then I answer that they are only such as nature directs and has provided for; and that is the end of it. You still make no headway. You only claim an advantage by way of protection to yourself and exemption from harm to which you are not entitled, without any adequate or corresponding benefit to me or to the race.

It is a very cheap and easy matter to insist that such and such a thing or act is wrong, without stopping to determine why it is so or what is meant by it. No particular act or single instance of human conduct has of itself, ex necessitate rei, any moral character or quality whatever. Nor can it be shown, by any process of reasoning alone, that any such act done or suffered has any such quality, any more than if the same had proceeded from a horse or dog.

Reason starts with certain truths and propositions that are known and recognized, and accepts nothing that is not admitted or self-evident, unless having first established it by proof. With what such premises shall we set out here? Right and wrong do not grow out of the ground. They are not inscribed on the works of nature anywhere. The forces of nature tell us nothing of them. The winds do not whisper them into our ears. The lights in the firmament inculcate no such lessons. Nature nowhere teaches any "must" or "must not." On the contrary, nature says you may do any thing you may choose, provided only that you accept the consequences. Some men might shudder at first, at the thought that their lives and property were at the mercy of such a principle as this, for the basis of human conduct; but it is because they are not accustomed

to it.

Right and wrong are terms employed to denote the respective qualities of the acts of a free and intelligent actor capable of understanding to what they relate; and that relation is to some principle outside of themselves which neither nature, science, nor reason discloses to us. They are not definable in any terms known to reason or natural science; nor can they be established by any inferences or conclusions drawn from those sources. They are vain and impotent for this purpose. There is nothing for them to catch hold of; nothing by which they can climb; nothing whereby any measurement may be taken

of their force or obligation. As well attempt to measure a chain of lightning, or the force of a can of dynamite, by the quart. It won't apply.

Until you can point me to some authority or power which I recognize as rightfully competent to say to me, "thou shalt" and "thou shalt not," and which has the means to detect and call me to account and punish me for violating such command every time, whether any other creature knows of it or not, I acknowl. edge no other master than myself, no rule to guide me but my own wants and inclinations; and them I will obey, for they are nature's laws and there is nothing higher than they. Neither reason nor science brings to view any such authority; and I am therefore at liberty to kill, rob, burn, and lie, at pleasure, subject only to the risk of such inconveniences to myself as others may chance to visit upon me in case of detection.

Do the inquiries then arise, how and whence comes the knowledge of right and wrong, and the force of obligation, if any, which it brings? Many have asked the same questions all along and every day. We profess no greater wisdom than reason and science reveal to us; and they pronounce these things fictions. So let us move on and let these have their sway. Society can get along quite well without troubling itself with these matters. It is only a menagerie on a large scale or a sort of zoological garden without the cages.

Then if any one sees proper to club his mother-in-law, let him only fortify himself with the reflection that the tiger or the hyena would have done the same under much lighter provocation, and with no abject fear of being called to account for the little diversion. It is nature's work, and the fittest survives. The race will be struggling up. If another will be mean and parsimonious, let him consider himself the highly evolved expansion of some molecule of past ages, which helped to finish out a flea; and let him draw courage and comfort from the thought, claim his origin and exercise his privilege. Or if it be the chosen prerogative of another, to lie, steal, plagiarize, or play the debauchee, let him sustain himself by selecting for his grand prototype, the frog, the civet, the opossum, the serpent, or the fox, and content himself with the reflection that he is of the same nature and the same kind of stuff as they, and enjoy

the consolation which it brings. It will help to sustain him in those seasons of despondency which, for some unknown cause, Occasionally afflict him. Whatever he may be or do, it matters not. Let him suffer no distress and borrow no trouble on this account, nor be unduly exalted with any sense of pride or selfsufficiency. There is neither bad nor good. It is all the same. These distinctions are the result of an imperfect education; and like other non-essentials, will soon vanish under proper training and an enlarged experience. Science will uphold and protect the man and vindicate nature's laws. Only let him be true to his origin, steadfast in the way of progress and vigilant in keeping alive the memory of that long line of august ancestry through which he has attained his present eminence, and preserve it without taint. Let him copy with reasonable diligence those noble traits and qualities which enabled their original possessors to reach their respective stations in the line of development, through the intervening links that have peopled this goodly planet, and prove himself worthy of such illustrious parentage. Nature will accomplish all the rest, true to herself and those unvarying laws which uphold and guide the universe. The race will thus advance in beauty and in strength under the benign influences of these coöperating harmonies, and the goal of human happiness will at length be reached.

The new system of Ethics we applaud without reserve, as worthy of its origin, admirable in its conception, sound in principle, practical in its operation and well fitted to meet the wants and special needs of a large and constantly increasing class in society hitherto much neglected.

The system may, and doubtless will, encounter no little opposition; and some time may elapse before it can be brought fully into practice. We can readily foresee difficulties and obstacles all around. It is the case with all new systems, however perfect in themselves and meritorious they may be, which affect the public interests. Men must be allowed time in which to conquer their prejudices. There is the well-known conserv ative element that brooks no innovation; and its adoption must be general in order to give it full effect and render its action harmonious. A partial trial will only benefit individuals,

and the public will be little better off, and perhaps not so well, to begin with. Morals will resist it, always jealous of the advance and encroachments of science. Governments will contend against it, because it forecasts their doom in the abolishment of place, patronage, perquisites, and power. So that, with so formidable an array against us, we may be compelled to wait long to witness the full tide of its accomplishment. But let us be patient. We can afford to be. Science will in due time assert herself and claim her own. She always has. Long live Science!

ARTICLE II.-DARWINISM AND CHRISTIANITY.

From the German of William Bender. By EDWARD G. BOURNE.

DUBOIS REYMOND, the standing secretary of the Academy of Science in Berlin, at the usual meeting in memory of the noted. dead of the past year, gave expression, somewhat exuberantly perhaps, to the thought that Darwin had rendered the same service in the interpretation of organic nature that Copernicus. was celebrated for rendering in the interpretation of our planetary system.

The comparison of Darwin to Copernicus reminds me at the outset that the Christian faith, or what is commonly so called, is not involved in a conflict with natural science for the first time. This conflict is as old as the emancipation of science from the authority of the Church. When science, toward the end of the 17th century, began to attribute to mental and physical disturbances certain diseases which hitherto had been explained as coming from the influence of the Devil and evil spirits, theologians, lawyers and physicians vied with each other in shouting that Christianity was in danger, the Bible was disregarded, and the devil deprived of his just claims.

But Science has advanced and taken under its powerful protection those unfortunates who used to be racked and burned for alleged possession by the devil.

If theologians have ventured to take delight in the interesting chapter on devils and demons, thenceforward only to be found in the less prominent parts of their dogmatics, the Christian faith has thereby suffered no loss. We have become accustomed also to esteem the Bible stories of the devil and demons as belonging to the notions of the distant past, but he would be a strange man who should wish to maintain that our belief in God and his Providence had lost its old power because we no longer earnestly believe in the devil and his fellows.

The alleged struggle between Faith and Science had at that time appeared only under the form of a struggle between two