1
10
1
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/84c2fdef9c18ab239da6c9785e144190.pdf?Expires=1785369600&Signature=g037m-2ZFE0N47LVC3yQrHd7AaQ4W4bVm6fOw4aTqkQ8LgZ0wPQRYGBYj1jfYH6WnUa832aAgbb-ZwjgUox77KBtt9pAJCjtU1-IWDR946WUx9iRrxuYzh%7ENQ%7Eub24-4f6mxwqYxzO09zx0qLM%7EgjYNDeeVCpfbhqaQdLTcxcMjm%7EtsToxM2lJ9JIR%7Eqj8PgjJqCW70pQ3Kxvk-qKijhDMX0KjFm-NSCUtF-EHSmMSnUEi%7EX9DypX8irZ3-nadsqgDpHge6pyvWbRhuWgmI5cBwGF094MndR0i%7ECz-UWB20GMAIx%7ErgnnQTLUyj2NrjoIkl3erWL1l7NmWoaPnW-Xg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
02bf42a3e1f2a03524224d75247e9e1b
PDF Text
Text
FROM THE
��A
MAN
FROM THE
MOON.
LONDON:
C. R. BROWN, ELDON STREET, CITY, E.C.
PRICE SIXPENCE.
�• Jjll'J
MOfli
�^4 Man from the Moon.
As I stood on the summit of Aconcagua, the loftiest peak of
the Chilian Andes, looking down on Anluco, Descabezado, and
Nevado de Chorolque, drinking in the beauties of the splendid
mountain scenery, I diverted my gaze from the space, and suddenly
became aware of the presence of an individual, apparently a human
being of the male sex; although very much resembling an
ordinary man, he differed entirely from any one I had ever seen;
his face was naturally hairless, and although he gave me the
impression of not being more than thirty years old, he looked as
though he bad attained that age many centuries ago.
Starting slightly, at what seemed almost like an apparition, I
said “ Good gracious I how long have you been here ? ”
In the coolest possible manner he replied, “ I’ve been on your
little planet just three days and a half according to your reckoning.”
Merely intending to ask him how long he had been on the
mountain beside me, I was surprised at his reply, and falteringly
enquired “Do I understand you to say that you are not an inhabitant
of this earth ? ”
“Exactly,” he replied, “when I’m at home I live on the moon.”
The moon ! ! I said in astonishment, as I looked searchingly at
at him; besides his old young look, I could deteft nothing ex
traordinary, except that he had none of the fresh color usual in a
�1
man of his apparent age, his entire face and neck being of a bronzy,
pink, blotting paper hue.
Smiling blandly at my look of surprise, he said, “Yes we don’t
often visit you, you’re so much behind us in everything.”
I felt that I could have kicked him for his cool impudence, but I
let it pass, merely remarking, “ I don’t quite see how you could
overcome the attraction of gravity.”
“ No, I dare say not,” he replied condescendingly, “we got over
that little difficulty a very long time ago.”
“ Do you mean to say that you can move off this earth, when
you like ? ”
“ Certainly, nothing is easier,” replied the lunar excursionist;
springing lightly into the air and ascending to the height of about
twelve feet, he stood there looking down benignly.
He descended at my request without the least shock; and I said,
“It must have taken you a long time to come all the way ? ”
Lunar Excursionist. No, only a fortnight.
Writer. But how about food ?
L. E. Well you see we’re not nearly so gross as you are 5 I
could carry almost enough for that short time; besides we have
certain methods of extracting a limited amount of sustenance from
the air.
W. Did any one see you arrive ?
L. E. No I always manage to alight during the night.
W. Why ?
L. E. Because you see one might be used as a target for rifle
practice.
W. Yes, that would be unpleasant, but did I understand you to
say that you lived on the air during your journey ?
L. E. Yes partially 5 not that I mean to say it’s good living, but
one can make shift with it for a short time; it’s not so difficult for
us, because we do’nt feed in the same heavy way that you do.
