1871.
["In 1871" (to quote Sir M. Foster), "the post of Secretary to the
Royal Society became vacant through the resignation of William
Sharpey, and the Fellows learned with glad surprise that Huxley, whom
they looked to rather as a not distant President, was willing to
undertake the duties of the office." This office, which he held until
1880, involved him for the next ten years in a quantity of anxious
work, not only in the way of correspondence and administration, but
the seeing through the press and often revising every biological paper
that the Society received, as well as reading those it rejected. Then,
too, he had to attend every general, council, and committee meeting,
amongst which latter the "Challenger" Committee was a load in itself.
Under pressure of all this work, he was compelled to give up active
connection with other learned societies. (See Appendix 2.)
Other work this year, in addition to the School Board, included
courses of lectures at the London Institution in January and February,
on "First Principles of Biology," and from October to December on
"Elementary Physiology"; lectures to Working Men in London from
February to April, as well as one at Liverpool, March 25, on "The
Geographical Distribution of Animals"; two lectures at the Royal
Institution, May 12 and 19, on "Berkeley on Vision," and the
"Metaphysics of Sensation" ("Collected Essays" 6). He published one
paleontological paper, "Fossil Vertebrates from the Yarrow Colliery"
(Huxley and Wright, "Irish Academy Transactions"). In June and July he
gave 36 lectures to schoolmasters--that important business of teaching
the teachers that they might set about scientific instruction in the
right way. (See below.) He attended the British Association at
Edinburgh, and laid down his Presidency; he brought out his "Manual of
Vertebrate Anatomy," and wrote a review of "Mr. Darwin's Critics" (see
below), while on October 9 he delivered an address at the Midland
Institute, Birmingham, on "Administrative Nihilism" ("Collected
Essays" 1). This address, written between September 21 and 28, and
remodelled later, was a pendant to his educational campaign on the
School Board; a restatement and justification of what he had said and
done there. His text was the various objections raised to State
interference with education; he dealt first with the upholders of a
kind of caste system, men who were willing enough to raise themselves
and their sons to a higher social plane, but objected on
semi-theological grounds to any one from below doing likewise--neatly
satirising them and their notions of gentility, and quoting Plato in
support of his contention that what is wanted even more than means to
help capacity to rise is "machinery by which to facilitate the descent
of incapacity from the higher strata to the lower." He repeats in new
phrase his warning] "that every man of high natural ability, who is
both ignorant and miserable, is as great a danger to society as a
rocket without a stick is to people who fire it. Misery is a match
that never goes out; genius, as an explosive power, beats gunpowder
hollow: and if knowledge, which should give that power guidance, is
wanting, the chances are not small that the rocket will simply run
amuck among friends and foes."
[Another class of objectors will have it that government should be
restricted to police functions, both domestic and foreign, that any
further interference must do harm.]
Suppose, however, for the sake of argument, that we accept the
proposition that the functions of the State may be properly summed up
in the one great negative commandment--"Thou shalt not allow any man
to interfere with the liberty of any other man,"--I am unable to see
that the logical consequence is any such restriction of the power of
Government, as its supporters imply. If my next-door neighbour chooses
to have his drains in such a state as to create a poisonous
atmosphere, which I breathe at the risk of typhoid and diphtheria, he
restricts my just freedom to just as much as if he went about with a
pistol threatening my life; if he is to be allowed to let his children
go unvaccinated, he might as well be allowed to leave strychnine
lozenges about in the way of mine; and if he brings them up untaught
and untrained to earn their living, he is doing his best to restrict
my freedom, by increasing the burden of taxation for the support of
gaols and workhouses, which I have to pay.
The higher the state of civilisation, the more completely do the
actions of one member of the social body influence all the rest, and
the less possible is it for any one man to do a wrong thing without
interfering, more or less, with the freedom of all his
fellow-citizens. So that, even upon the narrowest view of the
functions of the State, it must be admitted to have wider powers than
the advocates of the police theory are disposed to admit.
[This leads to a criticism of Mr. Spencer's elaborate comparison of
the body politic to the body physical, a comparison vitiated by the
fact that "among the higher physiological organisms there is none
which is developed by the conjunction of a number of primitively
independent existences into a complete whole."]
The process of social organisation appears to be comparable, not so
much to the process of organic development, as to the synthesis of the
chemist, by which independent elements are gradually built up into
complex aggregations--in which each element retains an independent
individuality, though held in subordination to the whole.
[It is permissible to quote a few more sentences from this address for
the sake of their freshness, or as illustrating the writer's ideas.
Discussing toleration,] "I cannot discover that Locke fathers the pet
doctrine of modern Liberalism, that the toleration of error is a good
thing in itself, and to be reckoned among the cardinal virtues."
