SOUTH PLACE MAGAZINE. No. I. Vol. Ill. OCTOBER, 1897. 2d. Monthly.

28. Gd. pOr annum, post troo.

(The writers of A rticles appearing i" this Magazine are alone re,sponsible for the opinions therein expressed.)

DOGMA IN MORAL ' EDUCATION.

ALIKE with the upholders of religious instruction in our national schools, and with those who on grounds of principle have been n:ost strenuous in opposing it, there is an assumption that some ~IDd. of dogmatic teaching bearing directly on the conduc~ ?f hfe IS a necessary part of elementary education. Indeed, It, IS almost taken for granted that this is a corollary to the pnor assumption which is common to both parties, namely, that the State having undertaken the training of children is bound not only to give them a fitting mental equipment, but to prepare then: to fill their proper place as members of t~e social. com­mumty. Yet these two positions stand in no logIcal relatlOn to each other, and the arguments that may be used in support of the latter would leave the former still debateable. I venture to offer certain reasons for holding that no form of dogmatic ~eaching either in religion or in morals should hold a definite p~ace ID our elementary curriculum, and I offer my counsel as a pIE:Ce of good worldly wisdom to the liberal thinkers with whose crusade against the present ecclesiastical tyranny I heartily sympathise. If they wish to hasten the success they must Some time achieve, they should use the weapons against which the enemy can least effectively defend themselves. As long as they preserve their aggressive anti-theological attitude, .they m~st be prepared for an indefinite continuance of frUItless stnfe. on the old battle-grounds of religious controversy. In pressIDg the argument from political philosophy, that whatever may be the true faith it cannot justly be taught even to those who desire it, at the expense of those who are opposed to it, they hav~ certainly a firmer ground of attack, but still o?e whIch mlght be cut from under them by modified financIal arran~em~nts which yet did not remove the objection based on consclentlous principle. The only argument, I believe, which has any chance of carrying conviction to a majority not easily moved by considerations of abstract reason, is that the attempt to re~ulate .the lives of children by any kind of purely theoretic tea,chmg, glven at set hours and in systematic form, is not only futlle as , regards its professed purpose, but is an educational

III

2

mistake that is likely to do a positive disservice alike to religion and morals, and to the credit of the institutions and authorities that are responsible for it . There may, no doubt, be some who would readily enough take up this position so far as theological teaching is concerned, but demur to it when it is made to include dogmatic instruction in morals . For my own part, I cannot see how such a distinction is to be made good. Certainly the reasons which carry weight to my mind apply with eqnal force to both. I will state these as shortly as possible.

No one can deny the importance of ethical theory. Its gradual elaboration, both on the historical and on the philo­sophical side, has had a powerful influence on the conduct of life. As men have become more clearly conscious of the causes and effects of their actions, as they have brought reason to bear more consistently on the course of human affairs, there has naturally been developed a keener scrutiny of motive, a more careful control of ha hit. But the effect of theory upon practice can only exist where there is some understanding of their relation, such as it would be hopeless to expect from children under thirteen or fourteen years of age. Is the elementary scholar to be made a judge of ethical systems? The ultimate rati01~ale of right and wrong is beyond his powers of apprehension, and can only be made a matter of mere authority.

Many people, indeed, would seem to acquiesce readily enough in this alternative. They might urge that the inductions of other sciences are taught as laws to be accepted, provisionally at least, before they can be verified; why not those of moral science also? In reply to this argument, it may be pointed out in the first place, that the phenomena of human nature and society are admittedly the most complex in the whole realm of knowledge. Whatever consensus of ethical opinion there may be among civilised nations-and it is but partial at the best-it belongs not to the statement of abstract principles, but to the more or less empirical acceptance of certain forms of conduct that obviously tend to social well-being. In the second place, even if the doctrines of moral science were much less subject to controversy than they are, it would be an unwise method to present them to an untrained intelligence in the form of a set of rules or catechism to be learned by heart. In no science does an enlightened teacher allow theoretic lessons to be unaccom­panied by practical applications, and he will always prefer to begin with the concrete appeal. Yet this is not a practicable course in morals ; demonstrations cannot be given in conduct. If it be suggested that examples of virtues and vices can be cited from history and fiction in illustration of ethical principles, I would reply that these are not cases of general laws, and do not really touch the dogmatic basis of morals. The only kind

3

of authority that children can realise in the m~xims of rig~t conduct that may be impressed upon them, IS the pubhc opinion represented by their parents, friends, teachers, and classfellows. What is thought right by those around them they will accept as right, without regard to any higher sanctions. Not even the weight of a supposed divine command has any practical effect on their minds if it is IJot reinforced by the prevailing sentiment of those near to them. How then should t~ere be any chance for an ethical philosophy that as yet speaks with no very certain voice and can.not appeal to consequences that are easily realised?

