hours with the revision of the Principles of Biology, making the
modifications and incorporating the new facts which the progress of
the science demands. He recognizes that the advance has been more
rapid in this branch than in any other; and that while it might be
almost hopeless for him at his time of life to bring a work on biology
at large up to date, the case is different in an exposition of the
Principles of Biology. The additions to the work include a chapter on
Metabolism supplementing the discussion of vital changes of matter; a
chapter on the Dynamic Element in Life, to render less inadequate the
conception of life previously expressed; some pages on Structure; an
account, under the head of Cell Life and Cell Multiplication, of the
astonishing actions in cell nuclei which the microscope has revealed;
a further chapter on Genesis, Heredity, and Variation, in which
certain views enunciated in the first edition of the book are
qualified and developed; a review of various modern ideas under the
title of Recent Criticisms and Hypotheses; a rewriting of most of the
chapter on The Argument from Embryology; and a number of changes
incorporated as sections in pre-existing chapters. The articles on
Weissmannism are incorporated in an appendix. In performing this work
assistance was needed, and the author sought and received criticism
and help from different persons, each taking a division falling within
the range of his special studies: Prof. W. H. Perkin in organic
chemistry and its derived subjects; Prof. A. G. Tansley in plant
morphology and physiology; Prof. E. W. MacBride and Mr. J. T.
Cunningham in animal morphology; and Mr. W. B. Hardy in animal
physiology. The first volume of this work, recently published, has
been received with favor by persons of all shades of opinion
respecting the questions it touches. The London Times, in not the
friendliest of criticisms, says that even persons who do not accept
the author's Philosophy will rejoice that he has been able to complete
it, and adds that as it stands it "is a marvel of erudition: every
page exhibits the wealth and variety of illustration for which Mr.
Spencer is justly famous." The latest notice of it that we have
observed, a French one in the _Revue Scientifique_, says that in
consulting it biologists "will not lose their time, and many will find
valuable ideas in it, suggestions by which their experimental work can
not fail to be greatly benefited. And, like us, they will be filled
with admiration for a work so condensed, and at the same time so
admirably co-ordinated, so replete with facts and ideas, of the
philosopher who has exercised so great an influence on the science of
his times, and who is one of the finest intellectual glories of his
country and of the present epoch." Perhaps one of the most significant
of recent testimonials of appreciation of the Synthetic Philosophy is
the announcement of the publication of a complete translation of First
Principles into Japanese by Mr. Fujii, who has devoted several years
to the work. "Mr. Spencer's works," it is added, "have long had a
great attraction for Japanese translators." Mr. Spencer is now engaged
upon the second volume of the Biology.
It was formerly Mr. Spencer's custom to spend about nine months of the
year in London and the three summer months in the country, but for
several years past he has found the fogs and other gloomy winter
conditions of the metropolis too trying. The confinement enforced upon
him by increasing feebleness has, moreover, precluded his enjoyment of
the social privileges, particularly of the Athenæum Club, which were
one of the attractions that made a town residence tolerable. He
therefore, at the beginning of 1898, took up his residence in
Brighton, where he has a house looking upon the sea, and giving him
the benefit of the flood of light which that place enjoys.
At present Mr. Spencer is able to give very little time to work, and
being confined to the house most of the time, the routine of his daily
life admits of little variety. His first business in the day is to
hear the morning paper read; then he attends to his correspondence,
and if well enough does a little work. If any matter is going through
the press he will generally be seen with a proof close by. His
afternoon is spent in such relaxation as is afforded by scanning the
illustrated papers and magazines, listening to music, which must
always be classical, or, if sufficiently well, a drive; and he retires
at ten o'clock.
* * * * *
It is often asked, Miss Mary H. Kingsley says in her West African
Studies, whether Christianity or Mohammedanism is to possess
Africa--"as if the choice of Fate lay between these two religions
alone. I do not think it is so, or at least it is not wise for a
mere student to ignore the other thing in the affair, fetich,
which is, as it were, a sea wherein all things suffer a sea
change. For, remember, it is not Christianity alone that becomes
tinged with fetich, or gets ingulfed and dominated by it. Islam,
when it strikes the true heart of Africa, the great forest belt
region, fares but little better, though it is more recent than
Christianity, and though it is preached by men who know the make
of the African mind."
PRESIDENT CHARLES W. DABNY, Jr., of the University of Tennessee,
once said in an address that when in school, where the work was
all done "at the point of the hickory, so to speak," the best
teacher he had "was the kindly old neighborhood loafer," who
roamed the woods with him, told him of the times of the wild
flowers and the habits of the birds, and taught him to shoot the
long rifle. He followed the "natural method, and showed a pupil
how to do a thing by doing it."
