complain of want of compassion in our Laws [!]; the very word
seeming contradictory to any idea of it. But I will venture to own
that to me it appears strange, that the men against whom I should
be enabled to bring an action for laying a little dirt at my door,
may, with _impunity_, drive by it half-a-dozen Calves, _with their
tails lopped close to their bodies and their hinder parts covered
with blood_....
“To conclude this subject--as I cannot but join in opinion with Mr.
Hogarth, that the frequency of murders among us is greatly owing
to those scenes of Cruelty, which the lower ranks of people are so
much accustomed to; _instead of multiplying such scenes_, I should
rather hope that some proper method might be fixed upon either
_for preventing them_, or removing them out of sight; so that our
infants might not grow up into the world in a familiarity with
blood.
“If we may believe the Naturalists, that a Lion is a gentle animal
until his tongue has been dipped in blood, _what precaution ought
we to use to prevent MAN from being inured to it, who has such
superiority of power to do mischief_.”--_The World_, No. LXI., Aug.
19, 1756.
XII.
JENYNS. 1704-1787.
A supporter of the Walpole Administration, he represented the county
of Cambridge, and during twenty-five years held the office of
Commissioner of the Board of Trade. He wrote papers in _The World_ and
other periodicals, and published two volumes of Poems. His principal
book is the _Free Enquiry into the Origin of Evil_, in which he
seeks to reconcile the obvious evils in the constitution of things
with his optimistic creed. Johnson, who, with all his orthodoxy, was
pessimistic, severely criticised this apology for Theism. In striking
contrast with the indifferentism of the vast majority of his class,
his just and humane feeling is sufficiently remarkable. The line of
reasoning, in his comprehensive arraignment of the various atrocities
perpetrated, sanctioned, or condoned by English Society or English Law
in the last century, and which, for the most part, still continue (it
is scarcely necessary to add), _logically_ leads to the abolition of
the Slaughter-House--the fountain and origin of the evil:--
“How will Man, that sanguinary Tyrant, be able to excuse himself
from the charge of those innumerable cruelties inflicted on his
unoffending subjects, committed to his care, and placed under
his authority, by their common father? To what horrid deviations
from these benevolent intentions are we daily witnesses! No small
part of Mankind derive their chief amusement from the deaths and
sufferings of inferior Animals. A much greater part still, consider
them only as engines of wood or iron, useful in their several
occupations. The Carman drives his Horse as the Carpenter his nail
by repeated blows; and so long as these produce the desired effect,
and they both go, they neither reflect nor care whether either of
them have any sense of feeling.
“The Butcher knocks down the stately Ox with no more compassion
than the Blacksmith hammers a horse-shoe, and plunges his knife
into the throat of the innocent Lamb with as little reluctance as
the Tailor sticks his needle into the collar of a coat.[307] If
there are some few who, formed in a softer mould, view with pity
the sufferings of these defenceless beings, _there is scarce one
who entertains the least idea that Justice or Gratitude can be due
to their Merits or their Services_.
“The social and friendly Dog, if by barking, in defence of his
master’s person and property, he happens unknowingly to disturb
his rest--the generous Horse, who has carried his ungrateful
master for many years, with ease and safety, worn out with age
and infirmities contracted in his service, is by him condemned to
end his miserable days in a dust-cart, where the more he exerts
his little remains of spirit, the more he is whipped to save his
stupid driver the trouble of whipping some other less obedient
to the lash. Sometimes, having been taught the practice of many
unnatural and useless feats in a Riding-House, he is, at last,
turned out and consigned to the dominion of a hackney-coachman, by
whom he is every day corrected for performing those tricks which he
has learned under so long and severe a discipline. [Add the final
horrors of the _Knackers’ Yard_, to which sort of hell the worn-out
Horse is usually consigned.]
“The Sluggish Bear, in contradiction to his nature, is taught to
dance, for the diversion of an ignorant mob, by placing red-hot
irons under his feet. The majestic Bull is tortured by every mode
that malice can invent, for no offence but that he is unwilling
to assail his diabolical tormentors.[308] These and innumerable
other acts of Cruelty, Injustice, and Ingratitude are every day
committed--not only with impunity, but _without censure, and even
without observation_....