. The moral training of children consists really not in mforming them what things they ought to do, much less in explaining why they ought to do them, but in quickening their sympathy, and helping them to form good habits. It is not a question 01 doctrine, either in the form of philosophy or of cut-and-dry maxims, but of motive and individual control of conduct. The art of morals, in so far as it can be practised by ~he young, is as independent of theory as any art can be; It requires neither knowledge nor the exercise of reason. But if the subject cannot be taught as a science, it is equally im­possible to teach it systematically as an art by practical demonstrations, for from the nature of the case the conditions cannot be artificially arranged. Is the teacher, then, unable to take any share in the moral development of his scholars? By no means. But I hold that he is debarred from any attempt to deal with the matter by direct lessons on a methodical plan, professedly and obviously devised for the purpose of influencing 'c?nduct. Such a course would assuredly defeat his ends. It glVes the flavour of task-work to conceptions and feelings that should always be associated with living interests. It brings a se~se of artifice and unreality where every suggestion should ~nse fr?m natural opportunity. It tends to strengthen the ImpresslOn which the formalities of religion have made too pre:valent among us, that the ideas and sentiments affecting the shnngs . of conduct stand in a class by themselves apart from t e affairs of the every-day world.

b Th,e te~ch~r must be content that his moral influence should . e mamly mduect, but there is no reason why on that account I~ s~ould be small. It is true that his control must be greatly llU11ted b~ that of the parents and the home surroundings, and ~hat he Will sometimes find himself in conflict with the tendencies Impressed .on the children outside the doors of the school, yet n~t .only Will there remain many opportunities of moral direction ansmg out of the ordinary routine of work, but he may:also, to a large extent, arrange further opportunities that are sufficiently natural and incidental to avoid the odium of lessons given

4

avowedly for spiritual edification. I say nothing of the obvious.. chances afforded by the discipline of the school, where such virtues as truth, honesty, justice, generosity, punctuality, cleanliness, perseverance, may be recommended with timely· persuasion. My last word must concern the indirect but powerful moral influences that may be gained from the subject­matt~ of the ordinary studies. The cultivation of the sym­pathetic instincts that lie at the root of all morality depends­largely on the degree of imaginative insight that may be gained into the thoughts and lives of others. By this means our limited experience may be indefinitely widened, and feelings stirred in us that would have had no outlet in our own personal consciousness. It is here that the teacher must find his chief opportunity. If his lessons in history and biography, in poetry and fiction are well-chosen, and turned to the fullest account, he will have no need to regret the absence from the curriculum of any special hours appointed for the formal delivery of mora! instruction.

JAMES OLIPHANT.

THE ETHICS OF VIVISECTlON.

PART II.

IN the last number of this magazine, I tried to show, as well as a few words on so vast a subject would permit, that the pain endured by the victims of vivisection is extremely severe, so horrible indeed, in many cases, as to task one's powers of belief, recorded though these martyrdoms are by those who inflict them. I gave references with every assertion I made, so that the reader could verify all statements for himself, if he wished to do so.

Let the reader then-for the moment at least-grant that torture to animals is involved in vivisection, by the very nature of the practice and its aims. The question of fact being settled, the question of ethics arises: Is the infliction of such torture on man's helpless dependents justifiable, and if so, on what grounds? The usual, and in fact, the only answer given is: It is justifiable on the ground that man is superior to animals, and' that the suffering of the inferior is of no moment, in comparison with the hoped-for benefit to the superior.

Now, I propose to examine the principles involved in this reply, and to ask my readers to enquire whether those principles are in line with ethical development, whether they are pro­gressive or retrograde in character, whether their acceptance by

5

the public and their sanction by law is likely to further the l~ovement of human society in the direction of security and 1lberty, in the growth of brotherly harmony, and of general wel~­being. Let us consider the vivisector's contention. "It IS

justifiable ", he asserts, "to inflict torture on the weaker inferior for what we may happen to believe will bring benefit t~ t~e ~tronger superior. It is justifiable to commit a deed that IS! In

Itself, atrocious, so long as our object can be shown to be Im­portant. In that case, the atrocity changes its character, and becomes laudable." ,_

This theory is no new discovery; indeed, it savours of the Mid~le Ages, When the Church held just such a creed, and

,carned out her views with the help of fire and sword, thumb­screw and rack-very much as science now carries out her aims by means strangely similar.

