli his doctrines : as for example, with Mr. Richard Potter, on whose constant affection he had entire dependence. With reference to this Lady Courtney of Penwith writes : —
My mother argued with him a good deal, my father never. It is rather curious that, considering the affection between the two men, and Mr. Spencer's generous appreciation of my father's practical sense and genial and expansive nature, the latter never read Mr. Spencer's books. My father loved an emotion or a sentiment, and understood the concrete ; but he
CHAP, xxix.] Characteristics and Reminiscences 493
had a rooted distrust of abstract ideas, and not much confi- dence in deductions which depended upon sustained argument ; and I can still hear him cheerily ending one of these arguments with : " Won't work, Spencer ; won't work, my dear fellow." After I was grown up, I remember vividly an incident illustrat- ing Mr. Spencer's good-humoured acceptance of this attitude of his friend. My mother and I were sitting in the garden at Standish, when Mr. Spencer came up to us with an expression half-annoyed, half-amused, on his face, and said to my mother : u I could almost be angry with your husband, Mrs. Potter, did I not know him so well." u What has he done ? " said my mother. Then Mr. Spencer told us how they had been standing together near a large pond we had, of which my father was rather proud, when the latter said : '' I wish, Spencer, you would explain the main points of your philosophy to me, just shortly." To which Mr. Spencer replied : '' I have been send- ing you my books these twenty years back ; I know you have not read them, and it is a little hard to put them all into ten minutes ; however, I will try," and so he began to expound. u Your husband," continued Mr. Spencer, " seemed to be listen- ing intently, as he gazed into the water, and I thought I had at least got my friend to give his mind to my ideas. Suddenly he exclaimed, ' I say, Spencer, are those gudgeon, and rushed round the pond.' ';
To go back to my childish memory of Mr. Spencer. He comes back to me as a tall slight man, with a certain air of personal distinction which made even an old coat look well on him. There was a dignity — perhaps also some .precision in his manner — which discouraged familiarity, and, except when we were very naughty and in open revolt against our elders, we treated him with great respect. Not that we did not laugh a little over his ways, and even argue with him on subjects of daily life, when we thought we could safely meet him ; and we got scolded for it too. I remember when quite a small child, Mr. Spencer coming down to breakfast one morning with his rather long upper lip longer than usual, and saying : " I slept badly, Katie argued with me last night " ; and that my remorse was not unmixed with pride that I should so affect a grown up man.
He never liked to feel far removed from opportunities of meeting his friends, though wrhen he knewr they were near he could do with little of their company. Few things gave him more satisfaction than to know that the feelings he cherished towards his friends were reciprocated. Lady Courtney gives an instance of this in connexion with one of her last visits to him.
494 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxix.
I had come armed with all the news I could collect of people he had known, whom I had seen at all recently, and, among others, mentioned the friend whose parents he had so frequently visited in Scotland, and to whose mother he had been much attached. After giving him a greeting from this lady, I said : " She spoke of her mother's affection for you." He started up in bed, coloured up, and said eagerly : " Did she really say that ? " ; and when I repeated the words as accurately as I could remember them, he lay back looking very pleased and said : u I am very glad to kno\v that. I had a great affec- tion for Mrs. [Mrs. Smith], but I never thought she liked
me. I fancied she only asked me because her husband did, and because she thought it was a duty to add to the pleasures and health of a man who was doing good work ; but I am glad, very glad, she liked me for myself." In spite of his great intellect Mr. Spencer always seemed to me to have a strong element of the feminine in his character : an element which manifested itself in the weaknesses, as well as in the attractive qualities, of his personality.
The Athenaeum was greatly prized, among other reasons, because there he could frequently— for many years almost daily — see his friends. The present writer remembers Spencer's unusual elation the morning he received intima- tion of his election. Readers of the Autobiography might be inclined to doubt whether a man of his habits could readily adapt himself to a kind of life so foreign to his experience as that of a London Club, but for thirty-seven years he was an acceptable member of one of those institutions in which absolutely democratic principles have to be reconciled with a nice regard for the feelings and comfort of others. The Club became more of a home to him than his own resi- dence. He tells us that in the beginning of 1868 there occurred " an incident of moment to me, affecting greatly my daily life throughout the future." This was his admis- sion as a member of the Athenaeum, under the provisions of a rule whereby the Committee each year elect not more than nine persons of " distinguished eminence in science, literature or the arts, or for public services," and the elec- tion must be unanimous. The names of the other eight members elected in the same year were : Mr. W. R. Greg and Professor David Masson, being representative of litera- ture ; Mr. (afterwards Sir) Charles Halle, of music ; Mr. W. Holman Hunt, of Art ; Mr. (now Sir) C. R. Markham,
CHAP. xxix. j Characteristics and Reminiscences 495
Sir William Palliser, and Colonel Sir Arthur Phayre, for public services; and Colonel W. J. Smyth, F.R.S., of science. Two of the number, Mr. W. Holman Hunt and Sir C. R. Markham, still survive. Spencer valued the dis- tinction of election to the Athenaeum Club by the Com- mittee very highly, and it was the sole recognition of merit which he accepted.
When in London he used to go to the Athenaeum almost daily, and occupied himself in looking at the weekly papers, glancing at the magazines, and skimming the new books, to see what was going on. Occasionally he read novels, but only by instalments. Biographies and histories he passed over, but travels had an attraction for him as containing materials for his work. Books dealing with sociology, philosophy, and theology were scanned, both for observing the current of opinion, and also to notice adverse criticism of his views. He was sensitive to anything in the way of misrepresentation and always took action at once, saying he kept in mind the proverb: "Give a start to a lie and you can never overtake it." He used the library for purposes of reference, and never spared time or trouble in verifying facts and statements. An hour or two every afternoon was passed at the billiard table, for which he offered no excuse. He simply liked the game. He was not displeased to have his own dexterity acknow- ledged, and once modestly boasted that his best break had been one of 47.
In May, 1874, he was chosen a member of the Com- mittee, "and for a long subsequent time continued to take an active part in the administration of the Club." He scarcely missed a meeting, and gave much thought and attention to the smallest details of domestic management, as well as to the more dignified elective duties under the rule above mentioned. He had an extraordinary acquaint- ance with facts of practical value, and loved to discuss the art of tea-making and kitchen administration on philosophical principles. This does not suggest a very pliable committee-man, but Spencer had more good sense and forbearance in social intercourse than he gave himself credit for. With his usual habit of severe self-judgment he accuses himself of want of tact as a committee-man,
Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxix.
and mentions how on one occasion Sir Frederick Elliott, an influential member and ex- Indian official, by means of suavity and cautiousness of expression, carried a motion which Spencer had not been able to accomplish. " Let me add that, though I sometimes failed in my aims from want of tact, I frequently succeeded by persistence." That his services were valued may be seen in the fact that although the usual term of service was three years, and a year must have elapsed before one who had served could become once more eligible, yet he was one of a special committee appointed at the Annual Meeting, and was then elected for a second term. He was thus connected with club business for seven consecutive years. He had long been a member of the London Library Committee. "At this my attendances were far less regular. I suppose in part because the administrative business, neither so extensive nor so complex, attracted me less."
In many respects Spencer was a model club-man. In his relations with his fellow members he invariably showed delicacy and good feeling. It is not enough to say that he was strictly courteous, but he realized that the true spirit of club etiquette is for a man to behave with the studied decorum of one who is living not in his own house, but rather in the house of a friend. In his manners and bear- ing he showed plenty of that tactful good nature in which he thought himself deficient. He never offended anyone by loud speech, injudicious remarks, or incautious behaviour and was ever most punctilious in adhering to the small unwritten laws upon which so much of the comfort of club life depends.
His craving for companionship and . his hospitable impulses were always struggling against the limits which health and work imposed on social intercourse. As he writes in 1870 : " I find more and more that I can manage pretty well when I am master of my circumstances ; but when the circumstances master me, I am pretty sure to go to the wall." His morbid fear of the results of excitement greatly restricted his personal intercourse with guests, some of whom have been known during a visit of several days duration not to have seen him once. Yet no host could have been more solicitous tor the comfort of his guests
CHAP, xxix.] Characteristics and Reminiscences 497
than he was. When in ordinary health he entered with zest into the amusements of the domestic circle. " He could thoroughly enjoy a good story," says Miss Killick, " and his powers of relating one were splendid." I have heard him repeat a poem of considerable length — ' The Northern Lights' — giving it in the Lancashire dialect with great charm. He enjoyed the humour of it so much that the tears streamed down his face." His conversation was singularly free from personal gossip, and invariably rose to the general point of view. Seldom adorned by graces of style, it was always fluent, correct, and clear : his deep rich voice adding to the charm. The gift of lucid ex- position was shown in his conversation as much as in his writings. Mr. Frank E. Lott mentions a visit in 1871 "to Penrhyn Slate quarries with Sir W. Gull and Sir James Paget, at which Mr. Spencer pointed out the glacial scratches on some of the rounded rocks in the Pass of Llanberis ; and his clear and vigorous description of the old glacier coming down from Snowdon, impressed me even more than when, a few years later at the School of Mines, Sir Andrew Ramsay explained the same phenomena in his usual inter- esting manner."
He cannot be accused of going out of his way to increase his reputation. From his replies to offers of academic and other honours, one may gather that there was at bottom a sense of disappointment that such signs of recognition had not been made earlier in his career, when they might have helped him in his struggle. Had he been less honest and outspoken he would have kept this feeling to himself. Even such notoriety as could not fail to be associated with his name was distasteful, leading him to go out of his way to avoid the manifestations of it, and causing regret, and sometimes offence, to those who wished to show their regard for him. Lady Courtney writes : —
We did not realize Mr. Spencer's reputation till we grew up and came often to London. Probably his fame was not great in general society before that time. It seemed to me to culminate during the seventies and early eighties. I was conscious during those years that you could not mention his name in many companies high or low without exciting a thrill of interest, and even in the most unlikely quarters his
32
498 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxix.
name would be known as that of a distinguished man. I remember travelling from Aberdeen to Inverness in a third class carriage (not that this in Scotland was an unlikely quarter), and hearing some Scotch farmers, and a minister from a far away northern village, discussing his books, and finding myself unawares quite a centre of attraction when I remarked that I knew him in the flesh. But he was far from kind to his disciples and admirers, and very disconcerting to those who had contrived to gain a sight or a word for them. He has himself told the story how, when at Cairo, he refused the request of a distinguished personage for a visit. ... I can add another story of the same period — a Dutch Judge of the Consular Courts was a great Spencerian, and his wife came to my sister and myself, to beg us to bring about a meeting. We thought and thought, and finally hit upon a moonlight ride to the Tombs of the Prophets. Mr. Spencer readily agreed, and the Judge, though he had not ridden for years, and was decidedly stout, eagerly accepted the invitation to join in. We started, and Mr. Spencer's admirer sidled up to him and began with much pomp a carefully prepared sentence. He was hardly under way when up came the Egyptian donkey boys yelling and hitting, and awray went the donkeys in various directions, and so the comedy went on all the time. Finally, Mr. Spencer absolutely refused to go to supper with our kind Dutch friends. We went and found all his books spread out on the tables — a pathetic disappointment to the poor gentleman, who was doubt- less very stiff the next morning after his unwonted exercise. People talk of Mr. Spencer as having a large measure of egotism, and he certainly did not conceal, as most of us do, what he had of that quality ; but a truly vain and self-regard- ing man would surely not have discouraged admiration and flattery as he did. Not only did he never seek, but most ungraciously refused, worldly honours and advancement all through his long life.
Again and again he complained of his lack of quick perception of the motives and actions of others, leading him to mistaken judgments and wrong courses of conduct. He thought he would be an easy dupe at a spiritualistic seance. While deficient in reading the motives of others, he was singularly wanting in ability to hide his own. He doubted his power to say " No " ; but few who had to do with him would accept this as a correct delineation. It used to be said of the late Sir Bartle Frere, when Governor of Bombay, that in refusing a request he did so with more than his usual courtesy, leading the applicant to think he had got a half promise. Spencer was not in the habit of
CHAP, xxix.] Characteristics and Reminiscences 499
toning clown the terms of a refusal : his reply being usually more blunt than suave. He thought more of making his refusal plain than of how it would be taken : as when requested by an American doctor to bequeath to him " the most perfect and wonderful brain of this century." He did not mince the terms of his refusal. " A bequest such as that which you wish I would not make even to my most intimate friend. You may judge, therefore, how little chance there is that I can be induced to make such a bequest to a stranger." Perhaps it was a certain brusquerie of manner and speech, joined with his unemotional cold- ness that prevented people, on first acquaintance, feeling quite at ease in his presence. Manner apart, his intellec- tual and moral superiority could not fail to engender a feeling of remoteness, which, however, disappeared on closer acquaintance.
Though he was not fond of the lower animals, the infliction of suffering on them was intolerable to him. His power of sympathy with human beings was exceptionally strong. Ill-health or distress of any kind, experienced by relatives, friends, acquaintances (even casual acquaint- ances), or correspondents whom perhaps he had never seen, could not be brought to his notice without exciting his lively interest and leading to measures for alleviation. Hundreds of letters bear eloquent testimony to the practical turn his sympathy took. For verbal expressions of sym- pathy, his undemonstrative character, and his dislike to exaggeration, unfitted him. As he wrote to a friend who had recently lost her husband : " I always feel so strongly my inability to say anything adequate in the way of con- solation that I am habitually debarred from attempting it." To the ailing members of his household he was " kind almost to a fault." Into their personal or family concerns he entered with sympathetic interest : rejoiced when they rejoiced, was grieved when things went wrong with them, warned them against courses which involved risk, pointed out dangers which they were likely to over- look ; but never said " I told you so " when his counsel had not been followed, and the bad consequences he had foreseen had to be faced. Above all he was considerate to his domestic servants, there being the fullest recogni-
5OO Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxix.
tion of the moral obligations of the employer. In ill-health every care and comfort was bestowed upon them. " On one occasion," writes Miss Killick, " when he was living in the country for a few months, a young woman had been engaged to assist in his household, and, observing her pallor and general lassitude, he gave her strengthening medicine, which, however, proved of small assistance, and she had to discontinue work and return to her home. Mr. Spencer himself drove over one afternoon to see her, and gave her a donation ; and on hearing that her bedroom was prac- tically unfurnished sent furniture for it anonymously." He could never turn his back upon genuine need, nor refuse to help a worthy person or a worthy cause. Even when a struggling author, he would pinch himself to help a friend. His generosity kept pace with the improvement in his circumstances. To the family of his uncle Henry, to Derby friends and acquaintances, to young men pre- paring for the battle of life, he extended a generous hand. Several who have since taken worthy positions at home and abroad, still remember him with gratitude. Against evil of all kinds, writes Rev. J. W. Chadwick, he " pro- jected himself with an ardour and vehemence strangely at variance with the idea that a cold, hard, dry intellectu- ality was exhaustive of the man."
He often referred to what he called his constitutional idleness, seeming to be rather proud of it than otherwise. If intellectual work consists in acquainting oneself with the opinions of others, the charge may contain an element of truth. But even in that sense, the man who could gather together and assimilate the wealth of facts to be found in his books, cannot have been so wanting in industry as some of his remarks would make it appear. If there was any defect of verbal memory it was compensated for by the readiness to grasp logical relations, as well as the natural relations of things. His defective memory for words and arbitrary relations, had, in his own opinion, much to do with the development of his mind, favouring as it did internal building up as much as it retarded external build- ing up. The pleasures of thinking were all the greater that he did not coerce the mind. His powers of analysis and synthesis were unsurpassed. He had a rare gift of seizing
CHAP, xxix.] Characteristics and Reminiscences 501
upon the important aspects of a question, and of keeping the unimportant points in the background. But for this he could not have marshalled his numerous facts so effectively. Complaint is sometimes made of the abstractness of his terms ; but such terms were necessitated by the width of his generalizations, only a part of the denotation of which would have been covered by less abstract terms. A more serious complaint was that he not infrequently passed without warning from the general and abstract use of a term or pro- position to the special and concrete, or vice versd, drawing conclusions which, though warranted in the one case, were not warranted in the other.
In some ways he gained, and in others lost, by not having had the training given by University life, which as Rev. J. W. Chaclwick says, acts as "a social mill in which men grind each other's angles down. Spencer's never were ground down : they were acute angles always." But argumentative and disputatious as he was, he never argued for victory. Always there was a principle to be contended for. Mr. Francis Galton writes :
Mr. Herbert Spencer's magnificent intellect was governed by a very peculiar character. It was full of whimsies that unduly affected the opinion of those who did not appreciate its depth and purpose. His disposition was acknowledged by himself to be contentious ; I would venture to consider it also as being sometimes a little perverse.
My knowledge of him was chiefly due to our both being in the habit of spending an afternoon hour or so in the then smoking room of the Athenaeum Club, which was a very suitable place for quiet conversation. This is quite altered now. He always took interest in my hobbies, and I owe much to his remarks and criticisms, which were not however always accepted. He loved to dogmatize from a priori axioms, and to criticize, and I soon found that the way to get the best from him was to be patient and not to oppose. He was very thin skinned under, criticism, and shrank from argument ; it excited him over much, and was really bad for his health. His common practice when pressed in a difficult position, was to finger his pulse and saying : u I must not talk any more," to abruptly leave the discussion unfinished. Of course, wicked people put a more wicked interpretation on this habit than it should in fairness bear. Anyhow, when Spencer forsook the Club as he did some years ago, to seek greater quiet elsewhere, I was conscious of a void which has never since been filled. ,
502 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxix.
An amusing instance of his strong leaning to a priori reasoning rather than to experiment occurred on his coming to a labora- tory I had then established for anthropometric purposes . . . I told Spencer of the difficulty of accounting for the peculiarities in the pattern of ringer prints, and that the dissections of em- bryos had thus far told no more than that they could be referred to folds of membrane in which the sudorific glands were formed, but threw no light on the reason why the pattern should here be a whorl and there a loop, and so on. He said that dis- section was not the best way to find out what I wanted to know : I ought to have started from a consideration of the uses of the ridges, and he proceeded to elaborate a line of argument with great fulness in his usual sententious way. It was to the effect that the mouths of the ducts, being delicate and liable to injury from abrasion, required the shield of ridges, and on this basis he reared a wonderfully ingenious and complicated super- structure of imaginary results to which I listened with infinite inward amusement. When he had quite concluded, I replied with mock humility, that his arguments were most beautiful and cogent and fully deserved to be true, but unfortunately the ducts did not open out in the shielded valleys, but along the exposed crests of the ridges. He burst into a good humoured laugh, and then told me the story, which also appears in his Auto- biography, of Huxley's saying, that if Spencer ever wrote a tragedy, its plot would be the slaying of a beautiful deduction by an ugly fact. . . .
The power of Spencer's mind that I most admired*, was that of widely founded generalizations. Whenever doubt was hinted as to the sufficiency of his grounds for making them, he was always ready to pour out a string of examples that seemed to have been, if not in his theatre of consciousness when he spoke, at all events in an ante-chamber of it, whence they could be summoned at will. In more than any other person whom I have met, did his generalizations strike me in the light of true "com- posite" pictures. Whether the examples he gave in justification were selected with a conscious or unconcious bias, or were taken at random, is another matter. Anyhow his wealth of ready illus- tration was marvellous.
The verdicts on his style have been almost as divergent as those on his doctrines. Occasionally, but rarely, it has been described as obscure — a criticism open to the retort that the obscurity may be due to the inability of the reader to grasp the meaning, no matter how it is expressed. Bearing in mind the highly abstruse nature of his thought, one will have to admit that few writers have so seldom left their readers in doubt. Burdened by wealth of il lustra-
CHAP, xxix.] Characteristics and Reminiscences 503
tion and exemplification, his style is apt to appear wanting in lightness and grace: but occasionally "a grave elo- quence lights up his pages." Its massiveness corresponds with the massiveness of his thought. Occasionally it is lightened by singularly felicitous words, or phrases, or passages, which have become part of the English language — thus furnishing additional examples of the survival of the fittest. Though condemned for its "barbarous termi- nology," it has also been praised for its " wonderful sim- plicity," its "terseness, lucidity, and precision." The author of the " Philosophy of Style" had, naturally, his own ideas about punctuation, and was often annoyed at the liberties taken by compositors and press readers. "The structure of a writer's sentence is in part the structure of his thought." His faculty of composing, under what would be to many very distracting circumstances, was remarkable : showing his rare power of concentration — of abstracting his thoughts from his surroundings. Whether in a racket court at King's Cross, or in a sports field at Kensal Green, or in a boat on the Serpentine, or under the trees in Kensington Gardens, he was able to carry on a train of abstract thinking, and to dictate to his secretary, as serenely as if he were in the privacy of his study. Unlike his friends, Mr. G. H. Lewes and Professor Huxley, who wrote and re- wrote their com- positions,1 he made comparatively few changes in his manuscript. In revising for future editions, however, he made numerous changes in the expression, but very few in the argument.
One of Mr. Spencer's traits (says Mr. Troughton), was his seeming inability to take in hand two or more things concur- rently. If, for instance, some controversy occupied him, per- manent work was for the time being put aside altogether. He had a rooted dislike to being hurried. A sequence of this was that he resented being put under pressure to do any piece of work within a given time. This largely explains his reluctance to engage in controversies, especially newspaper controversies, in which replies and rejoinders had to be made on the instant. The daily increments of work accomplished were very small, but the paucity of the performance never seemed to trouble him, or at all events never stimulated him to quicken the pace.
1 George Eliofs Life, ii., 99. Life of Professor Huxley, ii., 39, 291.
504 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxix.
He was an essentially methodical man. This characteristic manifested itself alike in his personal habits and in the expres- sion of his thoughts. His personal effects were all arranged and distributed on this principle — keys in one pocket, knife in another, and so on. Still more so was this the case with his papers of all kinds. These were all classified and put away in certain receptacles according to a definite plan, so that when required they could be found without any bother. When the time came for using any particular group of materials for the work in hand, that group would be subjected to a sub-classifi- cation, and so on, until the materials for a particular section were assembled together. With this orderliness of habit, it was not at all difficult, when circumstances arose which involved a suspension of work, to pick up the thread again when the time came for resuming it.
Some light is thrown upon his general reading by two of his secretaries. Referring to the period about the middle of the eighties, Mr. W. H. Hudson says: —
Once we went through some of the eighteenth century novelists, and he was specially interested in Humphrey Clinker. He was also struck by the delicate art of W. D. Howells, though he tired after two or three of his stories. I recall that he thought much of Shakespeare's witty dialogue (as in " Much Ado ") forced and childish. I think of all the novelists I read to him, he most enjoyed Thackeray.
Reading could hardly be called one of his pastimes (says Mr. Troughton, with reference to a later period), unless it was reading the daily and weekly journals, or rather listening to them, for reading them aloud was one of my functions almost from the beginning. Certainly his appetite for the Times was invariably keen and he followed the reading of it with close attention, accompanying it with a running commentary on events and opinions recorded, and noting anything especially bearing on his own work. This reading of the paper was the first order of the day, and moreover was always done in a certain sequence — summary first, then the gist of the leading articles, followed by the foreign news, and then the miscellaneous news — this was the order down to the last month of his life, when he usually dropped asleep before it had proceeded far. Then, in addition to the morning paper there was the evening paper, an invariable item in the day's programme, while the various weeklies gave him enough mental food to tide over Sunday. Of the constant succession of books which reached him — mostly of a grave character — a glance usually sufficed, and many of them \\cre put away on the
CHAP, xxix.] Characteristics and Reminiscences 505
shelves without even that. Fiction he had little taste for, and only at very long intervals read any.
Music was a great pleasure to him (Miss Killick writes), and his taste in the matter of composers good. In early life he enjoyed singing in glees, and in his closing years liked to hear them played on the piano. But in music, as in every- thing else, he had his own ideas how certain passages should be rendered, and they were as a rule contrary to the prescribed methods.
Spencer " disciplines himself to amusements/' wrote Dr. You mans in 1871. This was quite true. The dis- ciplinary process was also recommended to his friends. " Pray follow my example," he advises Dr. Gazelles, " in taking as much rest and amusement as is needful for your restoration, and be sure that, though at first you may, in consequence of having wedded yourself to work, find amusement dreary and uninteresting, you will in course of time habituate yourself to it, and begin to find life more tolerable." While passionately fond of the country and country pleasures, he cared little in boyhood and youth for out-door games. Of skating he* was very fond, and Mr. Frank Lott remembers "the very graceful figure he always made on the ice." After the breakdown in 1855 he began the sedulous pursuit of means for restoring his health. At first the quest was mainly not for pleasurable occupations, but for those involving bodily exertion and inducing sleep. After a time pleasurable pursuits were sought. But here also not the pleasure at the time, but the beneficial after- effects were the main considerations. He had few indoor relaxations. Backgammon and whist were played occa- sionally ; but he was not good at the latter, nor did he like playing for money. Miss Charlotte Shickle, who sometimes joined him in a rubber at Queen's Gardens, informed the present writer that it was an understanding that he would pay his losings when he lost, but would not accept winnings when he won. This was his invariable rule.
• His ideal of life found no place for asceticism, neither for the asceticism due to religious or moral feeling, nor for that which is dictated by the assumed demands of business. " Lit'c is not for learning, nor is life for working ; but
506 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxix.
learning and working are for life." A strange maxim this to come from one who scorned delights and lived laborious days in order to complete a task he had deliberately imposed on himself. While primarily valuing life and health for the happiness they afforded, he valued them next as the means of accomplishing his work. From worldly ambition, the desire to amass wealth — to "get on" in the ordinary sense — he was singularly free. He often spoke as if he had a mission — a message to deliver to the world. To this mission everything was subordinated.
His sincerity, truthfulness and honesty, impressed all who knew him. " He was absolutely sincere himself," writes Miss Killick, "and could not tolerate the very smallest deviation from the truth in others. Although at times he might appear to condemn unjustly, investigation always showed that some necessary data were unknown to him, and therefore his judgment, while apparently unsound, was in accordance with his knowledge of the facts." Suspicion of the motives of others was character- istic of himself, as well as of his father. Describing his first interview, Mr. Troughton says :
I had been informed that Mr. Spencer was in a precarious state of health, so much so that whoever filled the post could not expect to retain it for more than twelve months at the outside. But really there was nothing in his appearance to suggest any apprehensions of early demise — on the contrary, he struck me as being a man of more than average vigour : his upright bearing as he entered the room, his clear crisp voice, his searching gaze, seemed to betoken a hale, though perhaps not a hearty, physique. My unpunctuality called for serious notice. The time appointed was ten o'clock. Why was I late ? The explanation being forthcoming, a multitude of questions followed in quick succession. His inquisitiveness rather took me aback, but what struck me most was the brusque way in which he delivered his questions, and the way in which, when putting them, he concentrated his gaze upon me. Surely this man must have practised a good deal at the bar, I thought. I came to know afterwards that this was only a bit of affecta- tion. Some years later, when about to fill up a vacancy on his domestic staff, he deputed me to interview the applicants : instructing me in detail as to the proper method to pursue in interrogating them. It was just the same as that which he adopted at my first encounter with him. . . .
Numerous as were the instances in which Mr. Spencer
CHAP, xxix.] Characteristics and Reminiscences 507
appeared to distrust those with whom he had business or pro- fessional relations, it would not be fair to say that in more than a very few of them did he harbour any positive suspicion. He was a man who in everything he did, even in trivial matters, was guided by principle, the principle in each case being that which by a process of reasoning he had found to be valid. Because a large proportion of men are either unreliable or dishonest, therefore it must be assumed for the time being, that the man with whom you have dealings belongs to that number. To a certain extent the world at large acts on this assumption, but Mr. Spencer carried it to extreme lengths, and with entire disregard of the law of probability. I more than once told him that in the City, where office boys are more trusted than he trusted men of standing, business would come to a standstill if his principle were carried out to the letter.
He could not readily adapt himself to other peoples' ways, had very decided views as to how things should be made or done, and was fidgety and irritable when they were not made or done as he thought they should be. Though he was, in consequence, not easy to get on with in the house, yet he lived with the same hostess at Queen's Gardens for about a quarter of a century. While possessing wide knowledge, and a singular power of tracing the working of great cosmic forces, he was as innocent as a child in many of the ways of the world. Master as he himself was in dealing with wide generalities, and in marshalling and co-ordina- ting the details on which they rested, he overlooked the fact that most people content themselves with passing from detail to detail without a thought of a connecting link between them. They think from hand to mouth, as well as live from hand to mouth. Unable to grasp the principle which gives unity to details, they are liable to be plunged into confusion when told that they should take it as their guide. Allow them to ignore the general rule, all goes well until some unexpected event takes place which a wider out- look might have foreseen. If he himself had had the carry- ing out of his views on housekeeping, doubtless he would have justified their soundness. ]But having to depute this to others he would have been well advised had he kept many of his theories to himself. Embued with the notion that convention reigned supreme within the house as with- out, he continually fought against it. He had his whims
508 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxix.
and his crotchets — he was exacting in the sense of insisting that duties undertaken should be performed — he was not easily satisfied. But the attractiveness of his personality not only covered a multitude of foibles, but claimed the loyalty of those who lived with him, and who knew the deeply sympathetic nature that lay beneath a certain brusqueness of manner. Of his relations with Spencer, extending from the end of 1888 till the end of 1903, Mr. Troughton writes :
Brusque as Mr. Spencer often was in addressing those about him, he invariably treated me with courtesy. I cannot call to mind a single occasion during the many years I was in daily con- tact with him when he gave way to temper with me, and I have many remembrances of the kindly feeling he showed towards me. Beneath the asperity of manner which often showed itself, there was a really sympathetic nature ready to manifest itself when circumstances gave the needful stimulus.
Would Spencer have made a successful administrator ? If he had taken to teaching, one may say with confidence that as far as high aims, sound methods, and single-minded devotion could command success, he would have made his mark. But it is questionable whether he would have been successful in the administrative side of school- work. His want of tact, bluntness of speech, lack of quick and true perception of character, and impatience with the weaknesses of average human nature, would have stood in the way of smooth working with subordinates, colleagues, educa- tional authorities, and, perhaps most important of all, with parents. Had he adhered to railway engineering, there would doubtless have been some daring feats of construc- tive skill to be recorded ; but whether capital and labour would have co-operated with him is a moot question. Given his highly evolved humanity of the future, he would prob- ably have proved a successful administrator; with humanity as we know it, the issue would have been more than doubt- ful. Mr. Francis Gallon writes :
He was a most impracticable administrator on the only occasion in which I saw him put fairly to the test. We were both members of the Committee of the Athenaeum Club, at a long by-gone time, when the dining room management was bad, and there was much discontent. Spencer moved and carried the appointment of a Special House Committee, to consist of
CHAP, xxix.] Characteristics and Reminiscences 509
only three members. He, of course, was Chairman, another was one of the prominent malcontent members, and he persuaded me to be the third, as having no official duties and therefore presumably a man of leisure. I accepted the nomination with great misgivings, which after events fully justified. A more comically ineffective Committee than ours I never sat upon. Spencer insisted on treating the pettiest questions as matters of serious import, whose principles had to be fully argued and understood before action should be taken, with the consequence that we made no progress. Many funny scenes took place, one was with the butcher, who had supplied tough meat. Spencer enlarged to us on the subject of toughness in the same elaborate and imposing language with which his writings abound, and when the butcher appeared he severely charged him with supplying meat that contained an undue proportion of con- nective tissue. The butcher was wholly nonplussed, being unable to understand the charge and conscious, as I suspect, of some secret misdoing to which the accusation might refer.
An amusing instance of the failure of some of his theories, when brought to the test of experience, is related by Lady Courtney.
Of course he was an inveterate critic. He says so himself. One form this characteristic took was criticism of our various governesses for their management of us — on one occasion with amusing results. He had complained to my mother that one of these much suffering ladies, and ah especially indulgent one, \vas checking and destroying our natural instincts by her rules and instructions, mainly, I think, because she \vould not let us take off our jackets and either give them to her to carry or throw them about. Mother and the governess talked it over together, and Mr. Spencer was asked if he would like to take us out himself for the afternoon walk, and readily agreed. So off he started with some half dozen girls, whose ages ranged from six tp fourteen, up the hill into the woods. We had heard all about the complaint of our governess, and had had a pretty broad hint that we might behave as we liked. Two of the younger ones began at once to play the fool, and got so excited and outrageous that my eldest sister and I tried to second Mr. Spencer's efforts to control them. In vain and in vain. He eventually stamped his foot and said " When I say no, I mean no ! " Finally they managed to lead him into a pit full of dead beech leaves and carried off his hat which had fallen off — " you rude children ! '' was his exclamation, and all round behind the trees echoed r-r-r-rude children — for he rolled his r's slightly — or at any rate we thought so. He came home a wiser and a sadder man, and told my mother at dinner that two of her
510 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxix.
children were very headstrong, and would need a good deal of control. ... I know that he interfered less in future with our governesses.
Mr. Spencer certainly had a keener desire than most men to get other people to adopt and carry out his views, even on quite trifling subjects : such as how to light a fire, or revive it when it was low, the hanging of pictures, the colours in a carpet, or of the flowers on a dinner table, the proper shape of an inkstand, and a thousand other matters ; and he allowed what he thought an unreasonable way of doing these things, even when they had nothing to do with himself, to unduly disturb his peace. Indeed, the commonplace person would have said the philosophic temper was curiously absent in this great philosopher — so much so, that as he grew older and more nervous and delicate, his friends almost unconsciously abstained from arguing if they differed from him, unless they could p;.t their point humorously, for a good joke always found Mr. Spencer appreciative. Alluding to this irritability of tempera- ment, I remember Professor Tyndall saying at my father's house in London, Mr. Spencer standing by : " He'd be a much nicer fellow if he had a good swear now and then " — and our hilarity at the very notion of Mr. Spencer swearing.
An unsparing critic of others, how did he take criticism of himself ? He was too ready to say that he had been "misunderstood "_ or "misrepresented," and too prone to attribute the one or the other to moral obliquity. But he never deliberately took an unfair advantage of an opponent. Polemical writing was apt to entail " mischievous conse- quences" on his health. Foreseeing these, he often retired from a contest at an early stage, when the issue was as yet uncertain ; thereby causing annoyance to his opponent, besides laying himself open to the suspicion that he had begun to feel a little uncertain of his ground. . Between personal and impersonal criticism he drew a sharp line. In the former he seldom indulged, and if in the heat of con- troversy he was led into the use of personalities, he took care not to perpetuate them. Purely impersonal attacks on his doctrines seldom disturbed his equanimity, though they might lead to sharp thrusts of intellectual polemic. It was different with attacks on his character. To these he was more than usually sensitive.
Spencer's habit (the drawbacks of which he did not seem to realize) of throwing down a book when he
CHAP, xxix.] Characteristics and Reminiscences 511
disagreed with any of its cardinal propositions, afforded some justification for the suggestion that he was unwilling to deal with arguments and facts opposed to his own views. An accusation of want of candour would have greatly distressed him, conscious as he was of absolute loyalty to his convictions. The fact was that, though his allegiance to the truth never wavered — not a single instance being known of his declining to acknowledge as true what he believed to be true — he sometimes failed to reach it, owing to the engrossment of his mind with the creations of his ever-active constructive imagination precluding the admission of alien ideas. The shortcoming was intellectual, not moral — was due to the limitations of human intelli- gence, even of the highest. Whatever his moral short- comings, disloyalty to truth was not one of them. He who could only contemplate "from the heights of thought that far-off life of the race never to be enjoyed by [him], but only by a remote posterity," would have been the last to claim immunity from the infirmities of human nature. But we require to be reminded that the very greatness of the man has helped to bring too much into relief both the shortcomings of his character and the defects of his work. Take him for all in all, he was intel- lectually one of the grandest and morally one of the noblest men that have ever lived. His life was devoted to a single purpose — the establishing of truth and righteousness as he understood them. The value of a life of self-sacrifice for a lofty ideal is inestimable at all times, and is especially so in the present day of advertisement, push, and getting on in the world. This will endure whatever may be the fate of his philosophical opinions. " In the whole story of the searchers for truth," said the Times, just after his death, " there is no instance of devotion to noble aims surpassing his — courage, baffling ill-health, and proof against years of discouragement, unwearied patience, wise economy of powers, and confidence in the future recognition of the value of his work."
512
CHAPTER XXX. SPENCER'S PLACE IX THE HISTORY OF THOUGHT.
BY way of criticism on the Synthetic Philosophy much has been written about its a priori character. Spencer's habit of setting out from first principles and ever returning to them — his constant endeavour to verify every inductive generalization by showing it to be deducible from some higher generalization — has been too readily taken to imply that his philosophy does not rest on the solid ground of nature. Such an opinion is a survival of the Baconian reaction against the a priori methods of the schoolmen. It ought not now-a-days to be necessary to repeat the truism that the progress of science depends not on observation and experiment alone, nor on theorizing and hypothesis alone, but on the co-operation of these methods. Both are essential, and as a matter of fact both are pursued in all departments of knowledge, though not in an equal degree. The nature of the phenomena to be investigated, the stage the enquiry has reached, and the mental endowments of the investigator, each or all of these determine which of the two methods should be chiefly followed. Taking these considerations into account, the scientific enquirer shows his skill in so combining the two complementary methods as to avoid the .one and the other of two dangers that lie in the path of the seeker after truth. When theoretical specu- lation predominates there is the risk of losing touch with realities. When it is neglected in favour of observation and experiment there is apt to be aimless groping in the dark. The strict follower of experiment and observation reminds one of the man who had collected an encyclopaedic mass of information which he could not use, and of whom an Irish friend remarked : " Yes, he has got all the answers, but he has not got the questions." Unassisted by the
CHAP, xxx.] His Place in History of Thought 513
guidance of hypothesis, experiment and observation are apt to land the investigator in a labyrinth out of which he has to be assisted by some one possessing the clue. Mr. Darwin, one of the most painstaking of observers and experimentalists, was well aware how indispensable deduc- tive reasoning is in the course of inductive inquiry. " No one," he said, " could be a good observer, unless he was an active theorizer." " Without speculation there is no good and original observation." But the limitations of faculty rarely allow of the same individual possessing superior excellence both as a speculative thinker and as an observer or experimentalist. It has been said by way of disparagement of Spencer, that he was not a specialist, or expert. Had he been so he could not have taken the wide view he did of the whole domain of knowledge. Besides the consideration of constitutional aptitude for the one or the other, there is the further consideration that specializing absorbs a great deal of time. To acquire a minute acquaintance with details is often the labour of a lifetime. The specialist has rarely the time, and still more rarely the aptitude, to follow up wide generalizations. To disparage, therefore, the work of one who takes a wide survey of the field of knowledge, because in matters of detail he is not equal to one who has devoted his life to a very small portion of that field, indicates an entire misapprehen- sion of the limitations of human faculty and of human life. The organizer of knowledge would abdicate his function were he to attempt to emulate the specialist's acquaintance with details. His function is not to accumulate a store of individual facts, but to co-ordinate the facts supplied him, and reduce them to their most general forms. Moreover, as already said, the needs of science are not always the same. Accumulation of data may, at one time, be too far in advance of organization ; just as theorizing may, at another time, be too far ahead of accumulation. The necessity for the guidance of theory was emphasized by Professor Huxley in the testimonial he gave to Spencer in 1860, when the system of philosophy was planned. "Science would stagnate if the co-ordination of its data did not accompany their accumulation." Professor Huxley saw clearly that a man was needed to co-ordinate and 33
514 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxx.
systematize the facts and conceptions that had accumulated — to carry an " illuminating conception through all the departments of experience." Spencer came to supply the want by giving to the idea of evolution a development and application hitherto undreamt of.1 That he was successful in this respect has been freely acknowledged by those best able to judge. " In these days of increasingly straightened speculation it is well," says Professor Lloyd Morgan, " that we should feel the influence of a thinker whose powers of generalization have seldom been equalled and perhaps never surpassed."
The dread of hypothesis and deductive reasoning was for a time a healthy reaction against the methods of the schoolmen, but it is mischievous instead of salutary when carried to extremes. What Professor Meldola says of Biology is true of other branches of science. " In the case of the purely literary treatment of biological problems by writers who are not experts, the danger of over-weighting the science with hypothesis is much exaggerated. Writers of this class are often capable of taking a wider and more philosophic grasp of a problem than a pure specialist, and ideas of lasting value have sometimes emanated from such sources. . . . The philosophic faculty is quite as powerful an agent in the advancement of science as the gift of acquiring new knowledge by observation and experiment." It is not in the interests of science for those gifted with unusual speculative ability to keep the brake applied on their special endowment so as to secure leisure for observation and experiment, any more than it would be in the interests of science for singularly gifted observers and experimentalists to slight the accumulation of facts in order to soar into the regions of speculation. To restrict the free play of special endowments is the certain road to common-place results. Each should do what he can do best. He who is endowed with the rare gift of organizing knowledge should exercise that gift to the full, and he who has the less rare, but equally valuable, gift of accumulating knowledge should make full
1 See Mr. J. S. Mill's letter, dated 2 December, 1868 (chap, xii., p. 152).
CHAP, xxx .J His Place in History of Thought 515
use of it. Just as it is bad policy to put checks on experi- ment and observation ; so also is it unwise to clip the wings of speculation. It is far better that a Darwin and a Spencer should each exercise to the full his characteristic intellectual endowment and pursue the scientific method such endow- ment favours, than that a Darwin should try to be like a Spencer, or a Spencer try to be like a Darwin.
That Spencer came in the fulness of time to render an all- important service to modern thought, and that his mission was successful, are clearly set forth in the following sketch, for which the present writer is indebted to Mr. Hector Macpherson :
It may be fairly claimed for Herbert Spencer that he re- vived speculative thinking in this country, and inaugurated a new system of philosophy. When Spencer came upon the scene philosophy was at a low ebb. In one of his essays J. S. Mill bears decisive testimony on this head. In his review of Professor Sedgwick's " Discourse on the Studies of Cam- bridge 1835," reprinted in his Dissertations, Mill says: "England once stood at the head of European philosophy. Where stands she now ? Consult the general opinion of Europe. The cele- brity of England in the present day rests upon her docks, her canals and her railways. In intellect she is distinguished only for a kind of solid good sense, free from extravagance, but also void of lofty aspirations." Mill goes on to complain of the absence of investigation of truth as truth, of thought for the sake of thought. For this state of things there was an obvious reasca. Science had eclipsed philosophy in the popular regard. As I hav<; said elsewhere — " The early years of the nineteenth century were years of great fermentation. The practical energies of the nation freed from the great strain of the Continental wars found new outlets in commerce and industry. Scientific study of Nature, no longer tabooed by theology, demonstrated its validity by an imposing record of inventions and discoveries, whose influence on the national prosperity was at once dramatic and all embracing. Science became the idol of the hour. It was inevitable that an attempt would be made to reduce to something like order the ever-increasing mass of facts. Since the days of Bacon thinkers have endeavoured to weave the facts of science into a unified system. Whewell's History and Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences was an attempt in this direction. Unfortunately, just when Whewell was engaged upon the task of generalization and interpretation, epoch- making discoveries were being made, calculated to change the entire foundations of scientific and philosophic thought, for
516 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxx.
which no place was found in his work ; such as the conserva- tion and dissipation of energy, the variation of species, and organic evolution."
Next came Comte. Valuable as was Comte's contribution to the higher thought of the time, his influence on the philo- sophic side was rendered sterile by the arbitrary line which he drew between the known and the unknown. Many of the phenomena which science to-day is bringing into the region of knowledge were declared by Comte to belong to the region of the unknowable, to peer into which was a foolish waste of time. He tabooed all enquiries into the nature of gravitation, light, heat, electricity, etc. All enquiries into origins were dismissed as ontological speculations. Hampered by his res- tricted method, he could get no further than the division of phenomena into six classes — Mathematics, Astronomy, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, and Sociology. He clearly enough showed the relation between the sciences, but his limited conception of philosophy prevented him from tracing them to a common root. Comte left the great problem of the unification of the sciences unsolved ; he even declared it insoluble.
The philosophy of J. S. Mill was also inadequate to the task of assimilating and unifying the new facts of science. Mill's empirical theory of knowledge made it impossible for him to trace the bewildering phenomena of the Cosmos to a common root.