“The law of self-defence, undoubtedly, justifies us in destroying
those animals that would destroy us, that injure our properties,
or annoy our persons; but not even these, whenever their situation
incapacitates them from hurting us....
“If there are any [there are vast numbers even now], whose tastes
are so vitiated, and whose hearts are so hardened, as to delight in
such inhuman sacrifices [the tortures of the Slaughter-House and of
the Kitchen], and to partake of them without remorse, they should
be looked upon as demons in human shape, and expect a retaliation
of those tortures _which they have inflicted on the Innocent for
the gratification of their own depraved and unnatural appetites_.
“So violent are the passions of anger and revenge in the human
breast, that it is not wonderful that men should persecute their
real or imaginary enemies with cruelty and malevolence. But that
there should exist in Nature a being who can receive pleasure from
giving pain would be totally incredible, if we were not convinced
by melancholy experience that there are not only many--but that
this unaccountable disposition is in some manner inherent in the
nature of men.[309] For as he cannot be taught by example, nor led
to it by temptation, nor prompted to it by interest, it must be
derived from his native constitution.[310]
“We see children laughing at the miseries which they inflict on
every unfortunate animal who comes within their power. All Savages
are ingenious in contriving and executing the most exquisite
tortures, and [not alone] the common people of all countries
are delighted with nothing so much as with Bull-Baitings,
Prize-Fightings, ‘Executions,’ and all spectacles of cruelty and
horror.... They arm Cocks with artificial weapons which Nature had
kindly denied to their malevolence, and with shouts of applause and
triumph see them plunge them into each other’s hearts. They view
with delight the trembling Deer and defenceless Hare flying for
hours in the utmost agonies of terror and despair, and, at last,
sinking under fatigue, devoured by their merciless pursuers. They
see with joy the beautiful Pheasant and harmless Partridge drop
from their flight, weltering in their blood, or, perhaps, perishing
with wounds and hunger under the cover of some friendly thicket,
to which they have in vain retreated for safety.... And to add to
all this, they spare neither labour nor expense to preserve and
propagate these innocent animals for no other end than to multiply
the objects of their persecution.
“What name should we bestow upon a Supreme Being whose whole
endeavours were employed, and whose whole pleasure consisted, in
terrifying, ensnaring, tormenting, and destroying mankind; whose
superior faculties were exerted in fomenting animosities amongst
them, in contriving engines of destruction, inciting them to use
them in maiming and murdering each other; whose power over them
was employed in assisting the rapacious, deceiving the simple, and
oppressing the innocent? Who, without provocation or advantage,
should continue, from day to day, void of all pity and remorse,
thus to torment mankind for diversion; and, at the same time,
endeavouring, with the utmost care, to preserve their lives and
propagate their species, in order to increase the number of victims
devoted to his malevolence? I say, what name detestable enough
could we find for such a being. Yet if we impartially consider the
case, and our intermediate situation, with respect to inferior
animals, just such a being is a ‘Sportsman,’ [and let us add,
by way of corollary, _à fortiori_ one who consciously sanctions
the daily and hourly cruelties of the Slaughter-House and the
Butcher.”]--_Disquisition II._ “On Cruelty to Animals,” by Soame
Jenyns.
XIII.
PRESSAVIN. 1750.
An eminent Surgeon of Lyon, in the Medical and Surgical College of
which city he held a professorship, and where he collected an extensive
Anatomical Museum. At the Revolution of 1789 he embraced its principles
with ardour, and filled the posts of Municipal Officer and of Procureur
de la Commune. On the day of the Lyon executions, under the direction
of the revolutionary tribunals, Sept. 9, 1792, Pressavin intervened,
and attempted to save several of the condemned. In the Convention
Nationale, to which he had been elected deputy, he voted for the
execution of the King; in other respects he was opposed to the extreme
measures of the violent revolutionists, and in Sept., 1793, he was
expelled from the Society of the Jacobins. In 1798 he was named Member
of the Council of Five Hundred, for two years, by the department of the
Rhone. The date of his death seems to be uncertain.
His chief writings are:--
_Traité des Maladies des Nerfs_, 1769. _Traité des Maladies
Vénériennes, où l’on indique un Nouveau Remède_, 8vo., 1773. Last, and
most important, _L’Art de Prolonger la Vie et de Conserver la Santé_,
8vo. Paris, 1786. It was translated into Spanish, Madrid, 8vo., 1799.