The Church claimed that for the sake of her important end she might employ all necessary means (as she considered them) : the good end sanctifying the hideous means.

To this sacerdotal superstition the high priests 0,£ s~ience nave become heirs. It is not a little singular and slgmficant that the scientific priesthood have stepped into the place once usurp~d by the Church, repeating her tyranny over the public

. consclen~e, repeating the stupendous claims which she made for ~er speCial objects; demanding a privilege which, in these days, I~ granted to no other avocation or interest or body whatever, VIZ., to pursue just ends by cruel and unjust means .

. Putting, aside, for the moment, all other points, why should SCIence enJ<?Y a monopoly of this privilege? It is surely an '?ffence agamst public liberties, whicb every other body and ~nterest ?as,a right to resent, on this ground alone, If cruelty IS to be J~stI~ed by its object in one case, why, in the name of common Justice, not in another?

A law exists in the statute-book of England which forbids cruelty, to (domestic) animals. Another law exists which permits \ ~art1cul,ar class of men to obtain certificates by which, for ~ elr speCIal, e~ds, cruelty may nevertheless be inflicted., Why hay not religIOn, whose ends (from her own point of vIew and ~ at ,of vast nu~bers) are far more vitally important than those

ff SCience, o1;>tam a special charter for cruelty, on the same plea ' 0 a good obJect?

In Florence in the sixteenth century, the injustice of granting such a m~)llopoly, Was evidently felt, for while physiologists we~e prOVIded With victims from the State prisons to aid t he,lr learn~d .res~arches, art also, it is said, put in a successful ,clam; to a SimIlar mdulgence; a religious painter having obtained .a pnsoner from the Duke of Florence, with perm ssion to have

I

6

the miserable man crucified, in order to study his anguished face •. and so be enabled to paint a moving picture of the crucifixion. The artist, doubtless, believed he could thus move men's souls and bring them to salvation, and he felt that the pangs of this wretched criminal were not worth a moment's consideration in comparison with the importance of the 'service to art and to religion which those pangs might render.

And if the principle of the vivisector is to be accepted (that important ends justify at(ocious means), then the painter was perfectly right-from his own point of view-as the vivisector is from his. But does the general public accept this principle which has justified every atrocity that has ever been committed by powerful monopolies since the world began? If the in­feriority of a victim compared with the importance of an object has really anything to do with the matter-then the painter was right and the vivisector is right, and their principle (being right) ought to be universally applied in social life-that is to say, the importance and superiority of a sentient being should be recognised as the sole reason for exempting him from maltreat­ment under the law, for the sake of science, or humanity, or whatever object we may happen to consider of most vital importance to the State.

It is of course idle and illogical to attempt to decide exactly how inferior a sentient being must be in order to exonerate his tormentors from blame. That clearly would reduce the theory to sheer nonsense. There are idiots and maniacs and criminals who are certainly not superior, in any sense, to the faithful dogs and horses so indescribably tortured by physiologists; yet if the principle on which they profess to justify these tortures were generally and honestly applied, there could be no sound reason for exempting those luckless products of our social state from the torments of the laboratory. In fact it would all become a mere matter of comparison-and what is worse-of opinion; those below the average being regarded as fair game for the vivisector, who benevolently wishes to benefit the average: the average, again, being utilized, in the same way, for the good of the exceptionally noble and superior-though one wonders how long men and women exceptionally noble would continue to appear in this vivisectional order of society! As a matter of fact, the race would inevitably degenerate into something worse than savage; and with increasing criminality and selfishness, even the physical type would be rapidly lowered-science not­withstanding. The moral law will not be cheated.

Let the reader try to find a principle which justifies vivisec­tion, and at the same time allows itself to be applied to civilized society, without showing itself laughably absurd. I defy him to logically achi.eve that feat . Is it not plain to anyone admittin~

7

the existence of a moral obligation at all, that the claim to exemption from torture of either man or animal rests on the fact that he can feel it? Superiority has clearly nothing to do with the matter. As J eremy Bentham so well says, i~ c1~iming the right of animals to this exemption : "The questlOn IS not, Can they reason, or can they speak? . • . . but, Can they su.ffer ? " . .

If the test question were really, in all strictness: "Can they reason?" it is difficult to see how the majority of the human species would escape the hands of-the physiologist. Certainly the average Supporter of vivisection ought, in such a case, t~ be~are of explaining why he thought it justifiable to vivisect ammals!

