1 10 8 https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/2f5f592ae57cc4c21a5053a48b12b25f.pdf?Expires=1777507200&Signature=XCW%7E7d29U3fUv2rISpwJlPKlMXZ0Py98KVPa5-zdLja8Kyp9RhdWHgCVzjLs39LmN2VaKurOrbIJ1VF%7EpgibBxioheD%7EJcN9%7EBVAsOiAWb7qk6QHAdeRZGy473zuQJiSH8Z9LuZFJjhiMnc1eWMUqZ4zjH39%7EL9SK1pA8cMcXtKbhHqwzvcF5QuiQp%7ElT0LQ5C1GDHB7-c8iA1%7EGCHyICaT4yucN5XPlIICbJw-oy2A8Bpq5p%7ELhkcmo9BTAxqKikrhUR3xoV5GQ3wsYlHYjGX-pSHX6ypKV%7Et6sTTDSd65j1we7iGmHjSg3pSUe8cVLoiQc%7EYUQAo6WqL6qOmZe3Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 3d7e18b16c31f8053a6cf23f9222d703 PDF Text Text PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT, II THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD, UPPER NORWOOD, LONDON, S.E. A FAREWELL ADDRESS. T is now more than fifteen years since I began the work, which,—so far as regards the periodical issue of my publications,—I must now relinquish, in consequence of continued ill-health and increasing bodily infirmity. The spectacle of millions of my fellow-countrymen, bound hand and foot by metaphysical and priestly exclusiveness, made so painful an impression upon my mind that I felt irresistibly impelled to expose dog­ matic assumptions and promote free theological in­ quiry as the undoubted right of all thoughtful minds. I �2 Without under-estimating the formidable difficulties which clerical prejudice and bigotry might be expected to interpose in the way of such an enterprise, I entered upon it single-handed and entirely on my own responsibility; resolved in a courteous but un­ compromising spirit to do my utmost to bring all my forces to bear upon the errors and superstitions so degrading to man’s highest nature, and to follow truth, and truth only, wheresoever it might lead me. In reviewing the past I contemplate with extreme satisfaction the remarkable strides which Free Thought has made in all orthodox sects; but espe­ cially in the Church of England. The present agita­ tion among a considerable section of the clergy in favour of Ritualism, which at first sight might be regarded as a retrograde movement, I look upon as necessarily transient, and having no influence upon the highest intellect within the Church. It is but the last convulsive effort of priestcraft to keep hold of the mind of the country, which is fast growing dis­ satisfied with the arid pastures of ecclesiasticism, and repairing to the spacious and fertile meadows of reason and science. Even at the period when my labours commenced, intelligent persons interested in the relation of ortho­ doxy to the age could not fail to observe that the artillery of Science and advanced Biblical scholarship had already been directed against Church dogmas. Secret doubts and difficulties respecting the doc­ trines of Biblical inspiration, the atonement, and supernaturalism, here and there disquieted both lay �3 and clerical minds ; but the war was, for the most part, limited to learned critics in the hostile camps. The conviction was forced upon me that a series of pamphlets discussing the vexed questions in a search­ ing yet reverent manner would be welcomed by large numbers of thoughtful inquirers, and stimulate those who might be desirous of obtaining satisfaction to the free and independent scrutiny of theories errone­ ously held by the churches to be founded on the “Word of God.” My first efforts met with a much wider and more cordial reception than in my highest expectations I had reason to anticipate. On the first appearance of my publications, expres­ sions of sympathy with my design and offers of co­ operation in the work reached me from what seemed to be the most unlikely quarters, and, for a consider­ able period afterwards, able and highly-educated clergymen forwarded me manuscripts for publication, containing attacks on the false bulwarks of ecclesiasticism, and expositions of absolute moral verities. Cultivated and earnest laymen, capable of dealing with the points at issue, also came forward volun­ tarily and contributed useful papers to the series. While the movement has been under my direction, essays on every branch of theology have been issued, illustrating the unhistorical character of many Bible records, the gradual development of beliefs and cere­ monies from Solar and Phallic worship to Christianity, the Priestly Origin of creeds, and the true inductive method of investigation. But while destructive criti- �4 cism has been freely employed against the mythical element in the Old and New Testament, and the legendary traditions of the Church, which have been put forward by the orthodox as facts, there has been in many of the pamphlets a due recognition of Natu­ ral Law and essential Morality as the only solid and sufficient principles for the government of human conduct. It is one of the most striking evidences of the wide­ spread scepticism throughout Protestant Christendom respecting the foundations of religious faith, that many thousands of persons in all classes of society, —and in all parts of the world,—lay and clerical, have applied to me for my pamphlets, notwithstanding that I have never made use of any other medium of advertising them than their own contents. The work in which I have been engaged has brought me into very extensive correspondence and personal intimacy with officials and adherents of various churches, and afforded me special opportunities for studying current ecclesiastical and theological move­ ments, and I am forcibly, impressed with the belief that there are influences at work which are destined, sooner or later, to cause the disintegration of all existing systems of religion that are based on mere traditional authority, and to emancipate the human mind from the thraldom of priestcraft in every form. Experience and observation combine to convince me that the tendencies of the age point to the ultimate substitution of the authority of reason for that of alleged book revelation. �5 The persuasion gains ground everywhere that the only true orthodoxy is loyalty to reason, and the only infidelity which merits censure is dis­ loyalty to reason. The exaltation of blind and un­ thinking sentiment above calm and clear judgment constitutes the real offence which the orthodox have unwittingly branded as the “ sin against the Holy Ghost.” . It is no little gratification to me to note how many clergymen and ministers, now liberated from the bondage of creeds and detached from the worse than useless occupation of teaching dogmas, received their first impulse to free inquiry from the perusal of my publications. Recent charges delivered by Archbishops and Bishops unmistakably convey the impression that they are beginning to tremble for the Ark of Orthodoxy. The most observant digni­ taries of the Church openly confess that it is not Ritualism so much as Rationalism which they fear. Nor is their alarm groundless, for the rapid diffusion of the light of science and criticism will eventually disclose the hollowness of the pretensions on which are based the claims of the Christian Scriptures to the attributes of authenticity, genuineness, and mira­ culous inspiration. No leader of theological opinion affects to deny that the work which, at my own risk, I have carried on, has been an appreciable factor in the general movement of Free Thought within the Church and Nonconformist bodies. The seed which has been sown, must, in the nature of things, remain for a time, in some instances, appa­ �6 rently unproductive. There is a rapidly increasing number of Liberal thinkers who continue to occupy pulpits, and many more who frequent places of wor­ ship, that can hardly be expected to sever suddenly their connexion with their ecclesiastical associations. There are preachers convinced of the false position they hold who, from regard to social standing or from the imperious necessity of earning a living for their families, persist in doing violence to their intellectual and moral nature by reiterating creeds and enforc­ ing dogmas which they have inwardly renounced. There are Liberal thinkers in every sphere of life who keep up a questionable semblance of evangelical devotion from fear of the social “Mrs. Grundy,” and in order to avoid injuring the prospects of their sons and daughters in the walks of fashion. But over all such untoward agencies the cause of Freedom of Thought and Freedom of Expres­ sion will certainly triumph ; and every anathema of priests and denunciation by bigots will but tend to accelerate its progress. My work has absorbed most of my time and thought and a considerable portion of my private means from the outset. At the same time it has been to myself, as well as to Mrs. Scott, who has throughout ren­ dered me unremitted assistance, a source of unspeak­ able pleasure. But the work is now done as far as I am concerned, and has already been followed by results far surpassing any expectations I may have ventured to entertain when I began it. I can only trust that genuine sympathy with the object for �7 which I have laboured may incite others to redoubled zeal in the same cause; for many a blow will still have to be levelled at the fortress of superstition ere it be finally razed to the ground. To those who have aided me with able pen and liberal purse I tender my most hearty and grateful thanks. For the unfailing cour­ tesy and assistance ever rendered me in my work by my printers my sincere acknowledgments are justly due. It is with the deepest regret that I feel myself compelled, most reluctantly, to bid my readers farewell. While life remains, however, I shall cherish a watchful interest in the movement which I have done my best to promote. Nor can I doubt that those who have derived mental benefit from my labours will do their utmost to guide others, who are seek­ ing the light, towards that simple code of religion and morals which is comprehended in being good and doing good, not in hope of reward, not from fear of punishment, but because it is good. THOMAS SCOTT. 11 The Terrace, Farquhar Road, Upper Norwood, London, S.E., March, 1877. C. W. REYNELL, PRINTER, LITTLE PULTENEY STREET, HAYMARKET, W. � 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 &amp; 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 farewell address Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Scott, Thomas [1808-1878.] Description An account of the resource Place of publication: London Collation: 7 p. ; 18 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed by C.W. Reynell, Little Pulteney Street, London. "It is now more than fifteen years since I began the work, - so far as regards the periodical issue of my periodicals.