Pressavin thus expresses his convictions as to the fatal effects of
Kreophagy:--
“We cannot doubt that, if Man had always limited himself to the use
of the nourishment destined for his organs, he would not be seen,
to-day, to have become the victim of this multitude of maladies
which, by a premature death, mows down (moissonne) the greatest
number of individuals, before Age or Nature has put bounds to the
career of his life. Other Animals, on the contrary, almost all
arrive at that term without having experienced any infirmity. I
speak of those who live free in the fields; for those whom we
have subjected to our needs (real or pretended), and whom we call
_domestic_, share in the penalty of our abuses, experience nearly
the same alteration in their temperament, and become subject to an
infinity of maladies from which Wild Animals are exempt.
“Men, then, coming from the hands of Nature, lived a long
time without thinking of immolating living beings to gratify
(s’assouvir) their appetite. They are, without doubt, those happy
times which our ancient poets have represented to us under the
agreeable allegory of the _Golden Age_. In fact Man, _by natural
organisation_ mild, nourishing himself only on vegetable-foods,
must have been originally of pacific disposition, quite fitted
(bien propre) to maintain among his fellows that happy Peace which
makes the delights of Society. Ferocity, I repeat it, is peculiar
to carnivorous animals; the blood which they imbibe maintains that
character in them....
“But if this faculty (reflection), which is called Reason, has
furnished Man with so great resources for extending his enjoyments
and increasing his well-being, how many evils have not the
multiplied abuses, which he has made of them, drawn upon him? That
which regards his Food is not the one of them which has _least_
contributed to his degradation, as well physical as moral....
“Among other evidences of this, country-people, who subsist upon
the non-flesh diet, are exempt from the multitude of maladies which
engender corruption of the juices of the blood, such as _humoral_,
putrid, and malign fevers, from Apoplexy, from _Cachexy_, from
Gout, and from an infinity of miserable disorders--their offspring;
they arrive at a very advanced Age, free from the infirmities which
early affect our old _Sybarites_. On the contrary, the inhabitants
of towns, who make flesh their principal food, pass their lives
miserably, a prey to all these maladies which one may regard, for
that reason, endemic among them.
“Another very evident proof that Flesh is not a food natural to man
is that, whoever has abstained, during a certain time, when he goes
back to it--it is rare that this new regimen does not soon become
in him the germ of a disease, the graver in proportion to the
abstinence from that food. We have opportunities of observing this
after the Fasts of the Catholics--in the majority of those who have
faithfully practised abstinence from flesh.”
He admits that there may be some constitutions, whose organs of
digestion have been so corrupted by the long use of flesh, that a
_sudden_ change may be unadvisable; but a gradual reform cannot but be
always beneficial:--
“I do not doubt that Apoplexy, that fatal Malady so common among
the rich people of the towns, might be escaped by those who are
threatened with it, by entire abstinence from flesh. A Sanguine
or humoral _plethora_ is always the predisposing cause of this
disease. A sudden rarefaction of the blood or of the humours in the
vessels is the proximate cause of it; this rarefaction takes place
only by the predisposition of the juices of the body to corruption.”
Pressavin devotes a considerable proportion of his Treatise to the
arguments from Comparative Physiology.--While firmly persuaded both
of the unnaturalness, and of the fatal mischiefs, of the diet of
blood,[311] he expresses his despair of an early triumph of Reason and
Humanity by means of a general dietetic reformation.[312]
XIV.
SCHILLER. 1759-1805.
After Goethe the greatest of German Poets, began life as a surgeon
in the army. In his twenty-second year he produced his first drama,
_Die Räuber_ (“The Robbers”). Some passages in it betrayed the “cloven
hoof” of revolutionary, or at least democratic, bias, and he brought
upon himself the displeasure of the sovereign Duke of Würtemberg, in
consequence of which he was forced to leave Stuttgart. His principal
dramas are _Wallenstein_, _Wilhelm Tell_, _Die Jungfrau von Orleans_,
_Maria Stuart_, and _Don Carlos_, of which _Wallenstein_ is, usually,
placed first in merit. Even greater than the dramatic power of Schiller
is the genius of his ballad poetry, and in lyrical inspiration he is
the equal of Goethe. _Das Lied von der Glocke_ (“The Lay of the Bell”),
one of his most widely-known ballads, is also one of the most beautiful
in its kind.