.N or is this a mere gibe. In this, as in all others subjects :vJl1ch are still in the stage of ridicule or opposition, the reason­~ng powers of Opponents are not brought into real action . The ISSues and principles and their relation to ideas and principles already accepted have never forced themselves upon the under­standing; and intellects that are, in other directions, keen and honest, as!:ume in regard to the luckless topic all the attributes of a feeble and even of a disingenuous mind .

I. have purposely abstained, in these articles, from making a specIal appeal to the hearts and sympathies of my readers, for I am convinced that it is not the heart, but the intellect that is usually at fault, on this question. What heart could be so base ~s to cheer on the man who dissects living animals, unless some llltellectual conception, some theory or idea had redirected the he~rt and conscience, and thus overpowered every prompting of chIValry and pity?

It. i~, in fact , this preposterous theory which I have been exammmg, viz ., that the inferior may be justly tortured for the good of ~he superior (if the inferior be only sufficiently defence­less), whlch lies at the bottom of the strange perversion of feeling (~s I regard it) now so common even among kind and conscien­~o~s people. It is .to this intellectual confusion that I. especi~lly es;e to call attention in these articles. It has been ImpossIble

to d o. m?re than this . The practice is increasing, year by year, an d It IS ~eading, as it naturally must, to human vivisection, un er v~nous disguises and pretexts. Part of the natural p~~a~y IS al.ready beginning to fall upon the human race, w IC thus tnes to evade the moral law.

All who believe in that law ought to ask themselves whether they. can conscientiously support-or rather whether they can refram .fro.m stro.t;lgly opposing this practice, resting as it doe.s On a pnncIple ~hICh Would reduce human society to savagery if .generally apphed, a principle which checks tl;le tendency ot

8

developing humanity to include in its sympathies and its justice other races and kinds of suffering beings; which teaches the sacrifice of the weak for the strong, and puts to utter confusion all that we have so slowly and grudgingly learnt of moral truth, every generous and protective instinct, every fine impulse of justice and chivalry; in short, every quality that ennobles the human character, and justifies hope for the future of the race.

MONA CAJRD.

SOUTH PLACE READINGS. By JOHN M. ROBERTSON.

REVERENCE.

A CHARGE that is sure to be brought against the questioner of old creeds, if he proceeds with any intellectual vigour, is that of "want of reverence". It is an easy parry to so many thrusts, an easy and an impressive aspersion of an antagonist not otherwise answerable. And as it is often made in all good faith, by normally conscientious people, it is well that those who incline to make it should be challenged to think what it is they are saying. The challenge, as it happens, has been strikingly well put by a man little given to . tolerating criticism of his creed, and therefore the better worth listening to on such a point-the late Dr. Thomas Arnold. Here are his words, often quoted, but well worth quoting oftener still :-

.. To tax anyone with want of reverence because he pays no respect to what we venerate, is either irrelevant or is a mere confusion. The fact, so far as it is true, is no reproach, but an honour; because to reverence all persons and all things is absolutely wrong; reverence shown to that which does not deserve it, is no virtue; not even an amiable weakness, but a plain folly and sin. But if it be meant that he is wanting in proper reverence, not respecting what is to be really respected, that is assuming the whole question at issue, because what we call divine, he ca1Js an idol; and as, supposing that we are in the right we are bound to fall down and worship, so, supposing him to be in the right, he is no less bound to puIJ it to the ground and destroy it."

The last words, of course, are to be taken metaphorically, at least by all but fanatics; but with that qualification the passage is unanswerable by those to whom it is addressed.

It is possible, however, to carry the criticism of the ordinary notion of "reverence" a little further; and if that be done it will perhaps be found that the very essence of it is a vestige of barbarism, which has survived for sheer lack of intelligent attention to it . "Reverence," in the ordinary religious sense, is an attitude or mood of profound respect before omnipotent power, and, by consequence, before the expression of belief in such a power. That is the kernel of the idea-prostration

,

9

before power, not before goodness or wisdom. Goodness and wisdom are never treated among us in any such fashion. Royal .and titled persons are; and as we are called upon by.the usages -of our fellow-citizens to receive the formal mentIOn of the .sovereign's name with a reverence never given to the best ?r wisest of human beings, so do the same minds r~ver~, In

matters religious, not the alleged goodness but the 'almlghtmess -of their Deity. The feeling is a direct inheritance from the ag.es of brute rule, through the ages of military monarchy. If this be doubted, let the student seek otherwise to explam the fact that many people who have avowedly given up or greatly modified the idea of a personal God, will yet prescribe" rever­ence" towards the mere material vastitude of the Cosmos. They would not indeed ask us to reverence a tornado, or an earthquake, or a flood, as our forefathers did actually do; but they cannot get rid of the impulse to self-prostration before the total energy of things .