- I must now relinquish ... increasing bodily infirmity'. [Opening paragraph]. A reference possibly to Signs of the Times. Signed and dated March 1877. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Thomas Scott Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [1877] Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5460 Subject The topic of the resource Free thought Publications 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 farewell address), 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 Free Thought Press Thomas Scott https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/44ca20127846849033cd06e212028e8b.pdf?Expires=1777507200&Signature=IwmGNhNqjYhh5evfJR1jzzM-HOMPOInvL42DRQV8X%7EWfwy4kQfbtVOej%7E08eBqeC1lsmKVd4QgS%7E4UJMQzo6v53UuwEgTC-WCaDGRfh4VUntvHLQ-Lb96t8ndYyoEGmdRKnll4tHYk1wVJYaNGb94ITHRQUcvK0mRQwnj9WvVJ9PXWdOCYeVRCH-GOJIhfzRJJiywC7YYPUixE8YbgB%7EFAKnmEIOZRGEdGAeFSRti9Jwfl%7Ei7O8jmC%7E6BuBCbZx-1Y7Kz8-dhHZiRW1acKXL0P9UoyqhFcL4VIxBdfQI5STR0i68Abp9wogt1Py4Zvzv%7EgPP51Tf6ioCffFQI7G6bQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM a03093afc44bce44e8028719a801fc6d PDF Text Text ♦ % MH- • ‘Ip ,'■ '■•" tty % b Lj* 4 «r- *3 . ! <r F KNOWLEDGE THE ONLY GUIDE TO ACTION ft 'k)r An Address to the Graduate of the St. Loui§ Medical Col­ lege : Delivered February 28 th, 1857, by Professor J. H. r Watters, M.DU[Pwi/A/zetZ by- request of the ♦* ’ • * t* . MF* * [From the St. Louis Medical and Surgical Journal} of May, 1857.] **, Gentlemen—With no ordinary feelings of pleasure I Congratulate you on this honorable termination of your pupilage, and auspicious commencement of professional lifel Havjng chosen the medical’prof^ssion as your vocation, the present occasion marks one gdS.1 reached, but it equally marks the commencement of another stage of the race just begun. While the present is the legitimate offspring of the past, .it is also the germ of the future; and “the future is determined4 more by present development find intrinsic energy than by any extrinsic conditions or outside influences. A man may be almost what he wi}L*if he will but use the means. We are born human beings Without our wills, and we must die in spite of our wills ; |>ut between these two epochs much is op­ tional,—much depends upon our own volition and individual action. It is a thing more to be desired than riches or than hereditary position,.that a man just entering'ftpon life should personally realize how much he holds in his own hands,—how much he is legitimate heir to, independently of all contingenVol. xv—13 �2 Valedictory Address. cies, simply in virtue of his nature as a free and intellectual human being. AU progress in art, in science, and in literature, is due primarily to the individual development of those facul­ ties, and the energetic exercise of those capacities, which man inherits as a part of his being. And mtany of those foremost in the march and in the contest of truth, have been men least advantageously circumstanced by the accidents of fortune or other objective influences. There is nothing to discourage an ingenious youth from the noblest daring save inherent cow­ ardice. It is the want of a fixed purpose, self-rtffeance, and energetic action that necessitates failure, and Tint accident, fate or evil fortune. This is frequently learned in time only to be­ get regret, rather than to inspire courage. Content as lifeless sounding-boards, many learn not till their individuality and spontaneity are lost in the popular noise that they might have assisted in quieting the babbling discord, and themselves have given utterance to sounds more in harmony with the sweet music of nature;— “ How many a rustic Milton has passed by, Stifling the speechless longings of his heart, In unremitting drudgery and care ! How many a vulgar Cato has compell’dj! His energies, no longer tameless then, To mould a pin, or fabricate a nail! How maiiy a Newton, to whose plosive ken, Those mighty spheres that gem infinity, Were only specks of tinsel, fixed rin>heaven, To light the midnights of his'laffiraw!’’ In the study of the sciences connected with our profession, there is a fascination which thosg oijly who experience it can realize. From the wonderful constitution of the human mind, a man may have a sort of pleasure in any position or occupa­ tion, if it accord with his capacity; from the negro with^his tamborine and the emulation of a cor^g'hucking, throqah e'yery degree up to Humboldt in the grand contemplation of the cos­ mos ; from the hod-carrier, who toils day by day that he may live to toil on, up to Fulton,, Watt and Morse, who^, by their effective geniuses, have made the dumb agents of nature con­ spire to their ends. All have their pleasures and their sorrows, different however in degree, according to the respectiye, de­ velopments of their minds. The physician, if he be enthusi- �y-alediclcrry Address. . 8 a'stic in his calling, will find in the duties of his profession sources of indefinite pleasure. Who is there whose mind is at all cultivated that doesfnot deffiye a corresponding pleasure in studying a good painting, or nne piece of sculpture, or nicely adjusted machinery, or any work of art-, as he receives the conceptions, the ideas and the thoughts^of the artist ex­ pressed and personified in hisWork,—human thoughts, human ideas, and human conceptioip?taking on fo«? The antiqua­ rian, eager in h^pursuitJbtndies night and day the records of ancient time^ delighted with the anticipation to him allahsorbing, and encouraged by partial success, of bringing to light the thoughts, works and actions of his fellow-man of remote ages. The archeologist pi nds pleasure in studying the inscriptions upon old and crumbling monuments, and feels a thrill of rapture as he find/ a key te their interpretation* But the physician is a student of Nature, the monument of' , God ; and shall he not feel an untold delghtas he finds a clue to the characters there inscribed, not by man, but by the’nm- '*£.»' ' ger of the Eternal gausa -cauwn-wm,—characters which are the expressioni^tof infinite MBwledgeVEhe embodiment of the Di. vine Conception? The boo® of Nature, full of thought, not a particle without its purpose and signification, is opened, loudly calli^ for’fa terpretors. The human mind gives en­ thusiastic response, and man’s physical condition is improved by the revelations of science. But I do not propose, gentlemen, in taking leave of you, to dwell upon the beautieb of Nature, nor upon the pleasures af­ forded the human mind in studying her unchanging laws, but rather to direct your -attention to knowledge as the only guide to successful action. Actioi^energetic action, is demanded of him who has an object in lwing, and an end to accomplish ; of him who is unwilling to be tosS&djiamong whirlpools on the Sea of, life merely by the .current of cifence, without oar or riidde&Shnd remember, the oar and the rudder are equally apt to hasten to that which ^phild be avoided except their action ‘be guided by knowledge. It is the greatyfeecret of fail# ure/fiiat few stop to reflect wow awfully hazardous their very . freedom to act and to mould themselves as they please, ren/ ders their position. Freedom of action is useless, and even dangerous, unless knowledge andycaution be commensurate �4 Valedictory Address, with freedom.. This is true of every action in the range of man’s voluntary power, but it is of especial force in connec­ tion with the actions the physician is called upon to perform. The freedom of your Ifettle barque to move this way or that, indifferently, while it renders the gaining of almost any desir­ able harbor possible, makes destruction probable unless intel? ligently guided. The mechanic, the architect, the farmer, the merchant, or. the general, was not born? such. Who does not know fhat each must study till he acquire a knowledge to guide the ae-« tions pertaining to what he undertakes ? In every trade, each man’s work corresponds with the knowledge he^possesses pertaining to his business. The art of healing is no exception to this universal rule^ that knowledge is the only guide of voluntary action to useful ends. Physic has no discretionary power; our pills, and powders, and drops, would ^bout as leave kill a^cure. A sharp razor is good to shave with, but it would not hesitate toi ^ut your .throat if so directed by the hand of an assassin’. The only place for discretion and judge­ ment is in the administration; the physician is voluntary, and if he have not knowledge and caution to correspond, his very freedom makes it a sad thing to fall into his hands. I say# kriowledge and caution to correspond—caution to restrain wherfe knowledge fails to guide. He who knows most, most knows his ignorance, and he who knows his ignorance is mosifcautious. Only those whose minds are most cultivated, realize that they have gathered but ai few pebbles upon the shore of knowledge, while, the great ocean of unexplored truth is spread before them; but the school-boy who can read and write, and perhaps cypher as far as the rule of three, imagines himself almost a little god. (t Devils venture where angels feafito tread.” The reckless madman might perchance cross theniwaon floating icesafely, hy$.uinping from cake to cake-; so the heartless1* qua'ck might produce a wonderful cure by chance or accident; this is heralded to the world, and many good citizens intrust their lives in the hands of him whose recklessness^ engendered in ignorance, is the only claim to their confidences. Though these same persons could not be led by the madman on cakes o|#fioating ice, for they know if they sink the penalty of violated law must be paid ; thus far �Valedictory Address. 