Editor's Table.
_SCIENCE AND THE STATE._
It is probably not too much to say that the true measure of the
intelligence and efficiency of a government is the extent to which, in
the various spheres of activity which it controls, it recognizes the
authority and adopts the methods of science. There is one department
of Government--the remark might be applied to nearly all civilized
governments, and very pointedly to our own--in which science receives
a large and serious recognition, and that is the Navy Department. We
have lately had a striking exhibition, which the world at large has
watched with great interest, of the high state of efficiency to which
a navy can be brought in a comparatively short space of time. If the
question is asked how it was done, there is but one answer: it was
done by recognizing science and working on scientific lines. To work
on scientific lines is simply to study carefully, in the light of the
best available knowledge, the means for accomplishing a desired end,
and having found the best means, to adopt them in practice. Our naval
administration has fortunately been able to repel if not wholly, at
least to a remarkable extent, the intrusion of "political" influence,
and has consequently been able to apply itself without serious
distraction to the accomplishment of its own special tasks. It has
called science to its aid not only as regards purely physical
questions, but as regards questions of organization; and the result is
that it has succeeded in giving the nation not only ships and guns,
but the men who are fitted by knowledge, by training, and by
discipline to make the best possible use of the ships and guns.
Next to the navy in the recognition accorded to science, but yet a
long way off, comes the army. We are speaking now, of course, of our
own army; and what the "long way off" meant in waste of money and of
human life, in the suffering and misery of brave men, is a too
familiar tale. Had science governed the operations of the land forces
and presided over their whole organization to the same extent that it
did over the operations and organization of the navy, a certain recent
page of history would have borne a very different record, and would
not have been so burdened as it is with shame and heartache to
patriotic citizens.
Killing and being killed are serious matters, and everybody
understands that the business can not safely be trifled with. That is
why science is allowed to have its own way almost entirely in the
navy, and to exercise a large measure of control in the army, with the
effect of rendering the first a nearly perfect machine, and giving to
the latter a high degree of efficiency for its own purposes. But have
we not here object lessons which ought to be applied to other
departments of the Government? Is it only in the matter of killing
that the aid of science is required? Can the public at large not rise
to the conception that, if science can make splendid killing machines,
it might also, if allowed fair play, make excellent administrative
machines for peaceful purposes? We have departments which deal with
such important matters as currency and finance, agriculture and
statistics, the administration of justice, the control of railway
traffic, the erection of public buildings and the improvement of
waterways, the carrying out of geodetic and geological surveys, the
representation of the country abroad, the protection of the public
health, and, finally, the great question of public education. It must
be obvious to every thoughtful person that, if science could have its
say and its way in relation to these matters, it would put them all on
the best footing which the existing condition of knowledge permits. It
would ask, "What are the objects to be accomplished?" and would
proceed to select the persons and adopt the means best fitted to
realize those objects. The country would then have a civil service in
which economy and efficiency would be equally conspicuous, and which
would furnish examples for imitation in private enterprise of the best
ways of doing things.
It is needless to say how far removed the present condition of
government business is from anything like scientific organization. If
killing must be done scientifically, the injured feelings of the
politician find relief in insisting that nearly everything else within
the sphere of government action shall be done most unscientifically.
In the filling of important positions the first thing considered is
not the question of fitness for the work to be done, but the question
of party advantage. It is not too much to say that a prejudice
frequently exists against a man conspicuously qualified by knowledge,
experience, and character for a given post. There is an uncomfortable
feeling that such a man might not be sufficiently pliable afterward in
the hands of those who had appointed him--that the preposterous idea
might get into his head that, having obtained the office on his
merits, he was at liberty, in the execution of his duties, to think
only of the public interest. The preference of the politician,
therefore, for "the boys" is easily understood; but "the boys" and
science do not work hand in hand.
Our universities are turning out year by year men possessing the
highest scientific qualifications, men who have studied both in this
country and in Europe, and who are prepared to take any positions in
which scientific work is required. Some of these are absorbed by the
teaching profession, but the great majority find employment in the
various industries of the country. Unfortunately, the attainments of
such men give them no special advantage as regards employment in the
public service of the country; to qualify for that they must graduate
in another school entirely, and get certificates from a very different
class of professors. We are far from holding the opinion that men of
high education should dissociate themselves from the political life of
the country; but it is unhappily true that the kind of interest which
an intelligent man who places the nation above party can take in
politics is not likely to recommend him to those who have the
dispensing of places. The fact should, however, be emphasized that if
science does not receive due recognition in connection with the public
services, it is not because of any lack of native-born citizens
capable of representing it with credit and even with distinction. In
this respect America has placed herself fully abreast with the most
advanced nations of the modern world, and the Government has only to
say what service it requires in order to have its choice of men
possessing every qualification to render that service in the most
competent and satisfactory manner.