In prose literature, his _Briefe Philosophische_ (“Philosophical
Letters”), and his correspondence with his great poetical rival, are
the most interesting of his writings.
In _Das Eleusische Fest_ (“The Eleusinian Feast”) and _Der Alpenjäger_
(“The Hunter of the Alps”) are to be found the humanitarian sentiments
as follow:--
Schwelgend bei dem Siegesmahle
Findet sie die rohe Schaar,
Und die blutgefüllte Schaale
Bringt man ihr zum Opfer dar
Aber schauernd, mit Entsetzen,
Wendet sie sich weg and spricht:
’_Blut’ge Tigermahle_ netzen
Eines Gottes Lippen nicht.
Reine Opfer will er haben
Früchte, die der Herbst bescheert--
Mit des Feldes frommen gaben
Wird der Heilige verehrt.
Und sie nimmt die Wucht des Speeres
Aus des Jäger’s rauher hand;
Mit dem Schaft des Mordgewehres
Furchet sie den leichten Sand,
Nimmt von ihres Kranzes Spitze
Einen Kern mit Kraft gefüllt,
Senkt ihn in die zarte Ritze,
Und der Trieb des Keimes schwillt.[313]
* * * * *
Mit des Jammers Stummen Blicken
Fleht sie zu dem harten Mann,
Fleht umsonst, denn, loszudrücken,
Legt er schon den Bogen an;
Plötzlich aus der Felsenspalte
Tritt der Geist, der Bergesalte
Und mit seinen Götterhänden
Schützt er das gequälte Thier:
“_Musst du Tod und Jammer Senden_”
Ruft er “bis herauf zu mir?
_Raum fur alle hat die Erde_
Was verfolgst du meine Heerde?”[314]
XV.
BENTHAM. 1749-1832.
This great legal reformer was educated at Westminster, and at the
age of thirteen proceeded to Queen’s College, Oxford. At the age of
sixteen he took his first degree in Arts. The mental uneasiness with
which he signed the obligatory test of the “Thirty-nine Articles” he
vividly recorded in after years. At the Bar, which he soon afterwards
entered, his prospects were unusually promising; but unable to
reconcile his standard of ethics with the recognised morality of the
Profession, he soon withdrew from it. His first publication,--_A
Fragment on Government_, 1776--which appeared without his name, was
assigned to some of the most distinguished men of the day. His next,
and principal work, was his _Introduction to the Principles of Morals
and Legislation_ (1780), not published until 1789. At this period
he travelled extensively in the East of Europe. _Panopticon: or the
Inspection-House_ (on prison discipline), appeared in 1791. The _Book
of Fallacies_ (reviewed by Sidney Smith, in the _Edinburgh_), in
which the “wisdom of our ancestors” delusion was, mercilessly exposed
(1824), is the best known, and is the most lively of all his writings.
_Rationale of Judicial Procedure_, and the _Constitutional Code_,
are those which have had most influence in effecting legislative and
judicial reform.
Bentham stands in the front rank of legal reformers; and as a fearless
and consistent opponent of the iniquities of the English Criminal
Law, in particular, he has deserved the gratitude and respect of all
thoughtful minds. Yet, during some sixty years, he was constantly held
up to obloquy and ridicule by the enemies of Reform, in the Press and
on the Platform; and his name was a sort of synonym for _utopianism_,
and revolutionary doctrine. In his own country his writings were long
in little esteem; but elsewhere, and in France especially, by the
interpretation of Dumont, his opinions had a wider dissemination.
In _Morals_, the foundation of his teaching is the principle of the
greatest Happiness of the Greatest Number; that other things are good
or evil in proportion as they advance or oppose the general Happiness,
which ought to be the end of all morals and legislation.