5 they see that theTaws of nature are inexorable. Men in the various pursuits of life may be well acquainted with the con­ ditions to be fulfilled and the indications of action in their 'respective vocations,—they may be well acquainted with his­ tory and general literature, and yet take little thought of the organization of their own bodies—the functions the different organs have to perform in the general phenomena of life. They know that if ffipii’ watch does not keep time, there is some physical derangement, yet they have-not so clear a conception'ithart the same is true Of the human organism; that wvery molecular change, eve® vital phenomenon in'health or in disease,*is determined by physical conditions in accordance 'with law as mexorable. They have only an indistinct idea, insufficient/for all practical purposes, that disease depends upon deranged physical conations quite as much-as do the irregular actions of their timepiece. Actions, show how in­ operative this truth is in tfe popular wind. While none ^would attempt to adjust their watch \^h?en out of order, unless they knew something of iW naechaniBSiW apd conditions of ac­ tion, lest they might d® mW® harm, than good, man^, as ig* # ■uprant of anatomy and physiology, would not hesitate to .give iphysic to their sick child. Yet wefdo not doubt their child is quite as nea| their hear® a||theiir wateh-'is, though it were set with never so many precious dramoirfs. They do not stop to reflect that the truth ^appMcablS to the wrnan or-* ganism and to the laws ofwganie life,* thrat whatever drug is capable of doing any thing is^Capable of doing harm, and requires knowledge to guid^in the administration. May the time soon arrive when anatomy and physiology will constitude part of a ♦liberal education, quite as essential as^Geography, Grammar, Latin, Greek,’of Astronomy'!- This knowledge alone can give a clear conception of #he fixed daws of organic action, and remove that superstition still lingering,in every commqnity which in forftrer -times wa^ the basis of beliefLhi witchc^ift and sorcery. WWt"y¥tem of quackery is too ab­ surd to find belie vers in the popular mind 1 Ignorance and su­ perstition have always been correlative- In’ihe darkness of midnight, tombstbnfe and cobwebs become ghosts and hob­ goblins ; but the light day dispels tfie illusion. As nurses amuse children with fairy tales, and frighten them with ghost �Valedictory* Address. stories, s©' quackery has its influence through the credulity ®f ignorance. Who would not Laugh for instance, if, when a steam­ boat suddenly strikes a bar and is aground, the passengers,, who know little of the machinery, structure or management of the boat, o>r of the character of the particular difficulty, should volunteer their advice and suggestions ? I think I hear one remark,—perhaps a lady I was on a boat once before when she ran aground just as this did, they then did so and so ; now if they would only follow my suggestions and do the same thing, we would soon get her off. Another says : I have been in Mexico, South* America,, and in th® mountains among the Indians of the rudest tribes, and from these I learned the best method of getting steam-boats off of bars. Another says I know nothing of how it is done more tharf you, but I^have'the magic power by certain passes and motions of relieving steam­ boats from every difficulty to which they are subject. Another says: 1 have a principle applicable to all cases | just let them put on steam enough, and I will insure motion. And I can imagine one even presumptuous enough to say r The old cap­ tain and officers, whose actions are guided by the particular indications derived from a knowledge of the condition of lhingsb5present, are all wrong; the true guide is not this knowledge, but “ similia similibus curantur —now if you can only find out what is capable of producing a state of things like the present, and will use that in infinitesimally small doses, the difficulty will be removed like magic.—Farces in­ definitely more ridiculous than this, though awfully serious to those upon whom they are played, are aeted every day in our midst as a conseqa^pce of that superstition which only a more general knowledge of God’s organic laws for the preservation of health and removal of disease, can dispel. If your house is on fire, in th® name of Heaven throw on water ; God’s im­ mutable laws are not to be trifled with by man. As intelli­ gent beings, we may take advantage of these laws for the ac­ complishment of our objects; but never can we set them at defiance in the living organism more than in inorganic nature,. Flee th® burning wreck, or you will be consumed in the flames—if your knowledge of the laws of Nature direct not your action, the fire ■will care little whether you be a human being or a lifeless door-post; the burning body will be but �Valedictory Address. 7 fuel for the flame, to augment the heat. Preachers, lawyers, congressmen^ merchants, ana ladies too, are seen flocking to the office @f a man who pretends to cuVp all manneref dis­ ease by passes and charms. Now, it is so clear a proposition as to need only the statement to be received, that if any man can jjius change the organic actions under abnormal condi­ tions to a state of health, he cad by the same power change them from a state of health to diseases This is an awfully solemn vie v of the subject. Do you not see here partially slumbering in our most influential citizens, that same element of supej^jtition which a little while ago manifested itself in the buftnipg pitches on the commons of Boston? It is this ele* mefiut of superstition which gives foothold to quackery in all its various forms,—^it is this that neutralizes the force of the truth that man can relieve suffering and cure disease only by taking advantage of inexorable laws, and that without a knowledge of these laws he is worse than powerless. This source of error will remain till the young shall be instructed in the laws of organic action, which one would think quite as important as ancient mythology, or the languages and actions of the Greeks and Bomans ; and quite as wise gten for a na­ tion to take an interest in, as the exploration of the, regions about the north pole or even tfie gold mines of California But if knowledge is the only guide to Voluntary action, and if whatever is done withou^jthis guide is harm except by acci­ dent, the wisest of our profession should be diffident and mod­ est because even of their limited insight into the lawrs of na­ ture. But if the most learned in these laws have reason to be diffident, what is to be said of that oftplady, who, moved by her natural impulses and kindness of|heart, is ever going about among the sick, and, Instead bi^doing what good she might according to hei&capacities, becomes a self-conktituted doctor, unless indeed the attendant happen to be her own family physician to whom she modestly defers. I leave this question with you; I add no epithets—I know none sufficiently expressive. This lady is probably president of a society for the amelioration of the conation of the South Sea islanders, or Esquimaux Indian^lwhile her children are left without in­ struction in those principles and motives which alone can se­ cure their happiness in after life. And who would wonder if �.8 Valedictory Address. her eldest son, moved too by ms natural impulses, but ndt kindness of heart, should undertake the cure of disease for a business fl unwilling to devote that time to close study necessary for the legitimate business, he would likely deny .the ac­ cumulated lore of our profession and build for himself a brazen calf, that the people who love new things and seek after strange gods, might worship. It is not an easy thing to start an entering wedge; it will frequently rebound. The Esqui­ maux Indian or the South Sea Islander is little conscious of possibility of improvement, and he will repel the missionary; so if you talk to the people of the ne^ssity of a knowledge of the medical sciences, and remark upon the imposition of the quack, many will turn and rend you; and our profession, always open to improvement, and, as history attests, ever the cradle in which every infant science has been rocked with the hope better to relieve suffering, is even accused of jealousy. You cannot remove the effect while ignorance exists; if your acquaintance employ an empty pretender, you had as well leave him be: “ Ephraim is joined to his idols, let him alone.” Even the cobbler is not a cobbler by inspiration : “ A man must serve his time to every trade,” Save Physic—doctors, some are ready-made. True worth is always modest and unostentatious. It is the boy who has never yet left his father’s domicil that imagines he occupies the flejhtre of creation, and that his particular horizon is the boundary of the universe. As one ascends the hill of science, his field of vision enlarges, and as peak after peak is attained, each gives a higher point of view from which others appear still rising in the distance yet unexplored. Each successive peak affords a view more and more enchant­ ing ; the desire to know increases with knowledge. The hu­ man mind is capable of indefinite expansion, and the field of science, though bounded on either side, is infinite. The wise often hesitate, but ignorance is presumptuous and never at a loss. Men there are who even offer plans for the creation of worlds, and not a few would suggest improvements in the present order of things. Ignorance alone prompts man to “play such fantastic tricks before high heaven.” Man, whose capacities have as yet scarcely e’nabled him to obtain a glimpse of the intimacies with which things are effected in this world, �Valedictory Address. 