In the last resort, it must be admitted, the fault rests with
the people. It is with reluctance that the average elector
acknowledges--if he can be brought to acknowledge at all--that any
public office requires special qualifications. Such an idea seems to
be at war with true democratic doctrine, and to imply a serious
abridgment of the powers of the people's representatives. It is
readily conceded that private industries and enterprises of all kinds
call for training and experience and special knowledge on the part of
those who conduct them; but Government business is supposed to be so
simple that a wayfaring man, though a pronounced fool, need not err
therein. There is more or less hypocrisy, however, in the pretension.
The real underlying thought is that, outside of the two great killing
departments, no very serious harm can be done by official
incompetence, and that the great thing is to provide for "the boys."
No idea could be more false. The evil that can be done by unwise
economic measures, for example, is incalculable. The army and navy are
brought into action only when the dogs of war have been let loose; but
the influence of the civil departments of the Government acts
unceasingly, and touches the life of the people at a thousand points.
In the matter of public education science has never had the
recognition to which it is entitled; nor will it have until the people
as a whole know better what science is--until they cease to think of
it as a thing of mysteries and technicalities, and come to understand
that it is simply the organization of knowledge and the rendering of
it available for guidance in the business of life. Meantime, wherever
circumstances are favorable, the education of the young, even of the
youngest, should be given as far as possible a scientific character.
We are strongly inclined to the opinion that, in a country whose
fundamental industry is agriculture, an effort should be made in all
schools to impart a few sound elementary ideas as to the principles of
agriculture. What better starting point could there be for scientific
instruction than the soil out of which we derive, mediately or
immediately, all that goes to sustain life? It seems to us that no
human being should be permitted to be wholly ignorant of the
conditions upon which the successful cultivation of the soil depends,
and we are persuaded that the subject might, by proper treatment, be
made deeply interesting to the vast majority of school children.
A prominent Englishman, Mr. Boyd-Kinnear, has lately been discussing
this matter in a London paper. He points out that a knowledge of the
scientific principles of agriculture is of fundamental importance, and
that whatever else is taught in the national schools, the sciences on
which farming rests--physics, chemistry, mechanics, and the physiology
of plants and animals--should hold a principal place. He observes that
in order to know agriculture it is necessary to understand, first of
all, the elements and the action of the soil and the air. There is
urgent need, he contends, for teaching what is known on these subjects
and for pursuing research into the much larger field of the unknown.
In these remarks we entirely concur, and we believe that it would be a
happy thing for this country, and for every country, if education
could be so administered that, instead of tending, as it so often
does, to separate human beings from the soil, it should tend to
establish in their minds a sense of their dependence on it and an
intelligent, if possible a loving, interest in the operations by which
the living of the world is won and the face of Nature is beautified.
Here, as we conceive, is where scientific teaching should begin. Such
a system of instruction would do much more than increase the
intelligence of the farming community, though that would be a benefit
of the first magnitude; it would so transform public opinion in
general that the divorce we now see between science and the State
would no longer be possible. The whole national life would be placed
on a sounder basis; and it would probably be found that the result of
doing other things scientifically was to diminish very greatly the
importance of the arrangements for scientific killing. A nation
governed by science would be a peace-loving and peace-maintaining
nation.
_AGRICULTURE AND NATIONAL LIFE._
Some very interesting points of view are presented in an article on
the food supply of England which appeared a few months ago in The New
Century Review of London. The writer, Mr. Richard Higgs, Jr., is very
unwilling to admit the commonly accepted view that Great Britain must
be dependent upon other countries for the food her people require. He
holds that all that is required to make the production of grain
profitable in England is the application of higher intelligence and
more businesslike methods to the work of the farm. "Speaking
generally," he says, "agriculture has been of late a despised
industry; intellectual activity has not been brought to bear on it;
the men of force and enterprise have failed to recognize that it
offers an absolutely unrivaled sphere for the exercise of personal
initiative, skill, and knowledge.... Agriculture has not been regarded
as a means of assisting human development, but rather as a hindrance
to progress. A low type of manhood and a slow, unprogressive condition
of life are usually regarded as indispensable to agriculture, and
consequently it has been neglected by reformers who desire to further
the progress of the race."