Up till the time of Whewell the mechanical conception of Nature held sway — a conception which threw great obstacles in the way of discovering unity in Nature. If we treat the Universe as a vast machine we do not readily discover the idea of unity. Between the various parts of the machine there may be no necessary unity, which indeed may exist only in the mind of the constructor. To the mechanical conception was largely due the waning influence of philosophy of which Mill complained. The philosophy of which he was the distinguished representa- tive and exponent was ill-fitted by its fundamental conceptions for grappling effectively with the new views of Nature which science was disclosing ; it could not help in the endeavour to find necessary unity at the heart of things. In this sphere Mill was hampered by his theory of knowledge, which he inherited from Hume. According to this theory, knowledge originates in impressions made upon the senses, and is limited, of course, by the external world. Knowledge in this view, in its ultimate analysis and when perfectly organized, will consist of the classi- fication of facts and the arranging of them into groups. Are these groups held together by any necessary law ? Can the various branches of knowledge be traced back to one common root ? By the nature of his philosophy Mill was compelled to answer this question in the negative as follows : " There exists in Nature a number of permanent causes, which have
CHAP, xxx.1 His Place in History of Thought 517
subsisted ever since the human race has been in existence, and for an indefinite and probably an enormous length of time previous. The sun, the earth, and the planets with their various constituents — air, water and the distinguishable sub- stances whether simple or compound of which Nature is made up — are such permanent causes. Why these particular natural agents existed originally and no others, or why they are arranged in such a manner throughout space, is a question we cannot answer : more than this we can discover nothing regular in the distribution itself. We can reduce it to no uniformity, to no law." In its final results the Experience philosophy of Mill, like the Positivism of Comte, lends no encouragement to the search for unity which the new dynamical theory of Nature was fostering.
Spencer saw clearly that, on the lines of the old Experi- ence philosophy, the problem was insoluble. He saw that if the mind cannot pass beyond particulars, as Mill said, it was hopeless to search for universal laws, hopeless to trace existence in its multifarious aspects to one dynamic process. What Spencer did was to start with two universal intuitions, which cannot be proved, and which must be accepted as necessities of thought — belief in personal identity, and belief in the per- manence of the constitution of things which we call Nature. By starting with two intuitive beliefs — subjective existence and objective existence — Spencer escaped the sceptical conclusions of Hume and Mill.
As I have observed in a review of Spencer's philosophy : "Accepting as the data of philosophy, subject and object, self and not-self, Spencer deals with the general forms under which the not-self, the Cosmos, manifests itself to the self, the mind. These general forms under which the not-self, the cosmos, manifests itself to the self, the mind, are space, time, matter, motion, and force. After a careful analysis of these forms by which all thinking is conditioned, he comes to the conclusion that space, time, matter and motion, all necessary data of intel- ligence, are built up or abstracted from experiences of force. Force persists. When we say that force persists, we are simply saying that the sum total of matter and motion, by which force manifests itself to us, can neither be increased nor diminished. This, like personal identity, is an ultimate fact, an ultimate belief, which we must take with us as the basis of all reasoning ; if force came into existence and went out of existence, the Universe would be not a cosmos but a chaos, nay more, reasoning would be impossible. Scientific deductions, as well as abstract reasoning, would be impossible if the forces of Nature did not persist. Viewed thus, the Universe is one fact, the varying phenomena being but so many phases of the redistribution of matter and motion."
Spencer found in the two great scientific generalizations —
518 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxx.
i
the nebular theory and the conservation of energy — precisely the scientific materials which were necessary to the framing of his philosophical system. Here was clear proof that the Universe was not machine-like in construction, but was the outcome of a dynamic process. Starting with the ultimate fact of the redistribution of matter and motion, Spencer proceeds to trace the process by which the Universe evolves from its primitive nebulous form to its latest state of complexity. It is noteworthy that Spencer, in dealing with matter, did not, like so many of his contemporaries, accept the atom as an ultimate. When he wrote, the atom was treated as the founda- tion stone, so to speak, of the Universe. In his First Principles, he showed that matter, under philosophical analysis, resolves itself into a form of energy — a view which the discovery of radium amply confirms.
From the cosmical side, Spencer's great task was to trace the process of evolution. For convenience, phenomena are divisible into sections — astronomic, geologic, biologic, psychologic, socio- logic, but the process is one, and the law is one. In those spheres, Spencer has illuminated a whole world of facts, and by his magnificent powers of analysis and generalization has raised the human mind to higher reaches of thought. It has been finely said that to a thinker capable of comprehending it from a single point of view, the Universe would present a single fact, one all comprehensive truth. Spencer's attempt is the greatest that has yet been made to realize this ideal.
Spencer intended his system to be a philosophy of pheno- menal existence, but at the outset he deemed it necessary to deal with ontological problems. By his famous theory of the unknowable he involved himself in controversies which dis- tracted the public mind and drew attention away from his real aim. He realized that in this he had made a mistake. He was in his later days anxious to make it plain that his system was quite independent of his theory of the Unknowable. His system, he once remarked* to me, should be judged on its merits, apart from its metaphysical basis.1 Spencer's mis- take was in prefacing his First Principles with a discussion associated with the philosophy of Hamilton and Mansel. The conclusion of his great work was the proper place to treat of its philosophical aspects, when he would have been in a position to deal with ontological problems on modern lines.
Great inconvenience came from the mixing up of the scientific and the metaphysical. For instance, in First Princi- ples Spencer proceeds on the assumption that force, which he calls a form of the unknowable, explains all phenomena, living as well as non-living. His attempt to correlate living and non-
1 See Supra, chap, xv., p. 201 ; chap, xviii., p. 252 ; chap, xxviii,, p. 464.
CHAP, xxx.] His Place in History of Thought 519
living forces, and embrace them in a mechanical formula did not latterly satisfy himself. In the sixth edition of his First Principles, revised by him in 1900, he no longer believed in the transformation of motion into .feeling,^ but only in a constant ratio between the two. In dealing with life the same change of view is noticeable. In the last edition of the Principles of Biology the admission is made that " life in its essence cannot be conceived in physico-chemical terms." The effect of these admissions is to make the "Synthetic Philosophy" dualistic rather than monistic. From a scientific point of view these admissions are of no moment, because, as the psychical only manifests through the physical, it is quite legitimate to use mechanical terminology in dealing with phenomena. Both in biology and psychology the Spencerian formula has been ex- ceedingly fruitful. In regard to the former we have the testimony of a competent authority, Professor Arthur Thomson, the Scottish biologist, who describes the Principles of Biology as an epoch making work. " Even as a balance sheet of the facts of life the book is a biological classic ; consciously or uncon- sciously we are all standing on his shoulders." Distinguished scientists on the Continent have given like testimony to Spencer's labours in the region of biology.
In psychology Spencer's work was also epoch-making. His book proved to be the forerunner of a new method in the study of brain and nerve evolution and dissolution. No greater evidence of the value of Spencer's work in this department can be had than the testimony of distinguished medical specialists in brain and nerve disorders. It is claimed for Spencer that in neurology, psychology, and pathology, he has discovered the fundamental principles, and that whatever systems are erected in these sciences must be erected on the foundations he has laid. In Spencer's hands psychology, from being a sterile science confined to academic circles, has been converted into a valuable instrument of scientific research.
To the ethical, sociological, and political sciences, Spencer applied his evolution formula with marked originality. To the utilitarianism of Bentham and Mill he has given something like a scientific foundation, while political philosophy, which before his day was usually associated with forms of government, has now its proper place in sociological evolution. As has been well said : " Spencer, exchanging the point of view from the mechanical to the biological, originated quite a new train of political thinking. An organized society is subject to the law of growth. It has an economic root, and all political struc- tures as well as ethical ideals are determined, not from the outside by legislation, but by the economic conditions at each particular stage. All students of social evolution are his debtors."
What will be the verdict of history upon Herbert Spencer ?
520 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxx.
It will surely be that he belonged to the highly gifted race of thinkers who, by the boldness of their generalizations and their commanding outlook upon life and thought, have opened out to humanity wider intellectual vistas.
The warmth and catholicity of the tributes paid to the remarkable force of Spencer's intellect, the lofty simplicity of his character, the grandeur of his aims, and the heroic devotion which had sustained him throughout a long life, bore eloquent testimony to the extraordinary impression he had made on the men of his day and generation. He had reached the front rank among thinkers. But, it has been asked, will he hold this place in the estimation of future generations ? Do these tokens of appreciation warrant the assumption that the impression will be enduring — that there will be a permanent widening and clearing of the intellectual horizon, and such a purifying and strengthening of character as will stand the test of time ? This question is more easily put than answered ; but an attempt to answer it is desirable, inasmuch as the raising of it, besides carrying with it a suggestion of belittling Spencer and his achieve- ments, implies that an affirmative answer may be given to the general question — Is it possible for any one to frame a theory of things that shall be final ?
The durability of a thinker's work is seldom discussed with profit : owing partly to the uncertainty attaching to fore- casts of events like opinions and impulses, to the formation of which so many subtle elements contribute ; and partly to the absence of a clear idea of the question raised. Finality, in the strict sense of the word, may at once be put aside. Scientific theories cannot be final, inasmuch as the revela- tions of Nature are not final. A theory holds its own so long as, and only so long as, it harmonizes better than any other with ascertained facts. In any other sense than this, finality was not claimed by Spencer, nor could it have been claimed by him consistently with his fundamental doctrine. The gradual development of his own conceptions was a striking exemplification of evolution. " It may be," says Rev. J. W. Chadwick, of Brooklyn, "that there are particu- lars of Spencer's system that will require serious modifica- tion. If there are not, it will be an exception to its central
CHAP, xxx.] His Place in History of Thought 521
law. In Spencer's world there are no finalities, and for him to imagine his own system of philosophy as one would be impossible." Change, he held, is life, absence of change, death. He did not, as was implied by one of the news- paper obituary notices, so far forget himself as to conceive "it possible that he was saying the last word in Philosophy." He would have admitted that many of his generalizations would " have to give way before the tests of future experi- ence and research"; that many of his formulae were likely to " perish, not by being ever refuted, but because they cease to be instructive." A theory, though professing to be the most complete generalization of the on-goings of the universe as known in the second and third quarters of the last century,- does not on that account claim to be installed as the accepted scheme of things for all time, or for even the next generation. To suppose that Spencer, who had traced the genesis and growth of science in the past, assumed that there would be no growth in the future, would be to treat him as one of the most short-sighted, instead of one of the most far-seeing of thinkers. Viewed in this light, Spencer's work has nothing to fear from the discoveries, marvellous in number and importance, made in recent years. Even if evolution had now to be consigned to the scrap-heap, where lie so many outworn theories, that would not affect its claim to have been the most complete generalization of knowledge at the time he wrote. But, though there may be ambiguities of statement, oversights in details, and mistakes in application, there are at present no indications of the doctrine as a wrhole being superseded. Even the phenomena of radium, revolutionizing previous conceptions as to the constitution of matter, do not overthrow the doctrine of evolution. Some there are, indeed, who think with Dr. Saleeby that these phenomena " answer the Spencerian de- finition of evolution as if it had been framed to explain them." Others are of opinion that the formula of evolution will not fit the new discoveries so perfectly as this — that it will require a little letting out here or a little taking in there. When one remembers how the formula evolved in Spencer's mind under the influence of increasing knowledge, one will be prepared for such further modifications as fresh dis- coveries may necessitate. But whatever discoveries — far
522 Life of Herbert Spencer [CHAP. xxx.
surpassing those of radio-activity — lie in the womb of time, they will not affect the contention that Spencer's synthesis of knowledge was the most comprehensive and complete — was final, not as foreclosing his scheme of the Universe against future advances of knowledge, but as the fullest and grandest generalization of the knowledge of his day. It was a contribution towards a settlement, not a closing of the account. In this sense, his permanent place is assured for all time. In the history of the progress of the human mind, the Synthetic Philosophy will be an enduring land- mark. Men's ways of looking at things will never be what they would have been had he not written. Henceforth it will be " impossible thoroughly to pursue any kind of enquiry without being confronted by his ideas." " No man of the present time," said Rev. J. Minot Savage, of Boston, the Sunday after Spencer's death, " can discuss any one of the great problems of the world . . . without dealing with Herbert Spencer. He has got to agree with him or fight him : he cannot ignore him." What influence more permanent than this could any man have ? L
In addition to his rare gifts for co-ordinating and sys- tematizing the scientific conceptions of his day, Spencer possessed an unrivalled power of stimulating and directing others. To lead men to think for themselves — to suggest paths of inquiry at the end of which may lie a great truth — to direct a searchlight on the road to be traversed — surely these are attributes of the highest power. Sir Andrew Clark was wont to say that when feeling intel- lectually limp he was in the habit qf turning to Spencer's writings, the bracing effect of which he seldom failed to experience. The suggestiveness of his ideas was freely acknowledged in his lifetime. From the American ranch, the Australian bush, and the South African veldt — from those who go down to the sea in ships — from countrymen and from foreigners — from men and women in humble walks of life as well as from those in exalted station — came to him grateful acknowledgments of stimulus and guidance received from his writings. And who can tell the number of those who unconsciously by his thoughts have had their
1 Compare Lord Courtney's address, chap, xxviii., p. 479.
CHAP, xxx.] His Place in History of Thought 523
own thoughts made broader and clearer, and their lives turned into the path of new endeavour ?
We are as yet too near him to form a true estimate of his greatness. This is partly due to the fact that the details of his personality obscure the grandeur of its outlines — that the superficial and immediate effects of his work prevent us from estimating its deep and remote effects.. Partly, it is the result of the very success of his teaching, which, having permeated our thought and speech, gives the impression that many of his utterances are platitudes, truisms, common-places, His ideas and his ways of looking at things have become part of the intellectual atmosphere we breathe — have become embedded in the language we speak. The value of his teaching will be rightly appre- ciated only by future generations. What Professor Theodor Gomperz says of Plato, may be said of Spencer : —
An intellect of the first order, having found and selected the elements of a world-theory, will combine and develop them in such manner as may best accord with its own powerful and strongly marked individuality, and, for this very reason, there will be small prospect of gaining the adherence, within a short interval, of any very extensive section of society. At the same time, such an intellect, out of the abundance of its wealth, will exert an influence upon many later generations, with which it will continually present new points of contact, and thus upon the intellectual life of mankind at large.1
To posterity Spencer's reputation as a thinker may with confidence be left.
1 Theodor Gomperz's Greek Thinkers (translated by G. G. Berry), ii., 245.
APPENDICES.
NOTE. — The two following Appendices [A and B] being written in the first person, apparently belong to the Autobiography, and in a sense do so. The explanation of their appearance here is that the Autobiography was finished and stereotyped ten years before the first of them was written, and that now to incorporate them would involve a re-arrangement of the plates, which would be trouble- some and costly. Hence I have thought it best to leave them to be used by my biographer. The use of the first person instead of the third will, after this explanation, cause no misapprehension. \March, 1903.] H. S.
527
APPENDIX A. PHYSICAL TRAITS AND SOME SEQUENCES.1
YEARS ago I met with the remark that biographers do not adequately describe the physical traits of the men whose lives they write. Something is usually said about external appear- ance ; but little or nothing is said about constitution. Both sets of characters should have their places, since both are factors in a man's career. Recognition of this truth has de- cided me to set down such memoranda concerning my physical nature as seem significant.
Already in the Autobiography I have named the fact that my ultimate height was 5 feet 10 inches : and I think I have remarked that during boyhood I was unusually long-legged. Probably my ability to outrun my school-fellows was due to this trait of structure. . . . On approaching manhood a much greater rate of growth, reaching three inches a year, was, I suppose, due to the more rapid development of the trunk. Eventually the proportions were not far from the normal, though I think the chest was not so large as was needed for a complete organic balance. Like my father and mother, and like all my grandparents, I was " spare," not to say thin. In- deed, the fact that throughout adult life my weight was usually a little over 10 stone implies this thinness, for the normal weight for a man of 5 feet 10 inches is something like a stone greater. I should add that my limbs when fully developed were somewhat slighter than usual, my hands especially being small — too small for a man.
A life's experience has proved my constitutional strength to have been good if not great. There have come round to me reports respecting my feebleness in infancy — feebleness said to have been such that it was doubtful whether I should be reared. I know no warrant for such reports. It is true that my father would not have my brain taxed by early lessons ; but beyond this interdict I can remember no evidence. I was allowed to run wild and was freer from children's disorders than is usual.
1 Written in the autumn of 1902.
528 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. A.
Something should be said respecting complexion. My hair was brown, leaning rather towards a darker than a lighter shade. A moderate amount of colour in the cheeks was characteristic. I had neither that parchment-complexion which goes along with the strongest constitutions (contrary to common notions) nor that high colour which is popularly thought a sign of abounding health. And here seems the fittest place to remark that during middle and later life I changed very little. In advanced years the usual remark was that I looked ten years younger than I actually was. There were, I think, three causes for this. It was said of me, after the publication of Social Statics, that my forehead did not bear any of those lines of thought which were to be expected. The absence of such lines has remained a trait down almost to the present time. As before explained, my thinking has not been forced but spontaneous ; and, as a consequence, the face has not been drawn into furrows expressing strenuous mental action. A second cause is, I believe, that as my strong eyes never shrank from any light however bright, there was not induced that wrinkling up of the corners of the eyes which reflex efforts to shut off part of the light cause ; and, consequently, there has not been so marked a production of " crow's feet." And then, in the third place, I have retained up to the present time all my teeth. Where the crowns have decayed the roots have been left, and there has not been produced the usual sinking in of the cheeks from lack of the support which the gums normally yield. This has enabled the face to retain its contour in a much greater degree than usual.
Until the time of my nervous breakdown, I had good health. My constitution appears to have been not strong in the sense of possessing overflowing vigour, but strong in the sense of having a good balance. All through life, in late days as in early days, my state of body and mind has been equable. There have never been any bursts of high spirits and times of depression ; but there has ever been a flow of energy moderate in amount, but sufficient for the purposes of life.
One consequence has been that I have preserved down to late life a love of amusements of all kinds. I never fell into that state of indifference which characterizes many. Concerts and theatres continued to be attractions until my broken health forbade attending them : a good drama being to the last, as at first, one of the greatest pleasures which life yields. Certain sports, too, as salmon and sea-trout fishing, retained their attraction until my strength failed. To friends who have lost liking for other pursuits than work, I have often insisted that it is a mistake, even from a business point of view, to give up amusements ; since, when disturbance of health has made a holiday imperative, there remains no means of passing the time with satisfaction. u Be a boy as long as you can," was the
APP. A.J Physical Traits and Some Sequences 529
maxim which I reiterated. Games, too, I played as long as physical powers allowed. Above all I continued to enjoy the country ; my sojourn in which every summer was looked forward to as the great gratification of the year. How fully I entered into its concomitant pleasures may be judged from the fact that I went picnicking when over eighty.
Being moderate in amount, my flow of energy was never such as prompted needless activities. There are men whose fulness of life necessitates some kind of action — purposeless action, if no other. This was never so with me. Contrariwise, I tended always to be an idler. Action resulted only under the prompting of a much-desired end, and even then it was with some reluctance that I worked at things needful for achieving the end.
I emphasize this trait since it is so utterly at variance with the trait commonly ascribed to me. On looking at the series of my books, and at the amount of material brought together in them, as well as the thinking shown, it appears to be a necessary implication that I have been a hard worker. The inference is quite wrong, however. In the first place, that which I have clone has been done only under pressure of a great object : and even under that pressure it has been done with a very moderate activity. It is true that activity in thinking was constant ; and it was partly the pleasure of thinking (which in boyhood took the form of " castle-building," and in later life higher forms) which put a constant check upon action. Probably this trait did much towards shaping my career. Had I been energetic there would not have arisen those quiet contemplations, carried on irregularly and at first without definite aims, which led to the work I have done.
One of the traits of a constitution \vhich, though not vigorous, was organically good, appears to have been a well-finished development of the structures which arise out of the dermal system. I was thirty-two before I had any sign of decay of teeth. I never had a tooth taken out or stopped. Of the eyes, which are also dermal structures, the like may be said. They have all through life remained strong. Down even to my present age (eighty-two) I read without spectacles ; sometimes putting on a pair, but finding the inconvenience such that, on the whole, I prefer to do without them. I may add that I have, until quite recently, rejoiced in a strong light. That dislike to a glare which many people betray, even in their early years, I have rarely if ever felt. The like holds with the ears. Those around me say that my hearing is perfect. Is there any significance in this perfection and long endurance of teeth, eyes, and ears, all of them developed from the dermal layer ? The implication seems to be that in the process of development there was no failure of nutrition at the periphery.
34
53° Life of Herbert Spencer [A PP. A.
Part of my motive for setting down the foregoing facts has been that of introducing certain incidents and the effects they probably had on my constitution and career.
First of all there is the achievement in walking when thirteen, as narrated in my Autobiography [i., 95]. I have I think ex- pressed the belief that, notwithstanding the passage through this constitutional strain without apparent damage, yet some damage was done. That such a long-continued exertion was possible at that age is strange ; and it was, I think, impossible that it could have been gone through without leaving certain imperfect developments of structure.
[After the visit to Switzerland] came the breakdown in health caused by writing the Principles of Psychology. If, as above inferred, the vascular system at large, and more especially its central organ, had been injured, it seems an implication that the collapse which occurred under this moderate stress of work would not otherwise have taken place. From that time onwards throughout the rest of my life I have never had a sound night. Always my sleep, very inadequate in quantity, has been a succession of bits : not the broken sleep resulting from an occasional turning over while half awake, but having fre- quent breaks with no sense of sleepiness, and long intervals with no sleep at all. Always I dropped off without prelim- inary sense that I was about to do so, and always when I woke I was broad awake. Only during recent years (say after seventy- five) have I approached the normal state, in so far as that is indicated by feeling sleepy before going to sleep and after waking.
I have said that for eighteen months I did nothing. Even reading a column of a newspaper brought on a sensation of fulness in the head ; and when, in the winter of 1856-7, I at length undertook to \vrite the article on " Progress : its Law and Cause," the effort entailed was very trying. Still the result \vas beneficial, and from that time onwards, little by little, I resumed work.
It seems strange that with this nervous disability, accom- panied by nights of three, four, or five hours sleep made up of many parts, I should have maintained -what seemed to be good health. There was no failure of muscular strength. My usual practice was to run up three flights of stairs two steps at a time, and I remember noting that this habit remained easy to me on my sixtieth birthday. The essential cause was that my digestion remained good. Throughout preceding life I had never been to any extent troubled by dyspepsia, and this eupeptic state continued onwards after my break-down. The first indication of any lack of full digestive power was that, when forty, I found veal at a late dinner was no longer desirable. From that time onwards there has been no kind of food which I have avoided on the ground of indigestibility : my diet even down to this late
APP. A.] Physical Traits and Some Sequences 531
period including dishes which many people in middle life would shrink from. Of course the ability to obtain a good supply of blood has gone far towards compensating for the evils entailed by bad nights. Repair of the tissues goes on during waking hours as well as during sleep ; and sleep serves simply to give opportunity for making up arrears of repair and, especially, to give extra opportunity for repair 'to the heart. Hence it results that a comparatively small amount of sleep with good blood well circulated suffices — suffices better than a long sleep with a slow circulation and poor blood.
A partial ability to continue my work was the consequence. All through the period during which the Synthetic Philosophy was in hand, there was never any lack of power to think, and never any reluctance to think. Though my working time was so limited in duration (being checked by the rise of sensations in the head and a consciousness that mischief would result from perseverance) yet during this abridged period the process of dictating was in no degree restrained by a sense of effort or of disinclination ; and had I not known that disaster would follow I should have been ready to resume in the afternoon. The constitution had adjusted itself to the abnormal conditions, and the functions of all kinds went on within the prescribed bounds without apparent strain.
It is a question of some interest whether the state of things was injurious or otherwise to my work. Of course had I not lived beyond the usual age, part of it would have remained undone ; but having lived long enough to complete it (or all but a non-essential part of it), it seems possible that the slow rate of progress, giving opportunity for more quiet thinking than there would have been had I worked at the ordinary rate, was beneficial.
Thus far the ~ accounts of my physical nature and of the incidents which profoundly affected it, have concerned the part of my life which extended to 1882. Then there came an incident, further illustrating the rashness I have described and leaving no benefit but only enormous evil. I refer to the initiation of the Anti-Aggression League, and the effects pro- duced on my health.
Up to that time I had abided by my resolution not to enter into any public activity ; knowing that my state of brain was one which forbade any stress. But now the interest I felt in resisting our filibustering actions was such as to over-ride my resolution. Not that I thought of joining in a continued agita- tion. I thought that after the League had been set afloat I might retire, and assist only by name and money.
And now there began to be shown in more manifest ways the cardiac damage, and damage to the spinal cord, which had been left by my boyish exploit. I had to diminish my work, and year by year there came a diminution of the distance
532 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. A.
which I could walk without damage. Every now and then, with my constitutional imprudence, I exceeded the limit of work or exercise, and thereafter made both of them smaller, until, in 1886, came the final break-down. Thereafter for some years I was obliged to desist from the Synthetic Philosophy. . . .
Having returned to a higher level of health I resumed writ- ing the Philosophy, of which more than two volumes were still [in 1888] unwritten. Ensuing years witnessed the same general course of life — improvements for a time, relapses consequent on exceeding the amount of exertion bodily or mental which my state allowed, and then long periods during which very little or nothing could be done. The variations were great. From 1890 to 1896 there were times during which I was able to dictate a considerable amount each morning ; to walk up and down- stairs ; to sit at table to meals (except breakfast, which I had taken in bed since 1886) ; to drive to the Athenaeum ; and, when up to high water- mark, to play a game of billiards there. But always after a while some adverse incident — a little too much exertion, or a little too much talk, or a little too much work — brought me down again. And now, since the completion of the Synthetic Philosophy, the low level has become settled.
During these later years, when capable of any work, my dictation (according to Mr. Troughton) has amounted some- times to two periods of ten minutes each during the morning, and sometimes to three. Reading for more than a few minutes at a time is mischievous, and listening to reading has to be restricted to fragments. It has been so even with music. Even so simple a thing as looking at illustrations in monthly maga- zines is too much for me unless taken in portions. Sometimes things have considerably improved, as at Bepton, in 1900, when I could walk about the garden a little ; while at other times, as in the spring of 1901 and again during the present autumn (1902) I have been mainly confined to bed, even the extra effort entailed by reclining on a sofa being too much. To all appear- ance this state of things will become more pronounced, and infirmities of other kinds, which have during these last years added to my troubles, will make such part of my life as remains still more to be dreaded.
533
APPENDIX B.
NOTE. — When there occurred to me the thought of writing a brief intellectual history of myself I hesitated for some time : doubting whether it would be of any service. Now that it has been completed, however, I am glad that I undertook it. Placing the facts in order of genesis has had the effect of revealing to me some significant connexions of ideas I was previously un- conscious of ; and I infer that, if to me the narrative has yielded information, it is likely to yield still more to others. As eluci- dating the natural evolution of a theory, such information may not be without its use.
At the same time some aid may be given to those who have not yet made acquaintance with my books. I would suggest that for such the best course will be to read first a number of the Essays, beginning with the more popular ; then to read the little book on Education ; then The Study of Sociology ; and then the pages which here follow. A sketch plan of an unex- plored region is always convenient for guidance, and this u Filiation of Ideas " may serve as a sketch plan of the Synthetic Philosophy.
February, 1899.
THE FILIATION OF IDEAS.1
A COMPLETE biography should give an account not only of a man's career and conduct but also of his mental development, emotional and intellectual, and of the products of that develop- ment. Something is not unfrequently done towards delineating the evolution of character, but not much is done towards intel- lectual history, explaining the genesis of ideas and the elabora- tions of them. Such a history cannot to much purpose be given by any one but the man himself, and it has not commonly happened that the man himself has thought of giving it.
I have already, in the Autobiography, indicated stages of thought, and shown the origins of certain leading ideas ; but I have done this only in a fragmentary way, and much of the detail required to make the account coherent has been unmen-
1 The footnotes within square brackets have been inserted mainly to assist reference to the Life and Letters.
534 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
tioned. Then, beyond the fact that these indications do not form a continuous whole there is the fact that they are limited to the first half of my life. Hence the decision to narrate in full, so far as is possible, the successive steps, and also to describe the peculiarities of constitution, culture, and circum- stance, which have been influential. One significant result will, I believe, be that of showing how large a part emotional nature plays in determining the intellectual activities, and how it enters as an important factor into the resulting convictions.
The events of childhood and boyhood, narrated elsewhere, indicate to how small an extent authority swayed me. The disobedience, so perpetually complained of, was the correlative of irreverence for governing agencies. This natural trait operated throughout life, tending to make me pay little atten- tion to the established opinion on any matter which came up for judgment, and tending to leave me perfectly free to inquire without restraint.
The nature thus displayed was rather strengthened than otherwise by my father's habit of speculating about causes, and appealing to my judgment with the view of exercising my powers of thinking. By occasional questions of this kind he strengthened that self-asserting nature of which he had at other times reason to complain, but he did not apparently perceive this. Meanwhile he cultivated a consciousness of Cause — made the thought of Cause a familiar one. The discovery of cause is through analysis — the pulling to pieces phenomena for the purpose of ascertaining what are the essential connexions among them. Hence one who is in the habit of seeking causes is in the habit of analyzing. I have up to this time regarded my father as more synthetic than analytic : being led to do so by his perpetual occupation with synthetic geometry. But now, on reconsidering the facts, I see that he was in large measure analytic. He was a great adept at making solutions of puzzles, verbal or physical ; and this evidently implies analysis. Moreover, that analysis of articulations implied by his system of shorthand, exhibited the faculty.
No doubt this habit of mind, inherited from him and fostered by him, flourished the more in the absence of the ordinary appeals to supernatural causes. Though my father retained the leading religious convictions, yet he never appeared to regard any occurrences as other than natural. It should also be remarked that dogmatic teaching played small part in my education. Linguistic culture is based on authority, and as I rebelled against it, the acceptance of things simply on authority was not habitual. On the other hand, the study of Mathematics (conspicuously Geometry and Mechanics), with which my youth was mainly occupied, appeals, at each step in a demonstration,
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 535
to private judgment, and in a sense recognizes the right of private judgment. Many times, too, I assisted in experiments with the air-pump and the electrical machine ; so that ideas of physical causation were repeatedly impressed on me. More- over such small knowledge of natural history as I gained by rearing insects, tended to familiarize me with natural genesis.
I have elsewhere named, as early established, the habit of castle-building, carried to a great extent ; and I have expressed the belief that this was a useful exercise of the imagination — not reminiscent imagination, but constructive imagination. Another trait, not thus far named, and which I inherited from my father, was a dominant ideality, showing itself in a love of perfection. In him this love was so strong that it became a hindrance. He could not let a thing alone as being finished. With me the desire to make work better, though pronounced, has not gone to that excess. Still, I have never been able to rest satisfied with anything incomplete. This has been shown in the re- peated improvements of expression : correction, again correc- tion, and yet again correction, has been the history of most of my books. The love of completeness has been curiously shown from the beginning by the habit of summarizing every chapter. I could not leave a thing with loose ends : the ends must be gathered together and tied up. This trait has been further manifested in the tendency not to rest content with induction, but to continue an inquiry until the generalization reached was reduced to a deduction. Leaving a truth in an inductive form is, in a sense, leaving its parts with loose ends ; and the bringing it to a deductive form is, in a sense, uniting its facts as all parts of one fact.
A general result of these natural traits and this kind of culture was an attitude of detachment. The absence of those studies, linguistic and historical, which form so large a part of the ordinary education, left me free from the bias given by the plexus of traditional ideas and sentiments. This detachment had the same kind of effect as the detachment from surrounding authorities. All influences thus conspired to make me entirely open to receive those impressions and ideas produced by direct converse with things. Elsewhere I have referred to the fact that when thirteen, spite of the high authorities against me, I denied the existence of inertia as a positive force ; and have instanced it as showing unusual independence of judgment, at the same time that it implied an unusual intuition of physical truths. These two traits, joined with a constructive imagination unusually active, and a great love of completeness, may be considered as forming my positive mental equipment at the outset ; to which there should be added the negative equip- ment, if it may be so called, of absence of culture in " the humanities."
536 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
But I must not forget another trait of nature — a relative liking for thought in contrast with a relative aversion to action. My physical constitution did not yield such overflow of energy as prompts some natures to spontaneous activity. In many directions action was entered upon rather reluctantly ; while thinking was a pleasure. Obviously this predominant tendency to contemplation has been a factor in my career.
Letters written home when, at the age of seventeen, I com- menced engineering in London, show an excursiveness charac- teristic of me. There are, I see, some ideas respecting the expansion of steam in relation to its heat, which, quite wrong in their preliminary assumptions, imply the absurd supposition that the question had not been fully worked out by those who were competent. I refer to these as showing both the self- confidence and the tendency to explore in the field of physics : the idea of natural causation being dominant. The daily pro- fessional culture in surveying and making drawings of machinery, of course conduced to exact thinking ; ever impressing on me geometrical truths and the necessities of relation.
When, after nearly a year, I migrated to the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway, influences of the same class continued in operation. But I observe here coming out the trait above named — preference for thinking to acting. The first original thing I did was devising a new method of drawing the curves in skew arches ; and the prompting motive was aversion from taking much trouble. Subsequent promptings to invention had the same origin. The Scale of Equivalents originated from my dislike to the labour of reducing a set of dimensions taken in inches and eighths into hundredths of a foot ; and though I do not trace to that cause the invention I called a Velocimeter, which also is a means of dispensing with calcula- tion, yet the consciousness of such labour, gone through by a coadjutor, directed my thoughts into the channel which led to it. Other devices, dating from that time, illustrated the same excursiveness, self-dependence, and constructive imagination. The latter part of my first engineering period brought me a good deal in contact with men and with business ; and, being left in charge of some engineering work and allowed to carry out my own designs, there was a further familiarizing with mechanical truths and a further fostering of self-dependence. But here must be noted a significant fact. I became interested in geology, and bought Lyell's Principles, etc. The result of reading this was that, rejecting his adverse arguments, I adopted the hypothesis of development, which ever after influenced my thoughts. I was then twenty.
During this time at Worcester politics received no attention from me. But when, after the ending of my engagement on the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway, I returned to Derby,
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 537
a change took place in this respect ; and in June, 1842, my thoughts on political matters resulted in the letters to The Non- conformist on " The Proper Sphere of Government " — a some- what strange subject for a young man of twenty-two to enter upon. The general tenor of these letters betrays the emotional leanings. Individuality was pronounced in all members of the family, and pronounced individuality is necessarily more or less at variance with authority. A self-dependent and self-asserting nature resists all such government as is not expressive of equit- able restraint. Our family was essentially a dissenting family ; and dissent is an expression of antagonism to arbitrary control. Of course a wish to limit State-action is a natural concomitant ; and this characterized the letters on " The Proper Sphere of Government." Beyond this constitutional tendency, here first illustrated, there was shown the tendency to regard social phenomena as subordinate to natural law : the two tendencies being, in an indirect way, correlatives. Already in those early days the culture I have described had fostered the belief that in society as in the world at large, there are uniformities of relation ; and national life was vaguely thought of as a life having certain similarities to life at large. Though it had not yet taken shape, there was a dim idea of a social organism.
During the several subsequent years — years of miscellaneous and futile activities mainly spent over inventions, but partly in speculations, political, ethical, linguistic, showing as always the excursive tendency, and during which there 'was some art- culture — drawing, modelling, and music — there is little to be noted save accentuation of traits already shown. One matter, however, of some significance must be named. From the time when, at about the age of eleven, I heard a series of lectures on phrenology by Spurzheim, who was going through the country diffusing the doctrines of Gall, I had been a believer in phreno- logy. Though when twenty-one to twenty-four my scepticism had not risen to the height it eventually reached, yet, as might be anticipated, I entertained sundry phrenological heresies, and expressed them in articles published in a quarterly journal called The Zoist.1 Two of these I need not name ; the third had results. It appeared in January, 1844, under the title " A New View of the Functions of Imitation and Benevolence." The essential points in the argument were that the function of the organ called Imitation is to produce sympathy and that sympathy is the root of benevolence. Years afterwards I learned that the genesis of benevolence by sympathy had been expounded by Adam Smith ; but in 1844 I knew his name only as the writer of The Wealth of Xations.
During the second engineering period not much specula-
\_Snpra, chap, iv., pp. 40, 45.]
538 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
tive activity went on. There were devices for diminishing monotonous labour and there was the ever-present thought of improvement. From the one cause resulted the little appliance for facilitating the plotting of sections ; and from the other the improved levelling-staff and the proposed new type of level. Here, as always, instead of accepting the settled usages, as most do, the fact that they were settled usages had no influence with me.
Though there must have been filiations of the various mechanical ideas which prompted my activities between the time (1846) when my railway career ended and the time (1848) when my literary career began, yet I cannot recall them. There was a little invention, the binding pin, by which I made some money : there was the planing machinery by which I lost it ; and there were sundry ideas which did not reach the experimental stage. But new ideas of some kind daily occupied me.
During all this second engineering period there had, I doubt not, been going on some development of the ideas set forth in the letters on " The Proper Sphere of Government." That governmental actions should be definitely restricted was a con- clusion which in these letters stood without a satisfactory basis. What ultimate principle is it from which may be inferred the limits of State-action ? Analysis was required. The excogita- tion of this principle and the perception that not only these limits, but also the requirements of equity at large could be deduced from it, prompted the writing of Social Statics. This was commenced five years after the letters on " The Proper Sphere of Government " had been written. Let me add that during the interval there had been going on that political activity entailed by membership of the Complete Suffrage Union and advocacy of the doctrine of equal political rights : a kind of activity and a kind of exercised sentiment which kept in mind the principle Social Statics elaborated.
Concerning Social Sfatics itself there are various noteworthy things to be said. There is no invoking of authorities. A few references, mostly dissentient, are made to ethical and political writers whose well-known doctrines I had gathered in the course of miscellaneous reading — not from their books ; for I never could read books the cardinal principles of which I rejected. The course pursued in this case as in others was to go back to the facts as presented in human conduct and society, and draw inferences direct from them.
In fulfilment of the desire for ideal completeness there was, at the outset, a presentation of the entire field to be covered by a system of ethics. In pursuance of the ordinary conception theologically derived, ethics had been composed of interdicts of many desired actions and inculcations of actions not desired.
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 539
Ethical teaching had given little or no moral sanction to pleasurable activities. If not tacitly frowned upon, they were certainly not enjoined. But in the programme with which Social Statics begins — a programme corresponding with that ultimately adopted in The Principles of Ethics — there was a division recognizing the ethical sanction of those actions required for the fulfilment of the normal functions of life, and for the obtainment of those pleasures accompanying the normal functions. There was an assertion of the moral claims of the individual to natural satisfactions within specified limits.
And here, in going afresh over the facts, I observe some- thing of which at the time I was not definitely conscious — that the first principle formulated was simply an abstract statement of the conditions under which might equitably be pursued by each that self-satisfaction just insisted upon as ethically war- ranted. It was an assertion of that liberty, within limits, to pursue the ends of life, which was implied in the assertion that enjoyment of the ends of life is moral. And this leads to a remark of some interest concerning the mode in which this principle was approached. For thirty years I supposed myself the first to enunciate this doctrine of the liberty of each limited only by the like liberties of all — the right of every man to do what he wills so long as he does not trench upon the similar rights of any other man. But after the lapse of that time I learned, from a reference in Mind, that Kant had enun- ciated this principle. After some trouble I found his enuncia- tion ; and then it became manifest that Kant had reached the principle from the opposite side. He had specified the limits to the free action of the individual, leaving the free action as a thing not itself to be asserted but rather to be tacitly implied in the assertion of limits. I, contrariwise, had primarily asserted the claim of each to free action, and had secondarily asserted the limits arising from the presence of others having similar claim to free action. The two modes of reaching this con- clusion are significant of the difference between the social states of Germany and England, and also significant of the individual difference. Kant, native of a country in which sub- ordination to authority had been all along very marked, looked at this matter from the side of restraint — individual action was to be restrained within certain limits. And while the limits were made authoritative, there was no corresponding authorita- tiveness claimed for the right of free action. With me, the converse happened. Being one of a race much more habitu- ated to individual freedom, the primary assertion was that of a claim to free action — not a recognition of subordinations, but the assertion of a right subject to certain subordinations. And while this opposite method of conceiving the matter was characteristic of a citizen of a relatively free country, it was more especially characteristic of one in whom the maintenance
54° Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
of individuality had always been so dominant. I emphasize this contrast as clearly showing the extent to which the emotional nature influences the intellectual conclusions.
The next fact to be named is, that there was now displayed the tendency to pass from induction to deduction. The views I had expressed respecting the limitation of State action to certain spheres and exclusion of it from other spheres were lying all abroad : each standing on its own merits as an inde- pendent belief. Dissatisfaction with that condition of thought led to the search for an ultimate principle from which the limitations were deducible ; and this when found proved to be a principle from which were also deducible the various so-called rights. The whole ethical scheme, in so far as justice is con- cerned, had been reduced to a completely deductive, and con- sequently quite coherent, form satisfying the love of ideal completeness.
Another significant fact is, that throughout the whole argu- ment there is tacitly assumed the process of Evolution, in so far as human nature is concerned. There is a perpetual assump- tion of the moral modifiability of Man, and the progressive adaptation of his character to the social state. It is alleged that his moral evolution depends on the development of sym- pathy, which is held to be the root of both justice and bene- ficence. This change of mental nature is ascribed to the exercise of the sympathetic emotions consequent upon a peace- ful social life, and, therefore, tacitly implies the inheritance of functionally-produced changes of structure. There is also a passing recognition of Survival of the Fittest. The beneficence of the process by which, among animals and men, the inferior disappear and leave the superior to continue the race, is asserted ; but there is no recognition of the consequences seen by Mr. Darvvin.
In the last chapter, entitled " General Considerations," the evolutionary conception is distinctly brought out in many ways. Civilization is described as a continuous moulding of human beings to the social state, and of the social state to the human beings as they become moulded : the two acting and reacting. Along with this there is recognized the analogy between a society formed of individuals and an animal formed of living cells or units ; though at that time (1850) the hypothesis that an animal is thus formed was, when here and there hinted, regarded as an absurdity. Along with the conception of this analogy of ultimate components bet\veen the social organism and the individual organism, there went another which proved of far greater significance. How I came by the idea that a low type of animal consists of numerous like parts performing like functions, while a high type of animal consists of re- latively few unlike parts performing unlike functions, I do not remember. It may have been from Professor Kymer Jones's
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 541
Animal Kingdom ; for some of the facts cited are, I think, from that work. But wherever this general truth came from, I immediately recognized the parallelism between it and the truth presented by low and high types of societies. This was the earliest foreshadowing of the general doctrine of Evolution.
For the perception that there is a progress from a uniform to a multiform structure, and that this progress is the same in an individual organism and in a social organism, was a recog- nition of the progress from the homogeneous to the hetero- geneous, though no such words were used. I had at that time no thought of any extension of the idea ; but evidently there was the germ which was presently to develop. I should add that the acquaintance which I accidently made with Coleridge's essay on the Idea of Life, in which he set forth, as though it were his own, the notion of Schelling, that Life is the tendency to individuation, had a considerable effect. In this same chapter it is referred to as illustrated alike in the individuation of a living organism, and also in the individuation of a society as it progresses.
Shortly before, or immediately after, the publication of Social Statics, I made the acquaintance of Mr. G. H. Lewes at one of Chapman's soirees. We became mutually interested, and walked towards our homes together. I remember the incident because conversation during the walk having turned upon the Develop- ment Question, I surprised Mr. Le\ves by rejecting the view set forth in the Vestiges of the Xatural History of Creation, which he supposed to be the only view, and asserting the view that func- tional adaptation is the sole cause of development. I name the fact as showing what my belief was at the close of 1850 or beginning of 1851.
Nothing noteworthy in the development of ideas occurred during that period of mental inertia which followed the publica- tion of Social Statics. I think it probable, however, that further materials for thought were afforded by the lectures of Professor Owen on Comparative Osteology, given at the College of Sur- geons, which I attended. Along with a mass of details, there were presented to me certain general facts which were sug- gestive. An hypothesis sets up a process of organization in thoughts previously lying unorganized. The effect is analogous to that which results when a sperm-cell is added to a germ-cell. In the facts as exhibited throughout Professor Owen's lectures, there were many illustrations of the truth that the skeletons of low types of animals are relatively uniform in their structures — showing what he then and at other times used to call " vegeta- tive repetition." I could not accept his Platonic notion of an ideal vertebra, of which he considered each actual vertebra an embodiment ; but his facts illustrated progress from the uniform to the multiform in the course of osteological organization. I do not remember that I thought anything to that effect, but
542 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
here were materials for further development of the conception illustrated at the close of Social Statics.