. Now, if no one outbreak of cosmic energy, however vast, is ratlonally to be reverenced, neither is the totality, which can -only be conceived by symbols of vague vastness; and t.he ·demand for reverence towards the mere belief in some persomfi­cation of such vastness is on all fours with fetishism . We are not. discussing, of course, the point of mere decorum in ten;ples -or m company, but the intellectual tone of impersonal or wntten argument. A civilised rationalist will spontaneously be more decorous in such matters than the average Christian; for the average Protestant will not lift his hat to the Catholic Host, though he expects all to uncover in his own churches, and the average Catholic will deride a heathen idol where he safely can .

. But, it may be answered, there remains after all discussion .an Irr~du.cible thrill of feeling in presence of cosmic vastness, of .the mldmght heavens, of the mystery of Life and Time. Most true; and that irreducible fact alone should serve to make an end of the plea that mankind must lose a certain order of high ·sensati~:m when it gives up supernaturalist beliefs. All that is great .m the sensation, all that is spiritually ennobling and ·.enlarglDg, will securely endure.

. N.ay ~or~, the purification of the sentiment of reverence by ltS diSSOCIatIon from the barbarism of self-prostration before a powerfu~ person who is able to do us harm, will set free a source of. emotIOn for the transfigurement of human and intelligible thlDgs. It m~y be a mere private idiosyncracy, but I confess I ,can nev:er be m the midst of great forces of machinery in orderly ,,-:ork wIthout feeling a thrill as of awe set up, not by the mere dIsplay of pO~~r, but by its intellectual connotations-the ·sudden recogmhon of human sagacity and skill in the mastery of brute nature for human ends. In the breathless pulsation of

1..0

a great factory, with its rooted regiments of toiling iron things; its serried hosts of silent ministers, dizzily spinning without stay, its simultaneous, remorseless rise and fall of a thousand clutching levers, all labouring with the same frightful mindless' patience, and all reducible to motionlessness in an instant by one touch of a child's hand on the engine far below-in the midst of all this I am possessed by an irresistible rush of sensation which may well spring from the same roots as that of the barbarian's fear before his fetish or his king, but which in the act of recognition is transformed to a reasoned joy in the beneficent puissance of civilised man .

And if this be for any a fantastic form of exaltation, there is at least one to which nearly all are obedient, the spell of great music, the most truly transfiguring of human experiences. He who in the spirit, beneath Beethoven's rule, has felt himself a~ it were swung through time and space in the vast grasp of an immortal hand, has known all that is noble and ennobling in all the varieties of reverence that men can feel; has lmown it without fear, without abjection, without violence to one moral instinct . And here the purified and sublimated reverence is felt at once and for ever to be an inward possession, which to prescribe, to seek to enforce upon others, or to brandish in their faces if they be callous, would be the folly of a child or of a barbarian, incapable of realising his own personality, and unsure of his own mind.

INTELLECTUAL UTILITARIANISM.

IT is a somewhat remarkable fact that the raising of what is called the utilitarian test, in matters of the intellectual life, is far more often the work of those who either reject or closely restrict the utilitarian principle in abstract ethics than of those who profess themselves utilitarians. Theory and practice seem to be inverted. Perhaps the explanation is that utilitarianism is partly misstated at times by its advocates, and not sufficiently considered by its critics.

Roughly speaking, the principle of utility is a test in ethical difficulties rather than a constant ground of choice. In ordinary life, unhappily, men are only too utilitarian, in a narrowly se1£­regarding sense, making profit and loss, or convenience and inconvenience, their standards in matters where the higher and. remoter utilities would often furnish very different guidance. An intelligent utilitarianism consists, on the one hand, in looking to those higher utilities as well as to the lower, and on the other hand in looking to all manner of utilities where traditional morals gives an arbitrary counsel. And both orders of thinking ought to emerge in certain wholesome habits of action.