9 found created ready for him, to whose laws he»j a creature, owes his being, would assume all knowledge; and, closmg his eWs, he mistakes the dreamings and phantasms of his sleeping faculties for reality. The human mind isylimited upon either side by narrow confines; but these are parallel, making the province of knowledge infinite in the legitimate direction. As thought precedes action, and knowledge suc­ cessful action, human power is likewise limited : “ Remove yon skull from out the scatter’d heaps : Is that a temple where a God may dwell ? Why ev’n the worm at last disdains her shatter’d cell 1” “Look on its broken arch, its ruin’d wall, Its chambers desolate, and portals foul: Yes, this was once Ambition’s Bjfiih all, The dome of Thought, the palaes of the Soul; Behold, through each lack-lustre, eyeless hole, The gay recess of Wisdom and of WiL And Passion’s host, that neveribrook^control : Can allsaint, sage, or sophist, ever writ, People this lonely tower^this tenement refit?” , ■'<’ - Though man has not all powerjhe is not therefore impo­ tent; though he has not all knowledge, he is not on that ac­ count imbecile. True, he cannot make one grain of corn, but he can plant it and water it; he cannot tell why oxygen unites chemically with carbon with the phenomena of heat, but he knows the fact, and can dig the coal from its bed and have a comfortable fire of a cold day. Though he have not ten talents, he can legitimately use and cultivate the five that he has. Man’s sphere of action is definite, and fortunate is he who attempts not to crops the boundary, but keeps himself within his province:. Are the boundaries to the human mind and to human power apparent when you consider this tenantless skull? The same boundaries extend through every thing in nature/ The watch-maker can not create one atom of iron, nor yet can he tell why the steel spring recoils; his sphere of action is merely to determine such conditions by his knowledge of the fews of Nature so far as*they pertain to his business, that thesemnmutable laws shall work out his designs under the physical conditions determined by him for this special purpose. Nei^ier Fulton nor Watt could pro­ duce steam by any effort of thefr minds, nor could they tell why water is expansible by heat; but they cpuld determine �10 Valedictory Address. the conditions under which steam would be produced accord­ ing to the eternal laws of God. Then they could adjust .cylin­ ders, pistons, valves, &c., so as through such physical condi­ tions to avail themselves of these laws for the action of a powerful engine. Morse could not explain why the union of the poles occasions chemical action in the battery with electric phenomena, but he can so determine the conditions as to avail himself of these laws even for the communication of thought. To what subject soever you may turn your attention, you find the same limits to man’s sphere of action; his power stops with the adoption of physical conditions by which he may take advantage of unvarying laws for the accomplishing of his ends. Would he cure disease? Here too his sphere is defi­ nite and likewise limited to modifying physical conditions. Are knowledge and a cultivated mind necessary for the adop­ tion of the conditions of a telegraph, steam-engine or watch, and yet not necessary for the adoption of conditions for the cure of disease? Does the very difficulty of the problems in medicine, and the amount of time and study necessary to im­ prove the mind sufficiently to solve them, obviate the neces­ sity, and enable men to adopt means to cure disease without science and cultivated minds? What absurdities are often believed ! If you throw boiling water upon the skin, the des­ quamation and subsequent inflammation are determined by the existing conditions; the physician may modify the condi­ tions, and tljus, through the organic laws, promote recovery. This is his legitimate business—here his usefulness stops. As the blister is occasioned by the application of boiling water, so every disease depends upon some change in the conditions of life. The art of healing is the art of promoting the return of normal conditions. While the efficacy of remedies is thus restricted, within these limits the physician may do much for the prevention of disease and the restoration of health. The human organism is so wonderfully devised, that it is able to preserve normal conditions under great external vicissitudes; and even more wonderful is its natural capacity to remove disorders and restore the healthy equilibrium, if only supplied with pure air, cold water, and wholesome food. Hence the conclusion is clear, that the condition of a patient is far better in the hands of a good nurse, who attends to the ventilation �Valedictory Address. 11 and diet, and who keeps the tongue moistened with cold wa­ ter, and soothes the troubled mind with her sympathies, than under the charge of a thoughtless and uncautious M.D. And the truth is the same if the good nurse should have a nominal appendage in the shape of an infinitesimal doctor, if he would only stick to his third triturations in the administration of his pills and powders. But good maybe effected not only by the regulation of the air, water and diet, but by the use of means more directly to change the internal conditions and to modify the actions of organs. The physician cannot produce a single organic action, but, as in inorganic nature, he may modify conditions and thus promote recovery. The physician, there­ fore, is prepared for the duties of his profession upon precisely the same principles as men are prepared for any business whatever. There is no royal road to knowledge, and the mysteries of organic phenomena do not furnish the physician a short cut to wisdom or judicious action. But there are many short cuts to wealth ; a man may even steal it, or mur­ der for it, or, which is the same thing, he may tamper with human life under the pretext of relieving suffering, for it. Men there are who have even assumed the cloak of religion for gain, and shall we deny that there are men even in high places in our profession who resort to little things for per­ sonal favor, which would be a disgrace to a professed quack ? “The laborer is worthy of his hire,” but for hire an honorable man will never resort to any species of deception. If he be starving, he may take what will satisfy hunger, but he will do it openly, manly, and above-board. The laws of life, including health and disease, are as con­ stant and invariable as the laws of inorganic matter. There is no such thing as chance or accident in all the operations of nature. And nowhere throughout the domain of natural his­ tory do we with more wonder and admiration , witness the supremacy of law, than in the phenomena of organized beings. As health is preserved, and disease cured, only by taking ad­ vantage of these laws, it is more important, that the physician should be a scientific interpreter of phenomena, a deep thinker, a philosopher, than any other professional character whose duties are connected with our temporal relations. First, on account of the multiplicity of difficulties which present them­ �12 "Valedictory Address, selves, the number of circumstances and phenomena to be taken into consideration in the solution of every problem ; Second, because of the value of that which is at stake—nothing less than the lives of our fellow-men; Third, on account of the fact that any mistake is irretrievable. The mathematician may discover his mistake and correct his error—the planets move on their regular course in spite of it; the wayfaring man may mistake his road, but he can retrace his steps, but the physician’s mistake is irremediable;— " If I quench thee, thou flaming minister, I can again thy former light restore, Should I repent me :—but once put out thine, Thou cunning’st pattern of excelling nature, I know not where is that Promethean heat, That can thy light relume. When I pluck thy rose, I cannot give it vital growth again; It needs must wither.” .■' The land surveyor may be qualified for his business by a mere mechanical knowledge of some of the principal rules which he has committed to memory and made familiar by practicing a few examples, though entirely ignorant of the great principles from which the formulas have been deduced through which he arrives at the contents of land. But the art of healing is not to be hemmed in by any such rules or dogmas; the scientific physician cannot have his mind thus shackled by the iron fetters of mere routine. He must be ac­ quainted with the foundation principles, from which he may for himself deduce rules and formulas applicable to every par­ ticular case. Every case which may be presented to you in your practice will be an independent problem, needing a spe­ cial formula for its solution. As one face differs from another in form and expression, so diseases differ though called by the same name; hence the necessity of scientific knowledge and a well trained mind to determine appropriate remedies. It is a peculiarity of all the various schisms that they substitute some system as their guide, for this scientific knowledge and cultivation of mind. Men propose to cure disease by Turn­ bull’s system, by Thompson’s system, or by Hahnemann’s sys­ tem. The Yankees can put a block of wood into a machine and it will come out nutmegs; then we have sewing machines; �Valedictory Address. 13 and machine poetry too ; but who would knowingly entrust his life in the hands of a machine doctor? The nutmegs look well superficially ; but when you attempt to use them, your pudding is covered with sawdust. True, the land surveyor need not go further back than his formulas and tables of lati­ tude and departure; but the good physician must be as the mathematician who devises formulas and makes tables. Blackstone says, wisely, and with his usual conciseness, that the greatness of a man does not consist in the number of his ideas, but in the relation of those he has. In these few words we have the essence of the distinction between erudition and knowledge—between mere information and the cultivation of mind which alone can render that information available for practical purposes. There is perhaps no word in our language more misunderstood than the term Practical. Look around you among your acquaintance in the ordinary pursuits of life, and who is the practical man ? who is he that adopts the best and most judicious means to accomplish his objects, and whose judgment is desired in matters of opinion ? It is not the man of erudition necessarily, but necessarily the man of strong common sense; it is the man whose knowlege becomes fore­ knowledge through the relation of the ideas that he has. Hence this faculty of the mind needs especial cultivation for the judicious application of remedies for the cure of disease. All great men are necessarily self-made men, because this faculty upon which their greatness depends can be strength­ ened only by exercise in individual thought and in the habit of associating ideas so that the data in hand will spontane­ ously suggest ideas to direct. But the man of great erudi­ tion is necessarily a fool, if, in the acquisition of his informa­ tion, he suffer this faculty to run to waste and die out for want of exercise. The boy who is forced to provide the ways and means is bound to think ; but the school boy is bound to com­ mit to memory the thoughts and systems and formulas of others; and for this he is rewarded, and for this praised as smart. This one may become perfectly saturated with erudi­ tion, so that if he only open his mouth learning will flow in a constant stream, but in action and in judgment he will be out­ stripped by others of far less lore, but who have not neglected iklv :« �14 Valedictory Address. to improve that faculty by which knowledge is made available. No man can by any effort of his will call up ideas and thoughts, but to render information available the mind must be so trained, that the data