The acquaintance made with Mr. G. H. Lewes was followed by two country excursions which we made together in the autumn of 1851 — the first up the Thames Valley from Maiden- head as far as Abingdon, and the other in Kent, in the neigh- bourhood of Maidstone. They were accompanied by a great deal of philosophic talk. One effect, as indicated in George Eliot's Life, was to give him an active scientific interest. Another effect was that a leaf I gathered suggested to me certain facts of plant-structure : recognition of the Law of Organic Symmetry being the ultimate consequence.1 During the second excursion I made acquaintance with a little book just published by Milne-Edwards, which we looked into on board the steamer carrying us to Gravesend. It set forth the luminous idea of u the physiological*division of labour." Though the conception was not new to me, for it was illustrated at the close of Social Statics, yet this phrase, expressing an analogy between individual organizations and social organizations in so vivid a manner, gave greater distinctness to pre-existing thoughts. The reading of Lewes's Biographical History of Philosophy, which resulted from my acquaintance with him, did not, so far as I remember, give origin to any special ideas ; but it gave me an interest in philosophical and pyschological inquiries greater than had before existed. Presentation of the doctrines of various schools throughout the past served, not so much as a means of acquiring their thoughts as a means of stimulating my own thoughts, and this effect began presently to show itself.
During the first months of 1852 the essay on the " Theory of Population " occupied me. Chapman, then proprietor of the Westminster Review, to whom I had on some occasion expressed my view respecting the decrease of fertility which goes along with higher development, had been anxious to have an article on the subject. I at first declined for the assigned reason that I proposed to write a book about the matter. Subsequently circumstances decided me to accede to Chapman's proposal, and the article was written for the April number. Here again was illustrated the truth that a germinal idea thrown among unorganized materials sets up organization. The notion had been present with me, certainly from 1846-7, and how much earlier I do not know.2 But now the working hypothesis soon caused such knowledge as I had to take shape, and gave the power of rapidly assimilating other knowledge. Support was found in the doctrine of individuation above named ; for a thesis running throughout the essay is that individuation and reproduction are antagonistic — a formula
1 [Suflra, chap, vi., p. 63.] - \Sufira, chap, vi., p. 64.]
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 543
which, expressed in physical terms, as I should in later days have expressed it, is equivalent to — Integration and Disintegra- tion are antagonistic. A collateral effect of the reading of Coleridge's essay on the Idea of Life was that of making me seek a better definition of Life than " the tendency to Individuation." Hence resulted the definition given in that essay — the coordination of actions. Though a better one, this formula was incomplete because it limited the conception to actions going on within the organism, without reference to those external actions which they are adjusted to.
As narrated elsewhere, this essay on " The Theory of Population " led to my friendship with Huxley.1 I name the fact here because within a few weeks of its commencement there was an incident which fixes the date of one of my beliefs. I had suggested an introduction to Lewes, and had taken Huxley to Bedford Place, x Kensington, where Lewes then resided. On our way back the discussion turned on the Development question, and he ridiculed the notion of a chain of beings. I said that I no more accepted that symbol than he did, and that a tree was the true symbol. How long I had thought this I do not know ; but the incident shows that before that time there had arisen a belief which we shall presently see pervaded other speculations. It is observable that this conception of divergent and redivergent branches implies the conception of increasing multiformity or heterogeneity — one thing giving origin to many things : the thoughts are manifestly akin.
Persuaded by Lewes, who was at that time literary editor of the Leader (a paper which died a few years afterwards), I wrote for it a series of short essays under the title of uThe Haythorne Papers " — a name given as a bracket holding them together. They show the usual excursiveness, and a tendency everywhere to analyze and to generalize. The second of them, entitled u The Development Hypothesis," was of fundamental significance.2 It shows that in 1852 the belief in organic evolu- tion had taken deep root, and had drawn to itself a large amount of evidence — evidence not derived from numerous special instances but derived from the general aspects of organic nature, and from the necessity of accepting the hypo- thesis of Evolution when the hypothesis of Special Creation has been rejected. The Special Creation belief had dropped out of my mind many years before, and I could not remain in a suspended state : -acceptance of the only conceivable alternative was peremptory. This distinct and public enunciation of the belief was but a giving definite form to thoughts which had been gradually growing, as was shown in Social Statics.
[Supra, chap, vi., p. 65.] -' [6'«.t>ra, chap, vi., p. 65.]
544 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
From this time onwards the evolutionary interpretation of things in general became habitual, and manifested itself in curious ways. One would not have expected to find it in an essay on u The Philosophy of Style " ; but at the close of that essay, written in 1852, the truth that progress in style is from uniformity to multiformity — from a more homogeneous to a more heterogeneous form — finds expression : showing that in mental products, too, the distinctive nature of high structure was beginning to be recognized. The progress of thought in another direction was shown in an essay on " The Universal Postulate."1 I had been reading Mill's Logic. In it occur his strictures on Whewell ; and while agreeing as to the unsound- ness of Whewell's doctrine, I did not agree in the reason for rejecting it. Hence the essay. This involved the first ex- pression of metaphysical convictions ; for the outcome of the argument was a defence of realism and an assertion of the impossibility of establishing any belief at variance with it. Up to this time, thinking with me had been mainly concrete in character, but now it assumed an abstract character ; and thereafter the abstract and the concrete went hand in hand, as the inductive and the deductive were already doing. This essay on u The Universal Postulate " ended in a controversy with Mill, which, taking its first shape in the next edition of his Logic, went on at intervals in an amicable manner for some years and eventually led to our friendship.
In an essay on " Manners and Fashion " developmental ideas again displayed themselves. The origin of institutions by a process of evolution was taken for granted ; and there was delineated the rise of the different kinds of government by divergence from one original kind, which united the cere- monial, the political, and the ecclesiastical. There was also this same idea running throughout the account of the genesis of the different forms of manners from simple original forms — a mulplication of kinds from one kind.
A like trend of thought was shown in "The Art of Education," published in the North British Review (since deceased), and now embodied in my little book on Education. Various evolutionary corollaries were drawn from the proposi- tion that the unfolding of a child's mind repeats the unfolding of the mind in the human race. It was urged that education must proceed "from the simple to the complex," since the mind, " like all things that develop, progresses from the homo- geneous to the heterogeneous." It was contended that the development of mind "is an advance from the indefinite to the definite," and that teaching must follow that course. A further corollary was that as " humanity had progressed solely by self-
1 {Supra, chap, vi., pp. 67, 69, 73.]
A pp. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 545
instruction," "self-development should be encouraged to the uttermost in the child."
About this time, 1854, Miss Martineau's abridged transla- tion of Comte's works was published. I had already gathered a notion of his system from Lewes, who was a disciple and had written in the Leader some papers giving an abstract of it ; and a more specific knowledge of Comte's cardinal ideas had been gained in 1852, from reading the introduction at the instigation of George Eliot, and with her aid. She, too, was anxious that I should accept Posivitist doctrines. But the reading of the Introduction, while it left me undecided respecting the doctrine of the Three Stages, was followed by immediate rejection of the Classification of the Sciences. Now that the translation was published, I looked further into the Positive Philosophy, with the result that I engaged to write a review of it for the British Quarterly. Being an impatient reader, especially when reading views from which I dissent, I did not go far. But the part I read, and which prompted me to write a criticism, had a very important effect. I have said elsewhere that I owe much to Comte — not in the sense assumed by his disciples, but in an opposite sense. I owe to him the benefits of an antagonism which cleared and developed my own view's, while assigning reasons for dissenting from his. Rejection of his ideas concerning the development of the sciences, led to those ideas of my own which are set forth in " The Genesis of Science" ; and these had significant relations to the psychological ideas soon afterwards elaborated. The rise of certain fundamental perceptions and fundamental acts of reasoning was ascribed to gradual organization of experiences. There was a development of the idea of likeness, and out of this the idea of equality and inequality. From the likenesses and unlikenesses of things, a transition to the like- nesses and unlikenesses of relations, was alleged ; and this, leading to recognition of the equality of relations, was repre- sented as the basis of reasoning. Then it was shown that throughout this development divergence and re-divergence go on, causing multiplication and heterogeneity of sciences : the symbol of a tree being here again used. And it was further pointed out that along with differentiation of the sciences there goes increasing interdependence, that is to say, integration. Thus, w-hile there were several traits foreshadowing a psycho- logical theory, there were other traits foreshadowing a general evolutionary conception, in so far as it concerns intelligence and its products.1
In what year I decided to write a book on the Principles of Psychology I do not remember.2 But in 1853, there was reached
1 [Supra, chap, vii., pp. 72, 74.] - [Supra, chap, vi., p. 67.]
35
546 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
one of its leading views, consequent on the perception that the definition of life as " the co-ordination of actions," required to be supplemented by recognition of the relations borne by such co-ordinated actions to connected actions in the environment. There at once followed the idea that the growth of a corre- spondence between inner and outer actions had to be traced up from the beginning ; so as to show the way in which Mind gradually evolves out of Life. This was, I think, the thought which originated the book and gave its most distinctive char- acter ; but evidently, the tendency to regard all things as evolved, which had been growing more pronounced, gave another special interest to the undertaking. The evolutional .view of human nature had been assumed all through Social Statics, and in the essay on "The Development Hypothesis" belief in evolution had been distinctly avowed as holding of the organic creation. The progress of organisms and of societies from the uniform to the multiform had been recog- nized, and the thought of increasing mutual dependence of parts had been accentuated by meeting with Milne- Edwards's phrase " the physiological division of labour." Then came the congruous formula of Von Baer — of development from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous. At the same time had arisen the correlative conception of divergence and rediver- gence, and consequent increasing multiformity, as occurring in organisms, in governmental organizations, and in the genesis of the sciences. Advance from the indefinite to the definite, as displayed in the individual mind and in the mind of humanity, had also been recognized. Thus various ideas, forming com- ponents of a theory of evolution, were lying ready for organiza- tion. And after publication of the essay on u The Genesis of Science," in which the evolutional view of mental progress was so pronounced and coherent, the Principles of Psychology, which for a year or more previously had been taking shape, was com- menced." 1
Under the promptings above described, the part entitled " General Synthesis " was the one to which I first devoted myself ; and it was the writing of this that led to a wider and more coherent conception of evolution. Among the component chapters are some entitled " The Correspondence as direct and Homogeneous," " The Correspondence as direct but Hetero- geneous," " The Integration of Correspondences." Here, then, in another sphere had arisen the recognition of progress from the homogeneous to the heterogenous ; and it was the joining of this with the various previous recognitions which led to the question — Is not change from homogeneity to heterogeneity universal ? The question needed only to be asked to be
1 [Supra, chap, vii., pp. 72, 74.]
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 547
answered affirmatively. In pursuance of that tendency which I have before described as characteristic, there forthwith arose a desire to find for this induction a deductive in- terpretation. This universal proclivity must have a universal cause. What is that cause ? And the answer soon reached was that it is the multiplication of effects. It was at Treport in August, 1854, that this generalization, inductive and deduc- tive, was reached ; * and I immediately decided that as soon as the Principles of Psychology was completed I would write an essay under the title "The Cause of all Progress." Whether I then wrote to Chapman proposing such an article for the Westminster Review, or whether I made the proposal when I saw him in London later in the year, I cannot remember. I think the last is the more probable. Certainly, however, before the close of the year an agreement was made for such an article : the title, however, being negatived by Chapman as appearing too ambitious, and '' Progress : its Law and Cause " being substituted.
Of course the evolution of mind thus traced up throughout the Animal Kingdom as a part of the progressive correspon- dence between inner and outer actions, could be made clear only by various sequent interpretations. Hence resulted the chapters on " The Nature of Intelligence " and " The Law of Intelligence." After these more abstract conceptions came the more concrete conceptions of Reflex Action, Instinct and Reason as conforming to the general view. Finally, on rising up to human faculties, regarded as organized results of this intercourse between the organism and the environment, there was reached the conclusion that the so-called forms of thought are the outcome of the process of perpetually adjusting inner relations to outer relations ; fixed relations in the environment producing fixed relations in the mind. And so came a recon- ciliation of the a priori view with the experiential view. The whole theory of mental development as thus presented, assumed that the correspondence between inner and outer came to be gradually established because the effects registered in the nervous systems of one generation were more or less trans- mitted as modifications of the nervous systems in the next generation. Though, nowadays, I see that the natural selection of variations in the nervous system has been a factor, and, in the earliest stages, perhaps the most important factor, yet I still hold, as I then held, that the inheritance of functionally- wrought modifications is the chief and almost exclusive factor in the genesis of all the more complex instincts and all the higher mental powers. But the evolutionary view of mind, though manifested throughout the whole argument of these
1 [Supra, chap, vii., p. 75.]
548 Lije of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
chapters, was not put into the foreground ; partly, I suppose, because the evolutionary view of Life in general was at that time almost universally rejected and mostly ridiculed.
The thesis elaborated in the division entitled " Special Ana- lysis " was suggested by the conclusions reached in the essay on " The Genesis of Science," respecting the development of the ideas of equality of things and equality of relations. It needs but to read that essay to see that this conception of growing intellectual perceptions arose in the course of a search for the initial ideas of science ; and, on comparison, it will be manifest that the successive chapters of this " Special Analysis " are but an elaboration of that initial thought. Here the remarkable fact to be noted is that there has, unintentionally as I believe, resulted a complete correspondence between the General Syn- thesis and the Special Analysis — between the putting together and the taking to pieces ; for the adjustment of inner relations to outer relations, posited in the one case, is, in the other case, the root down to which the mental structure is traced. Con- cerning the conclusions which make up the " Special Analysis " one only calls for separate mention — the paradoxical one that Logic, hitherto regarded as a subjective science, is in reality an objective science. Authority and long usage may give such strength to a belief that no disproof changes it. I have fur- nished a triple demonstration of the objective nature of Logic, but the old idea persists without even a sign of change.
As stated in the preface to the volume when published in July, 1855, there was omitted a final part which would have been called, as in after years it was called, " Physical Synthesis." In this I had intended to show the way in which these evolu- tionary mental processes are to be interpreted as resulting from the passage of nervous discharges along lines of least resistance, which became lines of less and less resistance in proportion as they were oftener and more strongly traversed.
Concerning the ideas of this work it remains only to add that in the u General Analysis " was set forth the logical justifi- cation of that Realism without which the evolutionary view, in common with scientific views at large, becomes inconceivable. It was an elaboration of the Universal Postulate and its corol- laries : the general thesis being that Idealism takes for granted at every step of its argument the validity of that test-proof which it ends by tacitly denying.
After the interval of incapacity for work extending from July, 1855 to January, 1857 ; I at length prepared the long-contem- plated essay on " Progress : its Law and Cause."1 This was published in April, 1857 ; and in it the general conception which
1 [Supra, chap, vii., p. 83.]
APP. B.] Tke Filiation of Ideas 549
had been reached in August, 1854, was set forth in detail. Here may fitly be remarked a disproof of the statement not uncom- monly made that my thinking has been a priori. Besides many other evidences, the genesis of this essay is a clear demonstra- tion to the contrary. Progress from homogeneity to hetero- geneity was observed now in one class of phenomena and now in another, until the instances had become many and varied. Only then came the generalization that this transformation is universal ; and only then did there commence a search for the ultimate truth from which the induction might be deduced. But in some men — and especially so was it in Huxley — the hatred of deductive reasoning is such that the mere fact that an induction can be interpreted deductively arouses doubt. The rhythm of action and reaction necessarily carries opinion to extremes ; and the reaction against a priori reasoning in Biology and Geology, had gone to the extreme of repudiating all reason- ing but the a posteriori.
The origin of the next step I cannot remember. Whether it was that on contemplating the multiplication of effects there arose the question — How does there arise the first effect ? — I do not know. But a short time after the publication of the above - named essay, came perception of the truth that a state of homogenity is an unstable state. In an article originally called by me " Transcendental Physiology," but entitled by the editor " The Ultimate Laws of Physiology," a statement of this general truth was published in the National Review for October, 1857.1 This generalization was not like the other inductively reached, but was, I think, deductive from the outset : resulted from the prosecution of analysis. But though not forced upon me by observation it was, in the essay named, exemplified by facts of various orders : the deduction was here verified by induction. At the same time was set forth the process of integration as part of the process of evolution, both organic and social. But, as in the Principles of Psychology so here, it made its appearance as a subordinate or secondary process — was not recognized as a primary process. The development of thought in this direction was delayed until some seven years had passed.
During the same summer, while rambling in Scotland, there was written another essay, evolutionary in substance though not professedly forming a part of the doctrine — the essay on u The Origin and Function of Music." How there had arisen the belief that music results from development and idealization of those cadences of the voice which indicate emotion, I cannot remember. But it shows again the ever-present belief in natural genesis — the growth of the complex out of the simple. There had probably suggested itself the question — Where does
\Supra, chap, vii., p. 83.]
55° Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
music come from ? and in default of the theory of supernatural endowment, the origin set forth seemed the only possible one.
The drift of thought thus so variously displayed, was now made still more decided by re-reading my essays while prepar- ing them for publication in a volume : and thereupon followed the final result.1 During a walk one fine Sunday morning (or perhaps it may have been New Year's Day) in the Christmas of 1857-8 I happened to stand by the side of a pool along which a gentle breeze was bringing small waves to the shore at my feet. While watching these undulations I was led to think of other undulations — other rhythms ; and probably, as my manner was, remembere'd extreme cases — the undulations of the ether, and the rises and falls in the prices of money, shares, and com- modities. In the course of the walk arose the inquiry — Is not the rhythm of motion universal ? and the answer soon reached was — Yes. Presently — either forthwith or in the course of the next few days — came a much more important result. This generalization concerning the rhythm of motion recalled the generalization which was to have been set forth in the unwritten part of the Principles of Psychology — the generalization that motion universally takes place along the line of least resistance. Moreover there had become familiar to me the doctrine of the Conservation of Force, as it was then called — in those days a novelty ; and with this was joined in my mind Sir William Groves's doctrine of the correlation of the physical forces. Of course these universal principles ranged themselves alongside the two universal principles I had been recently illustrating — the instability of the homogeneous and the multiplication of effects. As, during the preceding year, I had been showing how throughout all orders of phenomena, from nebular genesis to the genesis of language, science, art, there ever goes on a change of the simple into the complex, of the uniform into the multiform, there naturally arose the thought — these various universal truths are manifestly aspects of one universal trans- formation. Surely, then, the proper course is thus to exhibit them — to treat astronomy, geology, biology, psychology, soci- ology and social products, in successive order from the evolu- tion point of view. Evidently these universal laws of force to which conforms this unceasing redistribution of matter and motion, constitute the nexus of these concrete sciences — express a community of nature which binds them together as parts of a whole. And then came the idea of trying thus to present them. Some such thoughts they were which gave rise to my project, and which, a few days later, led to the writing out
\Supra, chap, viii., p. 85.]
A PP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 551
of the original programme, still extant.. This I sent to my father on the 9th January, 1858.1
During the subsequent two years, partly occupied with vain endeavours to find some way of executing my project, there appears to have taken place some elaboration of this pro- gramme ; but, so far as I remember, no important addition was made to its leading ideas ; unless it be the conclusion that these laws of transformation, and the ultimate physical laws whence they result, are all corollaries from the Persistence of Force. This may, however, have been a later conclusion, but, when- ever arrived at, it implied the analytic habit ; since it gave an answer to the questions — Why is the homogeneous unstable ? Why do effects multiply ? Why is motion rhythmical ? There was no rest till there was reached this final truth not to be transcended — a truth equivalent to the truth that existence can neither arise out of nothing nor lapse into nothing.
The evolutionary belief implied interest in all orders of phenomena throughout which, according to its thesis, it should be displayed. Hence physical astronomy became interesting. During many preceding years the Nebular Hypothesis had been apparently discredited by the revelations of Lord Rosse's telescope : the resolution of various apparent nebulae into clusters of stars, was supposed to have given the Coup de grace to the theories of Kant and Laplace ; or, at any rate, it was concluded that all such support as appeared to be furnished by the present existence of nebulous matter was dissipated. It was supposed that these luminous patches which powerful telescopes proved to consist of enormous numbers of stars, were remote sidereal systems similar to our own. Of course under these circumstances I was prompted to look into the evidence, and was soon convinced that the reasoning assigned for this conclusion was vicious. This led to the essay on u Recent Astronomy and the Nebular Hypothesis," published in the Westminster Review for July, 1858. It contained proofs that the current conclusion was untrue, and that these clusters of stars form parts of our own sidereal system. This has since become an accepted doctrine. The invalidity of the reason for reject- ing the nebular hypothesis at large having been shown, there
1 [In reply to questions from Professor A. S. Packard, of Brown University, Providence, Spencer wrote (15 August, 1902) : " I believe you are right in crediting me with the introduction of the word 'evolution.' I did not, however, introduce it in the place of 'epigenesis,' or any word of specially biological application, but as a word fit for expressing the process of evolution throughout its entire range, inorganic and organic.
" I believe the introduction of it was between 1857, when ' Progress : its Law and Cause ' (was issued), and the time when the scheme for the Synthetic Philosophy was drawn up ; and the adoption of it arose from the perception that 'progress' has an anthropocentnc meaning, and that there needed a word free from that."]
552 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
followed an exposition of the reasons for believing in the nebular genesis of the solar system. Additional reasons of significance were assigned. One of them was that according to the ratio between centrifugal force and gravity in each planet is the greater or smaller number of satellites it possesses. Another was that to variations in this ratio, unlike in each planet, are ascribable the different specific gravities of the planets. With acceptance of the hypothesis of Olbers respecting the missing planet, went the conclusion that the celestial bodies are neither solid nor liquid all through ; but that the interior of each con- sists of gases reduced by pressure to the density of liquids. It had been shown that gases may be compressed to that degree of density without liquefying ; and since then the experiments of Prof. Andrews, proving that there is a critical temperature above which no pressure, producing however great a density, will cause liquefaction, has made this view more tenable than it at first appeared. In recent years it has been enunciated afresh in Germany by Dr. August Ritter in 1882. Of course the conclusion that from the bursting of a planet thus consti- tuted, resulted the asteriods, has gained an ever-increasing support from the ever-increasing number of them discovered ; for it is manifest that of the multitudinous fragments the larger would be relatively few, and that with successive decreases of size would go increases of numbers : an inference correspond- ing with the facts. An explanation of comets and meteor- showers was also afforded. It should be added that I ventured to dissent from the theory of the Sun held by Sir John Herschel, that the photosphere incloses a dark body, rendered visible through breaches in the photosphere known as spots. In pur- suance of the view that the Sun is the product of a still-concen- trating nebula, the temperature of which is too high to permit solidification, it was contended that the photosphere consists of metallic vapours ever rising and precipitating : a view soon afterwards verified by the discoveries of Kirchhoff and Bunsen. An extreme illustration of that disregard for authority character- izing me was thus shown ; for the then current view respecting the nebulae, and the view respecting the constitutiou of the Sun, had the highest warrant. I must however, in candour, add -that the essay contained some serious mistakes — one especially concerning the distribution of comets from which I thought evidence was derivable.1
The ever-present interest in the idea of evolution as ex- tending to all orders of phenomena, prompted other audacities displayed at this time. One of them was a criticism upon Prof. Owen's Archetype and Homologies of the Vertebrate Skeleton. It was published in the British and Foreign Medico-Chirurgical
[Supra, chap, xxvi., pp. 424-45.]
A PP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 553
Review for October, 1858, and afterwards appended to the second volume of the Biology.1 Of course his theory, which was a modern application of the Platonic theory of Ideas, conflicted with the evolutionary view of the organic world. The purpose of the essay was two-fold — to show the incon- sistencies of his reasoning, and to show how, by mechanical actions and reactions between organism and environment, the segmentation of the vertebral column might be produced.
In the same manner was to be accounted for, and I may add excused, the audacity shown in an article written in 1858 on " Illogical Geology," in which certain views of Lyell, Murchison, and Hugh Miller were adversely criticized.2 The pushing of evolutionary inquiries in all directions necessarily brought me face to face with geological facts, and theories, and with the palaeontological evidence accompanying them. The notion, still at that time generally accepted among geolo- gists, that during past eras there had occasionally occurred a sweeping away of the old organic types and the creation of a new set, was of course utterly repugnant to me, and it became needful to examine the reasonings which led to such a con- ception. It was shown that geological evidence does not warrant it.
This same period (1858-60) gave birth to several other essays pervaded by the same general thoughts. One of them, on "The Law of Organic Symmetry," was published in the Medico-Chirurgical Review for January, 1859.8 As already said, this arose from an observation I made during my excursion with Lewes in 1851. I do not remember that the general formula of Evolution was referred to (I have not got the essay at hand), but the interpretation was evolutionary. The transi- tions from spherical and radial symmetry to bilateral symmetry, and in some cases to asymmetry, were shown to illustrate the general proposition that the forms of parts are determined by their relations to surrounding actions : growths being equal where the incident forces are equal and unequal where the incident forces are unequal. I should remark, however, that the interpretation was incomplete in so far that it recognized inorganic forces only — heat, light, gravitation, etc. — and did not recognize any organic agency, such as the influence of insects in developing the forms of flowers.
A criticism of Prof. Bain's work on The Emotions and the Will was written at this time, and naturally from the evolution point of view. Especially is this seen in a proposed classifica- tion of mental states, which is said to be justified " whether
1 [Supra, chap, viii., p. 87.]
•' \Supra, chap, viii., p. 95 ; chap, xxvi., pp. 424-45.]
3 \Supra, chap, viii., p. 87.]
554 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
we trace mental progression through the grades of the animal kingdom, through the grades of mankind, or through the stages of individual growth."1
Then came the essay on " The Social Organism,"2 in which is observable the growth between 1850 and 1860 : the first being the date at which, in Social Statics, there had occurred the primary recognition of the analogy between an individual organism and a social organism. In this essay, as in its germ ten years before, the fundamental parallelism recognized is in that mutual dependence of parts which both display ; and all the phenomena of organization, individual or social, are re- garded as having this as their cause. Any one who refers to Social Statics (pp. 452 — 456, original edition ; pp. 264 — 267, revised edition) will see that this was the root-idea and that this dominates the developed idea. He will also see how entirely without kinship it is to the fanciful notions of Plato and of Hobbes. But in the essay on " The Social Organism " the general conception indicated in Social Statics, while developed in detail, has also become affiliated on the general doctrine of Evolution. In the first place, the mutual de- pendence of parts is shown to involve an increasing integration, and in the second place, numerous illustrations which society furnishes are summed up by the statement that " not only is all progress from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous, but, at the same time, it is from the indefinite to the definite."
And now came the actual start.3 Ideas which had become fairly definite and coherent were now to be made quite definite while being elaborated in First Principles.
As shown by the original programme, I had from the outset seen the need for specifying my position in respect to meta- physico-theological beliefs. If all things were to be interpreted in terms of the redistribution of matter and motion, I must guard myself against ascription of the materialism apparently implied. Along with such an interpretation must go the ad- mission, or rather the assertion, that our ideas of matter and motion are but symbols of that which transcends the possibilities of knowledge : and that hence, any explanation of the order of the changes which the Cosmos exhibits, still leaves unexplained the nature and origin of them.
Hence came to be thought out and written the preliminary division of First Principles — " The Unknowable." An absurd misconception resulted. While this was simply an introduc- tion intended to exclude misinterpretations, it was, by the few who paid any attention to the book, regarded as its substance. Having inspected the portico, they turned their backs on the building ! The general doctrine of a universal transformation,
1 [Sufira, chap, viii., p. 96. n - [Supra, chap, viii., p. 96.]
3 [Supra, chap, ix., p. 100.]
APP. B.J The Filiation of Ideas 555
conforming everywhere to the same laws, was passed by as not calling for exposition or comment ; or, if recognized at all, was supposed to be a sequence of Darwin's doctrine of "natural selection " ! The thought of the muddle-headed public seems to have been : — Both are evolutionary ; one was published later than the other ; therefore the second is a development of the first.1
The second division of First Principles, constituting its" essential part, is mainly, as above implied, an elaboration of the ideas already specified. It contains, however, three further ideas of cardinal importance. One is the process of " Segrega- tion" which, though indirectly implied in some of the essays, had not before taken shape as a necessary part of Evolution. A second concerned the final stage. I have a dim recollection that, referring to the general process of transformation set forth in u Progress : its Law and Cause," which had been the topic of conversation (during an afternoon call at Huxley's), Tyndall put to me the question — " But how does it all end ? " or some question to that effect.2 I cannot now remember whether the answer was given forthwith or whether it came only after reflection ; but my impression is that up to that time I had not considered what was the outcome of this unceasing change to a state ever more' heterogeneous and ever more definite. It needed only to ask the question, however, to bring the inevitable answer, and the chapter on " Equilibration " was the result. And then, in pursuance of the same line of thought, embodying itself in the question — " What happens after equili- bration is completed ? " there came the reply, tl Dissolution." This was at once recognized as complementary to Evolution, and similarly universal.
I may add that the expositions contained in the successive chapters of the second division of First Principles, were easier to write than at first appears. Having in each case got hold of the clue, it was not difficult to follow it out among all orders of phenomena. Bearing the generalization in mind, it needed only to turn from this side to that side, and from one class of facts to another, to find everywhere exemplifications.
In the first paragraph of the Principles of Biology may be perceived the effect of bringing a general view to the study of a special subject. The characterization of organic matter is obviously determined by the doctrine contained in First Prin- ciples. It is pointed out that its elements present two marked contrasts — carbon extremely fixed, hydrogen very volatile ; oxygen extremely active, nitrogen very inactive. That is, the components are specially heterogeneous ; and the heterogeneity of the compound is increased by the presence of phosphorus
1 \Supra, chaps, xv., p. 201 ; xviii., p. 252 ; xxviii., p. 464 ; xxx., p. 518.]
2 \Supra, chap, ix., p. 103.]
556 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
and sulphur. To this peculiar composition is ascribed that great instability which fits organic matter for those easy and perpetual changes implied by life ; while in the fact that three of its chief components, being gaseous, severally contain in their combined state immense amounts of molecular motion, is seen that constitution which makes it a source of visible activities. It is clear that, in the absence of the leading truths set forth in First Principles, organic matter would not have been thus conceived.
There is also exemplified, before the close of the chapter, the effect of bringing together the leading conceptions of different sciences. Complete knowledge of one science is by many urged as an educational ideal, rather than a general knowledge of several. But in each science progress depends on ideas which the other sciences furnish. Prof. Graham's all-important investigations respecting the colloid and crystal- loid forms of matter, well exemplified the need for transcending the limits of pure chemistry for the further advance of chemis- try. The contrasts he draws between colloids and crystalloids — between the instability of the one and the stability of the other, between the consequent energia of the former and the quiescence of the latter, have important implications of many kinds, especially biological. But, not being guided by the relevant biological ideas, there is a corollary which he did not reach. Had he looked at the vital changes from the physio- logical point of view, and observed that while the wasted tissues are continually being rebuilt the waste-matters have continually to be carried away ; he would have seen that it is because the tissues are formed of colloids while the waste- matters are crystalloids that the vital processes are possible. From the small molecular mobility of the large colloid mole- cules and the great molecular mobility of the small crystalloid molecules, it results that these last can rapidly diffuse through the first and escape into the channels which carry them out of the body.
Concerning interpretations contained in the immediately following chapters, it will suffice to say that they are dominated by the thought of interpreting vital activities in terms of latent motion taken in and visible motion given out — molecular motion in food and molar motion expended through muscles. And here came recognition of the part played by nitrogen. From the feebleness of its affinities for other elements it results that, easily liberated from its combinations with them, it becomes a constant cause of molecular disturbance and vital motions. This interpretation was suggested by remembrance of the various cases in which nitrogenous substances, both inorganic and organic, are made to serve artificially as agents initiating changes — explosions, fermentations, etc.
The succeeding division of the work, " The Inductions of
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 557
Biology," of course consists mainly of expositions of those general truths currently accepted at the time the work was written. Presentation of these in a relatively-coherent form was the natural result of an endeavour to affiliate them on the general principle of Evolution. In each chapter there are indicated the relations borne to first principles by the truths set forth. There may be noted, however, sundry special inferences reached through the systematic mode of contem- plating the facts. Everywhere arose the inquiry — What are the physical terms involved ? with the result that conclusions — true or untrue as it may turn out — were set down which would not have been reached had not this question been asked. The chapter on " Growth " furnishes a good example, and furnishes, too, another illustration of the way in which, to inter- pret the truths of a special science the truths of more general sciences have to be brought in aid. The amounts and limits of growth exhibited by the different classes of organisms, plant and animal, are inexplicable by one who limits himself to biology alone. Mathematics and physics have to be invoked — certain relations between masses and surfaces, certain relations between proportional sizes and proportional strains, certain relations between the genesis of energy and the tenacity of the parts which expend energy. And here let me exemplify the way in which an interest in scientific inquiries at large, may bring in, from a remote subject, the solutions of certain pro- blems. Some time between the issue of the first edition in 1864 and the recent edition in 1898, I met with a report of Mr. Froude's experiments made to determine the resistance to vessels moving through the water. The surprising result was that the chief resistance is not due to continued displace- ment but to u skin friction." When revising the chapter on " Growth " a significant corollary hence resulted. It became clear that by growth an aquatic animal gains in relative speed : since the increase of energy going along with increase of mass is not met by a proportionate increase of resistance : the skin- friction increases at a slower rate than the increase of energy. Hence great aquatic animals can come into existence. The catching of more prey needful for larger growth would not be possible in the absence of this relation between energy and resistance.
The aid which one science furnishes towards solution of the problems presented by another, is again exemplified in the chapter on u Adaptation." The processes of modification con- stituting adaptation of organic structures, are rendered quite comprehensible by reference to the analogous social processes.
The cardinal idea which runs through the chapters on "Genesis," " Heredity," and "Variation," is, as shown in § 66, an example of reasoning a priori — an exceptional example ; for, as I have shown, a posteriori conclusions have habitually pre-
558 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
ceded the a priori verifications. The argument is that the specific traits of organisms cannot be conveyed by the morpho- logical units or cells, nor can they be conveyed by the molecules of protein substances into which these are chemically resolv- able : these being common to all organisms. There appears therefore no alternative but to assume some intermediate units conveying the specific characters — physiological units as I called them, or, as I would now call them, constitutional units. That the structure of each organism results from the organic polarities of these seems implied by the facts that a scale from a Begonia leaf, or a fragment of a Polyp's body, begins to assume the typical structure of the species ; and yet it seems incon- ceivable that the complex structures of organisms of advanced types can be thus produced. A more feasible conception was suggested in the final edition of the work ; and here again sociological facts aided interpretation of biological facts. For evidence was given that beyond the tendency of a whole aggregate of units of a particular kind to assume the structure peculiar to that kind, whether a society or an animal, there is an ability of the units in each locality to form themselves into a structure appropriate to that locality, quite independently of the influence of the whole aggregate. Recent experimental evidence (1896-7) here came in verification.
Passing over minor ideas in Part III., the first to be named is, that the process of natural selection becomes incapable of producing specific adaptations as fast as there arise complex animals in which many organs co-operate to achieve a single end. The great Irish elk with its enormous horns is instanced ; and the argument is that growth of such horns is useless for offence and defence without an accompanying adjustment of numerous bones and muscles concerned in wielding them ; that appropriate variations cannot be assumed to take place simul- taneously in all the co-operating parts ; and that without simul- taneous variations in them, increase in the size of the horns must be injurious. After this, the thing of chief importance in this division is the interpretation of the two essential factors of organic evolution — Adaptation and Natural Selection — in phy- sical terms. And here I come upon a fact which obliges me to qualify the description of my method of thinking, namely, allowing some germ of thought accidently occurring, to grow by accretions until it became a fully- developed hypothesis. I was now met by a problem which demanded solution. Adaptation is not a process known to physical science ; and the hypothesis of Natural Selection is in both of its terms foreign to that class of ideas which physics formulates. How, then, are adaptation and natural selection to be conceived as caused by that universal play of forces which universal evolution postulates ? At first the interpretation seemed hopeless ; but when the life of an organism was regarded as a combination of functions forming
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 559
a moving equilibrium in presence of outer actions, an inter- pretation presented itself. All the phenomena fell into place as attendant on the maintenance of moving equilibria and the overthrow of them. It was in thus studying the facts that the expression " survival of the fittest " emerged ; for this is, as the context shows, as direct a statement as ordinary language permits of the physical actions and reactions concerned. Here again general truths served as interpreters of special ones.
Some months before completion of the first volume of the Principles of Biology, there occurred a digression which had im- portant results. More than once after writing the " Genesis of Science," in which M. Comte's classification of the sciences was rejected, I had endeavoured to make a valid classification, and had failed. Only now, early in 1864, did I hit upon the right mode of regarding the facts : recognizing that the primary basis Of a classification is a division into Abstract, Abstract- Concrete, and Concrete, dealing respectively with the forms, the factors, and the products.1 The conclusions arrived at seemed important enough to justify suspension of other work for the purpose of publishing a brochure setting them forth in detail. Incidentally there came a result of greater importance. While trying to arrange the concrete sciences, and asking what most general truth there is which must take precedence of all those truths presented by astronomy, geology, biology, etc., I saw that it must be a truth concerning the unceasing redistribution of matter and motion which all concrete things exhibit. This truth was that integration of matter and dissipation of contained motion are concomitant changes, and that the converse con- comitant changes are increase of contained motion and dissipa- tion of matter : the first resulting in Evolution and the last in Dissolution. In this way I was suddenly made aware that in setting forth the process of Evolution in First Principles, I had followed a wrong order ; since I had represented the increase of heterogenity as the primary process, and integration as a secondary process. Forthwith I decided to reorganize First Principles as soon as the Principles of Biology was completed. And here I note the second case in which the writings of M. Comte had an all-important influence ; but, as in the preceding case, an influence opposite in kind to that supposed. Had I not made acquaintance with his views concerning the development of the sciences ; had I not been thus led to reject his classifica- tion ; had I not been, consequently, prompted to seek another classification ; I should probably never have reached the above conception, and the doctrine set forth in First Principles would have retained that very imperfect form originally given to it.
For completion of the narrative, I must add that about this time was written an essay on " The Constitution of the Sun,"
1 [Supra, chap, x., p. 1 1 2.]
560 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
containing, among other things, the hypothesis that solar spots result from the condensation of metallic vapours in the rarefied interiors of cyclones ; and must add that about the same time was written an essay under the title " What is Electricity ? " I name these merely to show the excursiveness still displayed.1
Returning to the Principles of Biology, the first remark to be made is that the interpretation of the special by the aid of the general, is shown throughout Vol. II. in a conspicuous manner ; for in this there begins the deductive explanation of biological phenomena at large in terms of the formula of Evolution.
"Morphological Development" sets out by regarding the facts plants and animals display as primarily phenomena of integration. There is growth by simple accumulation of primary aggregates (cells or protoplasts) ; there is growth by union of groups of these into secondary aggregates ; and then again by union of groups of groups into tertiary aggregates. 'The rise of the two largest divisions of the plant world is dealt with from this point of view. From the needs of the interpretation there resulted a speculation respecting the origin of Endogens and Exogens (Monocotyledons and Dicotyledons). For in tracing out the origin of plant aggregates of the third order, produced by integration of those of the second order (each in its separate form a thallus or frond), there arose the question — By what different methods of integration did there arise these two different types of vegetal organization ? The interpretation im- plies a rejection of Schleiden's doctrine, which regards the shoot or axial organ as primary, and the leaf or foliar organ as secondary ; for it implies that the foliar organ is the homologue of a primitive separate frond or thallus, which of course came first in order of evolution. I may add that though in most cases the materials for my arguments were ready to hand in works on Biology, it was in some cases otherwise ; and here is an instance. Observations pursued for some years brought abundant support to the inference that axial organs may, under conditions of ex- cessive nutrition, develop out of foliar organs. u The Morpholo- gical Composition of Animals " was dealt with in like manner. Cells, aggregates of cells, and unions of these aggregates into still higher ones, were the stages : the various types of Protozoa falling within the first group, Pan/era and simple Coelenterates coming within the second group, and the compound coelenterate animals, fixed and moving, as well as Tunicata, coming within the third group. How far this compounding of groups proceeds in the animal kingdom was a question which arose. The con- clusion drawn was that while the Vertebrata are aggregates of the second order, annulose creatures (Arthropods and Annelids) are aggregates of the third order : each segment being the
1 [Suflra, chap, x., p. 117 ; chap, xxvi., pp. 427-31.]
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 561
homologue of what was originally an independent organism. This speculation was, I supposed, peculiar to myself ; but I recently found that it had two years earlier been propounded by M. Lacaze Duthiers. There are many reasons for and against it, but true or untrue, it is manifestly a sequence of the mode of regarding organic progress as exhibiting integration.
In conformity with the general order of evolution, as set forth in First Principles, there came next the production of structural differences : advance in integration being accom- panied by advance in heterogenity. And here arose the occasion for carrying out in new directions the speculation initiated in 1851, and subsequently set forth in "The Law of Organic Symmetry." The general thesis that the parts of an organism become unlike in form in proportion to their exposure to unlike conditions, was illustrated throughout : first in the shapes of plants as wholes, then in the shapes of branches, then in the shapes of leaves, then in the shapes of flowers, and finally in the shapes of vegetal cells. There followed a like series of inter- pretations of animal forms — general, and then more and more special. In this exposition was incorporated that theory of vertebrate structure indicated in 1858, as an alternative to the theory of Professor Owen — the theory, namely, that vertebrae have arisen from the mechanical actions and reactions to which the original undivided axis was exposed by lateral undulations ; these becoming as the vertebrate animal developed, more and more energetic, at the same time that the axis became by its reactions more and more indurated at the points of muscular insertion ; segmentation being a necessary compromise between flexibility and stability.
In the next division, " Physiological Development," there is again shown the way in which the interpretations in general and in detail are dominated by the general formula of Evolu- tion : more markedly shown, because, while Morphology had been studied from the evolution point of view, Physiology had been scarcely at all thus studied. As currently understood, Physiology was concerned only with the single and combined functions of organs, and scarcely at all considered the question how functions have arisen. Thus a new field had to be ex- plored, and the exploration was guided by the conceptions set forth in First Principles. The general question was "how heterogeneities of action have progressed along with hetero- geneities of structure " ; and it was held that to the various problems presented the " answers must be given in terms of incident forces."
Here the hypothesis of Evolution raised a new set of ques- tions, and the raising of them almost of itself prompted the answers. " Intercourse between each part and the particular conditions to which it is exposed " was shown "to be the
36
562 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
origin of physiological development." Throughout successive chapters, proof was given that physiological differentiations exemplify u the inevitable lapse of the more homogeneous into the less homogeneous " ; and evidence that the changes result from " the necessary exposure of their component parts to actions unlike in kind or quantity " was furnished by the order in which the differences appear. It was contended, further, that "physiological development has all along been aided by the multiplication of effects" : the differentiated parts acting and reacting on one another with increasing complexity. Then came the inquiry — How does there arise that mutual depen- dence of parts which is the necessary concomitant of the physiological division of labour ? Physiological integration accompanies physiological differentiation, and the question was — " What causes the integration to advance pan passu with the differentiation ? " a question to the solution of which the analogy between the individual organism and the social organ- ism was once more brought in aid. Then, lastly, came to be treated the phenomena of physiological equilibration, as it establishes itself more and more completely in proportion as organic evolution becomes higher : the result of the play of organic forces being such as continually to re-establish a dis- turbed balance between outer and inner actions, and to establish a new balance where outer actions of a permanent kind arise.
I indicate these chief heads of the argument simply to show how the filiation of ideas was here determined by the need for presenting the facts of physiological development in terms of evolution at large. General truths again served as keys to the more special truths, and caused these to fall into coherent order.