W. Indeed, how’s that ?
�3
L. E. Well, we don’t eat flesh, our animals are never slaughtered,
W. But don’t you ever require animal food ?
L. E. Yes, sometimes, and then we make it chemically.
W. That seems a great waste of time.
L. E. One must have some employment, but if we choose, we
can always find some of the less learned who don’t understand the
process, to do the mechanical work.
W. But have you no other employmentthan procuring your food ?
L. E. I never yet knew any one, either on your planet or ours,
to whom that was’nt the principal employment 5 you work in order
that you may earn money to buy food, we’ve long since progressed
beyond all that barbarism; we have no money.
W. No money, then how do you buy food and necessaries ?
L. E. We don’t buy them; there are various things which nature
sends ready made; anything else that we may require we make
chemically, this is very much better than your method 5 if you want
tea or coffee you first build a ship, then you pay sailors to navigate
her, after that you send out money to the grower, then you bring
it home and roast it, &c., &c., whereas we never take the trouble to
send a long way for anything, we have the elements always handy,
and we make all that we require.
W. But if you make no use of money, it seems to me that
you are not far removed from a savage state.
L. E. On the contrary, we have long since passed through the
money using stage of existence, when every one knew how to
make money as well as his neighbour, it became of no value;
people were tired of the unceasing round of work ■, life had become
so fast, that it was really too much trouble to live, and the weaker
individuals solved the difficulty by dying voluntary, “'committing
suicide ” as you roughly term it, but for a long time there had been
growing up a large body who pitied and despised the money
grubbers 5 this section of the people calling themselves “scientists”
promulgated the doctrine that the money grubbers mode of life
�4
was, in point of fact slow suicide ; by a long series of experiments,
extending over two or three hundred years, they proved that man
could live vastly longer and more comfortably, than he had been in
the habit of doing, if he would take the trouble to observe certain
rules of diet and exercise, and eschew the feverish excitement, of
money getting. Children were raised from birth on scientific
principles, and it was found that at the end of 200 years they had
more vitality than an ordinary man of forty.
W. Impossible ! !
L. E. Not at all, you must remember that these scientists were
better chemists than you will be for many centuries; they learnt, by
countless experiments, the exa^Rsort and amount of food which
best repaired the normal waste of material, and the quantity of
exercise necessary for tht* dispersion otlthat food 5 the brain was
just sufficiently exercised in a gentle pursuit after knowledge, to
keep it from stagnation,*0 that the only two constituents of
animal existence, brain and stomacn, act and re-act on each other
in a reciprocally health^manner.
W. Very good, all very well in it’s way, but these “ scientists ”
must be quite isolated from**fhe r'est of society.
L. E. Of course they were at first; but now everyone is, or as
pires to be a scientist; we have no society as you understand the
term; that mean desire to d®'ex1retly as your neighbours do, has
long since ceased among us ; we desire only our own approbation.
W. That’s all very fine, but tf^lly I don’t see how you can go
on, if you have no money you can have no House of Commons,
no judges, no police, no order.
L. E. We keep ourselves in order, there are no incentives to
disorder, money is your great cause of crime; we have abolished
money, therefore we require no police to protect property, no judges
to try criminals—there are none; there is only one description of
property on our planet, viz. :—public libraries, and everyone is
interested in preserving them and adding to them.
�5
W. But there’s another cause of crime, how do you manage
about love ?
L. E. Yes, we had some trouble with it at first;' priests having
been improved out of existence, no ceremony was performed at
marriage, and people sometimes left their husbands or wives, as
you can do here, if you choose to take the consequences; but this
sort of thing soon remedied itself, all ill-regulated passions being
deleterious to life, no one who desires to live indulges in them; if
a man deserts his wife, he is looked down upon in the same way
as a drunkard is with you; he has given way to an irregular and
debasing passion, he probably gives way to others, such as excessive
feeding or drinking, he rapidly deteriorates and dies, as you call it,
or as we say “he becomes inanimate matter;” the woman has
lost nothing, if she has continued to keep her passions under proper
control, she has become no older, and in course of time she finds
another husband.