[(This bears on his speech against Ultramontanism.)
Of Mr. Spencer's comparison of the State to a living body in the
interests of individualism:--]
I suppose it is universally agreed that it would be useless and absurd
for the State to attempt to promote friendship and sympathy between
man and man directly. But I see no reason why, if it be otherwise
expedient, the State may not do something towards that end indirectly.
For example, I can conceive the existence of an Established Church
which should be a blessing to the community. A Church in which, week
by week, services should be devoted, not to the iteration of abstract
propositions in theology, but to the setting before men's minds of an
ideal of true, just, and pure living; a place in which those who are
weary of the burden of daily cares should find a moment's rest in the
contemplation of the higher life which is possible for all, though
attained by so few; a place in which the man of strife and of business
should have time to think how small, after all, are the rewards he
covets compared with peace and charity. Depend upon it, if such a
Church existed, no one would seek to disestablish it.
The sole order of nobility which, in my judgment, becomes a
philosopher, is the rank which he holds in the estimation of his
fellow-workers, who are the only competent judges in such matters.
Newton and Cuvier lowered themselves when the one accepted an idle
knighthood, and the other became a baron of the empire. The great men
who went to their graves as Michael Faraday and George Grote seem to
me to have understood the dignity of knowledge better when they
declined all such meretricious trappings. [(On the other hand, he
thought it right and proper for officials, in scientific as in other
departments, to accept such honours, as giving them official power and
status. In his own case, while refusing all simple titular honours, he
accepted the Privy Councillorship, because, though incidentally
carrying a title, it was an office; and an office in virtue of which a
man of science might, in theory at least, be called upon to act as
responsible adviser to the Government, should special occasion arise.)
The usual note of high pressure recurs in the following letter,
written to thank Darwin for his new work, "The Descent of Man, and
Selection in relation to Sex."]
Jermyn Street, February 20, 1871.
My dear Darwin,
Best thanks for your new book, a copy of which I find awaiting me this
morning. But I wish you would not bring your books out when I am so
busy with all sorts of things. You know I can't show my face anywhere
in society without having read them--and I consider it too bad.
No doubt, too, it is full of suggestions just like that I have hit
upon by chance at page 212 of volume 1, which connects the periodicity
of vital phenomena with antecedent conditions.
Fancy lunacy, etc., coming out of the primary fact that one's nth
ancestor lived between tide-marks! I declare it's the grandest
suggestion I have heard of for an age.
I have been working like a horse for the last fortnight, with the fag
end of influenza hanging about me--and I am improving under the
process, which shows what a good tonic work is.
I shall try if I can't pick out from "Sexual Selection" some practical
hint for the improvement of gutter-babies, and bring in a resolution
thereupon at the School Board.
Ever yours faithfully,
T.H. Huxley.
[This year also saw the inception of a scheme for a series of science
primers, under the joint editorship of Professors Huxley, Roscoe, and
Balfour Stewart. Huxley undertook the Introductory Primer, but it
progressed slowly owing to pressure of other work, and was not
actually finished till 1880.]
26 Abbey Place, June 29, 1871.
My dear Roscoe,
If you could see the minutes of the Proceedings of the Aid to Science
Commission, the Contagious Diseases Commission and the School Board
(to say nothing of a lecture to Schoolmasters every morning), you
would forgive me for not having written to you before.
But now that I have had a little time to look at it, I hasten to say
that your chemical primer appears to me to be admirable--just what is
wanted.
I enclose the sketch for my Primer primus. You will see the bearing of
it, rough as it is. When it touches upon chemical matters, it would
deal with them in a more rudimentary fashion than yours does, and only
prepare the minds of the fledglings for you.
I send you a copy of the Report of the Education Committee, the
resolutions based on which I am now slowly getting passed by our
Board. The adoption of (c) among the essential subjects has, I hope,
secured the future of Elementary Science in London. Cannot you get as
much done in Manchester?
Ever yours faithfully,
T.H. Huxley.
[Sir Charles Lyell was now nearly 74 years old, and though he lived
four years longer, age was beginning to tell even upon his vigorous
powers. A chance meeting with him elicited the following letter:--]
26 Abbey Place, July 30, 1871.
My dear Darwin,
I met Lyell in Waterloo Place to-day walking with Carrick Moore--and
although what you said the other day had prepared me, I was greatly
shocked at his appearance, and still more at his speech. There is no
doubt it is affected in the way you describe, and the fact gives me
very sad forebodings about him. The Fates send me a swift and speedy
end whenever my time comes. I think there is nothing so lamentable as
the spectacle of the wreck of a once clear and vigorous mind!