II

A well-conditioned man does not pause to weigh the utility of rescuing a fellow-creature from drowning or burning, though ~e may at need judge that where he cannot render help, ~here IS no use in throwing away his own life also. Here there IS no dispute; no problem for deliberate analysis. It is wl:ere mere hereditary usage dominates life that the deliberate test IS needed, as in the cases of capital punishment, old endo:vrri~nts,. and .so on. In such matters as speaking the truth, acqUIescmg m futtle rel~gious ceremonies, and honesty in commerce, wh~tever ut.ili­ta.nan checking may be needed ought to be do~e ID early l.ife, with the result of leaving a spontaneous habIt of veraCIty, subject only to the qualification that good feeling and good manners may at times prescribe silence where protest could only create trouble. The test here is the final utility. But unfortunately the habit of veracity in matters of general intel­tellectual concern is liable to constant interruption from those who, as aforesaid, raise utilitarian tests without admitting their philosophic validity. You desire to bear witness for right ideas m ~atters of creed and ceremonial, and you are charged to bethmk you whether it may not be better to employ false establi~hed beliefs for good purposes, keeping people delud.ed for theIr good. You think that if truth has made you happIer it will tend to do the same for others; but you are told to reflect that for some people the truth is dangerous. Above all you are told that you must not take away a wrong belief without putting "something in its place". Thus is the principle of utility na~rowed and perverted, and all this in the name of a system whIch professes to regard the utilitarian test as subversive of true morality.

The answer is not far to seek. The utility of what may be ter~ed truth of opinion is established by proofs as clear as those whlc~ make good the utility of truthfulness in the practical ~e~ah(:>ns of life. The more delusion, broadly speaking, the more lDJuShc~, the more cruelty, conscious and unconscious, the more preventIble suffering, the more crookedness of moral principle all round. And whereas a man who is always stopping to calcula!e the expediency of truth and honesty is to be regarded as havlD~ no great gift for these virtues, so the man who is always cIrcumventing truth in matters of opinion is to be ~egarded as . ha~ing little natural turn either for discovering 01: or commumcatmg it. A French thinker has written a work on

Intellect?al Types, which he divides into Logical Minds and F~ls~ Mmds. ~~ere is here a biological truth involved; and the pnnclpl~ of utI.hty prescribes, among other things, that the Truth-disregarding Minds should be resisted for the common good, lest their type should lead all astray. '

.-- As ~gainst their one-sided utilit~rianism, the conclus.ions of

12

a comprehensive test are briefly these :-That in all matters of public concern, he who puts a true opinion in place of an error, or modifies an error in the direction of truth, is a co1tstruetive and not a destructive thinker; that the deliberate maintenance of received opinion, merely because it is received, is the most essentially destructive of all policies, since it is a deliberate seeking of the state of inanition, decay, and mental paralysis; and that in all matters of truly public concern the habitual presumption should be as much in favour of speaking the truth, considerately but without fear, as it is in private life in favour of truth and honesty between individuals, of relieving distress, and of telling a man the right road and not the wrong.

IMMORTALITY.

ON a bright evening in the sweet summer time I was sitting in a daisy field listening to the singing of the birds. But the flowers could not gladden me, nor the birds cheer, nor the sunshine bring brightness into my heart. For she whom we loved had left us for ever, and I was sick with the pain that knows no healing.

As I sat the light hurt me and I closed my eyes. Suddenly a spirit stood before me. A being with sweet loving eyes that reminded me of our lost one; they looked into mine as though they wished to help me but could not . I could not choose but gaze upon them, and as I gazed the spirit spake.

" Poor child," it said, "have you no consolation? Can you not believe that you will meet your dear one in a better land, when all the trials and troubles of this world are over? Would not this comfort you? "

"I cannot believe it," I said; "and it would not comfort me. The pain is here and now. If I can bear to live for twenty or thirty years without our loved one, I can bear to be laid to rest for ever beside her. That will not hurt; there will be no suffering in the grave."

The spirit smiled sadly. "Then can nothing comfort you? Think what you would wish, and if possible it shall be granted. We cannot keep our dear ones for ever, but what consolation is possible you "hall have."

I pondered much at this, and said at last: "I cannot have her back again, and shall not go to her. Our poor frail bodies are from the dust, and must return to it. But 0, the loving tenderness that watched over us! Is that gone too? Can Death kill Love? It seems too hard . I would like to think that Love is immortal and that after death the loving spirit still

I3

lingers near to comfort those who moutn. Is this too much to ask? "

The spirit smiled again, and such a sweet, tender joy lit up· its face that my pain seemed almost gone.