W. But do the women keep their passions under the same
control as the men ?
L. E. Almost, they are still slightly inferior to men in all
respects, but vastly superior to your women, intellectually I mean.
W. You can’t argue with them, I suppose ?
L. E. Yes you’Can.
W. Nonsense, you’re joking ?
L. E. No I’m not, but then you see we have no subjects of any
importance left to argue with them.
W. They bear children, of course ?
L. E.. Only the comparatively ignorant.
W. But the population must decrease.
L. E. Exactly.
W. In time it must die out altogether.
L. E. Just so.
W. What a dreadful thing !
L. E. Why would it be more dreadful for man to die out than
for the megatherium to become extinct ?
�6
W. It’s a different thing altogether.
L. E. Yes, only the difference does’nt just now occur to you J
if women ever become sufficiently strong of intellect, they will
refuse to be at the inconvenience of peopling the earth. On our
planet they are becoming more and more unwilling to have children,
and in ten or twenty thousand years, perhaps, the moon will be
without human inhabitants.
W. What, in spite of your achievement of a sort of limited
immortality ?
L. E. I did’nt say it was limited, what I say is that we can
live just as long as we like ■, but after a time it becomes so trouble
some and monotonous to obey the necessary rules, that very few
care to live more than 500 years j we have a few who have reached
1500, but they are very tired of it, and continue to exist purely
on public grounds.
W. Just to show what they can do ?
L. E. Exactly.
W. But your 1500 year olders don’t beat Methusalah by much.
L. E. The inhabitants of this earth never lived longer than
they do now.
W. But the Bible says so.
L. E. It’s either a pure invention, or, perhaps, the word months
has been altered into years.
W. It’s quite impossible that the word of God should be
altered.
L. E. You Christians, with the finest code of morality, have
the most ridiculous religion on the earth ■, you call a history of the
Jews, written by themselves, the “Word of God; ” on to this you
tack a legend, with which the Jews will have nothing to do, and
this mixture you try to thrust down the throats of other people as
the “ only true religion /’if they laugh at it, you call them blas
phemers. I should like to know whether you would’nt laugh
if any one mixed up some negro religion with a fancy of their
�7
own, and called it the only true religion ? I’am riot suprised that
it should have happened when it did, but that it should be believed
up to the present time does’nt say much for—however I must’nt
be too hard, for we were a long time getting rid of our numerous
religions.
W. You’re very kind, but you speak of the Jews as if they
were an ordinary people.
L. E. I think them a very ordinary people, if any Eastern race
had adopted the same exclusive method for the same number of
years, they would present precisely similar features.
W. I suppose you allude to the nose ?
L. E. No no, I meant general features, but it certainly is to be
feared that the nose may develop into a small trunk, if they remain
a separate race for about ten thousand years longer however, there’s
no fear of that, another two or three centuries will amalgamate
them.
W. You may depend they will always be a “ peculiar people,”
and remain separate to the end of the world, when they will all be
converted to Christianity.
L. E. You forget that the period they have passed through has
been one of intense ignorance, and that every year it becomes more
difficult for them to indulge in their Oriental superstitions •, as for
their being converted to Christianity, when the world comes to an
end, I’ll back the world to last a great deal longer than Christianity.
W. But Christianity will never die out.
L. E. Exactly, every religion in it’s turn has been believed to be
everlasting; unluckily they can’t all be right.
WAh ! but ours is the only one with a truly divine origin.
L. E. I can point you out half a dozen whose origins are
equally divine.
W. They have no immaculate conception.
L. E. No, but they could have had, it’s not more difficult to
manage than any other miracle.
�8
W. Oblige me by dropping the subject, I can’t tolerate such
rank blasphemy.
,
L. E. Oh certainly, I had no wish to hurt your feelings; you
4 see we’ve got rid of all those old prejudices, so I hope you’ll excuse
me.