in hand will spontaneously suggest thoughts and ideas through the laws of association, that our knowledge may be luminously spread out before the mind to guide ac­ tion. Whatever therefore will train the mind to close thought, and cultivate the habit of associating the ideas we have so as to bear upon a given subject, is eminently practical. This alone renders knowledge available; and a young man whose mind is thus trained will gain more practical experience from one patient closely observed, than would another, of mere eru­ dition, from a thousand. There have been two great schools of philosophy—the Idealists and the Sensationalists; the one referring all our knowledge to the senses, the other to the mind through innate ideas. In science there have been two great epochs, the spi­ rits of which partially represent these two schools. Prior to the time of Bacon, science was mainly pursued subjectively. The laws of nature were sought through workings of the human mind, and science necessarily consisted in conceptions of what might be rather than what is ; of what is plausible rather than what is truth ; of what is conceivable rather than what is actual. This is but an attempt on the part of finite man to substitute his inventive genius for the wisdom of the great Author of nature. It is apparent that we have not faculties to arrive at the knowledge of the laws of nature by such speculations. The order of things as presented in nature as a whole, is only one of many conceivable ; hence any attempt to arrive at a knowledge of what is, from purely a priori con­ siderations, must prove abortive. It is a comparatively easy thing to comprehend, for instance, the principles and mechan­ ism of a steam engine now, if we study the machine itself; but with all our skill and ingenuity this was not invented till the middle of the eighteenth century. If such a machine as this remained uninvented till so recent a period, how utterly futile must any attempt to arrive at the principles and laws of the machinery of nature prove, other than that based upon the facts and phenomena as presented in her works 1 Since the �Valedictory Address. 15 time of Bacon, however, the votaries to science have been becoming more and more exclusively practical sensationalists. Thus, men, like tides, pass from one extreme to another. The results of the old method proving its futility, the spirit of the last epoch has been to substitute the results of mere experi­ ment for science—to place empiricism above philosophy; as if science consisted in the mere collection and classification of the results of observation and experiment! Hence the pre­ sent is little less speculative and visionary than the former period. The collection and classification of facts are the neces­ sary means, but not the ultimatum of science. Facts are the raw material of which the temple of science is to be con­ structed; they are the rough marble just from the quarry, needing the chisel of the sculptor before it can have expres­ sive form; they are as the letters of the alphabet—but signs of ideas. The microscope and crucible have their uses, but can never substitute thought; the acorn is a condition, but it is not the noble oak of the forest. Before, they had thought without facts; now, relatively, we have facts without thought. But the arch of knowledge and science can be supported only by both conjointly. He alone is a practical man who thus joins the two. The strength of the arch depends upon the pillars that sustain it; but no arch whatever can be sustained by one pillar, how strong soever it may be. Give the facts of the present day to a Plato or Aristotle, and we can form no idea of what science would then become. The fall of an ap­ ple, the steam gushing from a tea-kettle, the jerking of a frog’s leg, are insignificant phenomena to the common mind; but to the cultivated nothing is trivial,—the commonest phe­ nomena suggest great principles which they but illustrate. How defective therefore is that education where the Memory is cultivated at the expense of the more important faculties of the Mind; where systems, rules, and formulas, are crammed in, rather than the mind led out and expanded in independent thought, reason and power. Is it not the great tendency of this age of young America, called practical, to anticipate the acquisition of useful knowledge by a short process; to lay aside individuality as a useless incumbrance and to substitute rules for thought? Young men thus educated are necessarily �16 Valedictory Jlddress. most conceited and ridiculously presumptuous, because they measure all things by the systems they have committed to memory, and have mistaken for knowledge, because taught by their oracles: but the man of thought feels how little is known, and while he thinks, he is equally -willing to let think, know­ ing that the pill that he gives will act according to the unva­ rying laws of nature without much regard to the systems of men. Gentlemen, iataking leave of you, I would remark, be not overawed by great names; preserve sacred your individuality, and let truth and the laws of God be honored rather than the dogmas of men; leave arrogance to the weak and narrow­ minded, and suppose not that dogmas and rules preclude the necessity of individual thought. Only those who mistake dogmasjor knowledge are arrogant. During the early period of your professional life devote your leisure time to study and thought, and thus lay up treasures from which you may after­ wards draw without exhausting, instead of giving yourselves up to those frivolous pursuits to which too many do, as if they sprang from the schools ready equipped as Pallas from the brain o^ Jupiter. Such a course will enable you to rise toi a position you could never otherwise attain whatever may be your natural geniuses. You will prize it more—it will ren­ der you more real happiness in after-life than the money you would make in the same time were you immediately to get into a large practice. Think not to arrive at great and use­ ful ends except by the route the laws of mind direct; there is no short process—and he who attempts one must fail;— “ What shaped thou here at the world ? Tis shapen long ago ; Tby Maker shaped it, and thought it were best even so. Thy lot is appointed, go £ llow its host; Thy journey’s begun, thou must move and not rest; For sorrow and care can not alter thy case, And running, not raging, will win thee the race." � 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 &amp; 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 Knowledge the only guide to action: an address to the graduates of the St. Louis Medical College: delivered February 28th 1857 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Watters, J. H. Description An account of the resource Place of publication: St Louis Collation: 16 p. ; 23 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. From the St. Louis Medical and Surgical Journal (May, 1857). Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available [s.n.] Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [1857] Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5364 Subject The topic of the resource Medicine 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 (Knowledge the only guide to action: an address to the graduates of the St. Louis Medical College: delivered February 28th 1857), 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 Knowledge Medicine Press https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/831d8f0dd36fe757a195fb6e8214b232.pdf?Expires=1777507200&Signature=aubDDZ7FObI%7Eo0ym3jbjWZShWNi0gSKAXXUEqROZsMUCKuoTEc5RtZXpbhI%7E5ZfQcusp6yFeFSyv3undZSmvlUKBYxWBdCFnIcmVtMkPsGzH7BWPWWIo53pscAfPvIX%7Erp%7EAJ4rHk-3iM-a3J5rh6t5tyo%7E5uwFqOcHIJ-LaqJwkwyceaGBg7L9F4gRA4MhwkxgVLp0OemDHFDo7cVt%7EN8rBaikvut6SRazrO0Bmxt-K9e7Gb5ypuHbANSp-qtqEndev9UA%7EUROKYTIWLxK9eINFlTeuLO4TObyBnFdw0umnvzbGYRNI5wIHr-HVOMUd6mEs3svsv3kmAc%7Eb3bC0Ow__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 67cca9f0b488cd5c3c9fecffb44162db PDF Text Text 3<?o AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS. [Apr. AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS. BY GEORGE CHAWORTH MUSTERS. II. HE hills on the northern side of the fixed to form a temporary toldo—sing­ valley of Chico women joined with the Tand rugged,the Rio abruptlyare bare ing, whilst theincantations andinhowlings. rising out of irregmost dismal ­ ular forms, while the southern heights are lower, and present more of the steep declivities known as barrancas, inter­ rupted at intervals by high, rugged hills of basalt, often assuming the appearance of ruined castles, closing in at the bends of the winding river. To one of these— a remarkable hill under which we were encamped on August 23, about one hun­ dred and twenty miles from Santa Cruz— I gave the name of Sierra Ventana, from a window-like opening through its peak : the Indians called it Mowaish. In many places the bases of these hills are form­ ed entirely of a description of lava; and one of the Chilians informed me that whilst passing over a ridge he had ob­ served several large masses of pure iron: this, however, I was inclined to disbe­ lieve, as, although farther up the coun­ try iron-ore exists in large quantities, I only observed in this part a species of ore similar to that common at Drobak in Norway. During the expedition up the Rio Chico I had an opportunity of witnessing the ceremonies with which the attainment of the age of puberty of one of the girls was celebrated according to custom. Early in the morning the father of the child informed the cacique of the event: the cacique thereupon officially commu­ nicated the intelligence to the acting doctor or medicine-man, and a consider­ able shouting was set up, while the doc­ tor adorned himself with white paint and was bled in the forehead and arms with a sharp bodkin. The women immedi­ ately set to work to sew a number of mandils together. When the patchwork was finished, it was taken with pomp and ceremony by a band of young men, who marched round the poles—already After marching round several times, the covering was drawn over the poles, and lances were stuck in front adorned with bells, streamers and brass plates that shook and rattled in the breeze, the whole thing when erected presenting a very gay appearance (its Indian name literally meaning “The pretty house ”). The girl was then placed in an inner part of the tent, where nobody was ad­ mitted. After this everybody mounted, and some were selected