" Dear child," it said, " be comforted-you have your wish. Death comes not suddenly to any, to some never. ' \i\Thile the mourners' hearts are sorrowful the loved ones are hovering near; it is only when they grow cold and hard that the spirits depart and are known to them no !pore. _ Therefore, grieve not hopelessly, my suffering child; your loved one is with you now, and will be to the end."

I sat up and gazed around. it was no dream.

The spirit had vanished ;-but F. A. L.

Sunday Afternoon Lectures.-These lectures will be resumed on Sunday, the 3rd instant, when the course on the British Empire will be continued. The Committee are to be congratu­lated in obtaining the assistance of distinguished men and women, thoroughly conversant with their subjects, to deliver the new series of lectures; and we hope their efforts to disseminate a fuller knowledge of the countries and peoples of this vast Empire will meet with the success they deserve. Among the lecturers for this month are :-

W. HERBERT lONES, F.R.G.S., who has been for the last twenty years travelling in various parts of the British Empire, and is now lecturing on it at the principal Institutions in the United Kingdom. . Miss MARY KINGSLEY (author of "Travels in West Africa "), who IS . the daughter of Dr. Henry Kin.gs!ey, and niece of CanoJ?- Charles Kmgsley. She has made the subject of West Africa a speCial study. I:ier second visit there extended over nearly two years, during which bme she lived amongst the natives and studied their habits, customs, beliefs, modes of thought, etc.

CLAUDE LYON, who has spent considerable time at Malta, making a study of the island, from which place he has just returned.

PATRICK GEODES, F .R.S.E. (Professor of Botany, University College, Dundee; Senior Resident, University Hall, Edinburgh), who has held posts a.t th~ Universities of London, Aberdeen, Edinburgh, St. Andrews, etc., '~Ith mtervals of travel. He has explored Mexico, and studied the different countries of Eastern Europe, making a special study of Cyprus.

Tuesday Evening Lectures.-Particular attention is drawn to the course of lectures on the French Revolution to be given by. Mr. Herbert Burrows, commencing on the last Tuesday in ~hlS mo~th, at 7.30. The syllabus and other particulars will be lssued ID a few days, and members are desired to make the course as widely known as possible.

I

. .

South Place Sunday Popular Concerts.-The Twelfth Season of the above Concerts will begin on Sunday, October 3rd , when a concert of works by the late Johannes Brahms will be given. In view of the recent death (3rd April last) of this great Master, it is hoped that the action of the Committee in taking an early opportunity of arranging a concert consisting entirely of his compositions may meet with general approval and hearty support. The programme will contain a new biographical note of Brahms, in addition to the words of the songs and the usual analytical notes. Mr. John Saunders will lead the String Sextet i.n B fiat, Op . 18; Messrs. R. H . Walthew and W. F. Morressy will play Hungarian Dances for Piano Duet; and Mrs. Hutchinson will be the vocalist.

The special Report of last season's Concerts is ready, and a copy is enclosed in this number of the Magazine.

South Place Discussion Society.-A very attractive programme has been arranged by the Discussion Society for the first half of its new session, and the subjects for debate arc such as should prove particularly interesting to members and friends of South Place. The first meeting will be held on October 6th, when the question of the Ethical teaching of Children will be treated by Mr. Seyler. A member of the Fabian Society will open a debate on" The Public Organization of Industry" in November, and in December" The Revival of the Contagious Diseases Acts", a topic exciting considerable discussion at present, is to be introduced by Mr. J. H. Levy.

The Sewing Society, connected with South Place, for making clothing for poor children, commences its Eighth Season this month. The Committee will be pleased to welcome any friends desirous of assisting, or will send work to those who cannot attend the meetings. Contributions of money, materials, or clothing, old or new, will be gladly received by Mrs. Dixon, 69 Tollington Park, N., or by Miss Christie, 20 Lambolle Road, South Hampstead. The meetings are held fortnightly, the first being on Tuesday, the 5th inst, at the residence of Mrs. Dixon, and the second on Tuesday, the 19th inst., at Miss Christie's.

Monthly Soirees.-These Soirees recommence on Monday, October 4th, when Mr. Robin Allen will read a paper, which will be followed by music. Tea and coffee at 7.30. The arrangements for the November and December soirees include an exhibition by Mr. Gerard Smith of a series of slides illustrating Insect Anatomy, and a paper by Mr. Felix Moscheles on" Mendelssohn as I remember him".

The monthly in-door meetings of the Sunday Shakspere

Society were resumed af 6 Eldon Street, Finsbury, E.C., on 19th September, with a reading of "The Comedy of Errors". The next meeting will take place on 17th October, the play being" A Midsummer Night's Dream".