W. Well I ca’nt see that you gain much by your longevity, it
does’nt seem worth the trouble as you have to live after death.
L. E. Live after death ! ah I yejTS suppose it will take you a
good many centuries to reason out of that semi-barbarous notion.
W. Belief in a future life, a semi-barbarous notion !! good ! I - - L. E. Why yes, does’nt it carry absurdity on the face of it ? it’s
a mere fancy, you have never had a shadowlof proof.
W. But we’re told so.
L. E. Told so ! do you believe everything you’re told ?
W. No, but that’s a thing on which there’s never been the
slightest doubt.
L. E. Just so, it’s purely the result of self-conceit, you see dogs,
horses, and elephants die, without a thought about there future
state, but because you’re superior to them by a mere accident, you
say that you’re going to have another life, I should have thought
that common justice would make you consider that you already
have a sufficient advantage over them.
W. I do’nt think that has anything to do with it, but what’s
the mere accident you allude to ?
L. E. Speech; if any of the large apes acquired the power of
languages—as they probably will do sooner or later—they would
progress as far as you have done in the same time.
W. Then you say that man is no better than the other animals ?
L. E. On the contrary I say that he is far superior to all the
other animals, but still he is only an animal, and is not more likely to
have two lives than any other beast.
W. Then what becomes of man after death ?
L. E. I’ll answer your question by asking another, “ Whafl
becomes of other animals after death ? ”
�9
W. But we’ve always been taught that man is quite different
from the other animals.
L. E. Yes, but you’d have known better, by this time if you
had ever troubled to reason to a conclusion.
W. But it is a part of our religion.
L. E. Yes, that accounts for it, religion is answerable for a
great deal of ignorance, your Angljcan priest retards the advance
ment of thought less than the Roman Catholic priest, still, without
any special desire to do so, he does retard it; such is the natural
tendency of his business, for if every one made a proper use of his
reason the priestly office could not exist.
W. What, do you mean to say that we could do without priests
altogether ?
L. E. Certainly, I don’t mean that you could very well dispense
with them to-morrow, but in course of time you’ll do without
them, as we have done j they’ve held you in subjection for a very
long time, but their influence is becoming less every day, even poor
Roman Catholics are beginning to see through their priests.
W. Well, I agree with you so far, the influence of the clergy
has certainly decreased, even in my time ■, some people will always
believe in them, but the proportion of those who care nothing
about either the church or the priesthood is certainly larger.
L. E. Naturally, why even among the Jews the better educated
laugh at their religious observances, but they know that without
them their nationality mhst cease.
W. The Jewesses are very devout ?
L. E. Of course, women are always more so than men religious
fervour is generally in inverse proportion to intellect.
W. If I understand your system, the exercise of the intellect
is a universal panacea ?
L. E. Certainly, by that means we have gradually done away
with all you most complain of. If we suffer disease it is purely
our own fault, if we - - -
�IO
W. You have no wars, of course ?
L. E. Wars ! no, we’ve nothing to fight for, everyone is complete and self-supporting, ages ago we used to have wars just as you
do, but when one looks back at them they do seem so utterly
ludicrous and childish, that it’s difficult to imagine how they could
have taken place, progress is intensely slow, it’s taken you untold
ages even to see the absurdity of the duel between individuals r
having abolished that, it ought not to take you very long to do away
with duelling between nations.
W I suppose you did’nt manage these things in a day or two ?
L. E. Oh no, but it’^fuch a long time since we were like you,
that it seems quite funny it’s s&mlthing like you’re paying a visit
to some aboriginal tribe, only you’remnuch further behind us than
any of your aborigines are behind you.
W. You’re not bo^sdywithlj the working man” I suppose?
L. E. No, we’re alb working men, Everyone works for himself
the worst of your typiSlworking man, is that they all want to be
masters, not that anyonej|frzishe* to prevent them, but they seem
to fancy that their Esters shouldTvoluntarily change places with
them.