The writer proceeds to describe the various ways in which, as he
believes, agriculture might be made more profitable, partly through
lowering of the cost of production, and partly by improvement of the
yield; and, finally, he sets forth the disagreeable and very serious
conclusions which flow from the proposition--if it is to be accepted
as established--that Great Britain can not feed herself by the
remunerative production of wheat in the face of low prices. In the
first place, the national policy must be one of "bluff and weakness
toward other nations: bluff, because it will not answer our purpose to
appear weak; and weakness, because, seeing that possible enemies are
our largest feeders, we are not in a condition to deal with other
nations on equal terms, but must ever face the galling necessity of
being dependent upon the good will of a few powerful nations for our
daily bread." A nation so situated must be "in the front rank of the
nations which are engaging in the mad scramble after markets"; must
give itself over "to all the orthodox requirements of diplomacy by
engaging in bullying, cringing, lying, deceit, and massacre, in order
to secure an outlet for its manufactured goods." Such a fact further
implies "the eternal persistence on the face of the land of those
hideous monstrosities--our manufacturing towns; those excrescences
which, like the dragon of old, are daily vomiting fire and smoke, and
by their foulness are blasting and cursing the lives of the people and
causing the physical, mental, and moral deterioration of the race....
It banishes the poetry, the music, and the glories of an agricultural
life, and condemns untold millions to the artificial and unhealthy
moral atmosphere of our towns."
It may be said that all this has not much application to the state of
things in these happy United States. It has application to at least
this extent, that our towns too are becoming bloated and our country
places starved. We are fully at one with the writer in his estimate of
the agricultural life, and believe that no greater service could be
rendered to any country than to place its agriculture on the moral and
intellectual, as well as on the economic, level which it has a just
claim to occupy. It is the application of science to agriculture that
will bring about this result.
Scientific Literature.
SPECIAL BOOKS.
_The Theory of the Leisure Class_[58] of Mr. _Thorstein Veblen_ is
primarily an inquiry into the place and value of the leisure class as
an economic factor in modern life. Hardly less attention, however, is
given to the origin and line of derivation of the institution, and to
features of social life not commonly classed as economic, into the
very heart of some of which the study goes. The institution of the
leisure class, which is defined generally as that class whose
occupation is not industrial, is found in its best development at the
higher stages of the barbarian culture, as in feudal Europe or feudal
Japan. Whichever way we go from this point it is modified. Its origin
appears at a very early stage in history, and appears in the germ in
the savage division of the occupations of men and women. The women
carried on the industries, and the men went to the hunt or to
war--occupations with which the idea of prowess or exploit was
associated, giving the stamp of aristocracy. In the highest
development of this distinction, the nonindustrial upper-class
occupations may be roughly comprised under the heads of government,
warfare, religious observances, and sports. In the sequence of
cultural evolution the emergence of a leisure class coincides with the
beginning of ownership, ownership of women being one of the most
conspicuous forms in earlier times, then ownership of property and its
symbols. Among the signs of wealth are conspicuous leisure, which
includes social distinction and functions and conspicuous consumption,
or the possession of fine things not necessaries, and plenty of them.
These lead to the setting up of a pecuniary standard of living and
pecuniary canons of taste, and the adoption of dress as an expression
of the pecuniary culture. In the chapter on Industrial Exemption and
Conservatism we are introduced to the reason of conventionalism and of
its power. "The fact that the usages, actions, and views of the
well-to-do leisure class acquire the character of a prescriptive canon
of conduct for the rest of society gives added weight and reach to the
conservative influence of that class. It makes it incumbent upon all
respectable people to follow their lead." Hence it exerts a retarding
influence on social development, stiffening the resistance of all
other classes against innovation. Further, the code of proprieties in
vogue at any given time or in any society has the character of an
organic whole, and any important infringement upon it is likely to
derange it. This conservative quality goes so far as to tend toward
spiritual survival and reversion. The idea of prowess survives in our
barbaric admiration of military exploits, in the taste for sports, and
in the gambling tendency, which is based on belief in luck and is
enhanced by the desire to triumph at the expense of another. A
connection is traced between the admiration of prowess and the
cultivation of the devotional spirit which, joined with the fondness
for display, leads all worshipers eventually to elaboration of
rituals. A further development, classed as Survivals of the
Non-Invidious Interest, is that of beneficences. The Higher Learning
was primarily the exclusive privilege of the leisure class, and has
still attached to it a mass of ritual in the shape of paraphernalia,
ceremonies, degrees, and privileges which grow more elaborate as the
college and the community become richer. Devotion to classical
learning, which is practically useless, is a form of "conspicuous
leisure" and "conspicuous expenditure," but now encounters a rival in
athletics, which is equally useless and conspicuous and more costly.
[Footnote 58: The Theory of the Leisure Class. An Economic Study
in the Evolution of Institutions. By Thorstein Veblen. New York:
The Macmillan Company. Pp. 400. Price, $2.]