Debenture Redemption Fund.-Dr. Moncure D. Con way has presented fifty autograph copies of his" Life of Carlyle", and fifty autograph copies of his" Travels in South Kensington" to the Committee, in aid of the Extinction of the Debt. Both works are, we believe, nearly, if not quite, out of print in the English edition, and no doubt friends will avail themselves of this oppor­tunity to possess copies of the works, which are rendered all the more valuable in having the author's autograph. The books are on sale in the Library.

1898 Bazaar.- Working parties in connection with the Bazaar are being held twice a week during October, and the C?~mittee will be pleased to receive the names of those wIlhng to hold meetings during the autumn and winter. Full details appear in the Monthly List.

KINDRED SOCIETIES. Union of Ethical Societies.-All the five federated societies

open the season's meetings on Sunday, October 3rd . The McI~tyre Library has been catalogued, and books are now at the dIsposal of members. The Moral Instruction Conference is preparing for active election work, and has issued a manifesto contrasting theological and ethical teaching, and appealing to the electors to support the establishment of non-theological

Em ehit.hods. Dr. Stanton Coit will lecture for the West London t cal Society every Sunday morning during October and

~o,:ember. A Children's Ethical Class will be held by that OClety On Sunday mornings, at II.IS.

S ~roydon Ethical and Religious Fellowship.- The Musical OClety meetings and the Fellowship Guild classes will be

~esu~ed this month. Volunteer workers interested in the wel­bar~ho the poorer children of South Croydon will be welcomed . y e members of the Fellowship Guild.

The Brot~erhood Publishing Company, of Croydon, are aFo~t to pubhs~ a book by V. Tchertkoff giving graphic details W t e persecuhons undergone by the Dukhobortsi (or Spirit

restlers) of the Caucasus at the hands of the Russian Govern­~ent. The author has himself been recently exiled owing to ~s. earn~st advocacy of the cause of this sect, who ha ve incurred

e enI~l1ty of the authorities Ol! account of their refusal to bear

16

arms or in any way support the Russian military system. The Dukhobortsi have exhibited, it is said, the greatest courage and patience throughout the cruelties which they have suffered and are still suffering.

Correspondence.-Mr. George Jacob Holyoake writes :-" Thank you for your friendly notice in your September number that I hav~ recently completed my 78th year. On last April (the 13th) I was 80, so you generously give me two more years to live before I shall be as old as I am."

NOTICES. - Removals. - Blake, Mr. and Mrs., to z Laburnum Villas, South Park, Ilford.

Hooper, C. E., to 34 Clifton Gardens, Maida Vale, W. Coles, Miss Mary F., to 124 Rectory Road, Stoke Newington, N.

South Place Magazine.-The present number is the first of the new Magazine year, and subscribers who have not already renewed are requested to send their subscriptions to the Hon. Sec., Ernest A. Carr, at the Chapel, or to the Hon. Treasurer, W. H allid ay, III Helix Road, Brixton. A Title-page and Index to the volume just completed is given as a Supplement to the present number. Back copies of the present, as well as of the former, series of the Magazine can be obtained at the Library, or of the Secretary, price 2!d., post free.

The next number of the Magazine will contain an article by Dr. Moncure D. Conway, on "Theism ", and one by Sydney J. Hickson, M.A., F.R.S., of Owen's College, Manchester, on Vivisection. Mr. Hickson, who is well known to many members of South Place. has been intimately connected with some of the principal Physio­logical laboratories of this country for the last twenty years, and his paper will be of interest as presenting the Scientist's view of this very important question.

A " Psalm of Pantheism", by Charles E. Hooper, will appear in an early number of the Magazine.

The SOUTH PLACE MAGAZINE is published for the Committee by A. and H. B. Bonner, I and z Took's Court, Chancery Lane. It is for sale in the Library of South Place Chapel, and also on the bookstalls of the following Ethical Societies: The London Ethical Society, Essex Hall, Essex Street, Strand; The West London, at Kensington Town Hall; The' South London, at the Masonic Hall, Camberwell New Road; and The East London, Libra Road, Bow, E.

It is requested that all Literary Contributions be addressed to the Editor of the SOUTH PLACE MAGAZINE, South Place Institute, South Place, Finsbury, E.C. Notes from Kindred Societies, Correspondence. Cbanges of Address, or other Notices for the next number of the Magazine, should be sent to the Editor not later than the 15th of the month.

Printed by A. BONNER, I & ~ Took'S Court, Chancery Lane, LondoD, E.C.