Something must be said respecting an inquiry which arose while writing this division. The genesis of the circulation in plants was one of the topics to be dealt with ; and I found very little information ready to my hand. Either I must treat the topic in a cursory manner or must investigate it for myself, and this last alternative I chose. In pursuance of the idea dominant throughout, that the differentiations of parts are due to differ- ences in the incident forces, I inferred that, initiated by slight differences of pressure in certain directions, the produced currents themselves gradually formed channels and so prepared the way for the differentiated structures. The current doctrine was that circulation is through the wood ; but there seemed to have been ignored the question — What happens in plants having no woody tissue, and in those young plants and young parts of plants in which woody tissue has not yet been formed ? Examination proved that in such places the spiral, fenestrated, or annular vessels are the sap-carriers, and that these fall out of use. as fast as the woody tissue arises. The investigation led to the discovery of absorbent organs in certain leaves and roots,
A PP. B.] The Filiation oj Ideas 563
which had not been seen because the sections of the leaves had not been made in such a manner as to disclose them. By com- pulsion I was in this case led into experimental research ; and I do not remember any other case in which an experimental research was undertaken.1
The remaining part of the Principles of Biology, entitled u Laws of Multiplication," need not detain us. It is an amplified and elaborated statement of the hypothesis which was set forth pretty fully in " The Theory of Population de- duced from the General Law of Animal Fertility," published in 1852. In this Part VI. of. the Biology many additional illus- trations, sundry developments, and various qualifications, are set forth. These supplementary ideas it is needless here to specify.
I am often astonished at the large results which grow from small causes. When drawing up the programme of the u System of Philosophy," as it was at first called, and laying out the plan of each work, it occurred to me that, before beginning deductive interpretations in pursuance of the doctrine of Evolution, it would be needful to set down the truths which had been, or which might be, reached by simple induction. And then it occurred to me that, before this statement of induc- tions, it would be needful in each case to specify the data. This conception determined in large part the arrangement followed. In each science the first and second divisions set forth respectively the data and the inductions, on which the evolutionary interpretations might stand.
This method of procedure had the effect of drawing my attention to truths, some already current and some not current, which would have been passed over unspecified or unrecog- nized, had it not been for the necessity of filling up these divi- sions of the skeleton plan. Especially was this cause influential in giving to the Principles of Psychology an extended develop- ment. What wrere the data ? What were the inductions ? were questions to be answered ; and search for answers led to some significant results.
The science of Life at large had to supply the data to the science of Mental Life. Setting out from the biological view, it was needful to regard the nervous system as the initiator of motion, and to trace up its development in relation to the quantity of the motion and the heterogeneity of the motion. It was also needful to formulate such truths of structure as are common to all types of nervous systems. Beginning with the simplest structure, in which there is seen nothing more than an afferent nerve, a ganglion, and an efferent nerve, it was con- tended that the nervous arc formed by the fibre carrying a
1 \_Supra, chap, x., pp. 123, 124.]
564 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
stimulus, the ganglion corpuscles to which it went, and the fibre running to a part to be excited, constituted the unit of composition out of which nervous systems are built — a unit of composition with which, in developing types, there is joined a fibre passing from the primary simple ganglion to a higher and more complex one. The thesis was that, throughout their extremely varied types, nervous systems are formed by com- pounding and re-compounding this unit in multitudinous ways.
Not particularizing others of the Data set down, and passing at once to the Inductions, the first to be named concerns the substance of mind. After showing that of this in its ultimate nature we can know nothing, it was contended that of its proxi- mate nature we may know something. Setting out from our knowledge of the sensation of sound, which is made up of minute nervous shocks rapidly recurring, there was ventured the hypothesis that sensations of all kinds, and by implication higher feelings of all kinds, result from the compounding and re-compounding in infinitely varied ways of minute nervous shocks, akin in their ultimate natures.1 So that possibly there is an ultimate element of mind which, like some ultimate element of matter, is, by entering into more and more complex aggre- gates and unions of aggregates, capable of generating the multitudinous kinds of consciousness, as the supposed ultimate element of matter, by its endless ways and degrees of compound- ing, produces the various substances we know. There is thus hypothetically illustrated in another sphere the general doctrine of Evolution, since the supposed process implies increasing integration and increasing heterogeneity.
The question next to be dealt with was — What are the general truths respecting our mental states which admit of being set down as simple inductions, based upon introspection, and not involving any hypothesis respecting origin. Writers on Psychology have mostly had in view not structural traits but functional traits. We see this in the grouping by Aquinas into Memory, Reason, Conscience ; by Reid into Memory, Concep- tion, Judgment, Reasoning ; by Dugald Stewart into Attention, Conception, Abstraction, Memory, Imagination, Reasoning. These various heads in the main connote kinds and degrees of action. It seemed to me that the first thing must be to contemplate the aggregate of mental states, and group them according to their characters and behaviours. Examination proved that there are marked structural distinctions in con- sciousness, and that these are related to structural distinctions in the nervous system. The broadest classification is into feel- ings and relations between feelings, of which the first are mental
'The instalment of the Principles of Psychology containing this view was issued in Oct., 1868. M. Taine, in Vol. I. of De flntelligence propounded a like view in 1870.
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 565
states existing for appreciable times, while the last exist but momentarily ; and it was inferred that while the feelings are correlated with changes in the nerve-cells, the relations are correlated with discharges along nerve-fibres. Examination proved that feelings themselves are first of all divisible into centrally-initiated or emotions, and peripherally-initiated or sensations. Among the peripherally-initiated, the broadest division is into those initiated on the outer surface and those initiated in the interior ; and it was of course recognized that all these kinds have their vivid or original forms and their faint or revived forms. These groups of feelings differ greatly in definiteness — that is, in the distinctness with which they are mutually limited : the feelings derived from the highest senses being mutually limited in the sharpest way, and the mutual limitation becoming vague in proportion as the feelings are internally generated, and have not sense-organs divided into numerous sensitive elements. Sharpness of mutual limitation was discovered to be connected with ability to cohere — readi- ness to be associated : where there is vague mutual limitation there is incoherence. Another result reached was that feelings which are definitely limited by others and which, as a concom- itant, readily cohere, are also feelings which can be called into consciousness with facility ; while feelings of the lower kinds, as those initiated internally, can be revived with difficulty and, consequently, take but small parts in intellectual operations. Once more it was found that these truths which hold of feelings hold also of the relations among them. Here as elsewhere it \vas found that progress in mental organization, as in nervous organization, is presentable in terms of Evolution ; for in rising to the higher types of mental states characterized by definite- ness, coherence, and revivability, we progress in integration and heterogeneity.
Concerning the parts entitled u General Synthesis " and 11 Special Synthesis," it is unnecessary to say much here, since they repeat with small alterations, mainly verbal, the correspond- ing parts in the first edition. The only significant fact is that to § 189 I have added a note saying that " Had Mr. Darwin's Origin of Species been published before I wrote this paragraph, I should, no doubt, have so qualified my words as to recognize 4 selection,' natural or artifical, as a factor." At the time the first edition was written the only factor I recognized was the inheritance of functionally-produced changes ; but Mr. Darwin's work made it clear to me that there is another factor of import- ance in mental evolution as in bodily evolution. While holding that throughout all higher stages of mental development the supreme factor has been the effect of habit, I believe that in producing the lowest instincts natural selection has been the chief, if not the sole, factor. This modification of belief, how- ever, affects but slightly the argument running through these two parts.
566 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
Part V. is the one referred to in the preface to the first edition as, for the time being, omitted. It sets forth and elaborates the idea, reached some time before the programme of the Synthetic Philosophy was drawn up, that the structures of nervous systems are to be interpreted as consequent upon the general law that motion follows the line of least resistance. The first chapter describes the genesis of nerves in pursuance of this hypothesis, and subsequent chapters carry it out in the description of simple and compound nervous systems.
Concerning the filiation of ideas exemplified in Parts VI. and VII. of the Principles of Psychology, there is not much to say here. The first of them reappears with no considerable change ; and the second of them, though greatly developed, is chiefly an elaboration of the argument set forth in Part I. of the first edition — an elaboration which, though it contains many ideas not contained in the first, does not call for detailed notice.
In Part IX., " Corollaries," there is yielded another excep- tion to what I supposed to be the uniform process with me — gradual development of a thought from a germ ; for here I had forthwith to solve the questions put before me as best I might. After dealing with general psychology it became requisite to enter upon the special psychology of Man in preparation for Sociology. Certain traits of human nature are presupposed by the ability to live in the associated state, and there came the questions — What are these ? and, How are they evolved ? One only of the leading ideas in this part need here be named as illustrating the course of filiation. Before there can be social co-operation there must be established in Men a liking, such as we see in gregarious animals, for living more or less in presence of one another. And there must be developed in him, as in gregarious creatures, but in a far higher degree, the faculty of sympathy — the aptitude for participating in the feelings exhibited by others. Development of the required type of emotional nature was shown to be a part of the general process of mental evolution. The discipline of social life, beginning in feeble ways, itself little by little developed the capacities for carrying on social co-operation : there was gradual evolution here as everywhere else.
The filiation of ideas as exhibited in the Principles of Sociology, cannot be understood without knowledge of certain acts and incidents which occurred while the work on the Prin- ciples of Psychology was in course of execution. Recognizing how large an undertaking the Principles of Sociology would be, how vast the required assemblage of materials, and how im- possible it would be for me to gather them, I decided as far back as 1867 to obtain help. I had to study the leading types of societies, from the savage to the most civilized ; and I required something like a comprehensive account of the institu-
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 567
tions of each. The only course was that of engaging one or more assistants who should, under guidance, collect facts for me. My first step was to scheme an arrangement in which they should be so presented that while their relations of co- existence and succession were easily recognized, they should be so presented that those of each kind could be readily found when required. In the tables drawn up the primary division of social phenomena is into Structural and Functional, and the main divisions under these are Regulative and Operative. A glance will show that ranged under these main and subordinate groups, the heterogenous masses of facts societies exhibit, dis- orderly as they at first seem, are made intelligible, and the comparing and generalizing of them easy. Sundry modifica- tions of beliefs at once resulted from thus facilitating in- duction.
The work on The Study of Sociology formed no part of the programme of the Synthetic Philosophy.1 But, rather fortun- ately, it was written before the Principles of Sociology was com- menced ; and, while serving to prepare the public, was also a good discipline for me. The cultured classes and their leaders — Carlyle, Froude, Kingsley, etc. — were in utter darkness about the matter. They alleged the impossibility of a " science of history," and were without any conception that there had been going on the evolution of social structures, not made or dreamed of by kings and statesmen, or recognized by historians. Two chapters u Is there a Social Science ? " and u The Nature of the Social Science," explained that there is a distinction between history and the science of sociology like that between a man's biography and the structure of his body.
Evidence was given at this time of continued natural growth from a germ dating far back. In the comparison between a society and an organism, made in Social Statics, where the mutual dependence of parts common to both and the progress in both from a primitive state of no dependence to a state of great dependence, were pointed out, there was no recognition of any fundamental division in the classes of parts or classes of functions. But "The Social Organism," published ten years later, exhibited the analogy between the expending organs of the two and between the sustaining organs of the two. And now this conception had become more definite. In an essay on " Specialized Administration " published in December, 1871, it was shown that the militant structures and the industrial structures, while growing more distinguished as expending structures and sustaining structures, grow more distinguished also by the different forms of government proper to them : the one being under a despotic central control needful to produce
1 \Supra, chap, xiii., p. 159.]
568 Lije of Herbert Spencer [AFP. B.
efficient joint action, and the other being controlled by the mutual influences of the co-operating parts and not, in respect of their functions, .subject to central direction. At the same time it was shown that individual organisms of high types furnish a parallel to this contrast in the contrast between the cerebro- spinal nervous system and the visceral nervous system. And here, more than before, was emphasized the truth that from the beginning war has been the cause of the development of centralized governmental structures, which become coercive in proportion as war is the dominant social activity ; while growth of that decentralized co-operation characterizing sustaining structures, becomes more marked as war ceases to be chronic : a corollary being that social types are essentially distinguished by the proportion between the militant structures and the industrial structures, and undergo metamorphoses according to the growth or decline of either order of activity.
One more essay, published in 1870, on "The Origin of Animal- Worship," must be named as containing another idea destined to undergo much development in the Principles of Sociology, the first instalment of which was issued in June, 1874. In the third paragraph (Essays, i. 309) it is said that u The rudi- mentary form of all religion is the propitiation of dead ancestors, who are supposed to be still existing, and to be capable of working good or evil to their descendants " ; J and that to prepare for " sociology, I have, for some years past, directed much attention to the modes of thought current in the simpler human societies."2
Growing complexity of subject-matter implies growing com- plexity of causation ; and with recognition of additional factors comes proof of the inadequacy of factors previously recognized. This is manifest when tracing the filiation of ideas throughout the Principles of Sociology. The modifications resulted from evidence contained in the Descriptive Sociology and added to from various other sources. Simple induction now played a leading part.
Already in Social Statics there were recognitions of the truth that the fitnesses of institutions are relative to the natures of citizens. More definitely the Study of Sociology again displayed
1 After the publication of the first volume of the Principles of Sociology, a controversy arose between Mr. (now Prof.) E. B. Tylor and myself concerning our respective views. Though his view, as set forth before 1870, was that animism is primary and the ghost-theory secondary, while my view was that the ghost-theory is primary and animism second- ary, yet he had the impression that I had derived my view from him. In the course of the controversy, when referring back to things I had written, I overlooked these sentences just quoted, which (setting aside any difference of view between us) conclusively dispose of his supposition. 2 [Supra, chaps, xii., p. 148; xiv., p. 190 xxvii., p. 451.]
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 569
this conviction. In youth my constitutional repugnance to coercion, and consequent hatred of despotic forms of rule, had involved a belief like that expressed in the American Declara- tion of Independence, and like that which swayed the French at the time of the Revolution — the belief that free forms of government would ensure social welfare. A concomitant was a great abhorrence of slavery, and a conviction that it has always been an unmitigated evil. Ecclesiasticism, too, excited in me profound aversion. Along with this went an unhesitating assumption that all superstitions are as mischievous as they are erroneous. These and allied pre-judgments were destroyed or greatly modified by contemplation of the facts. So that many ideas now set forth were not affiliated upon preceding ones, but generated de novo : some independent of, and some at variance with, preceding ones.
As in the works on Biology and on Psychology, fulfilment of the original programme, which in each case set out with Data and Inductions, was largely influential in producing certain of these changes. Especially did search for the data compel attention to those traits of human beings which are factors in social co-operation. Throughout many chapters the affiliation of every kind of superstition upon the universal belief in the doubles of the dead, was traced ; and it became manifest that all religious ceremonies originate from endeavours to please or pacify the ghost. The multitudinous facts showing this conspired also to show that belief in the continued, or rather the increased, power of the dead ruler came to supplement the power of the living ruler ; so that strengthening of natural control by supposed supernatural control became a means of maintaining social unions which could not else have been maintained. This was an all-important idea not affiliated upon preceding ideas. Nor could there be affiliated on preceding ideas the convictions produced by the logic of facts, that king- ship and slavery are institutions naturally arising in the course of social evolution, and necessary to be passed through on the way to higher social forms. So, too, it had to be reluctantly admitted that war, everywhere and always hateful, has never- theless been a factor in civilization, by bringing about the consolidation of groups — simple into compound, doubly-com- pound, and trebly-compound — until great nations are formed. As, throughout the organic world, evolution has been achieved by the merciless discipline of Nature, " red in tooth and claw " ; so, in the social world, a discipline scarcely less bloody has been the agency by which societies have been massed together and social structures developed : an admission which may go along with the belief that there is coming a stage in which survival of the fittest among societies, hitherto effected by sanguinary conflicts, will be effected by peaceful conflicts.
To these indications of the re-moulded conceptions per-
570 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
vading the Principles of Sociology, have now to be added the ideas characterizing the successive parts.
In "The Inductions of Sociology," the analogy between social organisms and individual organisms was elaborated : various minor ideas being brought to enforce the general idea. Here, as before, the assigned warrant for the comparison is the incontestable truth that in both there is co-operation of parts with consequent mutual dependence of parts ; and that by these the life of the whole, individual or social, is constituted and maintained. Among further developments of the conception the first was a perception of the fact that whereas in individual organisms the co-operation is among parts which are in physical contact, in societies the co-operation is among parts which are in various degrees separated. At the same time it is shown that the co-operation, effected in living bodies by molecular waves propagated through the tissues, is, in societies, effected by " signs of feelings and thoughts conveyed from person to person." A concomitant difference is named. Whereas the animal organism has one sentient centre, for the benefit of which, in superior types, all other component parts exist, in the social organism there are as many sentient centres as there are persons ; and, consequently, the units can no longer be regarded as existing for the benefit of the aggregate. Recog- nition of this essential difference explains the apparent anomaly that while societies highly organized for corporate action, and in that respect analogous to superior types of animals, are to be regarded as the highest so long as militancy is great, and the preservation of the society as a whole is the dominant end ; under peaceful conditions, when corporate action is no longer needed for offence and defence, the highest types of society are those in which the coercive governmental organization has dwindled, and corporate action, with its correlative structures, gives place to individual action, having directive structures of a relatively non-coercive kind.1
The ideas contained in Part III., " Domestic Institutions," mostly show little evidence of descent from preceding ideas. The first significant one is contained in a chapter on u The
1 Some fifty years ago M. Milne-Edwards pointed out the analogy between the division of labour in a society and the physiological division of labour in an animal, and regarded the growing complexity of structure as a concomitant in the one case as in the other. If any one had there- after asserted that he based the science of Biology on the science of Sociology, the assertion would have been regarded as extremely absurd. But the absurdity would have been no greater than is that fallen into by some American sociologists — Prof. Giddings and Mr. Lester Ward among them — who assert that I base Sociology upon Biology because I have exhibited this same analogy under its converse aspect ; and who continue to do this though I have pointed out that the analogy does not in either
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 571
Diverse Interests of the Species, the Parents, and the Off- spring " ; in which it is shown that along with a certain community of interest there go certain antagonisms. In low types the sacrifices of individual life and well-being to the maintenance of the species, are great ; and the sacrifices of parents to offspring and of offspring from inefficiency of parents, are also great ; but as evolution progresses, all such sacrifices gradually become less. The next conclusion sug- gested by the evidence is that the sexual relations which arise, are, in a measure, appropriate to the respective social stages reached : polygamy having a natural relation to a chronic warfare which entails much male mortality. A further con- clusion which the facts establish is that the stains of women is low in proportion as militancy is high, and gradually im- proves (as does that of children also) in proportion as indus- trialism develops. Of chief importance, however, is the doctrine that a radical distinction must be maintained between the ethics of family life and the ethics of social life. The ethics of family life, as concerning offspring, are that benefits received must be great in proportion as merit is small ; whereas, on passing into social life, the individual must become subject to the law that benefits shall be proportioned to merits. And it is contended that the effects are immediately fatal in the first case and remotely fatal in the last if a converse regime is in force.
The next division exemplifies not the filiation of ideas but the entire overturn of an earlier idea by a later. Dominant as political government is in the thoughts of all, it is naturally assumed to be the primary form of government ; and this had been assumed by me, as by everybody. But the facts which the Descriptive Sociologv put before me, proved that of the several kinds of control exercised over men the ceremonial control is the first. After recognition of this unexpected priority, the cardinal truth recognized was that ceremonies at large originate in the relation between conqueror and conquered : beginning with mutilations and trophies, and running out into all forms of propitiatory actions and speeches — obeisances, modes of address, presents, visits, titles, badges and costumes, etc. The
case furnish a foundation, but merely yields mutual illumination. (See Essays, vol. ii., p. 467 et seg.) Those not biassed by the desire to make their own views appear unlike views previously enunciated, will see that if Sociology was by me based on Biology, biological interpretations would be manifest in all parts of the Principles of Sociology succeeding the part in which the above analogy is set forth. But they are not. The interpretations running through Parts III., IV., V., VI., VII., and VIII., though they are congruous with this analogy, are not guided by it, but have quite other guidance. They are based on the general law of Evolu- tion, which is from time to time referred to as illustrated in the particular group of phenomena under consideration.
572 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
development of these exhibits very clearly the evolution from a simple germ to a complex aggregate, characterized by increas- ing heterogeneity and definiteness. A guiding truth finally emphasized was, that not only does ceremony begin with the behaviour of the conquered man to the conqueror, but that throughout all its developments it maintains its relation to militancy ; being peremptory and definite in proportion as militancy is great, and diminishing in its authority and precision as industrialism qualifies militancy. This connexion, is one aspect of the truth that militancy implies the principle of status, which involves ceremonial observances, while indus- trialism, implying contract, does not involve ceremonial ob- servances.
After premising that political institutions must be regarded as relative to the circumstances and natures of the peoples living under them, there is drawn a fundamental contrast between the two kinds of co-operation which societies exhibit. There is conscious co-operation in the actions of a society as a whole against other societies, and unconscious co-operation in the actions of citizens severally satisfying their own wants by subserving the wants of others, but who do this without concert : no arrangement for undertaking different kinds of production having been made or even thought of. Efforts for self-preservation by the aggregate originate the first form of organization ; while efforts for self-preservation by the units originate the last form of organization ; the first being coercive and the last non-coercive. Here, while setting down these leading truths, there is disclosed to me one which I had not observed — one which, like so many, others, is seen in the analogy between individual organization and social organization. For the contrast between the conscious co-operation of the structures which carry on the external actions of a society, and the unconscious co-operation of the industrial structures which carry on sustentation, is paralleled by the contrast between the conscious co-operation of the senses, limbs, and cerebro-spinal nervous system of a vertebrate animal, and the unconscious co-operation of its visceral organs and the nervous system of organic life which controls them.
The general truth referred to before, and again implied in the statements just made, is that political organization is initiated by war and develops with the continuance of war. The primitive chief is the leading warrior. During long stages the military chief and the civil chief are the same, and even in the later stages in which the king becomes mainly the civil chief, he remains nominally the military chief. By implication the political organization is at first identical with the army organization. Chiefs and sub-chiefs, kings and feudal lords, are in peace central and local rulers ; and the civil discipline among them and their subordinates is simply the military
APP. B.] The Filiation of Ideas 573
discipline : the servile or non-fighting portion of the population being the commissariat.
One final truth— an all-important truth — has to be named and emphasized. This is that the fighting structures and the industrial structures, though in a sense co-operative, are in another sense antagonistic ; and that the type of the society is determined by the predominance of the one or the other. The militant type, in proportion as it is pronounced, entails com- pulsory co-operation, the regime of status, and the entire subjec- tion of the individual ; while the industrial type is characterized by voluntary co-operation, the regime of contract, and the inde- pendence of the individual : all the habits, sentiments, and ideas which prevail being in either case accompaniments of the type.
In Part VII. it is shown that just as political institutions are initiated by the emergence of a leading warrior who, first chief in war, presently becomes chief iii peace ; so ecclesiastical institutions have their beginning in the emergence of a special ancestor-worship from the pervading ancestor-worship carried on by all families. The propitiation of the deceased chief rises into predominance ; the son who rules in his place, and succeed- ing rulers, being the primitive priests. Thus arising, the cults of heroes, conquerors, kings, generate a polytheism with its various priesthoods ; and, by implication, a developed ecclesi- astical system arises when victories produce composite societies and supreme rulers. Thus differentiated from political institu- tions, ecclesiastical institutions are partly co-operative and partly competitive : co-operative in so far that they join in enforcing the laws derived from the past, and competitive in so far that there grows up a struggle for supremacy : the ecclesiastical power, in virtue of its assumed divine authority, often becoming predominant. Differentiating as the ecclesiastical structure thus does from the political structure, it long participates in political functions. Its priests take part in war, and act as judges and local rulers during peace. But the differentiation becomes almost complete as social evolution progresses. And while ecclesiastical structures separate from political structures, there is shown within them progressing integration and progressing heterogeneity.
The futility of historical studies as ordinarily pursued, in- dicated already, is again shown on turning to the evolution of " Professional Institutions." Even before the collection and classification of the facts presented by inferior societies had gone far enough to make possible a complete tabulation, it became manifest that all the professions are differentiated from the priesthood. But so little recognized was this truth that the tabular representation, implying derivation of the one from the other, created surprise among highly educated critics.
Some significant evolutionary facts are exhibited in " Indus- trial Institutions." The division of labour displays unfamiliar
574 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
features when developmentally considered. Out of the primitive homogeneous stage there arise by degrees the three distinguish- able processes, Production, Distribution, and Exchange ; and it is pointed out that in each of these divisions there arises a secondary division into the essential and the auxiliary — the actual processes and the aiding processes. The increasing interdependence of all these processes is shown to constitute an industrial integration. On passing from the division of labour to the regulation of labour, we come upon the truth, inferable a priori and established a posteriori, that the regulation of labour has -a common origin with political regulation, and gradually differentiates from it. The first stage succeeding that in which each male member of a tribe, while warrior and hunter, makes for himself all such things as women cannot make, is the stage in which conquered men are made slaves ; and the directive power exercised over the slave is, like the political directive power, purely coercive. Social life and domestic life alike exhibit the relation of ruler and subject ; since this form of regulation for slaves is also the form of regulation for children. As the paternal passes into the patri- archal, the control of industry continues to be similar in nature to governmental control. The like holds in large measure when communes arise ; and though under gild-regulation there is in- dependent industrial action, it is subject to the coercive, quasi- political action of the gild. Only by degrees does the industrial regulation, based on contract, separate itself from the original form of industrial regulation, based on status : the lawr of evolu- tion is again illustrated. Passing over corollaries, it will suffice to name the generalization finally reached, that the essential differences in industrial regulation, as in political regulation, are implied by the question — To what extent does a man own him- self, and to what extent is he owned by others? In actively militant states, like Sparta, he is the slave of the society, com- pelled to devote his activities and his life to its preservation : each is owned by the rest. But as fast as industrialism qualifies militancy, he acquires increasing possession of himself ; until, in a society like our own, he is coerced scarcely more than is implied by paying taxes and, possibly, in case of war, going as a conscript. Still, however, he remains in considerable measure subject to the coercion of his industrial combinations — gilds or trade-unions. He is but partially master of himself, since he can use his abilities for self-maintenance only under such condi- tions as they prescribe. Complete possession of himself can be had by each citizen only in a perfectly peaceful state, and in the absence of all restraints on his power to make contracts.
In the Principles of Ethics, the title of the second chapter " The Evolution of Conduct," implies a point of view differing widely from the ordinary point of view. The idea that Ethics
APR B.] The Filiation of Ideas 575
is to be conceived as a certain aspect of evolving conduct, was utterly alien to current ethical ideas, at the same time that it was congruous with the ideas contained in the preceding works. The tap-root of the system goes back to Social Statics, in which some root-fibres went into Biology, Psychology, and, largely, into Sociology. These fibres had now developed into branch roots, as is shown by the titles of successive chapters — " The Physical View," " The Biological View," " The Psychological View," '' The Sociological View." Ethics was thus conceived as treating of conduct in relation to physical activities, vital processes, and mental functions, as well as in relation to the wants and actions of surrounding men. Hence not only duty to others, but also duty to self, had to be recognized and emphasized.
After these and other Data came the question — What are the Inductions ? Under this head had to be ranged the various kinds of conduct, and the various ideas of right and wrong, found in human societies of all kinds and in all stages of progress. The first general conclusion drawn from this Com- parative Ethics was that there is, in each case, an adaptation between the ideas of right and wrong and the kind of life which inherited nature and environing conditions produce ; and the second conclusion was that there exists no such thing as a moral sense common to all mankind, but that the moral sense in each society, and in each stage, adjusts itself to the conditions.
Part III. dealing with "The Ethics of Individual Life," recognized, in pursuance of the general conception, the moral sanction of all those individual activities implied in the healthful and pleasurable pursuit of personal ends, bodily and mental. The conclusions drawn, though checked by Biology and Psycho- log}', were in the main empirical ; for there are no adequate data on which to base a definite code of private conduct. Personal nature must largely determine the special activities and special limits to them, though vital laws must regulate these. But there is named, though not adequately emphasized, a general consideration furnishing much guidence ; namely, that to achieve the fullest life and greatest happiness, a due pro- portion must be maintained among the activities of the various faculties : excess in one and deficiency in another being, by implication, negatived. Doubtless, in our social life the sub- division of occupations necessitates great disproportion ; but consciousness of the normal proportion serves to restrain.
In uThe Ethics of Social Life — Justice," there is at length a return to the topic with which the whole series of my writings commenced. In " The proper Sphere of Government," and then in Social Statics, endeavours were made to reach definite ideas concerning the just regulation of private conduct and the just relations of individuals to the social aggregate, represented by its government. And now, after all the explorations made
576 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. B.
in an interval of forty years, this topic came up once more to be dealt with in the light of the results which had then been reached. No essential changes of the views set forth in Social Statics proved needful ; but there came to be recognized a deeper origin -for its fundamental principle. The assertion of the liberty of each limited only by the like liberties of all, was shown to imply the doctrine that each ought to receive the benefits and bear the evils entailed by his actions, carried on within these limits ; and Biology had shown that this principle follows from the ultimate truth that each creature must thrive or dwindle, live or die, according as it fulfils well or ill the conditions of its existence — a principle which, in the case of social beings, implies that the activities of each must be kept within the bounds imposed by the like activities of others. So that, while among inferior creatures survival of the fittest is the outcome of aggressive competition, among men as socially combined it must be the outcome of non-aggressive competition : maintenance of the implied limits, and insurance of the benefits gained within the limits, being what we call justice. And thus, this ultimate principle of social conduct was affiliated upon the general process of organic evolution.
" Negative beneficence " was recognized as a needful supple- ment to Justice. While society in its corporate capacity is bound to enforce Justice to the uttermost, there falls on each individual, acting independently, the obligation to refrain from doing some things which the law of equal freedom warrants him in doing. This special obligation follows from the general obligation of each to discharge his debt to the society which has fostered him : doing this by aiding in its improvement — by cultivating a sympathy such as will not tolerate the taking of every advantage strict justice accords. But it was held that this qualification of the dictates of justice by those of negative beneficence must be left to the private judgment of each.
In the final division " Positive Beneficence," not passive altruism was enjoined, but active altruism. In the chapter on " The Evolution of Conduct," it was shown that the highest life, and consequently the highest happiness, can be reached only when "all the members of a society give mutual help in the achievement of ends " ; and, by implication, can be reached only when they give mutual help in the avoidance of evils. In this final division it was contended that, while there is an indirect obligation on each to maintain and improve that social state which gives him the facilities of living he enjoys, he gains by cultivating the feelings which cause fulfilment of this obliga- tion ; since the sympathy which prompts alleviation of others' pains is the same sympathy which makes possible the partici- pation in others' pleasures, and therefore exalts personal happiness.
March, 1899.
577
APPENDIX C. LIST OF HERBERT SPENCER'S WRITINGS.
THE SYNTHETIC PHILOSOPHY.
First Principles. First edition, 1862 ; second edition, 1867 ;
third edition, 1875 ; fourth edition, 1880 ; fifth edition,
1884 ; sixth edition, and finally revised, 1900. Reprinted
with an additional appendix and a new index, 1904. Principles of Biology. Vol. i., 1864 ; vol. ii., 186y ; revised
and enlarged edition, vol. i., 1898 ; vol. ii., 1899. Principles of Psychology. First edition, 1855 ; second edition,
vol. i., 1870 ; vol. ii., 1872 ; third edition, 1880 ; fourth
edition, 1899. Principles of Sociology. Vol. i., first edition, 1876 ; second
edition, 1877 ; third and enlarged edition, 1885. Vol. ii.,
Part IV., 1879 ; Part V. 1882. Vol. iii., Part VI., 1885 ;
Parts VII. and VIII., 1896. Principles of Ethics. Vol. i., Part I., 1879 ; Parts II. and III.,
1892. Vol. ii., Part IV., 1891 ; Parts V. and VI., 1893.
OTHER WORKS.
Social Statics. First edition, 1855 : abridged and revised
edition, 1892.
Education. First edition, 1861 ; cheap edition, 1878 ; sixpenny edition, published by the Rationalist Press Association, 1903. Reprinted 1905.
The Study of Sociology. International Scientific Series, first edition, 1873 ; second to seventh editions, 1873-78 ; library edition, 1880. The Man versus the State. First edition, 1884 ; reprinted with
abridged and revised edition of Social Statics, 1892. Essays. First Series, 1857. Second Series, 1863. Third Series,
1874. Revised edition in three volumes, 1890. Various Fragments. First edition, 1897 ; enlarged edition, 1900. Facts and Comments. 1902. Descriptive Sociology : — English. 1873.
Ancient American Races. 1874.
Lowest Races, Negrito Races, and Malaya-Polynesian Races. 1874.
57
578 Life of Herbert Spencer [AFP. c.
African Races. 1875.
Asiatic Races. 1876.
American Races. 1878.
Hebrews and Phoenicians. 1880.
French. 1881.
Autobiography. In two volumes, 1904.
ESSAYS, ARTICLES, AND LETTERS PUBLISHED IN MAGAZINES AND
NEWSPAPERS.
1836.
Crystallization. Bath and West of England Magazine for
January. The Poor Laws. Bath and West of England Magazine for
March.
1839.
'' Skew Arches." Civil Engineer and Architect's Journal for May. (Autobiography i., 517.)
1840.
" A Geometrical Theorem." Civil Engineer and A rchitect's Journal for July. (Autobiography i., 520.)
1841.
" A New Form of Viaduct." Civil Engineer and Architect's Journal for July.
" The Transverse Strain of Beams." Civil Engineer and Archi- tect's Journal for September.
" Scale of Equivalents." Written for the Civil Engineer and Architect's Journal, but not published. (Autobiography, i., 525.)
1842.
"Architectural Precedent." Civil Engineer and Architect's
Journal for January. Letter on above. Civil Engineer and Architect's Journal for
March. u Velocimeter." Civil Engineer and Architect's Journal for July.
(Autobiography, i., 522.) Letters u On the Proper Sphere of Government." Nonconformist,
15, 22 June ; 13, 27 July ; 10 August ; 7, 21 September ;
19, 26, October ; 23 November ; 14 December.
1843.
" Effervescence — Rebecca and her Daughters." Nonconformist,
28 June. u Mr. Hume and National Education." Nonconformist, 2 August.
APP. c.] List of Herbert Spencer s Writings 579
"The Non-Intrusion Riots." Nonconformist, 11 October. Letter about the Derby flood of April, 1842. Architect, Engineer, and Surveyor for October.
1844.
" Imitation and Benevolence." Zoist for January.
u Remarks on the Theory of Reciprocal Dependence in the Animal and Vegetable Creations, as regards its bearing on Palaeontology." Philosophical Magazine for February. (Auto- biography, i., 533.)
" Situation of the Organ of Amativeness." Zoist for July.
''The Organ of Wonder." Zoist for October.
Various Articles. Birmingham Pilot, September to December.
1846. " Justice before Generosity." Nonconformist, 30 December.
1847.
" The Form of the Earth no proof of Original Fluidity." Philo- sophical Magazine for March. (Autobiography, i., 546.)
1848.
Article on " Political Smashers." Standard of Freedom, June or July.
1851.
" A Solution of the Water Question." Economist, 20 December. (Various Fragments, p. 229.)
1852.
" Use and Beauty." Leader, 3 January. (Essays, ii., 370.)
"The Development Hypothesis." Leader, 20 March. (Essays, i.,1).
" A Theory of Population." Westminster Review for April. (Principles of Biology, i., 577.)
"The Bookselling Question." Times, 5 April. (Various Frag- ments, p. 1.)
" A Theory of Tears and Laughter." Leader, 11 October.
"The Sources of Architectural Types." Leader, 23 October. (Essays, ii., 375.)
" The Philosophy of Style." Westminster Review for October. (Essays, ii.. 333.)
"Gracefulness." Leader, 25 December. (Essays, ii., 381.)
1853.
"The Value of Physiology." National Temperance Chronicle for
February. "The Valuation of Evidence." Leader, 25 June. (Essays, ii.,
161.)
580 Life of Herbert Spencer [API\ c.
u Over- Legislation." Westminster Revieiv for July. (Essays, iii.,
229.)
" The Universal Postulate." Westminster Review for October. "•The Use of Anthropomorphism." Leader, 5 November.
1854.
" Manners and Fashion." Westminster Review for April.
(Essays, iii., 1.) 44 Personal Beauty." Leader, 15 April and 13 May. (Essays, ii.,
387.) "The Art of Education." North British Review for May.
(Education, chap, ii.) u The Genesis of Science." British Quarterly Review for July.
(Essays, ii., 1.) 44 Railway Morals and Railway Policy." Edinburgh Review for
October. (Essays, iii. 52.)
1855.
" An Element in Method." A chapter in Principles of Psychology. (Various Fragments, p. 3.)
1856. Letter to Editor on charge of Atheism. Nonconformist, 23 January.
1857.
" Progress : its Law and Cause." Westminster Review for April. (Essays, i., 8.)
" The Ultimate Laws of Physiology." National Review for October. (Essays, i., 63.)
41 The Origin and Function of Music." Eraser's Magazine for October. (Essays, ii., 400.)
44 Representative Government : What is it good for ?" West- minster Revieiv for October. (Essays, iii., 283.)
1858.
14 State Tamperings with Money and Banks." Westminster
Review for January. (Essays, iii., 326.) u Moral Discipline of Children." British Quarterly Review for
April. (Education, chap, iii.) u Recent Astronomy and the Nebular Hypothesis." Westminster
Review for July. (Essays, i., 108.) 44 A Criticism of Professor Owen's Theory of the Vertebrate
Skeleton." British and Foreign Medico-Chirurgical Review
for October. (Principles of Biology, second edition, ii.,'-548.)
1859.
44 The Laws of Organic Form." British and Foreign Mcdico- Cliirnrgical Review for January.
APP. c.] List of Herbert Spencer's Writings 581
" The Morals of Trade." Westminster Review for April. (Essays,
iii., 113.) " Physical Training." British Quarterly Review for April.
(Education, chap, iv.) u What Knowledge is of most Worth." Westminster Review for
July. (Education, chap, i.)
u Illogical Geology." Universal Review for July. (Essays, i., 192.) Letter on Mr. J. P. Hennessey's paper read at the meeting of
the British Association. (Athenceum, 22 October.)
1860.
" Bain on the Emotions and the Will." British and Foreign
Medico-Chirurgical Review for January. (Essays, i., 241.) " The Social Organism." Westminster Review for January.
(Essays, i., 265.) u The Physiology of Laughter." M acini Han's Magazine for
March. (Essays, ii., 452.) " Parliamentary Reform : the Dangers and the Safeguards."
Westminster Review for April. (Essays, iii., 358.) " Prison Ethics." British Quarterly Review for July. (Essays, iii.,
152.)
1862.
"Theological Criticism." Athenceum, 8 and 22 November. u On Laws in General and the Order of their Discovery." Part of the first edition of First Principles. (Essays, ii., 145.)
1864.
" The Classification of the Sciences." Published as a brochure
in April. (Essays, ii., 74.) " Reasons for Dissenting from the Philosophy of M. Comte."
Appendix to the foregoing. (Essays, ii., 118.) u What is Electricity ? " Reader, 19 November. (Essays, ii., 168.)
1865.
" The Constitution of the Sun." Reader, 25 February. (Essays,
i., 182.)
u The Collective Wisdom." Reader, 15 April. (Essays, iii., 387.) " Political Fetichism." Reader, 10 June. (Essays, iii., 393.) " Mill versus Hamilton — The Test of Truth." Fortnightly Review
for July. (Essays, ii., 188.)
1866.
'' On Circulatio'n and the Formation of Wood in Plants." Transactions of the Linncvan Society, vol. xxv. (Principles of Biology, ii., 567.)
1870.
li The Origin of Animal Worship." Fortnightly Review for May. (Essays, i., 308.)
582 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. c.
1871. u A New Fishing Rod.'' Field, 14 January. (Autobiography, ii.,
504.) " Morals and Moral Sentiments." Fortnightly Review for April.
(Essays, i., 331.)
" Mental Evolution." Contemporary Review for June. " Specialized Administration." Fortnightly Review for December.
(Essays, iii., 401.)
1872.
" Survival of the Fittest." Nature, 1 February. " Mr. Martineau on Evolution." Contemporary Review for June. (Essays, i., 371.)
1873.
u Replies to Criticisms." Fortnightly Review for November and December. (Essays, ii., 218.)
" Obituary Notice of J. S. Mill." Examiner, 17 May. (Auto- biography, ii., 506.)
1874.
Correspondence relating to Physical Axioms. Nature, March to June. (Essays, ii., 298-314.)
1875.
" Professor Cairnes's Criticisms." Fortnightly Review for February. (Various Fragments, p. 14.)
1876.
"The Comparative Psychology of Man." Mind for January. (Essays, i., 351.)
1877.
" Views concerning Copyright." Evidence given before the Royal Commission. (Various Fragments, p. 18.)
" A Rejoinder to Mr. McLennan." Fortnightly Review for June. (Various Fragments, p. 63.)
" Mr. Tylor's Review of the Principles of Sociology." Mind for July.
1878.
Letter on the toast of "The Fraternity of the two Nations" proposed at a dinner in Paris. Standard, 30 May.
" Consciousness under Chloroform." Mind for October. (Prin- ciples of Psychology, i., 636.)
1879.
Letter to M. Alglave about the " Lois Ferry." Revue Scientifique for July.
APP. c.] List of Herbert Spencer s Writings 583
1880.
Letter on the feeling in England about the time of the out- break of the Civil War in the United States — written in 1859, but not then published. New York Tribune, 28 June. (Autobiography, ii., 497.)
u Professor Tait on the Formula of Evolution." Nature, 2 and 16 December. (Various Fragments, p. 75.)
Letter disclaiming having had to do with " George Eliot's " education. Standard, 26 December.
1881.
" Replies to Criticisms on the Data of Ethics." Mind for
January. " Views concerning Copyright." Speech delivered at a meeting
of the National Association for the Promotion of Social
Science, held in May. (Various Fragments, p. 57.) " Professor Green's Explanations." Contemporary Review for
February. (Essays, ii., 321.)
1882.
Letter on " The Anti- Aggression League." Nonconformist and
Independent, 2 March. " Professor Goldwin Smith as a Critic." Contemporary Review
for March.
Pecuniary liberality of Mr. J. S. Mill. Daily News, 27 March. '' Concerning the Misstatements of the Rev. T. Mozley."
Athenceum, 22 July. (Autobiography, i., 549.) u Ability versus Information." (Various Fragments, p. 91.) u Book Distribution." (Various Fragments, p. 93.)
1883.
Letter on the Edinburgh Review and on the Land Question. St.
James' Gazette, 14 February. " The Americans." Contemporary Review for January. (Essays,
iii., 471.)
1884.
Political Articles. Contemporary Review tor February, April,
May, June and July. Letter on a misquotation in the Duke of Argyll's Unity of
Nature. Athenceum, 16 February. u Mental Evolution in Animals." Athenceum, 5 April. u Retrogressive Religion." Nineteenth Century for July. Letter repudiating the opinion attributed to him that we should
be all the better in the absence of education. Standard,
8 August.
" Mr. Herbert Spencer and the Comtists." Times, 9 September. " Mr. Herbert Spencer and Comte." Times, 15 September.
584 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. c.
u Last Words about Agnosticism and the Religion of Humanity." Nineteenth Century for November.
1885.
"A Rejoinder to M. de Laveleye." Contemporary Review for
April. (Various Fragments, p. 98.) Letters on the Spencer- Harrison Book. Times, 1 3, 4 and 6
June. Standard, 10 and 13 June. "Government by Minority." Times, 21 December. (Various
Fragments, p. 110.)
1886.
"The Factors of Organic Evolution." Nineteenth Century for April and May. (Essays, i., 389.)
1888. " A Counter Criticism." Nineteenth Century for February.
(Essays, i., 467.) Letter with Reference to his Opinions on Painting. Architect,
24 February.
" The Ethics of Kant." Fortnightly Review for July. (Essays, iii., 192.)
1889.
Rev. J. Wilson's Statements about articles on " Sociology " in
the Birmingham Pilot. Pall Mall Gazette, 12 April. Letters on the Land Question. Times, 7, 11, 15, 19, 27 November.
1890.
" Absolute Political Ethics." Nineteenth Century for January.
(Essays, iii., 217.)
" Reasoned Savagery so-called. Daily Telegraph, 7 February. " The Inheritance of Acquired Characters." Nature, 6 March. " Panmixia." Nature, 3 April. "Our Space Consciousness. Mind for July. (Principles of
Psychology, ii., 717.) "The Moral Motive." Guardian, 6 August. (Principles of
Ethics, ii., 446.) " The Origin of Music." Mind for October.