to bring up the horses, out of which certain mares and fillies were chosen and brought up in front of the showy toldo, where they were knocked on the head by a ball, thus saving the blood (which was se­ cured in pots) to be cooked, being con­ sidered a great delicacy. It is a rule amongst the Indians that any one assist­ ing to take off the hide of a slaughtered mare is entitled to a piece of meat, but the flesh was on this occasion distributed pretty equally all round. Whilst the meat was cooking, Casimiro, w7ho was ruler of the feast, sent a message for me to come to Crime’s toldo, where I found him busy working at a saddle, in the construction of which he was, by the way, an adept. His wife had a large iron pot bubbling on the fire, containing some of the blood mixed with grease. When the mess was nearly cooked, we added a little pepper and salt and com­ menced the feast. Previous to this I had felt a sort of repugnance to eating horse, as perhaps most Englishmen— except, indeed, the professed hippophagists—have ; but hunger overcame all scruples, and I soon acquired quite a taste for this meat. Casimiro informed me, after the meal was concluded, that there would be a dance in the evening. �■Sfa.] AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS. 391 I looked forward with great anticipation I saw some of the women proceed to colto this “small and early,1' and. shortly I lect a considerable quantity of firewood, which was placed outside the tent. Pres- ! outside the sacred precincts. The wo* ently, toward dusk, a fire was made, first ! men all sat down on the grass round �392 AT HOME WITH THE I’A TA GO MIA'VS. [Apr. about, but at some distance from the I except four and the musicians. The ormen, who were all seated on the grass, | chestra consisted of a drum made by Stretching' a piece of hide over a bowl, I of the thigh-bone of a guanaco, with also a sort of wind iastruniettt formed holes bored in it. which is placed to the �1873.] AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS. mouth and played, or with a short bow having a horsehair string. When all was ready, some of the old hags all the time singing in their melodious way, the band struck up, and four Indians, muf­ fled up in blankets so that their eyes Only were visible, and their heads adorn­ ed with ostrich plumes, marched into the ring and commenced pacing slowly round the fire, keeping time to the music. After two or three promenades the time gradually quickened until they went at a sort of trot; and about the fifth round, dancing fast to the music, they threw away their mantles, and ex­ hibited themselves adorned with white paint daubed all over their bodies, and each having a girdle of bells extending from the shoulder to the hip, which jingled in tune to their steps. The first four consisted of the chiefs Casimiro, Orkeke, Crime and Camillo, who, after dancing with great action (just avoiding stepping into the fire), and bowing their plumed heads grotesquely on either side to the beats of the drum, retired for a short time to rest themselves, after which they appeared again and danced a dif­ ferent step. When that was over, four more appeared, and so on until every one, including the boys, had had a fling. Sometimes, to give greater effect, the performers carried a bunch of rushes in one hand. About 9 P. M., everybody having had enough, Casimiro gave the sign. The band stopped playing, and all retired to bed. The dancing was not ungraceful, but was rendered grotesque by the absurd motions of the head. It was strictly confined to the men, the women being only allowed to look on. At the beginning of November we fell in with a party of northern Indians, under a chief named Hinchel, on which occasion the ceremonial of welcome was duly observed. Both parties, fully arm­ ed, dressed in their best and mounted on their best horses, formed into opposite lines. The northern Indians presented the gayest appearance, displaying flan­ nel shirts, ponchos and a great show of silver spurs and ornamental bridles. The chiefs then rode up and down, dress­ ing the ranks and haranguing their men, 393 who kept up a continual shouting of “Wap, Wap, Wap.” I fell in as a full private, though Casimiro had vainly endeavored to induce me to act as “ Cap­ itanejo” or officer of a party. The Bue­ nos Ayrean colors were proudly display­ ed on our side, while the Northerns car­ ried a white weft, their ranks presenting a much better drilled aspect than our ill-disciplined forces. Messengers or hostages were then exchanged, each side deputing a son or brother of the chief for that purpose ; and the new-comers advanced, formed into columns of threes and rode round our ranks, firing their guns and revolvers, shouting and brand­ ishing their swords and bolas. After galloping round at full speed two or three times, they opened ranks and charged out as if attacking an enemy, shouting “Koue” at every blow or thrust. The object of attack was supposed to be the “ Gualichu ” or demon, and certainly the Demon of Discord had need to be ex­ orcised. Hinchel’s party then halted and reformed their line, while we, in our turn, executed the same manœuvres. Afterward the caciques advanced and formally shook hands, making, each in turn, long and complimentary speeches. This was repeated several times, the etiquette being to answer only “ Ahon ” or Yes until the third repetition, when all begin to talk, and formality is gradu­ ally laid aside. It was rather a surprise to find etiquette so rigorously insisted on, but these so-called savages are as punctilious in observing the proper forms as if they were Spanish courtiers. Guanaco-hunting having proved a fail­ ure, Orkeke, to my great delight, pro­ posed a visit to the wild-cattle country. The camp was accordingly struck, and following more or less the valley of the river, which flowed after one turn nearly due east, we shortly came out into an open plain running up between the mountains, at the head of which we en­ camped by some tall beeches on the bank of the stream. The whole of the latter part of the plain traversed was literally carpeted with strawberry plants all in blossom, the soil being of a dark, peaty nature. Young ostriches were now �394 AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS. (Apr. numerous, and in every hunt some were I tion to our dinner. The children had captured and formed a welcome addi- | several alive as pets, which they used to" let loose and then catch with miniature j Our programme was to leave all the wobolas, generally ending in killing them. I men, toldos and other encumbrances in �1872.] AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS. this spot, named “Weekel,” or Chaykash—a regular station which Hinchel’s party had occupied a few weeks previ­ ously—and proceed into the interior in search of cattle. The following morn­ ing at daylight horses were caught and Saddled, and, after receiving the good wishes of the women, who adjured us to bring back plenty of fat beef, we started off just as the sun was rising be­ hind the hills to the eastward. The air was most invigorating, and we trotted along for some distance up a slightly irregular and sandy slope, halting after an hour or two by the side of a deli­ ciously clear brook flowing east, where we smoked. We had previously passed guanaco and ostrich, but no notice was taken of them, the Indians having larger game in view. After passing this brook, the head-water of the river near which we had left the toldos, we skirted a large basin-like plain of beautiful green pas­ ture, and after galloping for some time entered the forest, traveling along a path which only permitted us to proceed in Indian file. The trees were in many places dead—not blackened by fire, but standing up like ghostly bleached and bare skeletons. It is a remarkable fact that all the forests on the eastern side are skirted by a belt of dead trees. At length, however, just as we came in sight of a curiously-pointed rock which in the distance resembled the spire of a church, we entered the forest of live trees: the undergrowth was composed of currant, bay and other bushes, whilst here and there were beds of yellow violets, and the inevitable strawberry plants every­ where. After crossing a stream which, flowing from the north, afterward took a westerly course, thus proving that we had passed the watershed, we proceeded, under cover of a huge rock, to recon­ noitre the hunting-ground. The scenery was beautiful: a valley, about a mile wide, stretched directly under us; on the southern verge a silver line marked the easterly river, and another on the northern the one debouching in the Pa­ cific ; whilst above, on both sides, rose high mountains covered with vegetation and almost impenetrable forests. On 395 the western side of the valley a solitary bull was leisurely taking his breakfast, and above our lookout rock a huge con­ dor lazily flapped his wings. These were the only specimens of animal life in view. Pursuing our way in perfect silence, as from the first entrance into the forests speaking had been prohibited, we fol­ lowed the leader along the narrow cattle­ path, passing here and there the remains of a dead bull or cow that had met its fate by the Indians’ lasso, and at length descended to the plain. It was about mid-day and the day was warm, so we halted, changed horses, looked to our girths, got lassos ready for use, and then started on. As we were proceeding we observed two or three animals amongst the woods on the opposite side, but, knowing that it would be useless to fol­ low, pursued our course up the valley. Having crossed the western stream, we at once entered a thicket where the path was scarcely distinguishable from the cover, but our leader never faltered, and led the way through open glades alter­ nating with thick woods, on every side of which were cattle-marks—many being holes stamped out by the bulls—or wallowing-places. The glades soon termi­ nated in forests, which seemed to stretch unbroken on either side. We had ex­ pected before reaching this point to find cattle in considerable numbers, but the warmth of the day had probably driven them into the thickets to seek shelter. We now commenced to ascend over a dangerous path, encumbered here and there with loose boulders and entangled in dense thickets, whilst we could hear and catch occasional glimpses of the river foaming down a ravine on our left; and presently arrived at the top of a ridge where the forests became more uniformly