W. I expect they’d soon find their level again.
L. E. Of course thejJ would, thevj|®modified Communists,
their vice proceeds mainly from ignorance, and although with us
some are more ignoranty^an othe^jnone are dangerous. I think
you clearly understand that it’s imp®sible they should be so.
W. Yes, I think I do j if none of you have any property, there
can be no inducement for anyone to be dangerous; but stay, the
thought has just struck me, that the evil-disposed might make slaves
of the others.
,
L. E. No, everyone thoroughly understands that such a course
could not possibly result in any good; we have a few dangerous
animals, and - - W. Which you kill, of course ?
�11
L. E. Oh no, we simply avoid their haunts, there’s plenty of
room ; you use animals very badly, you ought to treat them quite
as well as you treat niggers, your daily slaughter of sheep and
bullocks, is as immoral as killing a similar number of men, in fact
as they are slightly your inferiors, you ought to be all the more
forbearing towards them.
W. But what are we to do for animal food ?
L. E. Why, do without it, there are plenty of substitutes, we
don’t kill animals, either for food or sport.
W. But I don’t believe we could exist without animal food.
L. E. Nonsense, it might not suit so well for a generation or
two ; but use is everything ; even tigers could be taught to live
without flesh diet.
W. Perhaps, but I don’t quite see how all the animals would be
disposed ©f; if we did’nt kill them, they would become too numerous.
L. E. You might as well say that man would become too numer
ous, because he is not eaten as food; there are plenty of animals
that you don’t kill to any appreciable extent, and yet they don’t
cause any inconvenience.
W. But we’ve always been taught that animals were specially
created for man’s use.
L. E. Ah, that’s to be accounted for by the barbarous origin of
your religion; to me it seems ridiculous, that a civilised people
should retain such a word as “create” in their language.
W. But the world was created ?
L. E. Such an idea might be excusable in Moses, but surely
you ought by this time, to have discarded that silly fable ; does’nt it
carry absurdity on the face of it, you see things develop and alter
year by year, and yet you say that they were “created” a few
thousand years ago only a little different from what you now see
them, and since that they have been allowed to take their chance,
or to be tampered with by man for profit or caprice.
W. I don’t quite understand you.
�12
L. E. Well I mean that by careful selection you can effect very
marked changes in any animal or plant, even in a few years.
W. Yes, I know it.
L. E. Does’nt that suggest to you that everything must have al
ways been in a state of development ?
W. Well, I suppose it does, but the missing link between man
and the monkey has never been discovered.
L. E. I could never see that any link was missing; you might
as well ask for the missing link between the big apes and the little
apes, you might as reasonably expect to find fossils extending over
millions of years, showing the origin of man when he was not only
lower in an organization than monkeys, but inferior to the jelly fish;
man is an ape, so I don’t know where the missing link is to come
from.
W. If man is only an ape why don’t the apes do as he does ?
L. E. They probably will in a reasonable tim,e after they have
acquired speech, not that I intend to prophecy anything; they may
never acquire speech—although never is a very long day—but look
at the most intelligent ape as he now is, and ask yourself whether,
if circumstances proved favourable, it would require many millions
of years to develop him into as good a man as the lowest form of
savage, especially when you remember that even now the skulls
of man and the more advanced apes, differ less than the highest
and lowest apes.
W. Yes but when you talk of millions of years - - L. E. Exactly, it’s an interval you can’t appreciate, simply
because you’ve got bogged in the notion that the universe has only
been “ created ” about ten thousand years.
W. But the oldest fossil men hardly differ from man of to-day.
L. E. Which convinces me that it must have occupied many
millions of years to develop him up to the position which he held
ten thousand years ago; if it convinces you that he was conjured
�T3
into existence at about that period, you’re quite welcome to your
opinion, I can’t disprove it, that is to say I’ve no eye witness to
produce.
W. Therefore I shall rest satisfied with what the Bible tells me.
L. E. A mournful example of the state of intellectual blindness
induced by any given religion. Why should you believe a man
who tells you that a short time ago, all the animals and things
you see were created almost in their present form ?