1891.
" From Freedom to Bondage." Introduction to A Plea for
Liberty. (Essays, iii., 445.) " The Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children." Pall
Mall Gazette, 16 and 28 May. " The Origin of Music." A discussion. Mind for October.
1892.
Letter to Figaro about his unfamiliarity with M. Renan. Pall
Mall Gazette, 20 October. Letter on the sales of his books. Daily Chronicle, 3 December.
APP. c.] List of Herbert Spencer's Writings 585
1893.
u Social Evolution and Social Duty." (Various Fragments, p. 119.)
" The Inadequacy of Natural Selection." Contemporary Review for February and March. (Principles of Biology, i., 602.)
" Professor Weismann's Theories." Contemporary Review for May. (Principles of Biology, i., 633.)
" A Rejoinder to Professor Weismann." Contemporary Review for December. (Principles of Biology, i., 650.)
" Evolutionary Ethics." Athenaeum, 5 August. (Various Frag- ments, p. 111.)
1894.
u Obituary Notice of Professor Tyndall." Fortnightly Review
for February. " Parliamentary Georgites." Times, 20 February. (Various
Fragments, p. 122.) Letters relating to the Land Question Controversy. Daily
Chronicle, August to September.
"Weismannism Once More." Contemporary Review for Octo- ber. (Principles of Biology, i., 671.) " A Record of Legislation." Times, 24 November. (Various
Fragments, p. 125.) u The Booksellers' Trade Union." Times, 26 October. (Various
Fragments, p. 161.) " The Book Trade." Times, 30 October and 6 November.
(Various Fragments, pp. 163, 167.) "The Bookselling Question." Times, 21 November. (Various
Fragments, p. 169.) " Publishers, Booksellers, and the Public." Times, 24 October.
(Various Fragments, p. 156.) — Athenaum, 24 November.
(Various Fragments, p. 171.) — 29 December. (Various
Fragments, p. 174.) — The Author, December. (Various
Fragments, p. 177.) '' Origin of Classes among the ' Parasol ' Ants." Nature, 6
December. (Principles of Biology, i., 687.)
1895.
" Herbert Spencer on the Land Question." (Various Fragments,
p. 196.)
" The Antiquity of the Medical Profession." Nature, 27 June. " Mr. Balfour's Dialectics." Fortnightly Review for June. " The Nomenclature of Colours." Nature, 29 August. Note on the Ethical Motive. Nineteenth Century Review for
September. "American Publishers." Times, 21 September. (Various
Fragments, p. 236.)
586 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. c.
" Heredity Once More." Contemporary Review for October.
Letter on Canadian Copyright. Tintes, 21 October.
" Lord Salisbury on Evolution." Nineteenth Century Review for
November. " The Board of Trade and Railway Station Boards." Times, 2
December. (Various Fragments, p. 235.) On Mr. Howard Collins' letter suggesting a portrait. Times,
14 December.
1896.
u Dr. Bridges's Criticisms." Positivist Review for January.
" Anglo-American Arbitration." Letter read at a meeting in
Queen's Hall, 3 March. (Various Fragments, p. 128.) "Against the Metric System." Times, 4, 7, 9, 25 April.
(Various Fragments, p. 130.) Letter on Mr. Bramwell Booth's charges of Inconsistency.
Times, 17 December.
1897.
Clearing himself of seeming implication of " positive or nega- tive defect of quotation." Fortnightly Review for January. " The Duke of Argyll's Criticisms." Nineteenth Century for May.
1898.
Letters on "Primitive Religious Ideas." Literature, 5 and 19 February. Spectator, 23 July.
UA State Burden on Authors." Times, 9 and 16 February. (Various Fragments, p. 220.)
Letter on " Mr. Mallock's Representation of his - Views." Literature, 2 April.
The Times Art Critic on the Herkomer portrait. Times, 5 May.
" Cell Life and Cell Multiplication." Natural Science for May.
" Stereo-Chemistry and Vitalism." Nature, 20 October.
" Asymmetry and Vitalism." Nature, 10 November.
"What is Social Evolution?" Nineteenth Century for Sep- tember. (Various Fragments, p. 181.)
1899
" The Duke of Argyll and Mr. Herbert Spencer." Nature,
12 January.
" Prof. Meldola's Explanation." Nature, 26 January. Mr. Crozier's Charge of Materialism. Literature, 21 January
and 11 February. " Publishing on Commission." Literature, 4 February. (Various
Fragments, p. 217.) "The Metric System Again." Times, 28 March, 4, 8, 13 April.
(Various Fragments, p. 205.)
APP. c.] List of Herbert Spencer s Writings 587
" Professor Ward on ' Naturalism and Agnosticism.' " Fort- nightly Review for December.
Letter on a misrepresentation of Spencer's Ethics. Spectator, 16 December.
Letter to Mr. Leonard Courtney on the South African War. (Various Fragments, p. 223.)
1900.
On the South African War. Speaker, 13 January ; Morning
Leader, 5 February. (Various Fragments, p. 224.) u Professor Ward's Rejoinder." Fortnightly Review for April. "An Inhumanity." Times, 25 July. (Various Fragments, p. 225.) " Genesis of the Vertebrate Column." Nature, 25 October.
1901.
Letter on Space Consciousness, with reference to Dr. Tolver Preston's statement. Mind for January.
1902.
" The Spread of Small Pox." Signed u Observer," Daily News,
18 January.
" Ethical Lectureships." Ethics, 1 March. The Education Bill. Daily News, 8 April. Sir Michael Foster as M.P. for London University. Times 28
May.
APPENDIX D. ACADEMIC AND OTHER HONOURS.1
1871.
University of St. Andrews. Lord Rector.
University of St. Andrews. Doctor of Laws.
St. Andrews Medical Graduates Association. Honorary Member.
1874.
Royal Society. Fellow. University of Edinburgh. Lord Rector.
1875. University of Aberdeen. Lord Rector. .
1876.
Reale Accademia dei Lincei, Rome. Member. London Dialectical Society. President.
1880. Royal Academy of Sciences, Turin. Correspondent.
1882. Royal Society of Naples. Correspondent.
1883.
Institut de France. Correspondent.
Institucion Libre de Enseiianza, Madrid. Honorary Professor. Amercian Philosophical Society, Philadelphia. Fellow. Twilight Club, New York. Member.
Birmingham Natural History and Microscopical Society. Vice- President.
1885. Society of Physiological Psychology, Paris. Correspondent.
'With a few exceptions these proffered honours were declined. In cases where a mark of honour had been conferred before obtaining his consent, he made no use of the distinction.
APP. D.] Academic and other Honours 589
1888.
University of Bologna. Doctor of Philosophy and Letters. Neurological Society of London. Honorary Member.
1889. Royal Danish Academy. Member.
1891. Royal Academy of Belgium. Associate.
1892. Scientific Society of Athens. Member.
1895.
Royal Order " Pour le Merite." Imperial Academy of Vienna. Member. Royal Lombardian Institute, Milan. Member.
1896.
University of Buda Pesth. Doctor.
Associazione Educativa Spenceriana, Rome. Honorary Pre- sident.
1897.
Psychological Society of Moscow. Member. University of Cambridge. Doctor of Science. University of Edinburgh. Doctor of Laws. International Peace Association — Lombard Union. Honorary President.
1901.
British Academy of Letters.
1903. University of London. Doctor of Literature.
590
APPENDIX E. THE NEBULAR HYPOTHESIS.
To the Editor of The Fortnightly Review.1
SIR, — Often in the heat of controversy things are said which, whether true or not, should be left unsaid. Somewhat irritated by Professor Ward's expression UA fugitive essay," I named some facts in a way suggesting interpretations which I over- looked. Only when I saw the note after publication did I perceive the construction that would be put upon it. What mental lapse caused so great an oversight I cannot understand ; but a shattered nervous system entails countless evils — failure of judgment being one.
Though the note cannot now be cancelled, it is not too late to correct one of its expressions. It is between forty and fifty years since the period referred to, and I was incautious enough to speak from memory. I said that the belief that the nebulae are remote galaxies was current among astronomers. I should have said some astronomers. As will be seen on turning to the essay, I quoted a relevant passage from Humboldt's Cosmos. As he was in touch with Continental astronomers, and was in fact presenting the current astronomical conclusions, his representation of nebulae as remote galaxies was manifestly held by at least some of them. Doubtless it was the wide circulation of Cosmos during the fifties (I quoted from the seventh edition) which diffused this belief, and caused its acceptance as one which astronomers had established. Hence it happened that in 1857-8 any one who still adhered to "the Nebular Hypothesis " was smiled at. It was this which prompted the essay in question, and gave its original title
1 See Chap, xxvi., p. 445, note 2. It was arranged that this letter should be put in type, but that it should not be published in the Fortnightly if Professor Ward did not make a move. The occasion for its appearance in the Review not having arisen, it is now published for the first time.
APP. E.] The Nebular Hypothesis 591
" Recent Astronomy and the Nebular Hypothesis " : its primary purpose being to show the illegitimacy of the inferences drawn from Lord Rosse's disclosures. This should not, indeed, have needed showing. As far back as 1849, Sir John Herschel, in a description of the nebulae, had put together facts which, when duly considered, sufficed to show the fallacy of the current belief. But he made no reference to this belief ; and though its untruth was readily to be inferred, the inference was not generally drawn. In the essay just named I quoted this passage from Sir John Herschel, appending the remark that it furnished " another reductio ad absurdum " of the belief. Let me add that the question at issue was not one of mathe- matics, nor of mathematical physics, nor of physical astronomy. It was simply a question of general reasoning.
There is an error in the closing part of my last letter which I must rectify. I had referred to a passage from Sir John Herschel's Outlines expressing the belief that in clusters of stars having partially opposing impulses there must occur collisions ; but that after such collisions there must ultimately arise a circulation of a permanent character. Since globular clusters, like others, are formed of stars which, so far as appears, have opposing impulses, I assumed that all of these were included in the statement. I had before me at the time the second volume of Dr. Isaac Roberts's Photographs of Stars, Star-Clusters, and Nebula, in which, at pp. 1730-8, it is shown, both by the photographs and the descriptions, that those called globular clusters are in course of concentration — that is, are not in moving equilibrium (globular is a misleading word, since it connotes a definite limit, which nowhere exists) ; and I was the more led thus to regard them by Sir John Herschel's own statement respecting diffused and globular clusters, that " it is impossible to say where one species ends and the other begins " (Outlines, p. 639). Hence, it never occurred to me that he assumed some of the globular clusters to be already in a state of moving equilibrium ; nor do I understand now for what reason (save the theological one named) he thus assumed them. This, however, is beside the question, which is whether he did so assume them ; and here closer study of his words obliges me to admit that I was wrong.
This admission, however, does not in the least touch the main issue. In opposition to a view I had expressed, Professor Ward said that "the little that is known concerning the dis- tribution and motion of our Sidereal System points clearly to the existence of stable arrangements comparable to that of the Solar System, but of greater complexity " ; and he asserts that, in the passage I have quoted, " this view is maintained " by Sir John Herschel. My reply was that the passage makes no reference to our Sidereal System, either directly or by implica- tion, but only to extremely minute components of it — telescopic
592 Life of Herbert Spencer [APP. E.
star-clusters. And now to this negative proof of misrepresenta- tion I have to add positive proof ; for on pp. 630-1, Sir John Herschel discusses the speculations that had been ventured respecting the rotation of our Sidereal System, and after rejecting the only definite one named, that of Madler, expresses his own neutrality, and thinks that an opinion can be formed only after some thirty or forty years of a special class of observations.
HERBERT SPENCER. Brighton,
April ISth, 1900.
593
INDEX.
ABBOT, F. E., American critic, 130, 144
Aberdeen Free Press, 287
Aberdeen University, Spencer's refusal
of honours, 184 seq. Abney, Sir W. de W., 383 Aborigines' Protection Society, 326 Absolute, The : Sir John f lerschel on,
97 ; in ethics, 330 seq. Abydos, 206 Academic des Sciences Morales, &c.,
Paris, 232 sqq. Academy, The, 201, 410 Accademia dei Lincei, Rome, 194 Achilles, as the ideal of Christians, 400 Achranich (see Ardtornish) Acquired Characters, controversy con- cerning inheritance of, 269, 343 sqq.,
460
Acton, Lord [First Baron], 197, 267 Acts of Parliament, scheme for tabu- lating, 316 seq. Adamson, Prof. Robert, 383 .(Esthetic Progress (originally included
in Spencer's scheme for Synthetic
Philosophy), 375 Afghan war, 399 Agassiz' opinion of Spencer, 150 Agnosticism: 81,255; Spencer's change
from Theism to, 398, 491 ; attitude to
believers, 457 Airlie, Lord, 221 Airy, Sir G. B. (Astronomer Royal),
early correspondence with, 425 Alcock, Sir Rutherford, appreciation of
Descriptive Sociology, 173 Alexander, Prof. S., 484 Alexandria, 205, 206 Alger, William R., American author ;
expression of sympathy with Spencer,
128
Alglave, French translator, 200 Allbutt, Prof. T. Clifford, 484 Allen, Grant : 21 1, 383 ; writes eulogistic
verses, 171; Charles Danvin, 247;
visits to and from, 284, 415 ; champion- ship of Spencer, 377 ; death, 415 ; intellectual qualities, ib. '. " Personal Reminiscences " of Spencer, 489. Letter to, 377 _,
38
Alphabet, Spencer's scheme for natural,37
Alton, E. H., compiler of Descriptive Sociology, 453 note
Altruism, A. R. Wallace on genesis of, 199
Alviella (see Goblet d'Alviella)
America : Spencer's literary relations, 99, IO2, 106, 109 seq., 160, 164 seq., 215, 375, 409 ; first subscribers to Synthetic Philosophy, roo seq. ; Civil War, 106 seq. , 145, 207 seq. ; practical sym- pathy with Spencer, 127 seq., 164, 218 seq., 479 ; Spencer's proposed dedica- tion of philosophy to friends in, 146 ; International Scientific Series, 159 ; political machinery, 160; attitude to- wards Spencer, 202, 228, 253 seq., 387 ; Spencer's visit, 204, 217, 225 seq., 339 ; copyright question, 209, seq. , 265 seq. , 272; political state, 210; Twilight Club, 230: Japanese relations, 321 seq. ; Chinese immigration, 323 ; Henry George's attack on Spencer, 338 seq. ', testimonial, 339 ; admiration of " smart " men, 367; "dreadful catas- trophe " impending, ib ', Spencer's pamphlet on metric system, 379 ; arbi- tration, 379 seq. ; war with Spain, 409 ; doctor asks for bequest of Spen- cer's brain, 499 ; Declaration of Inde- pendence, 569
Amphimixis, Weismann's theory, 352
Amusements, recommended by Spencer to his friends, 528
Anarchist, use of term by an individualist,
367
Ancestor Worship, ecclesiastical institu- tions derived from, 573
Andrews, Prof., physicist, 432, 552
Animism : controversy with E. B. Tylor concerning, 356 seq., 409, 451
Anti- Aggression League, 221 seq. , 379,
410, 53«
Anti-Gambling League, 327, 358 Antiquity, veneration for, 34, 46 Anti- Vaccination League, 422 Ants, differentiation of classes, 408 Appleton, D. & Co., Spencer's American
publishers, no, 218, 260 seq., 342
594
Life of Herbert Spencer
Appleton, W. H., 202, 209, 446 A priori method in Spencer's philoso- phy, 512 seq.
Arbitration, Anglo-American, 379 seq. Architect, The, 282, 584 Architect, Engineer and Surveyor, 579 " Architectural Precedent," paper by
Spencer on, 34, 283, 578 Architecture, often spoiled by excess, 411 Ardtornish (formerly Achranich) Ar- gyllshire, Spencer's visits to, 82, 95, 101, 103, 109, 116, 123, 137, 172, 180 seq., 190 seq., 200, 216, 237, 308 seq., 472 ; a last reminder of, 470 (illustra- tion opp. page 309) Arena, 313
Argoed, The, Monmouthshire, 287, 288 Argyll, [Eighth] Duke of, 382; lettei
to, 346 Aristotle, Spencer's knowledge of his
writings, 418
Arnold, Matthew, 209, 456, 460 Arnold, Dr. [Thomas], 297 Arnott's smoke-consuming grate, 82 Art: French architectures and furniture, 76 ; Spencer's scheme fur classifying artistic characters of paintings, 374 seq. ; Ruskin's views, 403 ; need for restraint, 411
" Art of Education," 544, 580 Artisans (see Working Classes) Assouan, 206
Astronomy : in scheme for Synthetic
Philosophy, 377, 425 ; Spencer's
writings concerning, 425 set]. , 55 * »
genesis of asteroids, 552
Atheism, repudiated by Spencer, 8l (v.
491, 58o)
Athenaeum, The (Club) : 142, 215, 239, 292, 298, 405, 532 ; Spencer's election, 494 seq. ; S,.encer's attachment to,
494 seq. ; his qualities as a club-man,
495 se1- > Gallon's smoke-room talks with Spencer, 501 ; Spencer's imprac- ticable administration, 508 set/.
Athentzum (periodical), 81, 105 seq., 201, 336, 581, 583, 585
Athleticism, 328
Australia: Press attitude to "Religious Retrospect, &c.," 254; Sptncerian Society in Melbourne, 463
Author, The, 585.
Authority: women always supporters of, 138; honorary titles strengthen, 235 (see also Herbert Spencer, Character- istics)
Autobiography of Spencer : in relation to this work, vii. seq., initiation, 177 ; lacuna, 205 ; writing of, 238 ; con- templated publication of part during life, 257; coincidences, 406. (Fre- quent other references throughout this work)
Avebury, Lord (see Lubbock)
Avenue Road, No. 64, St. John's Wood,
Spencer's menage at, 326 seq., 329,
365 seq., 380, 404 seq.
BABBAGE, Charles, 113
Bacon, Francis : Spencer's knowledge of
his writings, 418 ; application of saying
by, 419
Baden-Powell, Sir G. S., 383, 426 Baer, K. von, formula of development,
546 Bailliere, French publisher, 193, 197,
206
Bain, Prof. Alexander: 81, 116, 215, 259, 383 ; Emotions and the Will, 96, 181, 5535 Mill on his psychological work, 115 ; Spencer's regard for, 115, 457, 471, 472 ; founder of Mind, 173 ; false report of death, 189 ; Mental an.i Moral Science, 195 ; review of " Data of Ethics," 201 ; opinion of Spencer's last book, 460 ; death, 471 ; Spencer's appreciation, 472. Letters to, 116, 457, 471 ; letter from, 471 Bain, Mrs., 471 seq. Baker, Miss, 310; letter lo, 317 Balfour, Rt. Hon. Arthur James: 477; criticism of Spencer's philosophy at Glasgow, 344 seq. ; Spencer's article on " Mr. Bilfour's Dialectics," 368, 585; visit to Spencer, 381 ; co-opera- tion in testimoi.ial to Spencer, 382 seq., 385. Letters to, 388, 453 Balfour [F. M.], 226 Ball, Sir Robert S., 383 i Bancroft, George, 100 j Barbarism, recrudescence of, 410 seq. \ Bainett, Rev. S. (Canon), 205 Baslian, Dr. Henry Charlton : Spencer's trustee, ix. ; co-operation in this woik, ib. ; letter to, on booksellers, 361 ; tes- timonial to Spencer, 382 seq. ; opinion of Herkomer's portrait, 394 ; corres- pondence concerning Norman Lock- yer's speculations, 434 ; visit to Spencer in his illness, 469 Bastian, Mis. Charlton, 407 Basutoland question, 219 Bath and West of England Magazine, 19,
578
Beaid, Dr. George M., 230 Beauty : substantiality a factor in, j6 Beckett, Sir Edward (Lord Grimthorpe), criticism of Spencer's philosophy, 239 Beddard, F. E., F.R.S., 383 Beddoe, John, M.D., 383 Beecher, Henry Ward : ico; appreciation
of Spencer, 128, 252 Beethoven, L. van, 310, 411 Bell, Graham, 193 Bellow;:, Henry W., 100
Index
595
Benn, Alfred W. , unpublished review of Synthetic Philosophy, 401 seq. ; letter to, 402
Bentham, Jeremy, Spencer's knowledge of his writings, 418
Bepton, Sussex, 448, 532
Besant, Sir Walter, 383
Betting, 327
Bevington, Miss L. S. , 216, 410
Bibliotheque Pacifiste Internationale, 476
Billiards, saying falsely attributed to Spencer, 298 seq.
Binding-pin, appliance devised by Spencer, 52, 538
Biography : popularity of, 379 ; what should be included in a complete, 533
Biology : Spencer's early interest in, 63, 535 ; importance of physics, 96 ; spontaneous generation, 144 seq. ; views of experts on Spencer's work, 151 seq. ; interbreeding of races, 322 seq. ; inheritance of acquired characters or functionally-wrought modifications, 343> 547 seq. ; its study essential for the ethical teacher, 419 ; commence- ment of life on the earth, 443 seq. ; filiation of Spencer's ideas in, 540 seq., 546 seq., 549, 553, 555 seq. ; a priori reasoning, 549 ; first use of word " evolution," 553 note ; alleged basis for Sociology, 570 note
Birks, Canon, 188
Birmingham : Complete Suffrage Con- ference, 37 ; Pilot newspaper, 48, 287
Birmingham and Gloucester Railway (afterwards merged in Midland Rail- way) : Spencer's appointment on, 22, 536
Birmingham Natural History and Micro- scopical Society, 231, 250
Bitter Cry of the Outcasts of London, 243
Black, William, 215, 222
Black and White, 452
Blunt, — , 271
Blunt, Wilfrid Scawen, writes Satan Absolved at Spencer's instigation, 411 seq. ; letters to, 410 seq., 450
Boehm, Sir Edgar, R.A., his bust of Spencer, 244
Boers, policy towards outlanders, 422 ; Relief fund, 464
Bologna, Italy, 205
Bologna, University of, degree conferred on Spencer, 291
Bonney, Canon T. G., 484
Booksellers' discounts and net prices, 67, 1 66, 361 seq., 579, 585
Booth, W. Bramwell, attack on Spencer, 398
Bosanquet, Bernard. 383
Botha, General Louis, letters to, on
management of Boer Relief Fund, 464 Boughton Monchelsea, 405 Bourne, H. R. Fox : letter to, on the
Kanaka Question in Queensland, 326 Bournemouth, 279 I Bowditch, J. I., 100 j Bowen, Sir Charles, 267 | Bowen, F., 100 Bowman, Thomas, Warden of Merton,
484
Boys, Prof. C. V., 383 Brabrook [Sir], E. W., 383 Bradlaugh, Charles, 222 Brant-Sero, Mr. (Iroquois), proposes
translation of Education into Mohawk,
452
Bray, Mrs., Letter to, 462 Brett, John, A.R.A., 282 Brettell, settlement of immigrants so
named at Stourbridge, I Brettell, Jane, see Holmes Brettell, Jeremiah, 2 Brettell, John, 2 Brettell, Joseph, of Wordsley, Spencer's
descent from, 2
Brettell, Joseph, Wesleyan Minister, 2 Bridge, James, Spencer's secretary, 222 Bright, Rt. Hon. John, M.P., 55, 208.
Letters to, 221, 224 Bright, Rev. Dr. J. Franck, 484 Brighton, Sussex : 76, 82, 100, 193, 215,
222, 239, 275, 353 ; Spencer's resi- dence at, 406, 454, 471 ; Free Church
meeting, 466 ; official mark of respect
at Spencer's funeral, 477 Brighton and Hove Natural History
Society, 477
British Academy of Letters, 456 British Association Meetings : 172, 217 ;
Lord Salisbury's address, 363 seq. British and Foreign Medico-Chirurgical
Review, 81, 552, 580 seq. British Library of Political Science, 403 British Quarterly Review, 59, 75, 85,
87, 105 seq., 165, 545, 580 Brodrick, Hon. George C., letter to, 304 Brooklyn Ethical Association, 293, 294,
398
Brough, Prof., letter to, 418 note Browning, Oscar, 197 Browning, Robert: 210, 411 ; lines from
"The Lost Leader" applied by II.
George to Spencer, 339, 340 Bruce, Mr. [S. Noble], 192 Brunton, [Sir|, T. Lauder, 383 Bryant, Edwin W., St. Louis, U.S.A.,
174
Buchanan, Robert : 410; Spencers ap- preciation and criticism of The Out- cast, 307 ; exposure of Christian hypo- ciisy, 308 ; defence of Spencer in Huxley controveisy, 333 seq., 307 seq. ;
596
Life of Herbert Spencer
death, 452. Letter to, the " higher
socialism," 334 Buckle, Thomas Henry : on programme
of Synthetic Philosophy, 97. Letter
from, 88
Buda Pesth, University of, 370 Bunsen, Baron, 445, 552 Burcleau, Auguste, Vice- President of the
French Chamber, and translator of
Spencer's Essays, 359 Burdeau, Mme., Letter to, 359 Burgess, J. B., R.A., his portrait of
Spencer, 393 seq.
Busk, Dr. (George), 123, 124, 193, 194 Butler, Mrs. Josephine, Letter to, on
coercive methods in social affairs, 420 Buzzard, Dr. Thomas, 358. Letter to,
certification of nurses, 315
CAINE, Hall, Canadian copyright, 376
Caine, W. S., M.P., 358
Caird, Dr. Edward, Master of Balliol, 423
Cairnes, J. E. : 173; letter to, Laissez- faire, 161
Cairo, 205, 206, 212
Calderon, Philip H., R.A., 282
Calderwood, Prof., Edinburgh, 204
Cambridge, University of : proposal to confer degree, 389 ; Hegelianism, 457 ; proposed memorial to Spencer in Westminster Abbey (signatures), 484 seq.
Campbell, Lord, 67
Canada : Copyright question, 375 seq. ', Spencer's visit, 225
Carlyle, Thomas : 220 ; Cromwell, 53 ; Spencer's opinion of, 378, 455 ; his opinion of Spencer, 378 ; repudiation of " science of history," 567
Carnarvon, Earl of, 373
Carnegie, Andrew : 317 ; gift of piano to Spencer, 305, 310; views concerning wealth, ib. ; asks Spencer to sit for his portrait, 387, 393 ; thoughts of Spencer in his illness, 472 ; request for memento, 473 seq. Letters to, 305, 387, 419, 465, 472
Carpenter, W. B., Principles of Physio- logy, 6 1
Carr's Dynamometer, 26
Carus, Prof. Victor : 359 ; translator, 420 ; pays Spencer the highest com- pliment he ever received, 421
Gary, Henry C., 100
Cause : relativity of idea, 402 ; investi- gation of, an analytic process, 534
Gazelles, Dr. E. : French translator of Spencer's works, 129, 153, 222, 365; Introduction to Evolution Philosophy, 153 seq., 170 seq. ; relinquishes trans- lation for political reasons, 399 ; Spen-
cer recommends amusements to, 505. Letters to, 154 seq., 399, 432
Cecil, Lord Arthur, 200
Cecil, Lord Lionel, 200
"Ceremonial Institutions" (a division of Spencer's Principles of Sociology), 191, 194, 200, 204, 205, 238, 569
Chadwick, Rev. J. W., Brooklyn : on Spencer's characteristics, 500 seq. ; on Spencer's philosophy, 520 seq.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. Joseph : 464 ; Canadian copyright, 376 ; presence at disestablishment meeting recalled, 466
Chambers, Robert, 66 : on Spencer's population theory, 64 ; on programme of Synthetic Philosophy, 97
Chapin, E. H., 100
Chapman, Dr. John, 54, 58, 63, 86, 88, 542, 547
Character, in relation to politics, 316, 420 (v. 540, 575 seq.)
Chemistry, evolution of elements, 434, 445
Chesson, F. W., 219
Children : Spencer's advice to a mother, 286, 317 seq. ; prevention of cruelty to, 303 seq. (See also Education)
China: relations with foreigners, 318; Descriptive Sociology, 453 note ; trans- lation of Spencer's work, 461 note
Christian Examiner, 128, 130
Christianity : attitude of clergy to Spen- cer, 202, 251, 254, 328; objection to Spencer's Study of Sociology at Yale, 208 ; profession and practice contrasted, 220, 308, 400, 413, 423 ; dissociation of religion and ethics, 324 ; eternal torment, 354 ; relapse of those who abandon, 465 ; Spencer's attitude, in connection with proposed memorial in Westminster Abbey, 486 sqq. ; in private life, 492
Church of England : 33, 35 ; Arnold's opinion, 460 ; disestablishment scheme, 466 seq.
Church Congress, appreciation of Spen- cer at, 202
Cirencester, 79
Civil Engineer and Architects' Journal, 26, 34, 578
Civilization, conception of, in Social Statics, 540
Clark, Sir Andrew, Bart. : testimonial to, 283 ; reads Spencer's writings as a tonic, 522
" Classification of the Sciences," 113, 377, 588
Clifford, Kingdon : 429, 431 ; lecture on mental development, 143
Cliftonville, Margate, 358
Clodd, Edward : 383; Memoir of Grant Allen, 415
Index
597
Clothing, importance of proper distribu- tion over body, 317 set/.
Cobden, Richard : character develop- ment, 32
Cockburn, Lord Chief Justice, dictum on martial law, 451
Coincidences : importance attached to, 357 ; basis for belief in the super- natural, 372 ; estimation of probabili- ties, 471
Coit, Dr. Stanton, correspondence on ethical movement, 454 set/.
Coleridge, S. T., Idea of Life, 541, 543
Collier, James, Spencer's secretary : 147, 237 ; Reminiscences of Spencer, 489
Collier, Hon. John, 244
Collins, F. Howard : 231, 250; Epitome of Synthetic Philosophy, 287 ; pam- phlet and correspondence concerning inheritance of acquired characters, 342 sqq. ; proposal for portrait of Spencer, 373) 586; co-operation in testimonial, 390 seq. ; correspondence with Bram- well Booth, 398. Letters to, 373, 374,
387, 389. 395 «?•, 398, 455
Cologne Cathedral, Spencer's opinion of, 72
Colonial federation, 328
Colour-blindness, frequency among Quakers, 345
Colours, Spencer's scheme for nomen- clature, 374
Columbus, Christopher, Spencer's eulogy of, 490
Communism : land question, 248 ; ten- dency to, 238 (see also Socialism)
Compayre, Gabriel, 465
Complete Suffrage Union, 36 seq., 47, 538
Comte, Auguste : Spencer's philosophical relations to, 72, 74 seq., 1 12 seq., 131, 153. 156. 258, 287, 376 seq., 545, 559 ; meeting with, 82 ; influence on Eng- lish scientific thought, 114; donation to Spencer from his executor, 126 ; the worship of humanity, 195 ; Har- rison-Spencer controversy, 254 seq. ; Hector Macpherson on his limited con- ception of philosophy, 516 sqq. ; what Spencer owed to him, 545, 559
Congregational Board of Education, 60
Congreve, Richard, letter from, on Har- rison-Spencer controversy, 255
Consciousness, evolution of, exemplified, 179 seq.
" Consciousness under Chloroform," 192,
195. 582
Conservation of Energy, Spencer s criti- cism of term, 175
Conservative Party, Spencer's attitude, 312
" Constitution of the Sun," 431, 559, 581
Contemporary Review, 149, 159, 160, 187, 212 seq., 217, 226, 238 seq., 245, 346 sqq, 413, 582 sqq. Conway, Moncure, 145 ; proposal for "supreme court of civilization," 409 seq. ; letters to, 355, 410, 450 Cooper, J. Astley, letter to, 328 Co-operation, 358
Copyright: international, 159, 209, 265, 266, 272 ; Royal Commission, 189, 453, 582 ; Canada, 375 seq. ; letter to A. J. Balfour suggesting legislative action, 453
Cornhill Magazine, 43 1 Corn-Law Repeal, effect on pauperism,
161
Correspondents, examples of requests re- ceived by Spencer from, 447 seq. Cosmic Philosophy, Spencer's objection
to title, 157 seq.
" County Council Tyranny," 313 Courtney, Leonard (now Lord C. of Penwith) : 382 ; address at Spencer's funeral, 477 sqq., $22. Letter to, on relations with his constituents, 423 Courtney, Mrs. Leonard (now Lady C. of Penwith, nee Kate Potter), 204 ; acts as " grundyometer," 311 seq.; visit to Spencer in his illness, 419; his last letter, 476 ; reminiscences of Spencer, 492 sqq., 497 seq., 509 Coutant, M., Paris, 475 Craig-Sellar, Mrs., 30% seq. Crawford and Balcarres, Earl of, 437 Cremer [Sir], W. R., 223 Crichton- Browne, Sir J., 383 Cripps, Judy, 286 (see 297) Cripps, Mrs. W. H. (nee Potter), 279, 297. Letter to, on care of her child- ren, 286 Critics, Spencer's experience of, 188,
201, 211, 407 sqq., 412 Croft, W. C. (Liberty and Property
Defence League), letter to, 224 Crookes, Sir William, theory of com- position of elements, 434 seq. Cross, John W. : 87, 137, 194, 214, 365 ; Life of George Eliot, 266, 542 ; letter to, 367
Cross, Mrs. J. W. (" George Eliot,"?.*.) Cross, Miss Mary, 365 Crucifixion, tableau vivant of, at St.
Cloud, 76 Cunynghame, H. H., on Crooke's theory
of composition of elements, 434 Curtis, George W., 100
DAILY CHRONICLE, 359, 584 ; land question, 341 seq., 585
Dailv News, 583, 587
Daily Telegraph, 222, 333 seq., 584
Dale, A. W. W., Vice-Chancellor, Liver- pool University, 484
598
Life of Herbert Spencer
Dalhousie, Lord, 237, 297
Dalhousie, Lady, 237, 297
Dallinger, Dr. W. H., 383
Daniel, Rev. C. H. O., 484
Darrell, Lionel, 205, 206
Darwin, Charles : on Spencer's biological speculations, 87, 125 ; effect of Origin of Species on Spencer's recognition, 140 ; Descent of Man and mental evolution, 148 seq. ; opinion of Spen- cer, 150; " Pangenesis," 151 ; death and funeral, 223 ; Spencer's philoso- phical relations to, 236 seq. , 245, 246, 247, 256, 258, 313, 540, 555, 565; theory ot music, 237 ; " Factors of Organic Evolution," 269 sqq ', use- inheritance, 343 ; alleged socialistic implications of doctrines, 368 ; pro- posal to acquire house at Down for biological purposes, 396 sqq. ; on value of speculation, 513
Letters to, 117, 148 seq., 151, 160, 167 ; letters from, 87, 98
Darwin, Dr. Erasmus, 269
Darwin, Francis, 384
Darwin, Prof. [Sir] George H. : 384, 437 ; letters to, 223, 397, 441 seq.
Darwin, W. E., 385
" Data of Ethics" (Part I. of Spencer's Principles of Ethics, q.v.), 194, 196 seq., 201, 212, 214 ; Japanese transla- tion, 231
Davidson, Prof. W. L., 471
De Morgan, William, 210
Debus, Dr. Heinrich, 193
Decimal System, 22, 379
Deduction : a synthetic process, 535 ; Huxley's hatred of, 549 ; his remark about Spencer's proneness to, 502
Deductive Philosophy, title and scheme proposed for omitted divisions of Synthetic Philosophy, 426 seq.
Defford, bridge over Avon at, originates nickname for Spencer, 25
Degrees (see Titles)
Delmonico's, New York, 225, 226, 230
Denmark : official invitation to Spencer to write on Social Development, 462 ; Royal Danish Academy, 291
Derby : 84, 93 ; Spencer's grandfather settles in, 3 ; Spencer's birthplace, 7, 389 ; Spencer'shome in Wilmot Street, 9 ; political events, 36 seq., 54 ; Spencer Society, 389
Derby, Earl of (Lord Stanley), 211 ; testimonial to Spencer, 92 ; on Spen- cer's Ethics, 199
Derby, Countess of, reception at Foreign Office, 185 siq.
Derby Met airy (1790), reference to Spencer's grandfather in, 3
Descriptive Sociology: 140 sqq., 147 seq., 164 seq., 218 seq., 568, 571 ; Sir R.
Alcock's appreciation, 173 ; losses, 2631 339 5 disparagement, by F. Harrison, 264 ; Chinese division, 295, 453 n°tf i Spencer's testamentary pro- visions, 453 ; new divisions in progress, iii. note "Development Hypothesis," 65, 543,
546, 579
Development Theory (see Evolution) Devonshire, the Duke of, 484 Dewar, Prof. [Sir] James, 437 Dickens, Charles, Christinas tale, 53 Disraeli, Benjamin [Earl of BeaconsfieldJ,
desire to help Spencer, 92 Dixon, Hepworth, editor of Athetiteum,
95
Donaldson, James, Principal of St. An- drew's University, 384
Donisthorpe, Wordsworth, tabulation of Acts of Parliament, 316; letters to, 360 seq.
Dorking, 284 sqq.
Dover, 78 ; design for landing pier, 43
Downes, Dr. Arthur, 271 seq.
Draper, J. W., 100, 226
Dreams, fulfilment of, a question of co- incidence, 357
Drummond, Prof. Henry : Natural Law in the Spiritual World, 232 ; alleged plagiarism, 363
Drunkenness, outcry against, 281
Dublin, impressions of, 146
Dublin Review, 173
Duncan, Dr. David (the author) : origin of this work, vii. seq. ; Spencer's secre- tary and assistant, 141 seq., 147
Duodecimals, 37
Dutch Judge, Spencer's refusal to meet, at Cairo, 498
Dynamometer, appliance invented by Spencer, 25, 26
Dysart, Earl of, 247, 353, 384. Letters to: Home Rule, 315; importance of character in politics, /'/'. seq.
EARTH, the : Spencer's speculations con- cerning atmosphere and form, 425 ;
age, 438 ; constitution of interior, ib. :
cooling, 441 Eclectic Review, 38 seq. " Ecclesiastical Institutions" (Principles
of Sociology, Part vi.), 245 seq., 251 sqq.,
266 Economist: 48, 56, 57 sqq. ,63, 77, 579 ;
Spencer's sub-editorship, 56, 57, 62,
67, 70 Edinburgh Review. 69, 76 seq., 117 seq.;
193, 229, 580 ; review of evolution
philosophy, 238
Edinburgh University, 184^., 389 Education : Spencer's early interest in
subject, 29 ; as a franchise qualifica-
Index
599
tion, 94 ; State agency, 257, 403, 454, 474 ; journalistic plebiscite concerning leading educationists, 259 ; London Liberty Club, 277 ; outcry against insufficient, 281 ; centralization and uniformity, 404, 454; Spencer's views not influenced by Rousseau, 465 seq. : evolutionary conception, 544
Education, Intellectual, Moral, and Physical [collected essays by Spencer]: 58, 71, 74, 84 seq., 87, 102 seq., 533, 544, 577 ; sixpenny edition, 465 ; translations, 197, 452, 461 note
Edward VII., King: 468; absurd story of, when Prince of Wales, 414
Egypt : visit and impressions, 204 sqq. ; crisis in, 223 seq.
Egyptians, Ancient, Descriptive Sociology,
453
Elam, Dr., 187, 188
Electric current, analogy in nervous action, 179
Elements, chemical, products of evolu- tion, 434 seq.
Eliot, George (nle Marian Evans): 205, 414 ; first meeting, 63 ; introduced by Spencer to G. H. Lewes, 64 ; on Spencer's ethics, 199 ; last meeting, 214 ; death and funeral, ib. ; Spencer's relations with, 215, 266 sqq. ; her mental powers, 296 ; gives Mill's Logic to Spencer, 418 ; instigates Spencer to read Comte, 545. Letter from, 214
Ellicott, Dr., Bishop of Gloucester, 188
Elliott, Sir Frederick, committee-man at Athenceum, 496
Ellis, Mr., educationist, 123
Emerson, Ralph Waldo : 232 seq. ; opinion of Spencer, 150
Engineer's Journal, 34
English : " bovine unintelligence," 314 ; too stupid to generalize, ib. ; national aggressiveness, 322, 328, 399 seq. (see a/so 387) ; Spencer's prestige in, 452 ; freedom, 539
Equilibration, views of Tyndall and Spencer, 104 (v. 555)
Escrick Park, 217
Essays (Spencer's collected), 84, 85, 1 12, 129, 226, 359, 436» 533. 577
Ethical Lecturers' Fund, 416 seq., 454 seq., 587
Ethical Movement, 455
Ethics : absolute, 59 ; genesis of moral sentiments, 148 seq. ; and religion, 227 ; highest aim of the beneficent, 324 ; differentiation from religion, 324 ; ideal or absolute, in political affairs, 330 seq. ; social evolution, 336 seq. ; qualifications for teaching, 416 sqq. ; Hector Macpherson on Soencer's work in, 519; conception
formerly current, 538 ; evolutionary conception, 574 seq. ; conclusions con- cerning private conduct empirical, 575
Ethics (periodical), 587
Evans, Sir John, 384
Evans, Marian (see Eliot, George)
Everett, Edward, 100
Eversley, Lord (Mr. Shaw Lefevre), 475
Evolution : man the highest result, 62 ; Darwin's views, 87, 245, 313 ; incom- patible with spontaneous generation, 144 seq. ; Gazelles' outline, 153 ; reply to criticisms on doctrine, 165 ; A. R. Wallace on altruism, 199 ; heredity, 269 seq. ; W. H. Hudson's exposition, 313 ; social state, 336, 540 sqq., 567 sqq. ; religious ideas, 251 sqq., 569 sqq. ; application to inorganic nature, 424 sqq., 445 ; origin of elements, 434 sqq., 445 ; equality of men excluded, 466 ; filiation of ideas in relation to, 540 sqq.
Examiner, 167, 582
Exhibition, the Great (1851), 62
Exhibition, International (1862), 104
Explanation, relativity of the conception, 402
Eyre, Governor, 451
" FACTORS of Organic Evolution," 247, 269 seq.
Facts and Comments (Spencer's last book) : 351 note, 446, 448 seq., 453, 456 seq., 491 ; opinions of friends and critics, 460; translations, 461 ; "ulti- mate questions," 481
Fairbairn, Dr. A. M.,2I7
Faraday, Michael, attitude to Comtism, 114
Fawcett, Henry, 297
Fawcett, Mrs., 277
Felton, C. C., 101
Ferri, Prof. Enrico, evolution and so- cialism, 368
Ferry, Jules, French statesman, 20O, 582
Fetichism (see Animism)
Figaro, Le, 361, 584
" Filiation of Ideas," viii., 413 (Appen- dix B., 533 sqq.)
First Principles : 101, sqq., 105, 108, 121, M7.I53. 175. 20I> 2I *• 238. 5775 second edition, 147, 559, 577 5 J- S. Mill's ap- preciation, 108 ; French translation, 153; Tyndall's criticisms, 175,428(1'. 555) ; position in scheme of Synthetic Philosophy, 377 ; final revised edition, 420, 445 seq., 577 ; scheme for omitted divisions, 426 seq. ; in relation to recent advances in physical science, 435'. ghost theory, 451 ; independence of its two parts, 464 seq. (v. 201), 554;
6oo
Life of Herbert Spencer
Hector Macpherson's criticism, 518
sfq.t filiation of ideas in, 554 seq. Fiske, John : 170 ; defence of Spencer in
Nation, 150 ; lectures at Harvard on
Spencer's philosophy, 156 ; proposes
title "Cosmic Philosophy," 157 seq, ;
death, 452. Letters to, 157, 159, 357 Fitch, Sir Joshua, letter to, 455 Flower, Sir William H. , 269, 271 ; letter
to, 325
Folkestone, 273 Forbes, Prof. Edward, on Spencer's
theory of population, 64 " Form of the Earth, &c.," 425, 579 Fortnightly Review, 119, 148, 189, 194,
216, 324, 363, 445, 489, 581 seq., 584
sqq.