dense, and we could with great difficulty pursue our way. It was a mystery to me how Orkeke, who acted as guide, knew where we were, as on one occasion the slightly-marked paths diverged in different directions, and on another we literally found ourselves amongst fallen trees in a forest so dense that the light of day scarcely penetrated its shades. Our leader, however, never �396 AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS. hesitated, but led us onward in all con­ fidence. Whilst brushing along, if I may be allowed the term, trying to keep the leader in sight, I heard something tapping on a tree, and, looking up, saw close above me a most beautifully-fea­ thered red-crested woodpecker. We at length commenced to descend, and, after passing many channels of rivulets issu­ ing from springs, where a slip of the horse’s foot on the wet and mossy stones would have occasioned something worse than broken bones, as they were situated on the edge of a deep ravine, finally emerged from the woods, and found our­ selves on a hill of some three hundred feet in height, whence we looked down On a broad plain in the form of a triangle, bounded by the river flowing through the ravine on the north side, and on the southern by another coming from the south, which two streams united in one large river at the western apex, at a dis­ tance of about perhaps a league. Above and around, on all sides excepting to the west and the ravines through which the rivers flowed, rose the unbroken wall of the lofty mountains of the Cordillera, many of their peaks snow-clad. No sound was to be heard except the rush­ ing of the river in the ravine, and no animal life to be seen except a condor or two floating high above us in the clear sky. The scene was sublime, and I view­ ed it in silence for some minutes, till the pipe, being handed to me, dispelled all nascent poetic tendencies. The Indians remained silent and looked disgusted, as a herd of cattle had been expected to be viewed on the plain below. We descend­ ed to the flats and crossed the river, on the banks of which “Paja” or pampa­ grass grew in abundance, as well as the bamboo-like canes from which Araucanian Indians make their lance shafts, and a plant called by the Chilians “Talka,” the stalk of which, resembling rhubarb, is refreshing and juicy. On the northern edges and slope of the ra­ vine behind us towered graceful pines sixty feet high, which, though an im­ passable barrier of rock prevented close inspection, appeared to be a species of Araucaria: the bark was imbricated, [Apr. and the stems rose bare of branches for two-thirds of their height, like those fig­ ured by M. Gay. Many had been car­ ried down by landslips, and lay tossed and entangled on the sides of the ra­ vine. The increase of temperature after passing the watershed was sensibly great, amounting to from seven to ten degrees, and the vegetation far more luxuriant, the plants presenting many new forms unknown at the eastern side. After leaving the plain and crossing the shal­ low stream, we left our mantles, and girthed up near a tree in a thicket fes­ tooned with a beautiful creeper, having a bell-shaped flower of violet radiated with brown. The variety of flowers made an Eden of this lovely spot: climbing clusters of sweet-peas, vetches, rich golden flowers resembling gorgeous marigolds, and many another blossom, filled the air with perfume and delighted the eye with their beauty. Proceeding still westward, we entered a valley with alternate clumps of trees and green pas­ tures, and after riding about a mile I espied from a ridge on one side of the valley two bulls on the other side, just clear of the thick woods bordering the ascent of the mountains. The word was passed in whispers to the cacique, and, a halt being called under cover of some bushes, a plan of attack was ar­ ranged in the following manner : Two men were sent round to endeavor to drive the animals to a clearing where it would be possible to use the lasso, the remainder of the party proceeding down toward the open ground with lassos, ready to chase if the bulls should come that way. For a few minutes we re­ mained stationary, picking the straw­ berries, which in this spot were ripe, although the plants previously met with were only in flower. At the end of five minutes spent in anxiously hoping that our plan would prove successful, a yell from the other side put us on the alert, and we had the gratification to see one of the animals coming straight toward our cover. Alas! just as we were pre­ paring to dash out he turned on the edge of the plain, and after charging furious­ ly at his pursuer, dashed into a thicket, �AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS. 397 where he stood at bay. We immediately ever, to our surprise, issued safe from closed round him, and, dismounting, I the bush, where he had lain quiet and advanced on foot to try and bring him unhurt, though the horse was killed. down with the revolver: just as I had got within half a dozen paces of him, The first question asked about the and behind a bush was quietly taking Patagonians by curious English friends aim at his shoulder, the Indians, eager has invariably had reference to their for beef, and safe on their horses at traditionary stature : Are they giants or a considerable distance off, shouted, not? Whether the ancestors of the Te“Nearer! nearer!” I accordingly step­ huelches—to whom alone, by the way, ped from my cover, but had hardly the name Patagonians properly applies moved a pace forward when my spur —were taller than the present race is caught in a root: at the same moment uncertain, though tales of gigantic skele­ “El Toro” charged. Entangled with tons found in Tehuelche graves are cur­ the root, I could not jump on one side rent in Punta Arenas and Santa Cruz. as he came on ; so when within a yard The average height of the Tehuelche I fired a shot in his face, hoping to turn male members of the party with which him, and wheeled my body at the same I traveled was rather over than under instant to prevent his horns from catch­ five feet ten inches. Of course no other ing me, as the sailors say, “broadside means of measurement besides compar­ on.” The shot did not stop him, so I ing my own height were available, but was knocked down, and, galloping over this result, noted at the time, coincides me, he passed on with my handkerchief, with that independently arrived at by Mr. which fell from my head, triumphantly Cunningham. Two others, who were borne on his horns, and stopped a few measured carefully by Mr. Clarke, stood yards off under another bush. Having six feet four inches each. After joining picked myself up and found my arms the northern Tehuelches, although the and legs all right, I gave him another Southerners proved generally the tallest, shot, which, as my hand was rather I found no reason to alter this average, unsteady, only took effect in the flank. as any smaller men that were met with My cartridges being exhausted, I return­ in their company were not pure Te­ ed to my horse and found that, besides huelches, but half-bred Pampas. The being considerably shaken, two of my extraordinary muscular development of ribs had been broken by the encounter. the arms and chest is in all particularly The Indians closed round me, and striking, and as a rule they are wellevinced great anxiety to know whether proportioned throughout. This fact calls I was much hurt. One, more courageous for especial mention, as others have than the rest, despite the warnings of the stated that the development and strength cacique, swore that he would try and of the legs is inferior to that of the arms. lasso the brute, and accordingly ap­ Even Mr. Cunningham alleges this to proached the infuriated animal, who for be the case, but I cannot at all agree a moment or two showed no signs of with him. Besides the frequent oppor­ stirring: just, however, as the Indian tunities afforded me of scrutinizing the was about to throw his lasso it caught young men engaged in the game of ball, in a branch, and before he could extri­ in which great strength and activity are cate it the bull was on him. We saw displayed, or when enjoying the almost the horse give two or three vicious kicks daily bath and swimming or diving, I as the bull gored him : at length he was judged of the muscular size of their legs lifted clean up, the fore legs alone re­ by trying on their boots, which in nearly maining on the ground, and overthrown, all cases were far too large for me, al­ the rider alighting on his head in a bush. though the feet, on the other hand, were We closed up and attracted the bull in frequently smaller than mine. The another direction, then went to look for height of their insteps is also worthy of the corpse of our comrade, who, how­ remark, one example of which may suf- �398 AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS. [Apr, fice. Having negotiated an exchange I ufactared by Messrs, Thomas, for some of an excellent pair of high boots, man- j necessary article with a TehuSche, the bargain fell through because he was un- I high-arched instep proving an insuper» able to get his foot into the boot, the I able obstacle to farther progress. �1872.] AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS. Their faces, of course, vary in expres­ sion, but are ordinarily bright and good- humored, though when in the settle­ ments they assume a sober, and even sullen, demeanor. Wáki and Cayuke, two friends of mine, are particularly present to my recollection as having always had a smile on their faces. Their ever-ready laughter displays uni­ versally good teeth, which they keep white and clean by chewing “maki,” a gum which exudes from the incense bush, and is carefully gathered by the women and children. It has a rather pleasant taste and is a most excellent dentifrice, worthy to rival Odonto or Floriline, and it is used simply as such, and not, as M. Guinnard says, because their greediness is so great that they must chew something. Their eyes are bright and intelligent, and their noses— though, of course, presenting different types—are as a rule aquiline and wellformed, and devoid of the breadth of nostril proper to the ordinary ideal of savage tribes. The peculiar prominence over the eyebrows has been noticed by all observers, and retreating foreheads, though observable, are exceptional. The thick masses of hair and the obvious risk, which would deter the most zealous craniologist from endeavoring to meas­ ure their heads, must