W. But everything is possibleHMth God.
L. E. That’s merely another w^Eof saying, everything is
possible to the imagination. You must admit that, if some Deity
created everything a few years ago, he’s been wonderfully inactive
ever since; you can’t point oitt.fl solitary instance of “creation,”
although everything keeps on developing.
W. But is’nt it all the same? God is the prime mover of
everything.
L. E. How can you say that, when you know that you can
alter trees and animals, and d®. almost what you like with them.
There are certain forces of nature which you do understand, and
others of which you know little or nothing, in time you may
understand them all, and be able to control them ; meanwhile it
would be much more reasonable to call every force in nature a
God, than to ascribe everything to one God.
W. Well it amounts to the same thing.
L. E. Excuse me if I say you’re very shallow, I was merely
making a reductio ad absurdum; to illustrate my meaning, take
steam, you evoke it, I might almost say, you create it, and you
have it under perfect control; if natural force is the same thing as
God, you ought to worship steam—a thing which you make your
slave.
W. But the very essence «of our religion is, that God created
everything.
�14
L. E. Exactly, you’re over-ridden by that silly eastern tale, about
the creation, if you could only manage to abolish Moses it----W. But Moses is the founder of our religion.
L. E. Never mind your religion, if it fetters your reason;
people tell you that there’s no such thing as development, because
your oldest fossil men, whose age is about ten thousand years, are
like man of the present day ■, they can’t see that this merely shows
how long a time must have been occupied in developing up to the
lowest form of man. I was asked, yesterday, how can you say man
has developed, when we find the figures on the Egyptian monuments
exactly the same as man of to-day; I replied, “ the figure on the
top of the Nelson Column is very much like the men of the present
day,” which is quite as strong an argument against the doctrine of
development; people look on two or three thousand years ago as such
a very long time. Then they go on to say, but where do you stop ?
Practically you don’t stop anywhere. People think it so conclusive
to say, “out of nothing, nothing comes,” but the establishment of
spontaneous generation almost upsets this sweeping aphorism,
because thdre is nothing left to account for except the air, which
would naturally produce everything you see, in course of time;
but not in a little flea-bite of time like 10,000 years, or even
jo,000,000. Why not rest satisfied with our theory, that every
thing has developed itself out of space ? Spontaneous generation
has been proved to a certainty, space must have always existed, in
this way you can account for the universe more rationally than by
your creation theory.
W. But that would do away with the necessity for belief in the
existence of a God.
L. E. Yes, the abolition of any old theory or practice must
cause pain or damage to some one; fancy the grief of the ancient
Roman mothers when they heard their sons ridicule the respectable
old system of Pantheism, which had been all sufficient for so many
years; or the horror of the stage coach proprietors, when they found
railways spreading all over the country.
�W. I can’t see how anyone can have any doubt as to the existance
of a God, how can you account for everything we see around us ?
L. E. I’ve just told you.
W. Oh ! I thought you merely put it as a theory.
L. E. It’s all theory of course, the only question is, which re
oommends itself most to the reason ?
W. Why, if your ideas were correct, thieves and murderers
would have no fear of future punishment.
L. E. Every whit as much as they have now, virtue is its own
and only reward, and vice is its own punishment, or receives present
punishment, anything else you must own to be at the best, a pure
speculation, let me ask you whether you yourself or any one you
know really has any fear of future punishment, in a vague sort of way
they fancy they have been brought upon the idea j but careful self
analysis will show that every action, whether good or bad, is done
solely with a view to the cousequences in this world 5 in fact I think
your are all beginning to understand that you will never see any
other.
W. Are we like the beasts that perish then ?
L. E. We are the beasts that perish.
W. Those holding such a creed must be of all things the most
miserable.
L. E. Implicit belief in the tenets of your religion must ne
cessarily make you much more miserable.