Forum, The, American magazine, 489 Foster, Sir Michael, 269, 271, 384 Fowler, Rev. Dr. Thomas, 484 Fox, Mr. (afterwards Sir) Charles, 22,
23, 43, 51
France : impressions of, 76 ; architecture and decoration, ib. ; bellicose feeling in, '58, 86; events of 1870-71, 153 sqq. ; social characteristics, 155; Spencer's views discussed in Chamber, 199 seq. ; Lord Salisbury's B.A. address and Spencer's article, 365 ; " political bur- glaries," 399 seq. ; Spencer's last book, 461 ; Loubet's visit to England, 468 ; Revolution, 569 (see also Academic des Sciences, and Paris)
Franchise : 325 ; educational qualifica- tion, 94 ; extension to women, 137 sqq,
Francis, John W., 101
Frankfort, Spencer's impression of, 72
Frankland, Prof, (afterwards Sir) Ed- ward, 144, 193, 215, 384, 437
Fraser, Prof. A. Campbell : testimonial to Spencer, 90; letters to, 71, 74
fraser's Magazine, 84, 580
Free libraries, Spencer's views con- cerning, 403
Free Life, organ of individualism, 300 seq*
Free-Trade, 39, 42 (v. 54)
Freedom, law of equal, 539, 576
Fremantle, W. A. H. C., letter to, 297
Frere, Sir Bartle, 498
" From Freedom to Bondage," 302, 584.
Froude, J. A. : 193 ; on programme of synthetic philosophy, 97; "science of history" repudiated by, 567
Froude [William], " skin friction," 557
Fry, Sir Edward : 384 ; argument against Weismann, 348 ; letters to, 348, 350, 422
Furness, Dr., IOI
GALL, Dr., phrenologist, 537 Gallon, Sir Douglas, 384
Gallon, Francis: 223, 282, 382, 384, 483 ; on Spencer's remarkable feat as a boy, 13; reminiscences of Spencer, 501 seq., 508 seq. Lelter to, 396
Gambling, 327
Garnett, Dr. Richard, 384
Garrett, Mr., 230
Garrison, William Lloyd, junr., 342
"Genesis of Science," 376, 545 seq., 548, 559, S8o
Geology : in scheme for Synthetic Philo- sophy, 377, 425 sqq. ; age of solar syslem, 433 ; writings bearing on, 425 sqq. ; age of the earth, 441 ; volcanic eruptions, 439 sqq; cooling of the earth, 441 sqq. ; a priori reasoning, 549
" Geometrical Theorem," article by Spencer on, 26, 578
George, Henry : Progress and Poverty, 218 ; meeting with, ib. ; repudiation of views, 229 ; policy of taxing out landlords, 299 ; attack on Spencer in A Perplexed Philosopher, 336 sqq.
Germany : Order " Pour le Merite," 369 ; Spencer's last book, 461 ; subordina- tion to authority, 539
" Germ-Plasm " theory, 348
Ghost-Theory, 356 sqq., 451, 568 note, 573
Gibbs, Walcott, 101
Giddings, Prof. F., 570 note
Giffen, Sir Robert, letters to, 452 seq.
Gingell, Miss Julia R., 312, 365
Giornale a" Italia, 463
Gladslone, W. E. : correspondence with, arising out of Study of Sociology, 162 seq., 339; amicable relations with Spencer, 163, 168, 193, 210,215, 346, 414 ; Anti-Aggression League, 224 ; protest from a correspondent, 254 ; opinion of "From Freedom to Bon- dage," 302 ; on teslimonial to Spen- cer, 385 ; principle of authority universally operative, 490 seq.
Glover, Miss, 256
Goblet d' Alviella, Count, letters to, 312, 366
Goethe, J. W. von : Wilhelm Meister, 53; Faust, 411
Golden Penny, 299
Golder's Green Crematorium, 477
Goligher, Prof. W. A., compiler of Descriptive Sociology, 453 note
Gomperz, Prof. Theodore (Vienna) : on Plato's intellect and influence, 523 ; letter from, on Spencer's election to Imperial Academy, 369
Goschen, W. E., 462
"Gospel of Relaxation," 230
Cowers, Sir William R., on specialization in science, 395
Index
60 1
Graham, Prof., colloids and crystalloids,
556 Grant, Sir Alexander, " Philosophy and
Mr. Darwin," 149 Grant, Miss Alice, painter of Spencer's
portrait, 394 nole Grant, Dr., 205
Grant-Duff, Sir M. E., 193, 384 Gray, Prof. Asa, 101, 169 Great Central Railway, opposition to
London extension, 314 Great-man theory, Mr. Mallock's criti- cism of Spencer, 407 sqq " Great Political Superstition," 243 Greater Britain, 328 Greeks, Descriptive Sociology, 453 note Greeley, Horace, 101 Green, Unitarian publisher, 54 Green, Mrs. J. R., 405 Green, Prof. T. H., 212 sqq., 413 Greenwich, Spencer's plan for dam at, 63 Greenwood, Frederick, 331 Greg, W. R. : on Spencer's population theory, 64 ; election to Athenaeum Club, 494
Grey, Sir George, 237, 254 Grimthorpe, Lord (Sir Ed. Beckett). 239 Grose, Rev. T. H., 485 Grote, George, 67 ; testimonial to
Spencer, 90
Ground, Rev. W. D. , critic, 251 seq. Grove, Sir George, 384 Grove, Sir William R., Correlation of
Physical Forces, 550 Grundyometers, ladies consulted by
Spencer as, 311 Gull, Sir William, 497 GUnther, Albert C. L. G., 384 Guthrie, Rev. Malcolm, critic, 201, 210
HALDANE, Right Hon. R. B., 485
Hales, E. E., 101
Halle, Sir Charles, 494
Hamilton, Rev. Dr. D., 485
Hamilton, Lady Claud, 214
Hamilton, Gail, The Insuppressible Book, 266
Hamilton, J. McLure, 373
Hamilton, Sir William, letter from, "The Universal Postulate," 73
Hanotaux, G., French Minister, 399
Harper, Mr., 209
Harrison, Frederic : 193, 194, 287, 384, 483 ; controversies with Spencer, 245, 254 sqq., 261 sqq. ; letters to, 263 seq., 324, 466
Harting, James E., 384
Hartog, Prof. Marcus, correspondence on biological matters, 349, 352, 397
Harvard University, John Fiske's lec- tures, 156
Hawke, John, Anti-gambling League, letter to, 327
" Haythorne Papers," series of essays by
Spencer, 65 seq., 72, 74, 543 Heberden, C. B., Principal of Brasenose,
485
Hegeler, B., 218 seq. Hegelianism : vogue in England, 457 seq., 488 ; last refuge of the orthodox, 458 Helmholtz, H. L. F. von, on heat
evolved in solar condensation, 432 Hemming, Mr., 193 Hemus, foreign origin of family named, I Hemus, Elizabeth, Spencer's ancestor, 2 Hennell, Miss Sara, 54 Hennezel, or Henzu, Thomas and
Balthazar de, immigrants named, I Henslow, Rev. Prof. George, argument
against Weismann, 348 Henzey, foreign origin of family so
named, I
Herald, New York, 226 Herbert, Hon. Auberon : 308, 462 ; urged to write on social questions, 355 ; in- dividualistic propaganda, 300 sqq. ; scheme for better ventilation of houses, 303 ; Herbert Spencer, Lecturer, 483. Letters to, 247, 300 sqq., 303, 355 Herbert Spencer on American Nervous- ness," 230 Herbert Spencer on the Americans, <&V.,
226
Heredity: use-inheritance, 269 seq., 343, 460; interbreeding of unlike races, 322 seq. ; limitation by sex, 396 Herkomer, Sir Hubert von, R.A., painter of subscription portrait of Spencer, 387, 389 sqq. Letters to, 391, 392
Herschel, Sir John : on programme of Synthetic Philosophy, 97 ; Comtism, 113; aids reorganization of Reader, 117; nebular hypothesis, 425, 591 seq. ; theory of the sun, 552 Hen wig, Prof., 349
Hey worth, Lawrence, M. P., 46, 54, 309 Highgate Cemetery : George Eliot's funeral, 214 seq.; Spencer's tomb, 482
Hill, Dr. Alex, Master of Downing, Cam- bridge, 485
Hillard, George S., 101 Hinton Charterhouse, Somersetshire : Spencer's life at, 12 sqq., 35 ; library, 279
Hirst, Dr. T. Archer, 166, 305, 331 History : futility of, 62 (v. 401) ; science of, repudiated by leading writers, 567 Hobbes, Thomas : Spencer's knowledge of his writings, 418; saying quoted, 490 Elobhouse, Lord : 384, 484 ; a greeting
from, 458 Hodge, F. H., 101
6O2
Life of Herbert Spencer
Hodgson, Richard, junr. : 212 seq, ; letter to, 228
Hodgson, Shadworth, 384
Hoffding, Prof. Harold : Danish trans- lator, 291 ; correspondence concerning correlation of mind and body, 178 «#•
Iloguet, M., 475
Holland, Sir Henry, testimonial to Spencer, 90
Holme, Charles: 205; last visit to Spencer, 476 ; executorship, 477 ; letter to, 378
Holme, George, of Derby : 205 ; saves Spencer's life when a bey, 10, 177 ; his gratitude, 10 ; portrait sketch, 34 ; death, 378 ; Spencer's tribute, //>. ; letter to, 177
Holmes, Jane, n&e Brettell, Spencer's grandmother, 2
Holmes, John, Spencer's grandfather, 2
Holmes, Oliver Wendell, 279
Holt, Henry, American publisher, 150
Holt, Richard, of Liverpool, 195, 225
Holt, Mrs. Richard (nee Potter), letters to, 172, 186
Holyoake, George Jacob: 100; Spencer's appreciation of, 468. Letters to, 358, 464
Homer, real creed of Christians derived from, 400
Home Rule, 247, 300, 315, 325
Honorary degrees (see Titles and Appen- dix D, 558)
Hooker, Sir Joseph Dalton : 83, 194 ; consulted by Spencer, 89, 101, 123, 124 ; testimonial to Spencer, 90 seq. ; opinion of Spencer's researches in plant circulation, 151 ; use inheritance, 269 ; the Huxley-Spencer controversy, 331 seq. ; transmits address of con- gratulation to Spencer, 382, 384 ; bond of friendship, 456, 470 : dissent from Spencer's view of South African War, 460.
Letters to : asking testimonial, 89 ; reason for seeking foreign consul- ship, 91 ; refusal to accept subscrip- tion, 101 ; reasons for not joining Royal Society, 168 sqq. ; address of congratulation, 386 ; subscription portrait, 387, 390, 391 ; personal, 456, 470
Letters from : on drawbacks of a foreign consulship, 89 ; X - Club remnant, 470
Hopkinson, Dr. A., Vice-Chancellor, Victoria University, 485
Hopps, Rev. J. Page, letter to, declining invitation to stand for Leicester, 240
Houghton, Lord [Monckton-Milnes], 346
House of Commons : power of, 240 ;
philosophers a failure in, 241 Howard, George, M. P., 239 Howells, W. D., Spencer's opinion of,
Howitt, William and Mary, 54
Hudson, William Henry, Spencer's secretary : 246 ; book on Rousseau, 465 seq. ; " Character Study " of Spencer, 489 ; reminiscences, 504 ; letters to, 313, 466
Huggins, Sir William, 384, 437
Hughes, Miss Edith, 365
Hughes, W. R., 231
Huguenots, settlement at Stourbridge, I (v. 6)
Humanity : true theory how derived, 62 ; organic badness, 301 ; irrationality, 366 seq., 450; lack of critical faculty, 372
Humanity, Religion of (see Comte) i Humboldt, Koitnos, 53 I Hume, David, 516, 517, 578 I Humphrey Clinker, 504
Hunt, W. Holman, election to Athe- nreuin, 494 seq.
Huth, Mr., 193
Hutton, Richard H. : attack on Social Statics, 59; Spencer's ethical views, 148
Huxley, Leonard, Life and Letters of T. H. Huxley, 101
Huxley, Prof. T. H. : on Spencer's boy- hood, 12; friendship initiated, 64 seq., 543 ; introduces Spencer to Tyndall, 65 ; friendly relations and intercourse, 78, 83, 85, i66sey., 192 sqq., 237, 239, 324 ; gives Spencer advice and criti- cism, 81, 83, 101, 123 seq.t 131, 144, 252 seq., 266 seq., 269 sqq., 275 ; New Y ear's dinners, 83, 239 ; controversy with Owen, 87 ; testimonial to Spen- cer, 91, 513 ; attitude to Comtism, 113 ; reorganization of Reader, 117; spontaneous generation, 145; "Ad- ministrative Nihilism," 150; Inter- national Scientific Series, 159, 187; Belfast lecture, 172; George Eliot's funeral, 214; jocose reference to photograph of Spencer, 215 ; Darwin's funeral, 223 ; President Royal Society, 236 ; views on heredity, 269 seq. ; reads proofs of Spencer's Auto- biography, 275 ; reply to W. S. Lilly, 276 ; State-education, 277 ; " The Struggle for Existence in Human Society," 280; combativeness, 282; banter, ib.t 502; house-building at Eastbourne, 290 ; land-question, 330 sqq., 466 ; Romanes lecture, " Evo- lution and Ethics," 336 ; death, 370 ; age of the Earth, 432, 441 ; alleged influence of Rousseau on Spencer, 466 ; saying about Spencer's deductive bent,
Index
502 erary composition, 503 ; on the value of theory in scientific research, 513; early discussion on development question recalled, 543; hatred of de- ductive reasoning, 549. Letters to : introductory, 65 ; Psy- chology, and congratulations on mar- riage, 78 ; foreign consulship, 91 ; First Principles, 101 ; loss of his son, ib. ; plans for keeping the philo- sophy going, 127; a publi-her's indis- cretion, 228 ; X-Club frivolity, &c., 249; criticism on " Factors of Or- ganic Evolution," 270, ib., seq.: sug- gested yachting cruise, 273 ; reply to Lilly, 276; death of his daughter, 280 ; London dissipations, 282 ; house building, 290 ; reconciliation after estrangement, 337 ; Lord Salis- bury's Address, 364; age of the Earth, 441
Letters from : X-Club frivolity, 249 ; use - inheritance, 270 ; Spencer's Autobiography, 275 ; reconciliation, 337; Lord Salisbury's Address, 364; Lord Kelvin and the age of the Earth, 441
Huxley, Mrs. T. H. : 100, 210; on Boehm's bust of Spencer, 244 ; letter to, 370
Hymns for Infant Minds, Spencer's text-book as a child, 9
IDEALISM, German, in England, 457 seq.
Libert [Sir], Courtney, comparative legislation, 360
" Illogical Geology," 95, 426, 553, 581
Imperialism, 328
India : early marriages, 296 ; its con- quest, an example to Japan, 321 ; Eurasians, 322 ; requests received by Spencer from, 447 ; Spencer's Educa- tion translated, 461 note.
Individualism, does not mean individual isolation, 354 (see Social State)
Industrial Freedom League, 468
"Industrial Institutions" [division of Principles of Sociology}, 380, 573 sqq.
Inorganic evolution, omitted division of Spencer's philosophy, 377, 424 sqq. ; writings bearing thereon, 425 sqq.
Insuppressiblt Book, The, 266
Inter-breeding between divergent species 322 seq.
International Arbitration Co-operative Society, 223
International Scientific Series, 158 J£</., 187
Inventiveness, implies self-confidence, 491
Ireland : 368 ; obstructive tactics of Irish Party, 315 {sec also Home Rule)
Italy : Spencer's visit to, 142 ; honorary degrees conferred on him, 194, 291,
370 (v. 588) ; translations, 461 ; official condolences on his death, 482 Ito, Count (now Marquis) Japanese statesman, 292, 320, 321, 323
JACKSON, Rev. B. W., Oxford, 485
Jackson, G. B. W. (Spencer's engineer- ing colleague), 52, 62; letters from, 34, 35
Jackson, Dr. H., Cambiidge, 485
Jackson, Dr. Hughlings, 227, 384
Jacob, Colonel, Chief Commissioner in Scinde, and Social Statics, 86
Janes, Dr. L. G., 342, 452
Janet, of French Institute, 173
Japan : Spencer consulted about political affairs, 161, 293, 318 Jf0. ; works trans- lated, 231, 461 note
Japp, Prof., address to Chemical Section of B. As., 398
Jaws, disuse and heredity, 344 sqq.
jersey, 75
Jesuits, circulate story of Spencer's con- version, 298 note
Jeune, Mrs. [Lady St. Helier], 218
Jevons, S., 226
Johnson, Rev. (Brooklyn, N. Y.), 278
Jones, Prof. T. Rymer, 540
Jones, Sir William, writings unknown to Spencer, 398 seq.
Jose, Mrs., 279, 310
Journal of Education, 259
Jowett, Benjamin, 102
Judd, Prof. J. W., correspondence on volcanic phenomena, 438 sqq.
Judge, Mark, letter to, 422
Justice, gratuitous administration, 242, 360 seq
"Justice " [Part IV. of Spencer's Prin- ciples of Ethics}, 304, 308, 342
KANAKAS, in Queensland, 326
Kaneko, Baron Kentaro, Japanese statesman, 292, 318 sqq. Lelters to, conservative policy fur Japan, 319; on Japanese policy with regard to foreigners, 321
Kant, Immanuel : philosophy, 228 seq. 455 ; Spencer's knowledge of his writ- ings, 418 ; principle of individual action, 539
Karnak, 206
Keatinge, M. W., letter to, 404
Kelvin, Lord (Sir Wm. Thomson) : metric system, 379 ; method of reason- ing, 396 ; age of the earth and solar system, 432 seq., 441, 442 ; cosmic evolution, 437 ; rigidity of earth's interior, 438 ; letter to, 437
Kershaw, John, Derby, 7
Key, Miss Lilian, 407
Killick, Miss Edith : 407 ; reminiscences of Spencer, 476, 497, 500, 505 seq.
604
Life of Herbert Spencer
Kimberley, Earl of, 219
Kingsley, Rev. Charles : on programme of Synthetic Philosophy, 97 ; repudia- tion of " science of history," 567
Kirchhoff, G. R., 445, 552
Kirk Ireton, Derbyshire, records of Spencer family in parish register, 3
Kirkman, Rev. T., 188, 21 1
Knight, Charles, publisher, 6l
Knight, Prof. William, 384 ; article in Bookman, 452
Knowledge, society for the repeal of taxes on, 67
Knowles, Herbert, poet, Spencer named after, 7
Knowles, [Sir] James, Editor of Nine- teenth Century, 209, 253, 400 sqq,
Krakatau, volcanic eruption, 438 seq.
Krishnavarma, Shyamaji, founder of Herbert Spencer Lectureship, Oxford, 483
LACAZE-DUTHIER, origin of annulose type, 561
Lace Manufacture, Spencer's father's connection with, 4, 8
Laidlawstiel, 200
Laissez-faire, current conception, 161
Lamarck, heredity, 269
Land Nationalisation Society, 218
Land question : 58, 247 ; Spencer's change of views, 327, 329 sqq., 398 ; discussion in Daily Chronicle, 359
Land Restoration League, 342
Landlords : interests of, unduly considered in leases, 292 ; H. George's policy of taxing, 299 ; operation of short-lease system, 304 ; rating of small tene- ments, ib.
Lang, Andrew : 384 ; The Making of Religion, 409 ; on bores, 447 ; Letters to, Ghost Theory, 356 seq.
Lang, Very Rev. Dr. J. H., Aberdeen,
485 Lankester, Prof. [Sir] E. Ray, 196, 343,
382, 384
Lansdowne, Marquess of, 482 Lardner, Dr. S., 26
Latham, Dr. R. G., testimonial to Spen- cer, 90 Laugel [Auguste], writer in Revue des
Deux Mondes, 113 Lavallie, M. 197 Laveleye, Emile de, 245, 366. Letter
from, 245 Law, gratuitous interpretation of, 360
teq.
Law of Equal Freedom (see Social State) Law of Organic Symmetry, 542, 553, 561 Lawley, Mr. and Lady Constance, 198 Lawrence, Sir Trevor, 384 " Laws of Organic Form," essay by
Spencer. 87, 580
Leader [extinct periodical], 58, 64, 65,
72, 74, 545, 579 seq. League of Liberals against Aggression,
449 Lear, Edward, composer of music to
Tennyson's "Farewell," 309 note Lecky, Rt. Hon. W. E. H. : 215, 384, 406 ; on Spencer's ethical writings, 198 ; death, 474 ; high character, 475 Lecky, Mrs. W. E. H. : 210, 215 ; " Grundyometer " to Spencer, 311 seq. Letters to, 312, 475 Lefevre, G. Shaw (Lord Eversley), 475 Leicester, Spencer asked to become Par- liamentary candidate, 240 seq. Leith Vale, Ockley, Surrey, 462, 465 Lewes, George Henry: 66, 71 seq., 126, 137, 192 sqq., 541 sqq., 553 ; first meeting, 63, 541 ; his versatility and appearance, ib. ; Spencer introduces Miss Evans to, 64 ; misunderstand- ing with, 64 seq. ; chaffs Spencer about wood- chopping, 80; Biographi- cal History of Philosophy, 131, 418, 542; death, 196; literary composition, 503 ; scientific interest awakened by Spencer, 542 ; introduction to Huxley, 543 ; literary editor of Leader, ib. ', ex- plains Comte's ideas to Spencer, 545 Lewes, Mrs. (" George Eliot," q.v.) Lewis, Sir G. Cornewall, editor of
Edinburgh Review, 69 Liberalism : 224, 243, 302, 312, 468 ;
socialistic tendencies, 449 Liberal Unionism : merged in Toryism,
450 Liberty: the idea and sentiment, 355;
result of removal of restraints, 368 Liberty and Property Defence League,
242, 299^,7., 338 Libraries, see Free libraries Lieber, Francis, 101
Life: gospel of relaxation, 230; aesthetic element in, ib. ; a thing or a process, 371 ; ultimate mystery, 398 ; com- mencement of, on the Earth, 443 seq. ; conception of, as individuation, 541 ; co-ordination of actions, 543, 546 Life, the Science of (see Biology) Lilly, W. S., 276, 344 Limburg Stirum, Count (executor of Auguste Comte), pecuniary help de- clined by Spencer, 126 Linguistic culture, based on authority,
534 Linnean Society, Spencer's paper on
plant circulation, 124, 581 Linton, Lynn, Mrs. : 54 ; " Grundyome- ter" to Spencer, 311 ; article on Prof. Drummond, 363 ; Letters to, 363, 405 Literature : patronage and talent, 40 ; concentration of feeling and idea, 411 Literature (weekly review), 407 seq. , 586
Index
605
Littleton, Hon. S , 197
Littre, E. (editor of La Philosophic
Positive), 155 Liveing, Prof. G. D., 485 Liverpool University, proposal for chair
of sociology, 211 Loch, Lord, 422 Locke, John, Spencer's knowledge of
his writings, 418
Lockyer, Sir J. Norman : 222, 384 ; con- versation with, on spectrum, 434 ; Letter to, 345 Lo-Feng-Luh, Sir Chih Chen, Chinese
Minister, opinion of Spencer, 419 Logic : uselessness of formal, 418 ; an
objective science, 548 London : Spencer's plans for pure water supply, 63 ; dryness of air, 95 ; move- ment for resisting municipal encroach- ments, 299, 302, 313, 339 London and Birmingham Railway (after- wards London and North Western Railway), Spencer's engineering work on, 22
London County Council, Spencer pro- posed as Alderman, 313 London Liberty Club, 277 London Library, Spencer's connection
with, 496 London Ratepayers' Defence League,
302, 313 sty., 339 London Review, 116 London School of Economics, 403 London University, honorary degree
offered to Spencer, 467 "Lord Salisbury on Evolution," 365, 586 Longevicy, proposed enquiry, 396 Lothian, Lady, 198
Lott, Edward : Spencer's portrait sketch of, 34 ; remonstrates with Spencer on excessive language, 49 ; on Spencer's favour with women, 55 ; objections to Social Statics, 59 ; Spencer's com- panion on excursions and travels, 71 seq., 78, 109, 116, 146, 193, 219, 225 ; illness and death, 273 seq. ; Spencer's appreciation of, 275
Letters to : " Proper Sphere of Govern- ment," 41 ; Wilson, editor of Pilot, 48 ; Shelley, 53 ; Goethe, Wilhclm Meisler, ib. ; Carlyle's Cromwell, ib. ; Dickens' Christmas Tale, ib. ; history and evolution, 62 ; Alex. Smith, Scotch poet, 66 ; impres- sions of France, 76 ; Darwin's Origin of Species, 98 ; political events [general election], 207 ; holiday movements, 216 ; a plan frustrated, 249 ; last good-bye, 273 Lott, Francis Edward: Spencer's execu- tor, 477 ; reminiscences, 497, 505. Letter from, 73 Lott, Miss (" Phy"), 249, 256, 273
Loubet, M., French President, visit to England, 468
Lowell, J. Russell, 101, 209
Lubbock, Sir John (now Lord Avebury), 109, 477, 484 ; Letter from, 456
Lushington, Vernon, Q.C., 384
Lyell, Sir Charles, 66, 102, 117, 536, 553 ; on programme of Synthetic Philosophy, 97
Lynn, W. T., assists Spencer in revising essay on " Nebular Hypothesis," 437
Lytton, Sir E. Bulwer [Lord] : on Spen- cer's views on education, 60 ; offended by Spencer's condemnation of Afghan war, 399
MACAULAY, Lord : Spencer on style of,
61
Me duress Magazine, 375 McCosh, Dr., 246 Machinery, outcry against, 37, 94 M'Lennan, J. F., 189 MacMahon, P. A., F.R.S., 384 Macmillan's Magazine, 238, 432, 581 Macpherson, Hector : 419 ; book on Spencer, 414 ; offered " Reminis- cences of Herbert Spencer" by a lady, ib. ; review of Spencer's position as a thinker, 515^^. .Letters to: Carlyle, 378 ; proposed book on Spencer, 379 ; " Reminiscences of Herbert Spencer,'
4H
Magnus, Laurie, letter to, 474 Magrath, Rev. Dr. J. R., 485 Mahaffy, Dr. J. P., compilation of
Descriptive Sociology, Greeks, 453
note
Mail and Express, New York News- paper, 306 Maine, Sir Henry S., election to French
Academy, 232 seq. Malabari, Behramji M., letter to, on
early marriage in India, 296 Ma) lock, W. H. : criticism on Spencer's
sociological ideas, 407 sqq. ; letter to,
407. Man versus The State, 244, 245, 308,
334
Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway, London extension, 314
"Manners and Fashion," 72, 74, 129, 544. 58o
Marble, Manton, 156, 288
Mariette Bey, 205
Marion, H., 206
Markham, Sir C. R., election to Athen- aeum, 494 seq.
Marriage : suggested to Spencer as a cure for his ailments, 80 ; reasons for opposing native usages in India, 296 ; between Europeans and Orientals, 320, 322 seq.
6o.6
Life of Herbert Spencer
Marsh, Prof. [O. C.], 194
Marshall, Prof. A., 485
Martello, Tullio (Bologna University) 291
Martial Law, 451
Martineau, Harriet: translation of Comte. 72, 545; refusal of pension, 290
Martineau, Rev. Dr. James: 384; criti- cism of Spencer's first Principles, 105, 1 60, 280 j Types of Ethical Theory, 245
Masson, Dr. David : 64, 69, 72, 95, 96, 138, 215, 282, 384 ; introduces writer to Spencer, 141 ; suggestion for criti- que of synthetic philosophy by, 400 seq. ; election to Athenaeum, 494 : opinion of Spencer's last book, 460. Letters to, 401, 458
Mastication, Spencer's admonition to a friend, 415
Materialism repudiated by Spencer, 81
Mathematicians: lack of judgment, 395 ; defects in reasoning, 396, 441 ; weight attached to conclusions of, 441
Mathematics, appeal to private judg- ment, 534
Mather, Mr., schoolmaster, of Derby, 9, 21
Matheson, Rev. George, D.D., Can the Old Faith livt with the New ? 252
Matin, Le, 468
Maudsley, Dr. H., derivation of doc- trines in Physiology and Pathology of the Mind, 140, 143
Maxwell, Prof. J. Clerk, correspondence concerning Spencer's physical specu- lations, 428 sqq.
Mechanic's Magazine, 26
Medical men: neglect of physics, 96; legislative policy, 153; Spencer's scep- tical attitude to, 469
Medical Times and Gazette, 227
Meinerizhagen, Mrs. (nee Potter), 205, 306,311,317,394. Letter to, 317
Melbourne, Victoria, Spencerian Society,
463
Meldola, Prof. Raphael, F.R.S.: 385; proposed memorial to Spencer in Westminster Abbey, 483 ; the Dean's reply, 486; on the philosophic faculty in scientific research, 514
Menabrea, Marquis, 184
" Mental Evolution," 149, 582
Mentone, 197
Merry, Rev. Dr. W. W., 485
Mesnil, M. du, 365
Metaphysical Society, 145
Methodist Register Office, Spencer's birth and baptism entered at, 7
Metric System, Spencer's opposition to,
379. 413 Miall, C. S,, 38, 42, 45, 58
Midland Naturalist, 231
Miers, Prof. Henry A., 485 Milan, 206 Miles, Mr., 205
Militancy : growth in teaching institu- tions, 454 ; factor in social evolution,
569 sqq. Militia, 54
Mill, John Stuart : 60, 544 ; opinion of Spencer's Psychology, 8 1 ; " Universal Postulate," 82, 418 ; consulted by Spencer about official appointment, 88 ; his testimonial, 90 ; ultimate test of truth, 119 sqq., 544 ; interest in Spen- cer's success, 126 ; recommends French translator to Spencer, 129; death, and Spencer's obituary notice, 167, 582 ; his educational standard, 417 ; Logic, 418, 544 ; omitted divisions of Spencer's programme, 424 ; on philosophy in England, 515 ; Hector Macpherson on his philosophic system, 516 seq. ; utilitarianism, 519
Letters to, 108 ; acknowledgment of sympathy, 88 ; liberty, 93 ; parlia- mentary reform, the franchise, &c. , 94; Principles of Psychology, 115; the conduct of The Reader, 117,119 ; political rights of women, 137 sqq. Letters from : utilitarianism, 108 ; Comte, &c., 114; aggressiveness of The Reader, 118; ultimate test of truth, 119, 122; Spencer's Biology, 152 (v. 256, 514) Millais, Sir J. E., 373, 386 Miller, Hugh, 553 Milman, Dean, 67 Milne-Edwards, [Henri], 365, 542, 546,
570 note
Milnes, Monckton [Lord Houghton, q.v.}
Mind: 173, 188, 189, 195, 201, 212, 295, 539, 582 sqq. ; change of control and policy, 457 seq.
Minghetti, Sgr., 197
Minturn, R. B. (New York), 128
Mitchell, Dr. Chalmers, 347
Mitchell, Mrs., of Laidlawstiel, 186 (v. 201)
Mitchinson, Canon J., 485
Mivart, Prof. St. George, 165, 173, 188
Monro, Dr. D. B., Oxford, 485
Moorsom, Captain C. E. : Spencer's en- gineering chief, 23, 24 ; his opinion of Spencer quoted, 28 ; domestic life with, 30 seq. , endeavours to check Spencer's philosophic propensity, ib. ; letter to, 30; letters to his niece, 35, 38 • " Morals of Trade," essay on, 93 (v. 87),
Mordan, A., Reigate, 374 Morell [Dr. J. D.], 81
Index
607
Morgan, Dr. C. Lloyd : 385, 485 ; on Spencer's influence, 514
Mori, Viscount Arinori, Japanese dip- lomat, 161, 319
Morley, Rt. Hon. John : Life of Cobden quoted, 32; meetings with, 192 set/., 215, 381; Newcastle election, 329; address of congratulation to Spencer, 382, 385 ; correspondence with Spen- cer relating to obsequies, 472 sqq., 477 seq. ; Life of Gladstone quoted, 490 seq. Letter to, martial law in South Africa, 451
Morley, Samuel, M. P., 60, 224
Morning Leader, 422 seq., 587
Mosse, James C. E., opinion of Spencer as engineering colleague, 23
Mottisfont, 306
Moulton [Sir J. Fletcher], 165, 211, 436
Mozley, Mrs., advice to Spencer's father to join the Church, 8
Mozley, Rev. T., Reminiscences, 245, 583
Muirhead, Dr. John H., 485
Municipalities, business enterprises, 468
Murchison, Sir R., 553
Music: theory of origin, 84; needless expansion, 411
Murray, John, 302
Mystery, the ultimate, 371, 378, 491
Mysteries, mediaeval, 412, 491
NAUEN, Constance, Spencer's charac- terization, 295 seq. Napoleon, Louis, altitude to England,
86
Nation (American journal), 150, 294 National Portrait Gallery, 373 seq., 382 National Public School Association, 60 National Review, 8l, 83, 105, 255, 580 National Temperance Chronicle, 68, 579 Native Races, aggressions by civilized
nations, 399 seq., 410 Natural Science, 397, 586 Natural Selection : 269 ; the question of acquired characters, 343 sqq. ; Lord Salisbury's view, 364 ; partially recog- nized in Social Statics, 540 ; factor in mental evolution, 547 ; general doc- trine of evolution, 555 ; interpretation in general terms, 558 Nature : non-moral character of, 280 ;
merciless discipline, 569 Nature: 166, 177, 213, 231, 398, 438, 582 sqq. ; acquired characters contro- versy, 343 sqq., 584; alleged bias, 345 Nature and Reality of Religion, 261 sqq. Nebular Hypothesis: 425 sqq., 551; cooling of the Earth, 442; "The Genesis of Gaseous Nebulae," 445 ; unpublished letter to Fortnightly Review, 590 sqq. (For Spencer's article on, see " Recent Astronomy") Nfue Freie Presse, 463
New Englander, 112
" New Form of Viaduct," 34, 578
" New Toryism," 239
"New View of the Functions of Imita- tion and Benevolence," 45, 49, 537, 579
New York : Twilight Club, 230 ; pro- posed sociological society, 23 1
Neiv York Saturday, 460
New York Times, 293, 294
New Zealand : Spencer's books read but not acted on, 237 ; " Religious Retro- spect, &c." 254
Newcombe, Mr., 68 seq.
Newspapers : provincial, 207 ; examples of perversions, 299 ; Americanized editing, 301 ; South Afiican War, 422
Newton, Sir Isaac, Principia, 75
Newman, Francis W., on programme of Synthetic Philosophy, 97
Nineteenth Century, 249, 253, sqq., 258, 271 seq., 280, 333, 400 sqq., 409, 583 sqq.
Nobel Prize, nomination of Spencer for, 456, 475
Nonconformist, 35,36, 38, 40, 55, 58, 81, 537, 578 seq.; — and Independent, 583
Nonconformity, relations of Spencer and his family to, 2, 3, 6, 42, 202
North American Review, 116, 144^., 198
North British Review, 59, 69, 71 seq.,
75» 544, 58°
"Northern Lights," Lancashire poem, 497
Northumberland Society for the Libera- tion of Education from State Control,
465
Nottingham, 9 Nurses: certificaiion of, 315; Spencer's
prejudice against professional, 469
OLBERS, H. G. M., 552
Odger, Mr., 297
Oldswinford, 2
Open Court, 355
Ordish, Mrs., 34
"Origin and Function of Music," 84, 237, 295, 549, 580
" Origin of Animal Worship," 568, 581
Ouless, Walter W., R.A., commissioned to paint Spencer's portrait, 387 ; pro- posal abandoned, 393
Outlanders, in Transvaal, 421 seq.
" Outsider," contributor to New York Times, 294
"Over- Legislation," 69, 75, 580
Owen, Sir Richard : 64, 66, 87, 372, 552, 561 ; memorial to, 325 ; Comparative Osteology, 541
Oxford University : discussion of Resur- rection, 297 ; Junior Scientific Club, 356 ; Romanes Lecture, 356 ; He-
6o8
Life of Herbert Spencer
gelianism, 457 ; Herbert Spencer Lectureship, 483 ; proposed memorial to Spencer in Westminster Abbey (signatures), 484 sqq.
PACKARD, Prof. A. S., introduction of the word " evolution," 551 note
Paget, Sir James, 497
Paley, William, Spencer's knowledge of his writings, 418
Pall Mall Gazette, 143, 201, 232, 244,
287, 3°3. 364, 584
Palliser, Sir William, 495
Pan-Britannic movement, 328
Panmixia, 347
Parents, interference with responsibilities of, 303 seq.
Paris : visits and impressions, 75 seq., 82, 105, 131, 154, 193, 206; events of '70-71, 154 ; dinner at Brebant's, 193 ; Vaillant's bomb-outrage, 361
Parkes, Kineton, 53 note
Parliament, members and constituents, 423.
"Parliamentary Reform, the Dangers and the Safeguards," 96, 99, 581
Parry, Sir C. Hubert H., 385
Pathology, social and physical, 276
Patronage as condition to success, 40
Paul, C. Kegan, Letter to, on H. George's Perplexed Philosopher, 340
Peace Society : non-resistance policy, 221 : Mr. Gladstone's view, 22 \
Peile, Dr. J., 485
Pelham, Prof. Henry F., 485
Pelly, Sir Lewis, 86, 193
Pembroke, Earl of, 197, 317, 370. Letter to, 232
Pembroke, Gertrude, Countess of, corre- spondence with Spencer, 371 sqq,
Pennington [F.], 224
Penrhyn Slate Quarries, a visit to, 497
Perrier, Edmond, 365
Perry, Prof., controversy with Lord Kelvin on cooling of the Earth, 442
Peru, Ancient, excessive officialism, 420
Pewsey, Wilts., 289, 299, 306, 317, 319, 327 seq., 353, 3t8, 370
Phayre, Sir Arthur, 493
Philosopher, The, periodical projected by Spencer, 46
Philosophical Anarchist, term objected to as describing individualist, 361
Philosophical Magazine, 45, 425, 579
Philosophy, unpopularity of, 379
"Philosophy of Style," 39, 42, 55, 66, 544, 579
Phrenological Journal, rejects Spencer's contributions, 40, 45
Physics : recent rapid progress in, 435 ; current theory of constitution of mat- ter, 436 ; biological phenomena alien l°> 558 ; (see Inorganic Evolution)
" Physiological Units" distinguished from Darwin's "gemmules," 151
Physiology : physics of, 96, 317; ignores pathology, 275 ; Huxley and Spencer on principles and practice, 330 seq,
" Physiology of Laughter," 96, 581
Pictures, Spencer's scheme for classify- ing traits of, 374 seq.
Pilot, Birmingham Newspaper, 39, 47, 50, 287, 297, 579
Pitt-Rivers, General, 385
Plants, circulation in, 123 seq., 151, 562
Plato : Spencer's knowledge of his writ- ings, 418 ; theory of ideas, 553
Plea for Liberty, 302 (v. 300), 584
Poetry : variety a desideratum, 307 ; concentration of feeling and idea, 411
Political Economy, takes no account of social pathology, 275 seq, (see also Social State)
" Political Fetichism," 316
" Political Institutions " (a division of Spencer's Principles of Sociology), 191, 206, 207, 212, 215, 248
Pollock, Sir Frederick, 382
Ponsonby, Hon. J. G. B., M.P. for Derby, 36
Poor Laws, 20 ; a breach of laissez-faire, 161
Pope, Alexander, Homer, 43
Popular Science Monthly, 159, 175, 189, 195, 215, 217, 258, 261, 265, 313, 375
Porter, Noah, President of Yale College, 208
Portsmouth, Evelyn, Dowager Countess of, 373 ; Letter to, 462
Positive Philosophy or Positivism (see Comte)
Positivist Review, 586
Potter, Richard : friendship begun, 47, 309; visits, 64, 71, 80, 146, 188, 194, 246, 275 ; suggested cure for Spencer's nervous ailment, 80; consulted by Spencer about George Eliot rumour, 266 ; no sympathy with Spencer's doctrines, 492 seq, (v. 257) ; never read his books, ib. ; humorous incident con- cerning this, 493. Letters to : Scotch scenery, 72; an early visit recalled, 286 ; invitation to the Argoed, 288 ; a New Year's greeting, 293. Letter from, Harrison controversy, 256. (For refs. to daughters, see Couriney, Cripps, Holt, Meinertzhagtrn, Webb) Potter, Mrs. : 205, 492 ; domestic management criticised by Spencer, 509; her retaliation, ib. Letters to: religious exercise, 80 ; a remarkable geologic discovery, IO2 Pouchat, 145
Poulton, Prof. E. B., 385, 485 " Pour le merite," Prussian Order con- ferred on Spencer, but declined, 369
Index
609
Preston, Dr. S. Tolver, 587
Price, Dr., editor of Eclectic Review, 38 seq.
Priestley, Sir W. O., 216, 385
Principles, ineffective without appropri- ate emotions, 355
Principles of Astrogeny, unwritten divi- sion of synthetic philosophy, 426
Principles of Biology : 108, 377 ; new ed., 351 note, 395, 397; revised ed., 420; Hector Macpherson on effect of modi- fied views in, 519 ; Professor A. Thom- son's opinion, 519 ; filiation of ideas, 555 */</-
Principles of Ethits: 192, 197, 198^., 292, 308, 311 seq., 323, 408; in rela- tion to Social Statics, 539; filiation of ideas, 573 sqq.
Principles of Geogeny, unwritten division of synthetic philosophy, 427
Principles of Psychology : 71,74, 77, 140, 146*7?., 149, 173, 177, 195, 206 se#., 211, 213, 228, 425, 530; J. S. Mill's appreciation, 114; Spencer's memor- andum on edition of 1867, 140 ; alleged appropriation of its doctrines by Maudsley, 140, 143 ; alleged in- consistences, 178 seq. ; inheritance of functional modifications, 351 ; post- scripts, 413 ; origin of work, 545 seq. ; evolutionary conceptions, 546 sqq. ; filiation of idea?, 563 sqq.
Principles of Sociology '. 162, 173 seq. ; 188, 190, 231, 246,280,287,297, 311, Tfigseq., 408 seq. ; preface to Vol. III., reference to, 19 ; arrest of Russian student seen with, 461 ; filiation of ideas, 566 seq.
Prichard, W. B., engineer, 42, 44, 45, 51. 79, 87. 96, 99, 198
Proctor, Richard A., 196 ; on Sun's constitution, 431 ; Old and New Astro- nomy, 445 note
Professions, evolution of, 573
" Professor Ward's Rejoinder," 445, 587
Progress, anthropocentric connotation of term, 551 note
" Progress : its Law and Cause," Spen- cer's essay on, 83, 530, 547, 555 seq., 580; introduction of the word "evo- lution," 551 note
" Proper Sphere of Government," Spen- cer's letters to the Nonconformist on,
35. 38.41. 55- 537«?-, 575, 578
Prospective Review, 59
Protection, argument for, based on Spen- cer's writings, 211
Psychology : first approached by Spencer through phrenology, 40 ; how treated by Spencer, 89 ; of fishes, 82 ; Hector Macpherson on Spencer's work in, 519 ; evolutionary conception, 544
39
sqq., 563 sqq., natural selection, 547 565 ; ultimate element of mind, 564
Public Health Act, 313
Public Schools, proposal for State con- trol, 454
Punch, 43, 175, 289
QUAKERS, colour-blindness among, 345 Quarterly Review, 7, 85, 86, 165
RABIES, scare about, 303
Radicalism, function of, 48
Radium, its phenomena congruous with evolution, 521
" Railway Morals and Railway Policy," 76 seq., 580
Railways, nuisances caused by, 314
Ramsay, Sir Andrew, 497
Ramsay, Sir William, researches in phy- sics, 436
Ransome, Dr. (of Nottingham), 79
" Rationalism, The Moral Colour of," 216
Rationalist Press Association, 464
Rayleigh, Lord, 385, 437
Reader, re-organisation, 117 seq., 427,
431
Reason: supremacy of, 176; not domi- nant in mankind, 366 seq. , 450
Reasoner, The, 66
" Reasons for dissenting from the philo- sophy of M. Comte," 113, 581
Reay, Lady, 200, 2IO
Reay, Lord, 200, 385, 484
Rebecca Riots, 40
" Recent Astronomy and the Nebular Hypothesis," essay by Spencer, 85, 116, 211, 426, 432, 436^^., 551, 580; Prof. Ward's criticism, 590 seq.
Record of Legislation, 359 seq.