I am glad Frank enjoyed his visit to us. He is a great favourite here,
and I hope he will understand that he is free of the house. It was the
greatest fun to see Jess and Mady [aged 13 and 12 respectively] on
their dignity with him. No more kissing, I can tell you. Miss Mady was
especially sublime.
Six out of our seven children have the whooping-cough. Need I say
therefore that the wife is enjoying herself?
With best regards to Mrs. Darwin and your daughter (and affectionate
love to Polly) believe me,
Ever yours faithfully,
T.H. Huxley.
[The purchase of the microscope, already referred to, was the subject
of another letter to Dr. Dohrn, of which only the concluding paragraph
about the School Board, is of general interest. Unfortunately the
English microscope did not turn out a success, as compared to the work
of the Jena opticians: this is the "optical Sadowa" of the second
letter.]
I fancy from what you wrote to my wife that there has been some report
of my doings about the School Board in Germany. So I send you the
number of the "Contemporary Review" [Containing his article on "The
School Boards," etc.] for December that you may see what line I have
really taken. Fanatics on both sides abuse me, so I think I must be
right.
When is this infernal war to come to an end? I hold for Germany as
always, but I wish she would make peace.
With best wishes for the New Year,
Ever yours,
T.H. Huxley.
26 Abbey Place, July 7, 1871.
My dear Dohrn,
I have received your packet, and I will take care that your Report is
duly presented to the Association. But the "Happy Family" in general,
and myself in particular, are very sorry you cannot come to Scotland.
We had begun to count upon it, and the children are immeasurably
disgusted with the Insects which will not lay their eggs at the right
time.
You have become acclimatised to my bad behaviour in the matter of
correspondence, so I shall not apologise for being in arrear. I have
been frightfully hard-worked with two Royal Commissions and the School
Board all sitting at once, but I am none the worse, and things are
getting into shape--which is a satisfaction for one's trouble. I look
forward hopefully towards getting back to my ordinary work next year.
Your penultimate letter was very interesting to me, but the glimpses
into your new views which it affords are very tantalising--and I want
more. What you say about the development of the Amnion in your last
letter still more nearly brought "Donner und Blitz!" to my lips--and I
shall look out anxiously for your new facts. Lankester tells me you
have been giving lectures on your views. I wish I had been there to
hear.
He is helping me as Demonstrator in a course of instruction in Biology
which I am giving to Schoolmasters--with the view of converting them
into scientific missionaries to convert the Christian Heathen of these
islands to the true faith.
I am afraid that the English microscope turned out to be by no means
worth the money and trouble you bestowed upon it. But the glory of
such an optical Sadowa should count for something! I wish that you
would get your Jena man to supply me with one of his best objectives
if the price is not ruinous--I should like to compare it with my 1/12
inch of Ross. [In this connection it may be noted that he himself
invented a combination microscope for laboratory use, still made by
Crouch the optician. (See "Journal of Queckett Micr. Club" volume 5
page 144.)]
All our children but Jessie have the whooping-cough--Pertussis--I
don't know your German name for it. It is distressing enough for them,
but, I think, still worse for their mother. However, there are no
serious symptoms, and I hope the change of air will set them right.
They all join with me in best wishes and regrets that you are not
coming. Won't you change your mind? We start on July 31st.
Ever yours faithfully,
T.H. Huxley.
[The summer holiday of 1871 was spent at St. Andrews, a place rather
laborious of approach at that time, with all the impedimenta of a
large and young family, but chosen on account of its nearness to
Edinburgh, where the British Association met that year. I well
remember the night journey of some ten or eleven hours, the freshness
of the early morning at Edinburgh, the hasty excursion with my father
up the hill from the station as far as the old High Street. The return
journey, however, was made easier by the kindness of Dr. Matthews
Duncan, who put up the whole family for a night, so as to break the
journey.
We stayed at Castlemount, now belonging to Miss Paton, just opposite
the ruined castle. Among other visitors to St. Andrews known to my
father were Professors Tait and Crum Brown, who inveigled him into
making trial of the "Royal and Ancient" game, which then, as now, was
the staple resource of the famous little city. I have a vivid
recollection of his being hopelessly bunkered three or four holes from
home, and can testify that he bore the moral strain with more than
usual calm as compared with the generality of golfers. Indeed, despite
his naturally quick temper and his four years of naval service at a
time when, perhaps, the traditions of a former generation had not
wholly died out, he had a special aversion to the use of expletives;
and the occasional appearance of a strong word in his letters must be
put down to a simply literary use which he would have studiously
avoided in conversation. A curious physical result followed the vigour
with which he threw himself into the unwonted recreation. For the last
twenty years his only physical exercise had been walking, and now his
arms went black and blue under the muscular strain, as if they had
been bruised.