W. How so ?
L. E. Because no one can be certain whether he’s just good
enough to go to glory 5 there are no rules laid down by which a
man may know exactly how much or how little will obtain for him
the desired position after death.
W. No, he must have faith.
L. E. Which means that he must refrain from using his reason ;
I think I am justified in saying that a belief in death bringing a
total cessation of all joys and pleasures is more comfortable than
�16
the miserable uncertainty of your creed, but as no one seems to
have the least fear of punishment in another world, I am led to
conclude either that you are all very conceited or that you have no
real belief in your dogmas.
W. Well you certainly have some excuse for your view of the
matter;. but I firmly believe that the soul of man will live again.
L. E. You might as well talk of the soul of the rose in your
button-hole; not a particle of it will be lost or destroyed but it will
never exist again as a rose.
W. .You say nothing is lost or destroyed, where then does the
life of man go, if you object to call it the soul ?
*
L. E. You might as well ask me where the steam goes which
has dragged you from London to Brighton ; your life carries you
about for a number of years, and when, like the steam, it’s used up
you ask me where it goes to. I realy can’t tell you; be contented
to believe only in what you see; rest assured that there is nothing
supernatural and that nothing has more power over nature than man.
I turned round towards the speaker to protest against this
subversive doctrine, but he had left me, and I sat for some time
thinking of all he had said.
It seemed that he totally differed from the Communists and other
idiots who have endeavoured to suddenly force their schemes—good,
bad, or indifferent—down their neighbours’ throats, either at the
point of the bayonet, or by the expenditure of large sums; he had
merely given me the outline of the state of things on his own planet,
and he had specially pointed out that any radical change, can only
be very gradually produced.
His Theology—or rather the want of it—was certainly most
startling, but many of his ideas seemed to have the merit of common
sense.
According to established precedent, I ought to say, “ and I woke,
and found it was a dream;” but I had’nt been asleep.
�Dr. RIDGE’S
PATENT cooked FOOD
FOR
FOR
INFANTS
INVALIDS
SATISFYING,
AGREEABLE,
STRENGTHENING,
DIGESTIBLE,
SOOTHING,
NOURISHING.
(Trade Mark.)
By Her Majesty’s Royal Letters Patent.
THE PATENT FOOD
Possesses the following Advantages over all other Articles of
a similar Character, vzz.—/
Having been cooked, it goes further.
Is cheaper.
Is made without trouble in two minutes.
Requires no cooking,
Does not cause acidity or wind.
Guaranteed purity.
Gives quiet nights to mothers, nurses, and invalids.
Health I Strength I Comfort I to all.
As professionally certified, it has saved the lives of many,
when other diet has failed.
Is put up in sizes to suit all classes,
jgg” Can be made with or without milk.
Sold by Chemists everywhere, in Packets and Canisters, with clear and full
directions for loth Infants and Invalids.
Works: BERMONDSEY, LONDON, S.E.
Also PATENT OATMEAL or GROATS, in Packets
6d. & Is. each.
Makes a delicious basin of Gruel iu two minutes
�Wl
6 i
CHEF”
■ .'.4 -
THE ONLY SAUCE
.4’
£
- ' AND
A
WITHOUT-; SEDIMENT
w\
■
■' if, •
8®
Use Thin and Gritty Sauces when you
can get this Unique Condiment.
;
* *’
"Um
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
A man from the moon
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 16, [2] p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Advertisements for patent food and tonic wines on unnumbered pages at the end. Unidentified author. Tentative date of publication from British Library catalogue.
An account in which a mountain climber, resting at the summit of Mount Aconcagua in the Andes, encounters there a man from the Moon who tells him that humanity is part but not necessarily the peak of Evolution, and who decries the feeble arguments of human Religions against this fact. When the climber asks him "Are we like the beasts that perish then?" the "Lunar Excursionist" responds, "We are the beasts that perish".
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
C.R. Brown
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1870?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5229
Subject
The topic of the resource
Secularism
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (A man from the moon), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Evolution
Secularism