Reichel, Dr. H. R., 485
Reid, Prof. J. S., 485
Relaxation, gospel of, 260
Religion : science and, 102 ; unreliability of testimony, 297, 356 seq. ', differen- tiation from ethics, 324 ; ghost theory, 356, 568 ; coincidences, 357, 372 ; factor in social evolution, 569 sqq. (see also Christianity)
Renan, Ernest, 129, 210, 584
" Replies to Criticisms," 165, 582
" Representative Government," essay by Spencer on, 84, 580
Reproduction, mystery of, 378
Review of Reviews, 313, 377
Revue des deux Mondes, 113, 173
Revue Scientifique, 200, 582
Rhys, Dr. John, Oxford, 486
Rhythm, Clerk Maxwell on, 430
Rhythm of motion, origin of Spencer's idea concerning universality of, 550
Riforma, La, Italian newspaper, 368
6io
Life of Herbert Spencer
Ribot, Prof. Th., translator of Spencer's Psychology, 154 seq., 206
Richard, Henry, M.P., 220
Ritchie, Prof. David G. , 385
Ritter, Dr. August, physicist, 552
Riviere, Mrs. Briton, 406
Roberts, Principal F. F., 486
Roberts, Dr. Isaac: 437 ; Photographs of Stars, &-Y., 445, 591
Robertson, Prof. G. Groom : 173, 190 ; letter to, 229
Robinson, J. Armitage, D.D., Dean of Westminster, proposal for memorial to Spencer, 483 sqq. ; reasons for reject- ing it, 487 seq.
Rogers, W. B., 101
Roman Academy (Accademia dei Lincei) 182 sqq., 194
Roman Catholicism, relapse into, how brought about, 465
Romanes, Dr. George J., 181, 347 seq., 356
Romanes Lecture, Oxford, 356
Romans, Descriptive Sociology, 453 note
Roscoe, Sir Henry E., 385
Rosse, Lord, 426, 591
Rotifers, dormant vitality, 371
Roupell, Charles, Official Referee, author of billiard story, 298 seq.
Rousseau, J. J., alleged derivation of Spencer's doctrines from, 465 seq.
Royal Academy, Herkomer's portrait of Spencer at 1898 exhibition, 392
Royal British Nurses' Association, 315
Royal Institution, 185
Royal Lom bard ian Institution of Sciences, &c., 370
Royal Society : Spencer's reasons for re- fusing nomination, 1681^,, 182 ; pro- posed purchase of Darwin's house, 396 seq.
Royce, Josiah, Herbert S fencer, 489
Rticker, Sir A. W., Principal of London University, letter to, 467
Ruskin, John, 403
Ruskin Hall, Oxford, 403
Russell, Lord Arthur, 192
Russell, Lord John, 54
Russell, Rollo, 200
Russia : translation of Spencer's works, 129; confiscation of Essays, ib.; Foreign Office reception to meet the Czar, 185 ; Jewish persecutions, 358 ; policy in Finland, 422 ; Times on Russian statesman's fate, 450 note; translations of Spencer's works, 461 ; strange arrest of a student, ib.
Rutson, Mr., 193
SABINE, Sir Edward, P.R.S., 168 St. Aidan's College, Birkenhead, Prin- cipal's appreciation of Spencer, 202
St. Andrew's Medical Graduates' Asso- ciation, Spencer's reasons for declining membership, 152 seq.
St. Andrews, University of, 152
St. Cloud, file of, 76
St. James's Gazette, 229, 583
St. John's Wood, opposition to railway extension, 314 (see also Avenue Road)
St. Leonards, 298 note, 325, 356
Saleeby, Dr., on radium and evolution, 521
Salisbury, Marquis of : British Associa- tion address, 238, 339, 363^17. ; advice to "capture the Board Schools," 454 note
Salmon fishers, effects of wading on, 318
Sanderson, Prof, (afterwards Sir) J. S. Burden : 350, 385 ; letter to, 350
Sanitation, regulation of, 75
Sargent, J.S., R.A., 393
Saturday Review, 241, 255, 314
Savage, Dr. G. H., 385
Savage, Rev. Minot J. (Boston, U.S.A.): 213, 227; Spencer's influence on thought, 522
Say, Leon, 365
Sayce, Prof. A. Henry, 206
" Scale of Equivalents,'' 536, 578
Schelling, conception of life, 541
Schleiden, J. M., 560
School, educational magazine, 474
Schulek, Geza, Buda Pesth, 458 note
Science : speculation and specialism, 512 sqq. ; will its progress affect Spencer's philosophy ? 520 seq.
Scotland : impressions and visits, *j2seq., 95, 104, 143, 172, 181, 1 86, 246, 256 ; Young Scots' Society, 468 ; Spencer's books discussed in a third-class carriage, 498 | Scott, A. M., letter to, 449
Scott [Alfred], 470
Scott, D. H., F.R.S., 385
Schafer, Prof. E. A., 385
Scheppig, Dr. Richard, compiler of Descriptive Sociology, 148, 164
Schmidt, Jean, writer in Figaro, 361
Scrope, Poulett, 441 | Seal, Horace, letter to, 354 | Sedgwick [Prof. Adam] , 66 ; " Discourse on the Studies of Cambridge (1835)," 515
! Sedgwick, Adam, F.R.S., 396 ! Sella, Quinto, President of Roman Academy, 183 seq.
Sellar, Alexander, 193
Sellar, Mrs. (see Craig-Sellar)
Sellar, T., 193 ! Sellar [Prof. W. Y.], 318 i Sex, limitation of heredity by, 396 j Shadows, projection of, 23 ! Shakespeare's dialogues, 504
Index
6n
Sharp, Dr. David : 347 ; inorganic evolu- tion, 424. Letter from, 349
Sheep, interbreeding of unlike varieties, 322
Shelley, Percy B. : Spencer's admiration for, 53 ; kinship of ideas, ib. note
Shickle, Miss Charlotte : 365 ; reminis- cences of Spencer, 505
Shoemakers' strike against machinery,
94
Shrewsbury Castle, 24
Sidgwick, Prof. Henry : 197, 212, 385 ; criticism of Social Statics, 176; pro- moter of Mind, 458
Silsbee, E. A., 99, 105, 278 seq.
Simmons, George, 42
Simon, Jules, 233
" Sins of Legislators," 243
" Skew Arches," 26, 536, 578
Skilton, J. A. : Brooklyn Ethical Asso- ciation, 293 ; Letters to, 294, 295, 336, 338 iff.
Smalley, G. W., 192, 193
Smith, Alexander, Edinburgh poet, 66
Smith, C. Fletcher, letter to, 468
Smith, Flora (daughter of Octavius Smith) : sings " Tennyson's Farewell," 309 ; recalls pleasant times at Ard- tornish, 470. Letters to, 200, 217, 237,
273, 3°9
Smith, Prof. Goldwin : 216, 583; Cana- dian copyright, 375 seq.
Smith, Octavius, of Ardtornish, 63, 82, 95, 194, 196
Smith, Mrs. Octavius: 193, 194; Spen- cer's affection for, 494 ; Letters to, 181, 191
Smith, W. Valentine (son of Octavius Smith), 95, 216; Letters to, 194, 309
Social insects, distinguished from a human society, 407 seq.
Socialism (see Social State)
"Social Organism," 95, 150, 418, 554, 567, 58r
Social State : principles of liberty, 93 ; franchise, 94 ; taxation, ib ; female suffrage, 137 seq. ', controversies with Huxley, 150, 330 sqq. ; laissez-faire, 161 ; law of equal freedom, 176, 539, 576; political parties, 240 f^. , 449 ; free administration of justice, 242, 360 seq. ; land question, 248, 329, sqq. ; education, 257, 281, 403 sqq., 474; social paiht.logy, 275 seq., 367; war, 281 ; outcry against diminishing evils, ib. ; socialism, 300 seq., 325, 403, 408, 422, 454, 468 ; assumption of parental responsibilities by State, 303^^.; unex- pected results of measures, 304 ; the higher socialism, 335, future outlook, 335! 368, Closer/.; State interference not identical with social co-opera- tion, 353 ; where demanded, ib. seq. ',
nostrums for curing disorders con- demned, 354 seq. ; majority rule, 355 ; survival of the fittest, 366, 540 ; con- ditions of future advance, 366 seq. ; socialism and evolution, 368 ; data of political science, 403 ; centralization, 404 ; inequality of individuals in social aggregate, 407 seq., 466 ; alleged so- cialistic implications of Darwin's and Spencer's writings, 408 ; remote effects ignored, 420 ; self-regulation versus coercive methods, ib. ; Church and State, 466 seq. ; ideas in Social Statics, 538 seq. ; moral modifiability of man, 540 ; biological parallelism, ib. ; religion and political factors in evolution, 569
Social Statics: 104, 218 ; Spencer's ex- perience in publishing, 67 ; Indian official's appreciation, 86 ; views sub- sequently modified, ill seq., 311; female suffrage, 137^.; H. Sidgwick on, 176; E. de Laveleye, 246; Hux- ley on Spencer's review of, 275 ; the land question, 329 sqq., 338, 342 ; revised ed., 308; written without previous special training, 417 seq. ; "National Education," 465 ; equality of man not alleged, 466; filiation of ideas, 538 seq. \ ethical doctrines, ib., evolutionary conception, 540, 543,
554
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, 303 sqq., 358, 584
Society of Authors, nomination of Spen- cer for Nobel prize, 456
Sociology : 287, 297 ; how treated by Spencer, 89 ; proposal for professor- ship, 211 ; evolutionary conceptions, 566 sqq. ; Hector Macpherson on Spencer's work in, 519. (See also Social State)
Sorley, Prof. W. R., 385, 486
South Africa : Basuto question, 219
South African War: 421 ^.,449,450 sqq. ; Conciliation Committee, 422 ; Spencer's last book, 460 seq. ; testi- monial to ex-President Steyn, 463, 476; Boer Relief Fund, 464
Southampton, design for dock, 42, 44
South Place Ethical Society, 449
Space, infinity of, 371 seq., 481
"Space Consciousness,'' 295, 584
Spalding, D. A., 177
Sparks, Jared, 101
Speaker, The (weekly journal, now The Nation}, 422, 587
Specialism in relation to speculation, 512 sqq.
"Specialized Administration," 150, 567, 582
Spectator, The, 77, 241, 361, 405, 409, 586 seq.
6l2
Life of Herbert Spencer
Spectrum, and evolution of elements,
434
Spencer family in Derbyshire, 3 Spencer, Anna, wife of Rev. Thomas
Spencer, 279, 309 ; letter to, 310 Spencer, Catherine \n&e Taylor), Spen- cer's grandmother, 3 Spencer, Earl, confused with Spencer
by continental writers, 475 Spencer, Henry, Spencer's uncle, 4, 500 Spencer, Henry, Spencer's cousin, 12,
IS Spencer, Herbert : /. Ancestry. II.
Career. III. Characteristics. IV,
Opinions. V. Recreations. (For
Writings see Appendix C, pp. 577
sqq., and General Index)
/. Ancestry :
Remote : foreign immigrants at Stour- bridge, I ; maternal ancestors, 2 ; followers of Wesley, ib.', paternal line, 3 ; grandparents, ib.; their children, 4 ; Spencer's father (v. W. G. Spencer), ib. set/.; mother, 6
//. Career :
Childhood and youth : birth and bap- tism at Derby, 7 ; named after writer of verses, ib. ; sole survivor of large family, ib. ; life at Not- tingham, 9 : schooling at Derby, il>., 10; narrow escape from drowning, 10 ; mental and moral traits, 1 1 ; character influenced by family associations, ib. ; becomes his uncle's pupil at Hinton, 12 ; rebels against curriculum and runs away, ib. seq. ; marvellous feat of endurance, 13; back at Hinton, ib. ; studies and pursuits, 14 sqq. ; literary style, ib. ; useful occupa- tions, 15; change in conduct at Hinton, 16 ; occasional diffidence, 17 ; laments his want of energy, ib. ; attitude towards father's spiritual entreaties, 18 seq. ; grief at death of infant sister, 19 ; con- tributes article to local magazine, ib. I also letter on Poor Law, 20 ; returns home, ib. ; question of a profession, ib. ; interval of teach- ing, 21
Engineering : London and Birming- ham Railway, 22 ; favours decimal system, ib. ; joins Birmingham and Gloucester Railway, ib. ; likes the profession, 23 ; neat draughtsman- ship, ib. ; relations with col- leagues, ib. ; occupation with serious problems, ib. ; attitude towards official superiors, 24 seq., 30; nicknamed " Defford " by colleagues, 25 ; invents veloci- meter and dynamometer, ib. ;
Spencer, Herbert : Career — Contd.
electro - magnetic experiments, ib. ; concern for health, 26 ; egotism, 27 ; neglect of study, ib. ; chief's estimate, 28 ; in- terest in religious and social ques- tions, ib. ; gets "the sack," and declines new appointment, 29 ; tribute to late chief, 30; friend- ship with chief's niece, 30; and children, 31 ; home again, ib. ; development reviewed, ib.
Journalism, 1841-44 : How stimu- lated,33 ; programme of daily routine, ib. ; miscellaneous activi- ties, 34 ; engineering papers, ib. ; politics and religion, 35 ; radi- calism, ib. ; sets a fashion in head- gear, ib. ; letters to Nonconformist on " Proper Sphere of Govern- ment," 36, 38 ; participation in local politics, ib. ; complete suf- frage propaganda, 37 : goes to London to pursue literature, 38 ; futile negotiations with editors, ib. et sqq. ; mistaken ideas about literary success, 40 ; further con- tributions to Nonconformist, ib. ; explains his " national specific," 41 ; writes address for Anti-State Church Association, 42 ; thinks about style, ib. ; another engineer- ing engagement, ib. seq. ; general reading, 43; writes verses, ib. ; ideas for inventions, ib. ; pecuniary straits — down to last penny, 44 seq. ; home again, 45 ; phreno- logical and biological essays, ib. ; edits his father's shorthand, ib. ; a new periodical projected, 46 (cf. 36) ; a valued friendship begun, 47 ; sub-editor of Pilot, ib,
Engineering, second period, 1845- 1848 : Unsettled prospects, 50 ; railway survey work, ib. ; punc- tiliousness curtails promising en- gagement, 51 : new position under Prichard, ib. ; more inventions, ib. sqq. ; miscellaneous reading, 53 ; meets Chapman, publisher, and others of note, 54 ; political activity ib. ; effect of heterodoxy on social relations, 55 ; reading and collect- ing material {or Social Statics, ib. ; method of studying style, il>. ; question of livelihood again urgent, 56 ; joins the Economist, ib.
Journalism and Authorship, 1848- 1857 : work on the Economist, 57 ; progress with Social Statics, ib. ; father's criticisms, 58 ; fixing on a title, ib. ; press reviews, ib. : R. Hutton's criticism, 59 ; friend's
Index
Spencer, Herbert : Career — ContJ.
objections, ib. ; chapter on Educa- tion reprinted, 60 ; Bulwer Lytton thereon, ib. ; signs of growing appreciation, ib. set], ', emigra- tion discussed, ib. ; lodgings in Paddington, 62; tries vegetarian- ism, ib. ; paper on the Water question, 63 ; new friendships — Octavius Smith, G. H. Lewes, Marian Evans, ib. ; Masson, 64 ; article on Population, ib. ; mis- understanding with Lewes, 65 ; friendship with Huxley and Tyn- dall begun, 65; " Haythorne Papers," ib. ; high opinion of Alex. Smith as a poet, 66 stq. ; a great discovery, 67 ; bookselling agitation, ib. : uncle's death, ib. ; legacy, ib. ; more articles, 69 ; leaves Economist, 70 ; pro- jected articles on Education and Comte, 71 seq. ; Leader asks for papers, 72 ; a Continental tour, ib. set/. ; overstrain in Switzer- land, 73 ; more " Haythorne Papers," 74 ; article on Comte, ib. ; writing the Psychology, 75 ; his opinion of it, ib. ; a holiday in France, ib. seq. ; impressions of Pari«, 76 ; an article on rail- ways, ib. seq. ; " hard up " again, 77 ; three months at home, ib. ; a nervous breakdown, ib. ; Psycho- logy published, ib. ; a tour in pur- suit of health, 78 ; his theories and remedies for ill-health, ib. seq. ; an opportune windfall, 79 ; grubs up tree-stumps, 80 ; mar- riage and religious exercise sug- gested, 80 ; repugnance to latter, 80 ; an enjoyable visit to the Potters, ib. ; repudiates charge of materialism and atheism, 81 (v. 580) ; meets Bain, ib. ; first visit to Ardtornish, 82 ; calls upon Comte in Paris, ib. ; a smoke con- suming invention ends in smoke, 83 ; first New Year dinner with Huxleys, ib.; more articles, ib. seq. Synthetic Philosophy (1858-1896): Scheme sent to father, 85 ; articles for the quarterlies, id., 87 ; com- pliment from an Indian official, 86 ; war rumours stop a trip to France, ib. ; attack on Owen, 87 ; futile endeavours to obtain post under government, 88 sqq., 96; correspondence with Mill on poli- tical questions, 93 seq. ; gets over dread of society, 95 ; more articles, 96 860. — Programme of philosophy
Spencer, Herbert : Career— Contd.
distributed, ib. seq. ; priority to Origin of Species, 98 ; Youmans offers co-operation, 99 ; influen- tial support from America, 100 ; writing First Principles, 101 ; another opportune legacy, 102 seq. ; health again unsettled, 103 ; first Principles com- pleted, 104 ; its reception, 105
1862. — Biology begun, 1 08 ; corre- spondence with Mill on Utili- tarianism, 108 seq. ; arrange- ments for publishing in America, no; earlier opinions modified, ill seq., 137 sqq. ; repudiation of Comtism, 112 sqq.; health improves, 116
1864. — Biology, vol. i. finished, Ii6; reorganizing Reader, 117;
• controversy with Mill, ll<)sqq. ; investigation of plant circula- tion, 123 seq. ; cessation of Philosophy announced, 126 ; movement for averting it, ib. ; American testimonial, 128 ; French translations, ib.
1867. — Reorganizing First Princi- ples, 131 ; father's death, 132 ; mother's death, ib. ; relations with parents reviewed, ib. sqq. ; revising Psychology, 140 ; present writer engaged as secre- tary, 141 ; Descriptive Sociology started, 141 seq. ; tries a course of rackets for his nerves, 142
1868. — Election to Athenaeum, ib. ; a small controversy about spontaneous generation, 144
1870. — First vol. of revised Psy- chology issued, 146
1872. — Second vol. of Psychology finished, 147 ; gives himself ten years to complete the system, ib. ; Descriptive Sociology con- tinued spite of heavy cost, 148 ; more parentheses, 148 sqq. ; controversy with Huxley, 150; prestige receives a " little thrust" from America, ib. ', academic honours declined, 152 seq.', Gazelles' Introduction, 154 (v. 170 seq.) ; Ribot translates the Psychology, 155 ; naming of the Philosophy further considered, 156 ; objections to terms " Positive " and " Cosmic," ib. seq. ; reasons for selecting "Synthetic," 158 (v. 170); International Scientific Series started, ib. seq. ; The Study of Sociology, 159 sqq. ; reply to Martineau, 160
Life of Herbert Spencer
Spencer, Herbert : Career— Contd.
1873.— Consulted about Japanese institutions, 161 ; interest in disestablishment, 162 ; corre- pondence with Mr. Gladstone concerning criticism, ib. sqq. ; cordial relations ensue, 164 (v. 1 68) ; Descriptive Sociology causes worry and trouble, ib. (see 174); replies to criticisms, 165 seq. ; obituary notice of Mill, 167 ; reasons for not join- ing Royal Society, 168 sqq. ; British Association Meeting, Belfast, 172
1874.— Principles of Sociology be- gun, 174 ; its destructive nature, ib. seq. ; further revision of First Principles, 175
187 5.— Begins Autobiography, 177; keeps away from Tyndall's wed- ding, 182 ; election to Roman Academy, ib. ; desires it to be cancelled, 183 ; request with- drawn, 184 ; nomination for Lord Rectorships, Edinburgh and Aberdeen, declined, ib. seq. ; invitation to Foreign Office re- ception declined, 185 seq. ; first vol. of Principles of Sociology, 1 88 seq., 190
1877.— Ill-health, 189; recuperates at Ardtornish, 191 ; " Cere- monial Institutions," ib. seq., 194, 200 ; a bad time, 192 ; tries the social distraction cure, 193 ; "Data of Ethics," 194, 197 seq. ; attends Lewes's funeral, 196
1879.— A holiday in the Riviera, 197; visit to Wilton, ib. ; "Po- litical Institutions" begun, ib., 207 ; appreciation from theo- logians, 202 ; visit to Egypt, 204 sqq. ; intercourse with cele- brities, 210 ; proposal for chair of Sociology at Liverpool, 21 1 ; absurd rumours, 212 1880-1881.— More encounters with critics, ib. sqq. ; Tail's attack, 213 ; George Eliot's death and funeral, 214 ; controversy with Goldwin Smith, 216; planning visit to America, 217 1882. —Meeting with Henry George, 218 ; cessation of De- scriptive Sociology, ib. ; gener- ous ' offer from America, ib. ', Anti-Aggression League, 221 sqq.; "Political Institutions" finished, 222 ; Darwin's funeral, 223 ; visit to America, 224
Spencer, Herbert : Career— Contd.
sqq. ; banquet and speech at Delmonico's, 225, 230. j883.— Last visit to Ardtornish, 237 ; Edinburgh Review attacks Philosophy, 238 ;" game cure," 239 ; political articles, ib. sqq. 1884.— Asked to stand for Leices- ter, 240 seq. ; Boehm's bust, 244 ; more side currents, 245 ; religious discussion, 251 sqq. ; controversy with Harrison, 254
sqq.
,885. _ « Ecclesiastical Institu- tions " finished, 246, 251, 266; " Factors of Organic Evolu- tion," 247, 269 sqq.; revised views on land question, 247 ; Harrison controversy repub- lished in America, 259 sqq. book suppressed, 262 seq. ; re- lations with George Eliot— sug- gested disclaimer, 266 seq. ,886.— Extreme depression, 273 ; death of Lott, 274 ; a sojourn at Brighton, 275 1887.— Death of Youmans, 277 ; interest in Hinton village library, 279; children's visits, 275; at Bournemouth with Potters, 279 1888.— Back in London, 280, 282 ; proposal for a portrait, 283 ; with Grant Allen at Dorking, 284 seq.; another loan of children, 285 ; interest in their welfare, ib. ; Pilot days recalled, 287 ,889.— Boarding-house life at an end, 289; m&nagert. St. John's Wood initiated, ib. ; a summer in Wiltshire, ib. ; honours from Bologna and Copenhagen, 290 seq. ; an American newspaper attack, ib. seq. ; a billiard story put right, 298 ; controversy on land question, 329 sqq.; rupture with Huxley, 331 sqq. (see post,
1893)
x 890. —Another attack by Hux- ley, 337 5 campaign against socialism, 299 sqq.
1 891. —Visit to Tyndall, 307: pleasures of Ardtornish recalled, 308 seq.
1892.— Death of Mr. Potter, 309 ; completing the Ethics, 311 seq.; asked to become an Alderman, 313; protest against a railway invasion, 314; project for a " Record of Legislation," 316 ; life in Wiltshire, 317 ; consulted on Japanese affairs, 318,^.; Ethics finished, 323 ; winter
Spencer, Herbert : Career — Could.
residence in London ceases,
325
1892-1895. — Weismann contro- versy, 343 sqq.
l893- — Henry George's onslaught, 338 sqq. ; domestic troubles, 326> 353 > reconciliation with Huxley, 337
1894. — Letters to Times on book- selling question, 361 seq. ; dis- solution of menage contem- plated, 365
1895. — Prussian Royal Order de- clined, 369 ; also honours from foreign academies, ib. seq. ; story about eating tallow candles in engineering days, 370 ; death of Huxley, 370
1896. — Correspondence with Countess of Pembroke on meta- physical questions, 371 sqq. ; proposals for portrait declined, 373 seq. ; death of George Holme, 378 ; Letters to Times on Metric System, 379 ; the philosophy completed, 380 (see 459)
Last years at Brighton, 1896-1903 (see 404, 406)
1896. — Letter of congratulation, 381 sqq. ; portrait commis- sioned, 387
1897. — Moredegreesdeclined,389
1898. — Portrait finished, 391 ; his dissatisfaction with it, ib. ; na- tional policy denounced, 410; Mr. Scawen Blunt instigated to write a poem, ib. seq.
1899. — " Filiation of Ideas" (Ap- pendix B) written, Biology re- vised, 395, 420; opposition to South African War, 421 sqq. ;
449 M<?'
1900. — First Principles revised, 420, 446 ; 8oth birthday con- gratulations, 421
1901-2. — Last book, 446, 448 sqq. , 460 seq.
1902. — Put forward for Nobel Prize, 456 (see 475) ; condition at 82, 459 ; last visit to country, 461 seq. , 465 ; testimonial to Ex-President Steyn, 463, 476
1903. — London University offers a degree, 467 ; last birthday congratulations, 468 ; illness, 469 ; pleasant reminders of the past, 470; death of Bain, 471 (see 457) ; visit from Mr. John Morley, 472 ; correspondence with him concerning funeral ad- dress, ib. sqq. (see 479) ; Lecky's
Spencer, Herbert : Career — Contd.
death, 474 ; last letter, 476 ; visits from friends, ib. ; last words, ib. ; death, 477; crema- tion, ib.; Mr. (Lord) Courtney's funeral address, 480 seq. ; tomb in Highgate Cemetery, 482 ; manifestations of sympathy, id. ; Herbert Spencer Lectureship founded at Oxford, 483 ; pro- posed memorial in Wesminster Abbey, 483 sqq. ; the Dean's reply, 486 ; reminiscences of friends, 492 sqq. ; his place in the history of thought, 512 sqq. III. Characteristics : generally, 489 sqq, 534 sqq.
Administrative, 495, 508
Agnosticism, 398, 491
Amusements, fondness for, 528
Analysis, 534, 551
Argumentaiiveness, 30 (v. 501)
Artistic, 9, 14, 15, 25 seq.
Authority, disregard of, 9, II, 16, 130, 241, 401, 489, 534, 537 sqq., 552
Books, objection to seeing, 396
Brusquerie, 499
Castle-building, 51, 529, 535
Causality, 402, 491, 534, 536
Ceremonial, aversion to, 185, 223, 490
Children, liking for, 31, 81, 279, 285, 317
Classics, aversion from, 13 seq.t 418,
535
Club life, 495 seq. Combativeness, 282 Concentration, 503 Conscientiousness, 25, 275 Consistency, 332, 343 Conversational, 497 Courteousness, 496, 508 Criticism, sensitiveness to, 335,
510; proneness to, 509 seq. Deductive tendency, 351, 502, 535,
540, 557
Detachment, 535 Distrust, 507 Dogmatism, 492, 501 Domesticity, 495, 5°7 Ecclesiasticism, aversion from, 569 Egotism, v. 498 Erudition, 416 sqq. Femininity, 494 Filial affection, 135 seq. Friendship, 492 seq. Health, concern for, 26, 78 seq.t
307 Honours, indifference to, 168, 183,
339. 369, 388> 497 Ideality, 535, 538, 540 Idleness, 297, 500, 529, 536
6i6
Life of Herbert Spencer
Spencer, H.: Characteristics— Contd. Individualism (see Opinions, Social
State)
Individuality, 17, 537 Intellectual, 416, 419, 500, 511, 535 Inventiveness, 14, 22, 24, 25, 26,
43, 51, 82, 491, 536, 538 Irritability, 510 Judgment, 498 Linguistics, aversion from, 13 seq.,
534 Mathematical, 12 sqq., 22, 25 set/.,
417, 438, 534 Memory, 500 Method, 504 Moral, 343, 511 Music, 407, 505 Nature study, 418 Optimism, 42, 44, 49, 71 Originality, 65, 171 Persistence, 50 Physical, 391, 489 sqq. Political, 312 (see Opinions) Punctiliousness, 272 Principles, 490 Radicalism, 35, 48 seq. Reading, aversion to, 490, 504 Restraint, impatience of, 12 Scepticism, 469 Self-advertisement, aveision from,
161, 171, 358 *<?«/., 381 Self-assertion, 1 6, 23 Self-confidence, 1 6 set/., 24, 26, 492,
535 «?•
Sincerity, 55, 135, 506, 511
Singing, 505
Social, 225, 285, 494 sqq.
Study, aversion to, 12 (v. reading)
Style, literary, 14, 39, 42, 55, 57, 6 1, 502 seq., 535
Sympathy, 307, 499
Tact, 495 seq.
Unconventionally, 507
Vanity, v. 75, 498
Wealth, indifference to, 164 seq., ?74, 339. 419, 5°6
Will power, 469, 476 IV. Opinions.
America : Civil war, 107 ; political institutions, 209 seq., 316 ; wo- men, 281 ; Chinese exclusion, 323 ; impending crisis, 367
Art, 76, 411
Athleticism, 328
Carlyle, 53, 378, 455
Cause, conception of, 402
Character, 420
Children, regimen, 286, 317 (see Parents)
Christianity, 220, 307^7., 354,423, 457, 465
Co-operation, 358
Coincidences, 357, 372, 471
Spencer, H. : Opinions — Contd. Critics, 201, 211, 242 Disestablishment, 466 Education, 39 seq., 277, 335, 404,
417, 454, 474 England, aggressive policy, 219 seq.,
284, 307 seq., 390 Ethics and evolution, 336 Franchise, 41, 94, 137 seq. French, 86, 155, 399 Gambling, 327 Hegelianism, 458 Hell, 354
Home Rule, 247, 300, 315, 325 Humanity, 301, 335, 366 Imperialism, 328 Japanese affairs, 318 sqq. Justice, administration, 242, 360 Laissez-faire, 161 Landlords, 292, 304 Land question, 247, 329 sqq., 338
T %*•
Liberty, 301 seq., 355
Libraries, free, 403
Licensing reform, 422
Living wage, 355
Marriage, 78, 296
Medical profession, 96, 153
Military, 54, 219 .51/17., 410 (see
England) Music, 411 Napoleon, Louis, 86 Natural selection, 346 Nature, non-moral, 280 Nurses, 315 Old age, 468, 470 seq. Parents' responsibility, 304 Paris, 76
Peace Society, 221, 224 Poetry, 307, 411 Politics, 28 seq., 37, 41, 48, 54,
224, 240, 242 seq., 247, 308, 355,
423
Poor Laws, 161
Press, 207, 301
Punch, 175
Races, mixture of, 322
Railway nuisances, 314
Relaxation, 230, 260
Religion, 18 seq., 48, 55, 60, 80, 251 W-t 356, 372
Rousseau, 466
Ruskin, 403
Sanitation, 75
Scotchmen, 67
Scotch scenery, 72, 186
Social State, Socialism, &c., 104, 153, 161, 238, 244, 248, 275 sq., 28l, 299 sqq., 314, 325, 353«?., 361, 366, 368, 403, 411, 420, 422,
454, 468
South African War, 421 sqq. Stevenson, R. L., 455
Index
617
Spencer, Herbert: Opinions — Contd.
Supernaturalism, 372
Swiss scenery, 72
Taxation, 94 set/.
Testimonials, 283, 325
Testimony, unreliability of, 356 seq.
Titles, 152 set/., 234 seq.
Trade-Unionism, 335, 341
Uniformity, 404
Vaccination, 277, 303
Ventilation, 303
Wealth, 305, 419; wealthy, 260
Women, 281, 296, 405 V. Recreations : generally, 237, 239,
328, 505 ; billiards, 215, 222, 237,
298, 495, 532 ; chess, 16 ; fiction,
n, 505; fishing, 15, 82, 87, 123,
172, 186, 195, 472 ; quoits, 16, 237,
239 ; skating, 16, 505 ; whist, 505.
See also 15, 16, 79, 80. Spencer, John, Spencer's uncle, 4, 310,
447
Spencer, Matthew, Spencer's grand- father, 3 set/., ii
Spencer, Thomas, of Kirk-Ireton, Spen- cer's ancestor, 3
Spencer, Rev. Thomas, M.A., Spencer's uncle : influence on Spencer, 4, 16, 36 ; financed by Spencer's father, 4 ; takes charge of Spencer's education, 12 sqq. ; encourages his political activity, 36 (v. 33) ; introduces him to Mr. Iley- worth, 46 ; business advice to Spencer, 47; pamphlets, 54 ; editor of National Temperance Chronicle, 68 ; death, ib. ; Spencer's obituary notice, ib. seq. ; founder of library at Hinton, 279. Letters to, 15, 56 ; letter from, 16
Spencer, Mrs. Thos. (see ante, Anna Spencer)
Spencer, William, of Kirk-Ireton, 3
Spencer, William, Spencer's uncle and teacher: 4, 9, 20, 21, 63, 102; Letter to, 68
Spencer, William George (commonly called George), Spencer's father: as- sists his father as teacher, 3 ; charac- teristics, 4 set/., 20, 46, 133 sqq., 534 set/. ; religious attitude described, 5 seq. ; marital relations, 6 ; lace- making speculation, 8 seq', reminis- cences, 10 ; distress at Spencer's be- haviour at Hinton, 13, 17 ; solicitude for Spencer's spiritual welfare, 18 seq., 28 (cf. 80) ; relieves Spencer in his pecuniary straits, 44 seq. ; system of shorthand, 45, 534 ; on Spencer's use of theological language, 60 ; death, 130, 132 ; Spencer's relations with, ib. sqq., 425
Letters to : "a pair of clothes," 15; application to studies, 17 ; religious feelings, 18 ; first essays in jour-
Spencer, W. G. . Letters to— Contd.
nalism, 19 seq. ; projection of shadows, 23 ; engineering activities, 24 ; mental progress, 27 ; journalis- tic enterprises, 38 sqq. ; Anti-State- Church address, 42 ; Punch and Pope's Homer, 43 ; financial em- barrassment, 44 seq. ; inventions, 52 ; Lord John Russell, 54 ; style, 55 ; The Standard of Freedom, 56 ; Social Statics, 57, 61 ; an excursion with Lewes, 63 ; Population article, 64 ; " Development Hypothesis," 65 ; essay on Style, 66 ; Rev. T. Spencer, 69 ; more articles, ib. : continental impressions, 72 ; Psy- chology, 77 ; breakdown, 79 ; opinions of Psychology, 81 ; Mill's Logic, 82 ; Huxley's and Tyndall's lectures, 83 ; Anglo-French rela- tions, 86 ; holiday and social move- ments, 95 ; programme of philo- sophy, 96 ; writing First Principles, 100 ; reviews of it, 105 ; social en- gagements, 109 ; cordial treatment at Ardtornish, 116; progress with work, 123; New Year's dinner at Huxley's, ib. ; John S. Mill's generosity, 126 ; advice, expostula- tion, and entreaty, 133 seq. ; Nebu- lar hypothesis, 426 Letters from, 13, 15, 58 Spencer, Mrs. W. G, (nee Harriet Holmes), Spencer's mother : general characterization, 6 (v. 62), 133; in- fluence on Spencer, 16 ; objects to Spencer mentioning Voltaire, 58 ; death, 132; Spencer's relations, ib. sqq. Letters to, 39, 67, 79, 82, 92,
134
Spencer, Mr., aeronaut, 472
Spielmann, Mr., 463
Spontaneous generation, 144 seq.
Spooner, Rev. W. A., Oxford, 486
Spottiswoode, William, P.R.S., 193
Spurzheim, Dr., lectures on phrenology, 10, 537
Standard, The : 232, 302, 363, 582, seq.; Harrison-Spencer controversy, 256, 262 seq. ; outline of Spencer's work, 312 ; Spencer's letter declining nomi- nation as Alderman of L.C.C., 314
Standard of Freedom, 56, 579
Standish House, Gloucestershire, 193,
237
Stannard, Mrs. Arthur, letter to, on religious view in Soul of a Bishop, 354 Stanley, Arthur P., Dean of Westmin- ster, 214, 215
Stanley of Alderley, Dowager Lady, 303 Stephen, Sir James Fitzjames, 255 Stephen [Sir] Leslie : 382, 385 ; relations with his father, 18 ; Ethical Lecturers'
6i8
Life of Herbert Spencer
Fund, 416 seq., 454. Letter to, 417; Letter from, 417 seq.
Stevenson, Robert Louis, 455
Steyn, M. J., Ex-President Orange Free State, testimonial and letter to, 463 seq., 476
Steyn, Mrs., Letter from, 476
Stourbridge, settlement of emigrants at, i
Stout, G. F., 385
Strutt, Edward, M.P. for Derby, 36
Study of Sociology. 159 seq. , 208, 210, 214, 297, 359, 399, 408, 533, 568; criticism of W. E. Gladstone, 162 seq. ; popularity of, 173 ; objected to as text book for Yale, 208 ; evolutionary conceptions, 567
Sturge, Joseph, 36, 47
Style: Lord Macaulay's, 6l ; evolution, 544 (see " Philosophy of Style")
Sully, Prof. James : co-operates in testi- monial to Spencer, 382, 385, 389 ; Letter to, 389, 421
Sumner, Charles, 101
Sumner, Prof., Yale College, 208
Sun : Spencer's article on constitution of, 431 seq., 559; question of age, 432; photosphere, 445
Sunday Society, 247
Supernatural, coincidences favouring be- lief in, 372
Survival of the Fittest : in social evolu- tion, 366, 540 ; in the inorganic world, 436 ; the term, 559
Swinburne, Algernon Charles, letter to, 220
Switzerland, Spencer's impression of, 72
Symes, Principal J. E., 486
Sympathy : genesis, 537 ; Adam Smith's theory, ib.: root of justice and benefi- cence, 540; in social evolution, 576
Synthetic Philosophy : this work not an exposition of, viii. ; scheme for, 85, 551, 563 ; distribution of programme and opinions thereon, 96 sqq. ; in relation to Comte's philosophy (see Comte) ; Gazelles' introduction, 153 seq. ; title and reasons for it, 156 sqq. , 170; nature and origin of, 256, 257 seq. ; Mr. A. J. Balfour's criticism, 344 ; completion, 380; letter of congratulation, 381 sqq.; finishing touches, 421 ; unwritten divisions, 424 sqq., 531 ; Clerk Max- well on scheme, 429; "The Un- knowable" in First Principles, 465; deductive and inductive methods con- sidered, $12 seq. ; Hector Macpherson on its dualistic character, 519; con- gruity with scientific progress, 520 sqq. ; Spencer's condition when writing, 531 ; omitted divisions not essential, ib. ; "Filiation of Ideas" (Appendix B), a sketch plan, 533
TABLET, The, approval of article by Spencer, 239
Tag, Der (Berlin newspaper), 475
Taine, H. : Idtal in Art, 150; nervous sensation, 564 note
Tail, Prof. P. G., Spencer's controversy with, 1 66, 211 sqq.
Tail's Magazine, rejects article by Spen- cer, 39, 40, 44, 66
Talent, as a condition to success, 40
Tappan [EL P.], French Academy, 233
Taxation, universal direct, advocated, 94 seq.
Taylor, Bayard, 101
Taylor, Miss Helen, 137
Taylor, Peter A., M.P., 240
Teaching (see Education)
Tedder, Henry K., Secretary and Li- brarian, Athenaeum Club: ix., 231; general editor of Descriptive Sociology, 453 note
Tenniel, Sir John, Punch cartoon, 289
Tennyson, Alfred, Lord, poet laureate, " Hands all Round," 222 ; peerage, 241 ; civil list pension, 289^7 ; " Fare- well," 309; "The Larger Hope," 371. Letter to, 78
Testimonials, grave social abuse, 283
Testimony, untrust worthiness of human, 297, 356 seq., 372
Thackeray, W. M., Spencer s favourite novelist, 5°4
Thames, Spencer's suggestion for im- proving, 63
"Theory of Population," 64 seq., 98, 5425^., S79 ; doctrine of selection, 98
Thiselton-Dyer, Sir W. T., 348, 385
Thompson, Sir E. Maunde, letter to, on British Academy of Letters, 456
Thompson, Sir Henry, Bart., 193, 215
Thomson, Sir Wm. (Lord Kelvin, q.v.)
Ticknor, George, 101 Times, The : letters by Spencer on sundry topics, 67, 247, 360, 375 (see 242, 579, 583 sqq.} ; foreign reports con- cerning Spencer, 129, 200; article on Virchow's address, 195 seq. ; report of Church Congress, Swansea, 202 ; Anti-Aggression League, 222 ; Spen- cer's refusal to stand for Leicester, 241 ; Harrison-Spencer controversy, 256, 261 seq., 265 seq. (v. 583 seq.) ; Spen- cer's advice to Japan, 323 ; contro- versy on land question, 329 sqq. (v. 584) ; Bookselling Question, 362 (v. 579, 585) ; Metric System, 379, 413, 586 ; F. H. Collins's proposal for por- trait of Spencer, 373, 374, 586 ; testi- monial to Spencer, 382 ; criticism of Herkomer's portrait, 392, 586 ; Bram- well Booth's attack, 398, 586; R. Buchanan's letter, 410; remark con- cerning fate of Russian statesman, 450
Index
619
note; life of Stevenson, 455; Spen- cer's last book, 460 ; report of Russian student's arrest, 461 ; Spencer's daily reading, 504 ; on Spencer's career,
Titles : Spencer's reasons for refusing various kinds, 152, 168 sqq., 182 sqq., 233 *qq-> 291, 369 seq., 467 (see Appen- dix D, 558)
T. P.'s Weekly, 298
Trade-Unionist : hostility to employers, 341
" Transverse Strain of Beams," 34, 578
Trelawney, Sir J., 95
Treport, 75, 78, 100
Tribune, New York newspaper, 208, 340, 342, 583
Troughton, Walter, Spencer's secretary, 1888-1903: ix., 469; reminiscences, 287, 288, 380, 448, 462, 465, 469, 476. 492. 503 se</-> 5°6, 508, 532; Spencer's last words, 476
Truth, ultimate test of, 119 sqq.
Tunbridge Wells Hydro. 227
Tupper, Sir Charles, Canadian Copy- right, 375 "I-
Turner, Sir William, Edinburgh Univer- sity, 486.
Twilight Club, New York, 230
Tylor, Dr. E. B. : 189, 238, 356, 409, 568, 582 ; correspondence concerning controversy, 451 seq.
Tyndall, Prof. John : friendship with Spencer begun, 65 ; testimonial to Spencer, 91 ; view of equilibration, 104 (»• 555) ; meetings with, 109, 142, 305, 307 (v. 414) ; attitude to Comtism, 113; re - organizing Reader, 117; consulted by Spencer, 131, 143, 144, 252 seq., 426 sqq., 437 ; infectious vivacity, 146 ; International Scientific Series, 159, 187; Tail controversy, 1 66 ; resents attack on men of science, ib. ; British Association address, 172, 174; criticism of First Principles, 175, 428 ; marriage, 181, 223 ; George Eliot, 214, 266 seq. ; health, 273, 305 seq. ; Huxley v. Spencer controversy, 331 sqq ; Weismann controversy, 348 ; death, 356 ; age of the earth, 438 ; on Spencer's character, 510 Letters to : equilibration, 104 (see 555); plagiarisms of psychologists, 143 ; physical conceptions in First Prin- ciples, 175 ; his marriage, 182 ; Times leading article, 195 ; personal, 289, 297> 3°5 s£q-i 326 ; political and social tendencies, 325 ; the Huxley affair, 333. Letters from : Huxley, 332 ; on Spencer's physical ideas, 428
Tyndall, Mrs. : letters to, 356, 365, 368, 370; letter from, 370
" ULTIMATE Laws of Physiology," 549, 580
" Ultimate Questions," essay in Spen- cer's last book, 448, 460
Uniformity, mania for, condemned, 404
United Service Club, 298
United States (see America)
" Universal Postulate," 69 sqq., 73, 79, 82, 544, 580
Universal Review, 426
Universities, standard of education, 417
Unknowable : 324 ; relation to knowable inexplicable, 402
" Use and Beauty," 65, 579
Use-Inheritance, see Heredity
" Use of Anthropomorphism," 74, 580
Utilitarianism, Spencer's attitude, 108 seq., v. 519
VACCINATION, 303
Vambery, A. 210
Vanity Fair, caricature of Spencer, 197
Varigny, II. de, French translator, 400
Various Fragments, 316, 461, 583 sqq.
Vedanta, its teachings alleged to have
influenced Spencer, 398 Vegetarianism, 62 Velocimeter, appliance invented by
Spencer, 25, 34, 536, 578 Venice, 206 Venn, Dr. John, 385 Ventilation of dwelling houses, 303 Vertebrate skeleton, Spencer's attack on
Owen's doctrine, 87 Vesey, Lord and Lady, 198 Vestiges of the Natural History of
Creation, 53, 541 Vesuvius, eruption of, 1868, 439 Vetter Dr. B., German translator, 269,
359
Vienna, Imperial Academy, 369, 589
Vincent, Henry, 36
Vines, Prof. S. H., 385
Vitalism, 144, 398 (see Life)
Volcanic eruptions, Spencer's specula- tions concerning, 439 seq.