But the holiday was by no means spent entirely in recreation. One week
was devoted to the British Association; another to the examination of
some interesting fossils at Elgin; while the last three weeks were
occupied in writing two long articles, "Mr. Darwin's Critics," and the
address entitled "Administrative Nihilism" referred to above, as well
as a review of Dana's "Crinoids." The former, which appeared in the
"Contemporary Review" for November ("Collected Essays" 2 120-187) was
a review of (1) "Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection," by
A.R. Wallace, (2) "The Genesis of Species," by St. George Mivart,
F.R.S., and (3) an article in the "Quarterly" for July 1871, on
Darwin's "Descent of Man."]
"I am Darwin's bull-dog," [he once said, and the "Quarterly
Reviewer's" treatment of Darwin,] "alike unjust and unbecoming,"
[provoked him into immediate action.] "I am about sending you," [he
writes to Haeckel on November 2,] "a little review of some of Darwin's
critics. The dogs have been barking at his heels too much of late."
[Apart from this stricture, however, he notes the] "happy change"
[which] "has come over Mr. Darwin's critics. The mixture of ignorance
and insolence which at first characterised a large proportion of the
attacks with which he was assailed, is no longer the sad distinction
of anti-Darwinian criticism." [Notes too] "that, in a dozen years, the
'Origin of Species' has worked as complete a revolution in biological
science as the 'Principia' did in astronomy--and it has done so,
because, in the words of Helmholtz, it contains 'an essentially new
creative thought.'"
[The essay is particularly interesting as giving evidence of his skill
and knowledge in dealing with psychology, as against the "Quarterly
Reviewer," and even with such an unlikely subject as scholastic
metaphysics, so that, by an odd turn of events, he appeared in the
novel character of a defender of Catholic orthodoxy against an attempt
from within that Church to prove that its teachings have in reality
always been in harmony with the requirements of modern science. For
Mr. Mivart, while twitting the generality of men of science with their
ignorance of the real doctrines of his church, gave a reference to the
Jesuit theologian Suarez, the latest great representative of
scholasticism, as following St. Augustine in asserting, not direct,
but derivative creation, that is to say, evolution from primordial
matter endued with certain powers. Startled by this statement, Huxley
investigated the works of the learned Jesuit, and found not only that
Mr. Mivart's reference to the Metaphysical Disputations was not to the
point, but that in the "Tractatus de opere sex Dierum," Suarez
expressly and emphatically rejects this doctrine and reprehends
Augustine for asserting it.]
By great good luck [he writes to Darwin from St. Andrews] there is an
excellent library here, with a good copy of Suarez, in a dozen big
folios. Among these I dived, to the great astonishment of the
librarian, and looking into them as "the careful robin eyes the
delver's toil" (vide "Idylls"), I carried off the two venerable
clasped volumes which were most promising.
So I have come out in the new character of a defender of Catholic
orthodoxy, and upset Mivart out of the mouth of his own prophet.
[Darwin himself was more than pleased with the article, and wrote
enthusiastically (see "Life and Letters" 3 148-150). A few of his
generous words may be quoted to show the rate at which he valued his
friend's championship.
What a wonderful man you are to grapple with those old
metaphysical-divinity books...The pendulum is now swinging against our
side, but I feel positive it will soon swing the other way; and no
mortal man will do half as much as you in giving it a start in the
right direction, as you did at the first commencement.
And again, after "mounting climax on climax," he continues:--"I must
tell you what Hooker said to me a few years ago. 'When I read Huxley,
I feel quite infantile in intellect.'"
This sketch of what constituted his holiday--and it was not very much
busier than many another holiday--may possibly suggest what his busy
time must have been like.
Till the end of the year the immense amount of work did not apparently
tell upon him. He rejoiced in it. In December he remarked to his wife
that with all his different irons in the fire, he had never felt his
mind clearer or his vigour greater. Within a week he broke down quite
suddenly, and could neither work nor think. He refers to this in the
following letter:--]
Jermyn Street, December 22, 1871.
My dear Johnny,
You are certainly improving. As a practitioner in the use of cold
steel myself, I have read your letter in to-day's "Nature," "mit
Ehrfurcht und Bewunderung." And the best evidence of the greatness of
your achievement is that it extracts this expression of admiration
from a poor devil whose brains and body are in a colloid state, and
who is off to Brighton for a day or two this afternoon.
God be with thee, my son, and strengthen the contents of thy
gall-bladder!
Ever thine,
T.H. Huxley.
PS.--Seriously, I am glad that at last a protest has been raised
against the process of anonymous self-praise to which our friend is
given. I spoke to Smith the other day about that dose of it in the
"Quarterly" article on Spirit-rapping.