Not the least of his merits as a moralist is his assertion of the
rights of other animals than man to the protection of Law, and his
protest against the culpable selfishness of the lawmakers in wholly
abandoning them to the capricious cruelty of their human tyrants. The
most eminent of the disciples of Bentham, John Stuart Mill (who found
himself forced to defend the teaching of his master, in this respect,
against the sneers of Whately, Archbishop of Dublin, and others),
repeats this protest, and declares that--
“The reasons for legal intervention in favour of children apply not
less strongly to the case of those unfortunate slaves and victims
of the most brutal part of mankind, the lower animals. It is by
the grossest misunderstanding of the principles of Liberty, that
the infliction of exemplary punishment on ruffianism practised
towards these defenceless beings has been treated as a meddling by
Government with things beyond its province--an interference with
domestic life. The domestic life of domestic tyrants is one of the
things which it _is the most imperative on the Law to interfere
with_. And it is to be regretted that metaphysical scruples,
respecting the nature and source of the authority of governments,
should induce many warm supporters of laws against cruelty to
the lower animals to seek for justification of such laws in the
incidental consequences of the indulgence of ferocious habits
to the interest of human beings, _rather than in the intrinsic
merits of the thing itself_. What it would be the duty of a human
being, possessed of the requisite physical strength, to prevent by
force, if attempted in his presence, it cannot be less incumbent
on society generally to repress. The existing laws of England are
chiefly defective in the trifling--often almost nominal--maximum
to which the penalty, even in the worst cases, is limited.”
(_Principles of Political Economy_, ed. 1873.)
The observations both of Bentham and of Mill upon this subject,
slighted though they are, are pregnant with consequences. It is thus
that the former authority expresses his opinion:--
“What other agents are those who, at the same time that they
are under the influence of man’s direction, are susceptible of
Happiness? They are of two sorts: (1) Other Human beings, who
are styled _Persons_. (2) Other Animals who, on account of their
interests having been neglected by the insensibility of the ancient
Jurists, stand degraded into the class of _Things_. Under the
Gentoo and Mahometan religions, the interests of the rest of the
animal kingdom seem to have met with _some_ attention. Why have
they not, universally, with as much as those of human beings,
allowance made for the differences in point of sensibility?
_Because the Laws that are have been the work of mutual fear_--a
sentiment which the less rational animals have not had the same
means, as men have, of turning to account. Why _ought_ they not [to
have the same allowance made]? No reason can be given....
“The day has been (and it is not yet past) in which the greater
part of the Species, under the denomination of _Slaves_, have been
treated by the Laws exactly upon the same footing--as in England,
for example, the inferior races of beings are still. The day _may_
come, when other Animals may obtain those rights _which never could
have been withholden from them but by the hand of Tyranny_. The
French have already (1790) recognised that the blackness of the
skin is no reason why a human being should be abandoned, without
redress, to the caprice of a tormentor.
“It may come one day to be recognised that the number of the legs,
the villosity of the skin, or the termination of the _os sacrum_,
are reasons equally insufficient for abandoning a sensitive being
to the same fate. What else is it should fix the insuperable
line? Is it the faculty of reason, or, perhaps, the faculty of
discourse? But a full-grown Horse or Dog is, beyond comparison, a
more rational, as well as more conversable animal, than an infant
of a day, or a week, or even of a month old. But suppose the case
were otherwise, what would it avail? The question is not, can they
reason? Nor is it, can they talk? But, _can they suffer_?”[315]
XVI.
SINCLAIR. 1754-1835.
This celebrated Agricultural Reformer and active promoter of various
beneficent enterprises was a most voluminous writer. During sixty years
he was almost constantly employed in producing more or less useful
books. He was born at Thurso Castle, in Caithness, and received his
education at the Edinburgh High School, and at the Universities of
Glasgow and Oxford. In 1775 he was admitted a member of the Faculty of
Advocates, and afterwards was called to the English Bar. Five years
later he was elected to represent his county in the Legislature; and
for more than half a century Sir John Sinclair occupied a prominent
position in the world of politics, as well as of science and
literature. His reputation as an Agriculturist extended far and wide
throughout Europe and America; and statesmen and political economists,
if they did not aid them as they ought to have done, professed for his
labours the highest esteem.
His principal writings are: (1) _A History of the Revenue of Great
Britain_, 3 vols.; (2) _A Statistical Account of Scotland_, a most
laborious work; (3) _Considerations on Militias and Standing Armies_;
(4) _Essays on Agriculture_; (5) Not the least important, _The Code of
Health and Longevity_, in which the sagacious and indefatigable author
has collected a large number of interesting particulars in regard to
the diet of various peoples. Comparing the two diets, he asserts:--