Voltaire, Spencer suppresses his name, 58
Voluntary system, Spencer dissociates himself from ethics of, 59
Voluntary taxation, 301 seq.
WADE, Sir Willoughby, 385
Wales, Prince of, (King Edward VII.), ridiculous statement concerning, 414
Wales, Prince and Princess of, London University degrees, 467
Walker, J. Hanson, 394
Wallace, Alfred Russel : 385 ; opinion of Spencer's biological writings, 151 seq. ', Spencer's ethics, 199; Land Nationali- zation Society, 218 ; Weismann con- troversy, 349. Letter to, 364
62O
Life of Herbert Spencer
Waller, Mr., 192
Walshe, Walter II., 192
War, in social evolution, 281, 366 seq.,
569 sqq. Ward, Prof. James : 486 ; controversy
with, 445, 590 Ward, Lester F. : biological basis of
Spencer's sociology, 570 note ; letter
to, on Spencer's relations to Comte,
376 set].
Ward, Wilfred, 255 Water Question, article by Spencer on,
63. 579 Waikins, Rev. Prof., appreciation of
Spencer, 202 Watson, Prof., 228 seq. Watson, William, 410 Watts, George F., R.A., 373 seq. Watts, Isaac, Divine and Moral Songs,
Spencer's text-book as a child, 9 Wealth, distiibution during life approved,
305
Wealthy, lack of initiative, 360
Webb, Sidney, 361
Webb, Mrs. Sidney (nee Beatrice Potter) : 385 ; last visit to Spencer, 476 Letters to: "game-cure," 237; social pathology, 275 ; proposed portrait, 283 ; billiard story, 298 ; agnostics and believers, 457 ; thoughts in illness, 470
Weismann, Professor A., controversy respecting inheritance of acquired characters, 342 sqq.
Welby, Lady Victoria, 385
Wells, H. T., R.A., 374
Wemyss, Earl of, 317. Letters to : reasons for not joining Liberty and Property Defence League, 242 ; anti- socialist movement, 299 seq. ; railway nuisances, 314 ; English stupidity, ib.
Werner, E. T. C., 295; compiler of Chinese Descriptive Sociology, 295
Wesley, John, letter quoted, 2 ; converts Spencer's grandmother, 3
Wesleyan Methodism, associations of Spencer's family with, 2, 3, 5
Westerham, Kent, 370, 374
Westmacott, Mr. [son of Sculptor], 244
Westminster Abbey : 2145^7.; movement for memorial to Spencer in, 483 sqq.
Westminster Review : Spencer's con- tributions to, 64, 66 seq., 83 seq., 96, 547> 579 sqq. ; review of Spencer's First Principles, 105
"What is Electricity," 117, 427, 431, 560, 581
Wheatley, Mr., 197
Whewell, William : History and Philoso- phy of the Inductive Sciences, 515 ; Mill's criticism, 544
Whipple, E. P., 101
Williams, Geoffery S., 483
Williams, Mr. [Sidney], 228
Williams and Norgate (Spencer's pub- lishers), 126
Williamson, Dr., 437
Wilks, Dr. Samuel, 385
Wilson, Rev. Dr. James, editor of Pilot, 48, 287
Wilson, James, M.P., of the Economist, 48, 56 seq., 92
Women: suffrage question, 137 sqq. ; outcry against wrongs of, 281 ; in- tellectual powers, 295 seq. ; over- exaltation of, 405
Worcester, 23 sqq., 536
Working classes, political power, 94
Workman's Peace Association, 223
Wright, Prof. W. Aldis, 486
Wright-Henderson, Rev. P. A., Oxford, 486
Wroughton, Mr., 206
Wylde, Rev. M., 202 seq.
Wyman, Jeffries, 101, 150
X Club, 169, 193, 248 seq., 282, 327, 33 ! •*?</•> 456> 470
YALE College, 208
Youmans, Edward Livingston : intro- duction to Spencer, 99 ; personal in- tercourse, 104, 130, 196 seq., 218; Civil War, 106 seq. ; watches Spen- cer's interests in America, 109 seq., 164 seq., 174, 207, 278 ; raises fund to recoup Spencer's losses, 128 ; amanu- ensis to Spencer, 130; Spencer's drastic criticism of lectures, 130; or- ganizes Int. Scientific Series, 159, 187 ; founder and editor of Popular Science Monthly, 159, 174; lecture on Spen- cer, 171 ; introduction to Spencer's Data of Ethics, 198, 201 ; Spencer's obligations to, 218, 274 (see 236) ; Spencer's American visit, 226 ; con- scientiousness, 275 ; Spencer's appre- ciation, 274, 278, 375 ; death, 277 ; Fiske's memoirs, 357 seq; interest in Spencer recalled, 379 Letters to : Civil War, 106 seq. ; pub- lishing affairs, 1 1 1 ; change of views in Social Statics, in; Comtism, 113 ; Count Stirum's donation, 126 ; holiday sight seeing, 131 ; First Principles, ib.; spontaneous genera- tion, 145 ; progress with the Philo- sophy, a forecast, 147 ; Hutton con- troversy, 148 ; Darwin and mental evolution, 149 ; Fiske's Harvard lectures on " Positive " Philosophy, 156; making a fortune by philo- sophy, 160; an opportunity for advertisement rejected, 161 seq. ;
Index
62 i
Youmans, E. L. : Letters to — Contd. Descriptive Sociology worries, 164 seij. : Huxley's condition, 166 ; author and publisher, ib. ; a tilt with Tyndall, 166 ; lecture at Liberal Club, 171 ; Tyndall's Bel- fast address and its effect, 172 sty. ; scheme for financial assistance, 174 ; Popular Science Monthly policy, 175 ; Bain and evolution, Romanes, 181 ; Dr. Elam's attack, 187 set], ; conversation with a bishop, 188; copyright, 189, 209 ; Tylor and McLennan, 189 ; Data of Ethics, 194 : holiday 'companionship in- vited, 196 ; " devil-may-care " mood enjoined, 198 ; French clerical party, 200 ; reviews of Data of Ethics, 201 : Mr. Guthrie's misrepresenta- tions, ib. ; reviewers' misconcep- tions about First Principles, ib. ; visit to Egypt, 204; Grant Allen and Critics, professorship of socio- logy, &c. , 211; civilities with an old antagonist, 211; sundry critics, 212 set]., 217 ; hardest bit of work finished, 223 ; the American visit, 226; Hughlings Jackson's researches, 227; Henry George, 229; "gospel of relaxation," 230; a Japanese translation, revision of Essays, 231 ; Drummond's book, election to French Academy, 232 seq. ; Darwin- ism, 236, 237 ; Tylor, 238 ; Com- munism, ib. ; Edinburgh Review's criticism, 238 ; political articles, 239, 243 ; proposed parliamentary candi-
Youmans, E. L. : Letters to — Contd. dature, 241 ; Pall Mall Gazette's couplet, 244 ; Boehm's bust, ib. ; permanent work resumed, ib. ; per- sonal inquiries, 245 ; Irish Obstruc- tion, 247 ; friends breaking up, 248 ; a "dreadfully destructive " chapter in " Ecclesiastical Insiitutions,"25i ; " Religious Retrospect and Pros- pect," 252 sqq. ; Harrison's con- troversy, 254 sqq. ; Autobiography, 257 ; reprinting the Harrison con- troversy, 259 sqq. ; relations with George Eliot, 267 ; '• Factors of Or- ganic Evolution," 269, 271 ; Inter- national copyright, 272 ; consola- tion in illness, 274 ; a last greeting, 277 ; " What is Electricity," 427 ; nebular hypothesis, 431, 437. Also 123, 125, 207
Letters from : publishing affairs, 102, 109 sqq. ; Civil War, 106, 208 ; Social Statics, 1 1 1 seq. ; . Abbot controversy, 145 ; a " little thrust " from the Nation , 150; false report of Bain's death, 189 ; Harrison's controversy, 258 seq., 261 ; Spen- cer's tribute in Autobiography, 274
Youmans, Miss Eliza, 277, 357. Letters from, 278, 293, 379
Youmans, Dr. W. J., 293, 342, 452
Young, Prof., ideas of Sun's constitu- tion, 431
Young Scots' Society, 468
ZOIST, The (phrenological magazine), 40, 45. 537, 579
JOHN BALE, SONS & DANIELSSON, LTD., 83-91, Great Titchfield Street, Oxford Street, London, W.
HERBERT SPENCER'S WORKS.
In 2 vols. bound in buckram, 28s. net ; post-free, 29s. With a number of Portraits, some in Photogravure.
AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY.
CONTENTS OF VOL. I.
1. Extraction. 2. Grandparents and their Children. 3. Parents. 4. Childhood. 5. Boyhood. 6. A Journey and a Flight. 7. Youth at Hinton Charterhouse. 8. A False Start. 9. Commence Engineering. 10. Life at Worcester. 11. Some Months at Powick. 12. A Nomadic Period. 13. Return to Derby. 14. A Visit and its Consequences. 15. Back at Home. 16. A Campaign in London. 17. At Home Again. 18. A Brief Sub-editorship. 19. A Parliamentary Survey. 20. An Interval in Town. 21. Another Parliamentary Survey. 22. Inventions. 23. Suspense. 24. Begin Journalism. 25. My First Book. 26. An Idle Year. 27. A More Active Year. 28. Leave The Economist. 29. Two Months' Holiday. 30. Writing for Quarterly Reviews. 31. My Second Book. 32. Eighteen Months Lost. " 33. Some Significant Essays. APPENDICES A to K.
CONTENTS OF VOL. II.
34. A System of Philosophy Projected. 35. Plans for executing it. 36. A Plan Fixed upon. 37. Writing First Principles. 38. An Autumn's Relaxations. 39. A Volume of Biology. 40. A Digression. 41. Another Volume of Biology. 42. Impending Cessation. 43. Sad Events. 44. Re-casting First Principles. 45. An Imprudence and its Consequences. 46. A Tour in Italy. 47. Developing the Psychology. 48. Finishing the Psychology. 49. An Extra Book. 50. Some Minor Incidents. 51. The Descriptive Sociology. 52. A Retrospective Glance. 53. Vol. I of The Sociology. 54. A Series of Articles. 55. The Data of Ethics. 56. Ceremonial Institutions. 57. Up the Nile. 58. Ending of Descriptive Sociology. 59. Political Institutions. 60. A Grievous Mistake. 61. Coming Events. 62. A Visit to America. 63. Conclusion. 64. Reflections. APPENDICES A to H.
Popular Re -issue NOW READY.
Seventh Edition. In one vol. demy 8vo, cloth, price 7s. 6d., With a Photogravure Portrait of the Author-
FIRST PRINCIPLES.
CONTENTS.
PART I. — THE UNKNOWABLE.
1. Religion and Science.
2. Ultimate Religious Ideas.
3. Ultimate Scientific Ideas.
4. The Relativity of All Know-
ledge.
5. The Reconciliation. 3 | 08 A
2 HERBERT SPENCERS WORKS.
PART II. — THE KNOWABLE.
1. Philosophy Defined.
2. The Data of Philosophy.
3. Space, Time, Matter, Motion,
and Force.
4. ThelndestructibilityofMatter.
5. The Continuity of Motion.
6. The Persistence of Force.
7. The Persistence of Relations
among Forces.
8. The Transformation and Equi-
valence of Forces.
9. The Direction of Motion.
10. The Rhythm of Motion.
11. Recapitulation, Criticism,
and Recommencement.
12. Evolution and Dissolution.
13. Simple and Compound Evolu-
tion.
14. The Law of Evolution.
15. The Law of Evolution, con-
tinued.
16. The Law of Evolution, con-
tinued.
17. The Law of Evolution, con-
cluded.
18. The Interpretation of Evolu-
tion.
19. The Instability of the Homo-
geneous.
20. The Multiplication of Effects.
21. Segregation.
22. Equilibration.
23. Dissolution.
24. Summary and Conclusion.
In two vols. demy 8vo, cloth, price 36s.
THE PRINCIPLES OF BIOLOGY.
(Qfk Thousand, REVISED AND ENLARGED EDITION.)
CONTENTS PART I. — THE DATA OF BIOLOGY.
1. Organic Matter.
2. The Actions of Forces on Or-
ganic Matter.
3. The Re-actions of Organic
Matter on Forces. 3A. Metabolism.
4. Proximate Definition of Life.
5. The Correspondence between
Life and its Circumstances.
6. The Degree of Life varies as the
Degree of Correspondence. 6A. The Dynamic Element in Life.
7. The Scope of Biology.
PART II.— THE INDUCTIONS OF BIOLOGY.
1. Growth.
2. Development. 2A. Structure.
3 Function.
4. Waste and Repair.
5. Adaptation.
6. Individuality.
6.\. Cell-Life and Cell-Multipli- cation.
7. Genesis.
8. Heredity.
9. Variation.
HO Genesis, Heredity, and Varia- tion.
OF VOL. I.
10A. Ditto, concluded.
11. Classification.
12. Distribution.
PART III. — THE EVOLUTION OF LIFE.
1. Preliminary.
2. General Aspects of the Special -
Creation-Hypothesis.
3. General Aspects of the Evo-
lution-Hypothesis.
4. The Arguments from Classi-
fication.
5. The Arguments from Embry-
ology.
6. The Arguments from Mor-
phology.
7. The Arguments from Distri-
bution.
8. How is Organic Evolution
caused ?
9. External Factors.
10. Internal Factors.
11. Direct Equilibration.
12. Indirect Equilibration.
13. The Co-operation of the Fac-
tors.
14. The Convergence of the Evi-
dences.
14A. Recent Criticisms and Hypo- theses. FOUR APPENDICES.
HERBERT SPENCERS WORKS.
CONTENTS OF VOL. II.
PART IV. — MORPHOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT.
1. The Problems of Morphology.
2. The Morphological Composi-
tion of Plants.
3. The Morphological Composi-
tion of Plants, continued.
4. The Morphological Composi-
tion of Animals.
5. The Morphological Composi-
tion of Animals, continued.
6. Morphological Differentiation
in Plants.
7. The General Shapes of Plants.
8. The Shapes of Branches.
9. The Shapes of Leaves.
10. The Shapes of Flowers.
11. The Shapes of Vegetal Cells.
12. Changes of Shape otherwise
caused.
13. Morphological Differentiation
in Animals.
14. The General Shapes of Ani-
mals.
15. The Shapes of Vertebrate
Skeletons.
16. The Shapes of Animal Cells.
17. Summary of Morphological
Development.
PART V. — PHYSIOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT.
1. The Problems of Physiology.
2. Differentiations between the
Outer and Inner Tissues of Plants.
3. Differentiations among the
Outer Tissues of Plants.
4. Differentiations among the
Inner Tissues of Plants.
5. Physiological Integration in
Plants.
6. Differentiations between the
Outer and Inner Tissues of Animals.
7. Differentiations among the
Outer Tissues of Animals.
8. Differentiations among the
Inner Tissues of Animals.
9. Physiological Integration in
Animals.
10. Summary of Physiological De- velopment.
10A. The Integration of the Organic World.
PART VI. — LAWS OF MULTIPLICA- TION.
1. The Factors.
2. A Priori Principle.
3. Obverse a priori Principle.
4. Difficulties of Inductive Veri-
fication.
5. Antagonism between Growth
and Asexual Genesis.
6. Antagonism between Growth
and Sexual Genesis.
7. Antagonism between Develop-
ment and Genesis, Asexual and Sexual.
8. Antagonism between Expen-
diture and Genesis.
9. Coincidence between high
Nutrition and Genesis.
10. Specialities of these Relations.
11. Interpretation and Qualifica-
tion.
12. Multiplication of the Buman
Ba.ce.
13. Human Evolution in the
Future.
APPENDICES.
A Criticism on Professor Owen's Theory of the Vertebrate Skele- ton.
On Circulation and the Formation of "Wood in Plants.
And six others.
A 2
HERBERT SPENCERS WORKS.
Qth Thousand.
In two vols. demy 8vo, cloth, price 36s.,
THE PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGY.
CONTENTS OF VOL. I.
PART I.— THEDATAOFPSYCHOLOGY
1. The Nervous System.
2. The Structure of the Nervous
System.
3. The Functions of the Nervous
System.
4. The Conditions essential to
Nervous Action.
5. Nervous Stimulation and
Nervous Discharge.
6. ^Estho-Physiology.
PART II. — THE INDUCTIONS OF PSYCHOLOGY.
1. The Substance of Mind.
2. The Composition of Mind.
3. The Relativity of Feelings.
4. The Relativity of Relations
between Feelings.
5. The Revivability of Feelings.
6. The Revivability of Relations
between Feelings.
7. The Associability of Feelings.
8. The Associability of Relations
between Feelings.
9. Pleasures and Pains.
PART III. — GENERAL SYNTHESIS.
1. Life and Mind as Correspond-
ence.
2. The Correspondence as Direct
and Homogeneous.
3. The Correspondence as Direct
but Heterogeneous.
4. The Correspondence as ex-
tending in Space. 5 The Correspondence as ex- tending in Time
6. The Correspondence as in-
creasing in Speciality.
7. The Correspondence as in-
creasing in Generality.
8. The Correspondence as in-
creasing in Complexity.
9. The Co-ordination of Cor-
respondences.
10. The Integration of Corres-
pondences.
11. The Correspondences in their
Totality.
PART IV. — SPECIAL SYNTHESIS.
1. The Nature of Intelligence.
2. The Law of Intelligence.
3. The Growth of Intelligence.
4. Reflex Action.
5. Instinct.
6. Memory
7. Reason.
8. The Feelings.
9. The Will.
PART V. — PHYSICAL SYNTHESIS.
1. A Further Interpretation
Needed.
2. The Genesis of Nerves.
3. The Genesis of Simple Ner-
vous Systems.
4. The Genesis of Compound
Nervous Systems.
5. The Genesis of Doubly-Com-
pound Nervous Systems.
6. Functions as Related to these
Structures.
7. Psychical Laws as thus Inter-
preted.
8. Evidence from Normal Varia-
tions.
9. Evidence from Abnormal
Variations. 10. Results.
APPENDIX. On the Action of Anesthetics and
Narcotics.
HERBERT SPENCERS WORKS. CONTENTS OF VOL. II.
PART VI. — SPECIAL ANALYSIS.
1. Limitation of the Subject.
2. Compound Quantitative Rea-
soning.
3. Compound Quantitative Rea-
soning, continued.
4. Imperfect and Simple Quan-
titative Reasoning.
5. Quantitative Reasoning in
General.
6. Perfect Qualitative Reason-
ing.
7. Imperfect Qualitative Reason-
ing.
8. Reasoning in General.
9. Classification, Naming, and
Recognition.
10. The Perception of Special Ob-
jects.
11. The Perception of Body as
presenting Dynamical, Sta- tico Dynamical, and Stati- cal Attributes.
12. The Perception of Body as
presenting Statico-Dynami- cal and Statical Attributes.
13. The Perception of Body as pre-
senting Statical Attributes.
14. The Perception of Space.
15. The Perception of Time.
16. The Perception of Motion.
17. The Perception of Resistance.
18. Perception in General.
19. The Relations of Similarity
and Dissimilarity.
20. The Relations of Cointension
and Non-Cointension.
21. The Relations of Coextension
and Non-Coextension.
22. The Relations of Coexistence
and Non-Coexistence.
23. The Relations of Connature
and Non-Connature.
24. The Relations of Likeness and
Unlikeness.
25. The Relation of Sequence.
26. Consciousness in General.
27. Results.
PART VII. — GENERAL ANALYSIS.
1. The Final Question.
2. The Assumption of Meta-
physicians.
3. The Words of Metaphysicians.
4. The Reasonings of Metaphysi-
cians.
5. Negative Justification of Real-
ism.
6. Argument from Priority.
7 . The Argument from Simplicity
8. The Argument from Distinct-
ness.
9. A Criterion Wanted.
10. Propositions qualitatively dis-
tinguished.
11. The Universal Postulate.
12. The test of Relative Validity.
13. Its Corollaries,
14. Positive Justification of Real-
ism,
15. The Dynamics of Conscious-
ness.
16. Partial Differentiation of Sub-
ject and Object.
17. Completed Differentiation of
Subject and Object.
18. Developed Conception of the
Object,
19. Transfigured Realism.
Two Postscripts to Part VII. PART VIII. — CON&RUITIES.
1. Preliminary.
2. Co-ordination of Data and
Inductions.
3. Co-ordination of Syntheses.
4. Co-ordination of Special
Analyses.
5. Co-ordination of General
Analyses.
6. Final Comparison.
PART IX. — COROLLARIES.
1. Special Psychology.
2. Classification.
3. Development of Conceptions.
4. Language of the Emotions.
5. Sociality and Sympathy.
6. Egoistic Sentiments.
7. Ego-Altruistic Sentiments.
8. Altruistic Sentiments.
9. ^Esthetic Sentiments.
HERBERT SPENCERS WORKS.
In demy 8vo, cloth.
THE PRINCIPLES OP SOCIOLOGY.
CONTENTS OF VOL. I. (4th Thousand, price 21s.)
PART I. — THE DATA OF SOCIOLOGY.
1. Super-Organic Evolution.
2. The Factors of Social Phe-
nomena.
3. Original External Factors.
4. Original Internal Factors.
5. The Primitive Man — Physical.
6. The Primitive Man — Emo-
tional.
7. The Primitive Man — Intel-
lectual.
8. Primitive Ideas.
9. The Ideas of the Animate and
the Inanimate.
10. The Ideas of Sleep and Dreams.
11. The Ideas of Swoon, Apo-
plexy, Catelepsy, Ecstasy, and other forms of Insen- sibility.
12. The Ideas of Death and
Resurrection.
13. The Ideas of Souls, Ghosts,
Spirits, Demons.
14. The Ideas of Another Life.
15. The Ideas of Another World.
16. The Ideas of Supernatural
Agents.
17. Supernatural Agents as caus-
ing Epilepsy and Convul- sive Actions, Delirium and Insanity, Disease and Death.
18. Inspiration, Divination, Exor-
cism, and Sorcery.
19. Sacred Places, Temples, and
Altars ; Sacrifice, Fasting, and Propitiation ; Praise and Prayer.
20. Ancestor-Worship in General
21. Idol- Worship and Fetich -Wor-
ship.
22. Animal -Worship.
23. Plant- Worship.
24. Nature- Worship.
25. Deities.
26. The Primitive Theory
Things. 27- The Scope of Sociology.
of
PART II.— THE INDUCTIONS OF SOCIOLOGY.
1. What is a Society?
2. A Society is an Organism.
3. Social Growth.
4. Social Structures.
5. Social Functions.
6. Systems of Organs.
7. The Sustaining System.
8. The Distributing System.
9. The Regulating System.
10. Social Types and Constitutions.
11. Social Metamorphoses.
12. Qualifications and Summary.
PART III. — DOMESTIC INSTITU- TIONS.
1 . The Maintenance of Species.
2. The Diverse Interests of the
Species, of the Parents, and; of the Offspring.
3. Primitive Relations of the
Sexes.
4. Exogamy and Endogamy.
5. Promiscuity.
6. Polyandry.
7. Polygyny.
8. Monogamy.
9. The Family.
1(1. The Status of Women.
11. The Status of Children.
12. Domestic Retrospect and
Prospect.
HERBERT SPENCER'S WORKS.
CONTENTS OF VOL. II. (4:th Thousand, price 18s.)
PART IV. — CEREMONIAL INSTI- 3.
TUTIONS. 4.
1. Ceremony in General. 5.
2. Trophies. 6.
3. Mutilations.
4. Presents. 7.
5. Visits. 8.
6. Obeisances. 9. 7 Forms of Address. 10
8. Titles. 11.'
9. Badges and Costumes. 12.
10. Further Class-Distinctions. 13.
11. Fashion. 14.
12. Ceremonial Retrospect and 15.
Prospect. 16.
PART V. — POLITICAL INSTITU- TIONS. lg
1. Preliminary.
2. Political Organization in 19.
General.
Political Integration. Political Differentiation. Political Forms and Forces. Political Heads — Chiefs,
Kings, etc.
Compound Political Heads. Consultative Bodies. Representative Bodies. Ministries.
Local Governing Agencies. Military Systems. Judicial Systems. Laws. Property. Revenue. The Militant Type of
Society. The Industrial Type of
Society. Political Retrospect and
Prospect.
CONTENTS OF VOL. 111. (2»d Thousand, price 16s.)
PART VI. — ECCLESIASTICAL
INSTITUTIONS.
1. The Religious Idea.
2. Medicine-Men and Priests.
3. Priestly Duties of Descendants.
4. Eldest Male Descendants as
Quasi-Priests.
5. The Ruler as Priest.
6. The Rise of a Priesthood.
7. Polytheistic and Monotheistic
Priesthoods.
8. Ecclesiastical Hierarchies
9. An Ecclesiastical System as a
Social Bond.
10. The Military Functions of
Priests.
11. The Civil Functions of Priests.
12. Church and State.
13. Nonconformity.
14. The Moral Influences of
Priesthoods.
15. Ecclesiastical Retrospect and
Prospect.
16. Religious Retrospect and
Prospect.
PART VII. — PROFESSIONAL INSTITUTIONS.
1. Professions in General.
2. Physician and Surgeon.
3. Dancer and Musician.
4. Orator and Poet, Actor and
Dramatist.
5. Biographer, Historian, and
Man of Letters.
6. Man of Science and Philo-
sopher.
7. Judge and Lawyer.
8. Teacher.
9. Architect.
10. Sculptor.
11. Painter.
12. Evolution of the Professions.
8 HERBERT SPENCERS WORKS.
PART VIII. — INDUSTRIAL INSTITUTIONS.
1. Introductory.
2. Specialization of Functions
and Division of Labour.
3. Acquisition and Production.
4. Auxiliary Production.
5. Distribution.
6. Auxiliary Distribution.
7. Exchange.
8. Auxiliary Exchange.
9. Interdependence and Integra-
tion. 10, The Regulation of Labour.
11. Paternal Regulation.
12. Patriarchal Regulation,
13. Communal Regulation.
14. Gild Regulation.
15. Slavery.
16. Serfdom.
17. Free Labour and Contract.
18. Compound Free Labour
19. Compound Capital.
20. Trade-Unions.
21. Co-operation.
22. Socialism.
23. The Near Future.
24. Conclusion.
In two vols. demy 8vo, cloth, price 27s. 6d.
THE PRINCIPLES OF ETHICS.
CONTENTS OF VOL. I.
(3rd Thousand, price 15s.)
PART I. — THE DATA OF ETHICS.
1. Conduct in General.
2. The Evolution of Conduct.
3. Good and Bad Conduct.
4. Ways of Judging Conduct.
5. The Physical View.
6. The Biological View.
7. The Psychological View.
8. The Sociological View.
9. Criticisms and Explanations.
10. The Relativity of Pains and
Pleasures.
11. Egoism versus Altruism.
12. Altruism versus Egoism.
13. Trial and Compromise.
14. Conciliation.
15. Absolute Ethics and Relative
Ethics.
16. The Scope of Ethics.
APPENDIX. The Conciliation.
PART II. — THE INDUCTIONS OF ETHICS.
1. The Confusion of Ethical
Thought.
2. What Ideas and Sentiments
are Ethical.
3. Aggression.
4. Robbery
5. Revenge.
6. Justice.
7. Generosity.
8. Humanity.
9. Veracity.
10. Obedience.
11. Industry.
12. Temperance.
13. Chastity.
14. Summary of Inductions.
PART III. — THE ETHICS OF INDIVIDUAL LIFK.
1. Introductory.
2. Activity.
3. Rest.
4. Nutrition.
5. Stimulation.
6. Culture.
7. Amusements.
8. Marriage
9. Parenthood.
10. General Conclusions.
HERBERT SPENCER'S WORKS.
CONTENTS OP VOL. II.
(2nd Thousand, PART IV. JUSTICE.
1. Animal-Ethics.
2. Sub-Human Justice.
3. Human Justice.
4. The Sentiment of Justice.
5. The Idea of Justice.
6. The Formula of Justice.
7. The Authority of this
Formula.
8. Its Corollaries.
9. The Eight to Physical
Integrity. The Eights to free Motion and
Locomotion. The Eights to the Uses of
Natural Media.
12. The Eight of Property.
13. The Eight of Incorporeal
Property.
14 The Eights of Gift and Bequest.
15. The Eights of Free Exchange
and Free Contract.
16. The Eight of Free Industry.
17. The Eights of Free Belief and
Worship.
18. The Eights of Free Speech
and Publication.
19. A Eetrospect with an
Addition.
20. The Eights of Women.
21. The Eights of Children.
22. Political Eights— so called.
23. The Nature of the State.
24. The Constitution of the State.
25. Duties of the State.
26 The Limits of State-Duties. 27. The Limits of State-Duties, continued.
price 12s.
28. The Limits of State-Duties,
continued.
29. The Limits of State-Duties,
concluded.
PART V. — NEGATIVE BENEFI- CENCE.
1. Kinds of Altruism.
2. Eestraints on Free Com-
petition.
3. Eestraints on Free Contract.
4. Eestraints on Undeserved
Payments.
5. Eestraints on Displays of
Ability.
6. Eestraints on Blame.
7. Eestraints on Praise.
8. The Ultimate Sanctions.
PART VI.— POSITIVE BENEFI- CENCE.
1. Marital Beneficence.
2. Parental Beneficence.
3. Filial Beneficence.
4. Aiding the Sick and the
Injured.
5. Succour to the Ill-used and
the Endangered.
6. Pecuniary Aid to Eelatives
and Friends.
7. Eelief of the Poor.
8. Social Beneficence.
9. Political Beneficence. 10. Beneficence at Lai'ge.
APPENDICES.
A. The Kantian Idea of Eights.
B. The Land-Question.
C. The Moral Motive.
D. Conscience in Animals.
To be had Separately : —
JUSTICE,
3rd Thousand. Price 6s.
THE DATA OF ETHICS.
Entirely Re-set Uniform with Popular Edition of FIRST PRINCIPLES. Paper Wrapper, 2s. 6d. net, cloth, 3s. net.
10 HERBERT SPENCERS WORKS.
<§%r
46th Thousand. In one vol., crown 8vo, cloth, price 2s. 6d.,
EDUCATION :
INTELLECTUAL, MORAL, AND PHYSICAL. CONTENTS.
1. What Knowledge is of most
Worth ?
2. Intellectual Education.
3. Moral Education.
4. Physical Education.
BEING A POPULAR EDITION,
ENTIRELY RE-SET IN STYLE UNIFORM WITH POPULAR EDITION OF FIRST PRINCIPLES.
4:th Thousand. In one vol., demy 8vo, cloth, price 6s.,
FACTS AND COMMENTS:
Consisting of 40 Short Essays on various topics.
ENLARGED EDITION. In one vol. demy 8vo, cloth, price 6s.
VARIOUS FRAGMENTS.
Consisting of 23 Articles.
21st Thousand.
LIBRARY EDITION (2nd Thousand), ivilh a Postscript. In one vol. demy 8vo, cloth, price 10s. 6d.,
THE STUDY OP SOCIOLOGY.
1. Our Need of it.
2. Is there a Social Science 1
3. Nature of the Social Science.
4. Difficulties of the Social
Science.
CONTENTS.
5. Objective Difficulties.
6. Subjective Difficulties — Intel-
lectual.
7. Subjective Difficulties — Emo-
tional.
HERBERT SPENCERS WORKS. 11
8. The Educational Bias.
9. The Bias of Patriotism.
10. The Class-Bias.
11. The Political Bias.
12. The Theological Bias.
13. Discipline.
14. Preparation in Biology.
15. Preparation in Psychology.
16. Conclusion. Postscript.
2nd Thousand. In one vol. demy 8vo, cloth, price 10s.,
SOCIAL STATICS & MAN F. STATE.
CONTENTS OF SOCIAL STATICS.
1. Happiness as an Immediate
Aim.
2. Unguided Expediency
3. The Moral- Sense Doctrine.
4. What is Morality ?
5. The Evanescence [? Diminu-
tion] of Evil.
6. Greatest Happiness must be
sought indirectly.
7. Derivation of a First Principle.
8. Secondary Derivation of a
First Principle.
9. First Principle.
10. Application of this First Prin-
ciple.
11. The Eight of Property.
12. Socialism.
13. The Eight of Property in Ideas.
14. The Eights of Women.
15. The Eights of Children.
16. Political Eights.
17. The Constitution of the State.
18. The Duty of the State.
19. The Limit of State-Duty.
20. The Eegulation of Commerce.
21. Eeligious Establishments.
22. Poor Laws.
23. National Education.
24. Government Colonization.
25. Sanitary Supervision.
26. Currency, Postal Arrange-
ments, etc.
27. General Considerations.
CONTENTS OF THE MAN VEKSUS THE STATE.
1. The New Toryism.
2. The Coming Slavery.
3. The Sins of Legislators.
4. The Great Political Supersti- tion. Postscript.
Also separately (17th Thousand), In paper wrapper, Is.
THE MAN VEESUS THE STATE.
12 HERBERT SPENCERS WORKS.
6th Thousand (LIBRARY EDITION). In three vols. demy 8vo, cloth, price 30s. (or 10s. each).
ESSAYS :
SCIENTIFIC, POLITICAL, AND SPECULATIVE. CONTENTS OF VOL. I.
1. The Development Hypothesis.
2. Progress : Its Law and Cause.
3. Transcendental Physiology.
4. The Nebular Hypothesis.
5. The Constitution of the Sun.
6. Illogical Geology.
7. Bain on the Emotions and
Will.
8. The Social Organism.
9. The Origin of Animal Wor- ship.
10. Morals and Moral Senti-
ments.
11. The Comparative Psychology
of Man.
12. Mr. Martineau on Evolution.
13. The Factors of Organic
Evolution.
14. Lord Salisbury on Evolution.
CONTENTS OF VOL. II.
1. The Genesis of Science.
2. The Classification of the
Sciences.
3. Reasons for Dissenting from
the Philosophy of M. Comte.
4. On Laws in General, and the
Order of their Discovery.
5. The Valuation of Evidence.
6. What is Electricity 1
7. Mill versus Hamilton — the
Test of Truth.
8. Eeplies to Criticisms.
CONTENTS
1. Manners and Fashion.
2. Railway Morals and Railway
Policy.
3. The Morals of Trade.
4. Prison Ethics.
5. The Ethics of Kant.
6. Absolute Political Ethics.
7. Over-Legislation.
8. Representative Government —
What is it good for ?
9. Prof. Green's Explanations.
10. The Philosophy of Style.
11. Use and Beauty.
12. The Sources of Architectural
Types.
13. Gracefulness.
14. Personal Beauty.
15. The Origin and Function of
Music.
16. The Physiology of Laughter.
17. The Relations of Biology,
Psychology and Sociology.
OF VOL. III.
9. State-T amperings with Money and Banks.
10. Parliamentary Reform : the
Dangers and the Safe- guards.
11. "The Collective Wisdom."
12. Political Fetichism.
13. Specialized Administration.
14. From Freedom to Bondage.
15. The Americans.
ALSO SEPARATELY, Price 6d.
REASONS FOR DISSENTING FROM THE PHILOSOPHY OF M. COMTE.
HERBERT SPENCERS WORKS. 13
Ocscriptibt
CLASSIFIED AND ARRANGED BY
HERBERT SPENCER.
COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED BIT
DAVID DUNCAN, M.A., D.Sc., LL.D.(late Director of Public Instruction,
Madras) ; RICHARD SCHEPPia, Ph.D. ; and JAMES COLLIER.
EXTRACT FROM THE PROVISIONAL PREFACE.
In preparation for The Principles of Sociology, requiring aa bases of induction large accu- mulations of data, fitly arranged for comparison, I, some twelve years ago, commenced, by proxy, the collection and organization of facts presented by societies of different types, past and present; being fortunate enough to secure the services of gentlemen competent to carry on the process in the way I wished. Though this classified compilation of materials was entered upon solely to facilitate my own work ; yet, after having brought the mode of classification to a satisfactory form, and after having had some of the Tables filled up, I decided to have the undertaking executed with a view to publication ; the facts collected and arranged for easy reference and convenient study of their relations, being so presented, apart from hypothesis, as to aid all students of Social Science in testing such conclusions as they have drawn and in drawing others.
The Work consists of three large Divisions. Each comprises a set of Tables exhibiting the facts as abstracted and classified, and a mass of quotations and abridged abstracts other- wise classified, on which the statements contained in the Tables are based. The condensed statements, arranged after a uniform manner, give, in each Table or succession of Tables, the phenomena of all orders which each society presents— constitute an account of its mor- phology, its physiology, and (if a society having a known history) its development. On the other hand, the collected Extracts, serving as authorities for the statements in the Tables, are (or. rather will be, when the Work is complete) classified primarily according to the kinds of phenomena to which they refer, and secondarily according to the societies exhibiting these phenomena; so that each kind of phenomenon as it is displayed in all societies may be separately studied with convenience.
In further explanation I may say that the classified compilations and digests of materials to be thus brought together under the title of Descriptive Sociology, are intended to supply the student of Social Science with data, standing towards his conclusions in a relation like that in which accounts of the structures and functions of different types of animals stand to the conclusions of the biologist. Until there had been such systematic descriptions of different kinds of organisms, as made it possible to compare the connexions, and forms, and actions, and modes of origin, ot their parts, the Science of Life could make no progress. And in like manner, before there can be reached in Sociology, generalizations having a certainty making them worthy to be called scientific, there must be definite accounts of the institu- tions and actions of societies of various types, and in various stages of evolution, so arranged as to furnish the means of readily ascertainine what social phenomena are habitually associated. _ __ _
In Royal Folio, Price 18s.,
•vr y TIAT/^T i OTT COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED BY
JNo. I. EJNljrLlbti. JAMES COLLIER.
In Royal Folio, Price 16s.,
No. II. MEXICANS, CENTRAL
AMERICANS, CHIBCHAS, AND
PTT,T^TTVT ATCS COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED BY
RICHARD SCHEPPIG-, PH.D.
In Royal Folio, Price 18s.,
No. III. LOWEST RACES, NEGRITO RACES, AND MALAYO-POLYNESIAN
"P A r^TTft COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED BY
DAVID DUNCAN, M.A., D.Sc., LL.D.
TYPES OF LOWEST EACES.— Fuegians, Andamanese, Veddahs, Australians. NEGRITO RACES. — Tasmanians, New Caledonians, etc., New Guinea People, Fijians. MALAYO-POLYNESIAN RACES. — Sandwich Islanders, Tahitians, Tongans, Samoans, New Zealanders, Dyaks, Javans, Sumatrans, Malagasy.
14 HERBERT SPENCERS WORKS.
In Royal Folio, Price 16s.,
No. IV. AFRICAN RACES.
DAVID DUNCAN, M.A., D.Sc., LL.D.
Bushmen, Hottentots, Damaras, Bechuanas, Kaffirs, East Africans, Congo People, Coast Negroes, Inland Negroes, Dahomans, Ashantis, Fulahs, Abyssinians.
In Royal Folio, Price 18s., V/~v \T A QT A TT/^ "P A f^TTd COMPILED AND
Mo. V. AblAIIC RAGES. ABSTRACTED BY
DAVID DUNCAN, M.A., D.Sc., LL.D.
Arabs, Todas, Khonds, Gonds, Bhils, Santals, Karens, Kukis, Nagas, Bodo and Dhimals, Mishmis, Kirghiz, Kalmucks, Ostyaks, Kamtschadales.
In Royal Folio, Price 1 8s.,
No. VI. AMERICAN RACES. ^SSL™
DAVID DUNCAN, M.A., D.Sc., LL.D.
Esquimaux, Chinooks, Snakes, Comanches, Iroquois, Chippewayans, Chippewas, Dakotas, Mandans, Creeks, Guiana Tribes, Caribs, Brazilians, Uaup6s, Abipones, Patagonians, Araucanians.
In Royal Folio, Price 21s.,
No. VII. HEBREWS AND PHOENICIANS.
COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED BY RICHARD SCHEPPIG, PH.D.
fn Royal Folio, Price 30s.,
VTTT FTCFINTITT COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED BY . Vlll. nuiM^n. JAMES COLLIER.
In Preparation.
Edited by HENRY R. TEDDER, Secretary and Librarian of the Athenaeum Club.
CHINESE COMPILED AND E. T. C. WERNER,
ABSTRACTED BY H.M.'8 Consular Service, China.
ANCIENT EGYPTIANS. HELLENIC GREEKS. BY
REV. DR.J.P.MAHAFFY,and PKOFESSOR W. A. GOLIGHER,
Trinity College, Dublin.
HELLENISTIC GREEKS. By the same.
ROMANS. BY MR' E- H- ALTON, F.T.C.D.,
and PROFESSOR W. A. GOLIGHER.
HERBERT SPENCERS WORKS.
AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY,
With a number of Illustrations, some in Photogravure, 2 Vols., 28s. net.
A SYSTEM OF SYNTHETIC PHILOSOPHY. FlBST PKJNCIPLES. *°Plf°'°*ead* 7* 6 A
PlUNCIPLESOFBtOLOGY. 2 Vols. 36*.
PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGY. 2 vols. 6th Thou. 36s.
PRINCIPLES OF SOCIOLOGY. Vol. I. 4th Thou. 21 s.
DITTO Vol. II. 4th TAo«. 18s.
DITTO Vol. III. 2nd Thou. 165.
PRINCIPLES OF ETHICS, Vol. I. 3rd Thou... 15S.
DITTO Vol. II. 2nd Thou. 12s. 6d
JUSTICE (separately). 3rd Thousand . . 6s.
THE DATA OF ETHICS (separately].
Sewed, 2s. 6d. net, cloth, 3s. net. OTHER WORKS.
THE STUDY OF SOCIOLOGY. 2 is* Thousand. 10s. 6rf. EDUCATION". Popular Edition. 46th Thousand. 2s. 6d.
ESSAYS. 3 vols. Gth Thousand . . . .
(Each Volume may be had separately, price 10*.)
SOCIAL STATICS & MAN v. STATE, in one
vol. 2nd Thousand .. .. . .
TEE MAN v. THE STATE (separately), nth Thou. Is. FACTS AND COMMENTS. 4th Thousand. . . 65.
VARIOUS FRAGMENTS. Enlarged Edition. . . 6s.
REASONS FOR DISSENTING FROM THE
PHILOSOPHY OF M. COMTE . . . . 6d.
A REJOINDER TO PROF. WEISMANN . . 6d,
WEISMANNISM ONCE MORE . . . . 6d.
AGAINST THE METRIC SYSTEM. r!*,l.™> 3d.
tvith additions [For particulars see end of the volume.]
WILLIAMS AND NORGATE,
14, HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON, W.C.
HERBERT SPENCER'S & W. G. SPENCER'S WORKS.
HERBERT SPENCER'S
DESCRIPTIVE SOCIOLOGY,
COMPILED AND ABSTRACTED BY
DR. DUNCAN, DR. SCHEPPIG, & MR. COLLIER. FOLIO, BOARDS.
1. ENGLISH .. .. .. .. .. 18,9.
2. ANCIENT AMERICAN RACES .. .. 16s.
3. LOWEST RACES, NEGRITOS, POLYNESIANS 18s.
4. AFRICAN RACES . . . . . . 16s.
5. ASIATIC RACES . . . . . . . . 18s.
6. AMERICAN RACES .. .. .. 18s.
7. HEBREWS AND PHOENICIANS . . . . 21s.
8. FRENCH . . . . . . . . . . 30s.
[For particulars and announcement of works in preparation, see end of the volume.]
ALSO, BY W. G. SPENCER
(Herbert Spencer s Father), Crown Svo, Cloth, price Is. each,
INTENTIONAL GEOMETRY,
(Third Thousand),
With a Preface by HERBERT- SPENCER. AND
A SYSTEM OF LUCID SHORTHAND,
WILLIAMS AND NORGATE,
14, HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON. Harrison and Sons, Printers, St. Martin's Lane.
24139
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
Los Angeles This hook is DUE on the last date stamped helow.
A 000 038 299 4
University of California
SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
Return this material to the library
from which it was borrowed.
SRUF
QL
3CT f «