be deemed suf­ ficient excuse for my not being able to state whether they are dolichokephalic or brachykephalic — a point, however, which I confess did not particularly at­ tract my observation; but for the partial comfort of anthropologists, be it noted that both Chilians and myself inter­ changed hats with some Tehuelches, especially Orkeke and Hinchel, without finding misfits. The complexion of the men is reddish-brown—that is to say, when cleansed from paint, and, like an old picture, restored to its pristine tint, which is not quite so deep as to warrant Fitzroy’s comparison of it to the color of a Devon cow. The scanty natural growth of beard, moustaches, and even eyebrows, is care­ fully eradicated by means of a pair of silver tweezers, and I was often urged to part with my beard and undergo this 399 painful operation, but I naturally object­ ed to complying with the request. The men’s heads are covered with thick, flowing masses of long hair, of which they take great care, making their wives or other female relatives brush it out carefully at least once a day. Very few appeared to have gray hair, though there were a few exceptions, one very old man’s hair being of a snowy whiteness, which contrasted strangely with his tawny face. The women have, as far as I could judge, an average height of about five feet six : they are very strong in the arms, but seldom walk, beyond fetching the supplies of wood and water, all their journeys being performed on horseback. Their hair, which is of no great length, scarcely indeed equaling that of the men, and very coarse, is worn in two plaited tails, which on galadays are artificially lengthened, prob­ ably with horsehair interwoven with blue beads, the ends being garnished with silver pendants. This practice, however, is confined, I think, to the un­ married ladies. The young women are frequently good-looking, displaying healthy, ruddy cheeks when not disguised with paint. They are modest in behavior, though very coquettish, and as skilled in flirta­ tion as if they had been taught in more civilized society, appealing as prettily for help as a young lady in imaginary difficulties over a country stile. Thus, when at Orkeke’s request I led the way through a river — halfway across the channel suddenly deepened, with mud­ dy bottom, and an abrupt bank to land on—I heard a plaintive appeal, “Mus­ ter, help me! my horse is too small.” Exposure and work do not age them as soon as might be expected, but when old they become most hideous beldams, and the most weird-like witches imagined by Dore would be surpassed by a trio of Tehuelche grandams. The dress of the men consists of a chiripa or under­ garment round the loins, made of a poncho, a piece of cloth, or even of a guanaco mantle; but, whatever the ma­ terial, this article of dress is indispens­ able and scrupulously worn, their sense �400 AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS; [Apr. of decency being very strong. All other I and warm skin-mantle, which, worn garments are supplied by the capacious | with the fur inside and the painted side out, will keep the wearer dry for a con- I This is often dispensed with in the ch >se, siderable time in the wettest weather. I but if worn when riding is secured at the �AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS. 1872.] waist by a belt of hide or leather if it can be obtained. When in camp the belt is not used, and the garment is worn loose, something after the fashion of the melodramatic assassin’s cloak. When sitting by the fireside, or even when walking about, the furred part of the mantle is generally kept up over the mouth, as the Tehuelches aver that the cold wind causes sore gums—-a habit which assists in rendering their guttural, and at all times rather unintelligible, language more difficult of comprehen­ sion to' the novice. The women’s dress consists of a man­ tle similar to that worn by the men, but secured at the throat by a large silver pin with a broad disk, or a nail, or thorn, according to the wealth or poverty of the wearer; and under this is a loose calico or stuff sacque, extending from the shoulders to the ankle. When trav­ eling the mantle is secured at the waist by a broad belt ornamented with blue beads and silver or brass studs. The boots worn by the women are similar to those described, with the exception that in their preparation the hair is left on the hide, while it is carefully removed from those of the men. The children are dressed in small mantles, but are more frequently allowed to run about naked up to the age of six or eight: their little boots are made from the skin taken from the fore legs of the guanaco, soft­ ened in the hand. The small children generally remonstrated strongly and ef­ fectually against wearing this article of clothing, and, whatever the severity of the weather, preferred running about barefoot. The cradles for the babies are formed of strips of wickerwork interlaced with hide thongs, fitted with a cover to keep sun and rain off, and made of a convenient shape to rest on the saddle­ gear of the mother when on the march. They are ornamented, if the parents are wealthy, with little bells, brass or even silver plates. The women are fond of ornaments, wearing huge earrings of Square shape, suspended to small rings passing through the lobe of the ear; also silver or blue-bead necklaces. The men also wear these necklaces, and Vol. IX.—27 401 adorn their belts, pipes, knives, sheaths and horse-gear with silver. Those who can afford it also indulge in silver spurs and stirrups : most of their ornaments, except the beads, are homemade, being beaten out of dollars obtained by com­ merce in the settlements. Both sexes smear their faces, and occasionally their bodies, with paint, the Indians alleging as the reason for using this cosmetic that it is a protection against the effect of the winds ; and I found from personal ex­ perience that it proved a complete pre­ servative from excoriation or chapped skin. The paint for the face is composed of either red ochre or black earth mixed with grease obtained from the marrow­ bones of the game killed in the chase, all of which are carefully husbanded by the women, and when opportunity offers pounded and boiled in the large pots, the grease and gelatine being carefully skimmed off and secured. On state oc­ casions, such as a birth-feast, and for a dance, the men further adorn themselves with white paint or powdered gypsum, which they moisten and rub on their hands, and make five white finger-marks over their chests, arms and legs. The usual morning toilette is simple : after the plunge in the river, which is almost always the first thing—except of course when circumstances prevent it—-indulged in by both sexes, who bathe scrupulous­ ly apart, and generally before daylight, the men’s hair is dressed by their wives, daughters or sweethearts, who take the greatest care to burn any hairs that may be brushed out, as they fully believe that spells may be wrought by evil-intentioned persons who can obtain a piece of their hair. From the same idea, after cutting their nails the parings are care­ fully committed to the flames. After the hair-brushing, which is performed by means of a rude hand-brush, the women adorn the men’s faces with paint: if in mourning they put on black paint, and if going to fight, sometimes put a little white paint under the eyes, which assists in contrast to the other in giving a sav­ age expression. The women paint each other’s faces, or if possessed, as some­ times occurs, of a fragment of looking­ �402 AT HOME WITH THE PATAGONIANS. [Apr. glass, paint their own. Both sexes tattoo etc., are intended to propitiate the Guaon the forearm, by the simple process of lichu. When a child hurts itself, the puncturing the skin with a bodkin and slaughter of mares seems to partake at inserting a mixture of blue earth with a once of the nature of a thank-offering piece of dry glass: the usual patterns that the hurt was no worse, and a pro­ consist of a series of parallel lines, and pitiation to avert further harm. sometimes a single triangle or a double Whilst in their native wilds I observed triangle, the upper one resting on the little immorality amongst the Indians: apex of the lower. I myself had one in the settlements, however, when de­ line tattooed by a fair enslaver, and con­ based by intoxication, they are no doubt fess that the process was rather painful. depraved and loose in their ideas. But The religion of the Tehuelches is dis­ it must be recorded that on the entry of tinguished from that of the Pampas and the Indians into the settlements of the Araucanians by the absence of any trace Rio Negro at a subsequent period, most of sun-worship, although the new moon of the young women and girls were left is saluted, the respectful gesture being ac­ with the toldos in Valchita, outside the companied by some low muttered words Travesia, to be out of the way of temp­ which I never could manage to hear. tations. There are many Tehuelche They believe in a great and good Spirit, youths now growing up who have the though they think he lives " careless of greatest abhorrence of liquor; and I mankind.” They have no idols or ob­ hope that in time this abstinence will jects of worship, nor—if a year’s expe­ spread farther among them, for they rience can enable one to judge—do they possess no intoxicants of their own, and observe any periodical religious festival the rum is an import from the Christians, on which either the good or evil spirit is the ill effects of which they are well able adored. The mention of this by other to discern. travelers can only be explained by con­ One word of advice to the future trav­ fused accounts which have attributed eler may conclude this imperfect sketch. Araucanian customs to the totally dis­ Never show distrust of the Indians : be tinct Patagonians. The belief which as free with your goods and chattels as prompts all their religious acts is that in they are to each other. Don’t ever the existence of many active and ma­ want anything done for you — always licious evil spirits or demons, of whom catch and saddle your own horse. Don’t the principal one is always on the watch give yourself airs of superiority, as they to cause mischief. To propitiate or drive do not understand it, unless you can away this spirit is the function of the prove yourself better in some distinct wizard, or doctor, or medicine-man, who way. Always be first, as you are not combines the medical and magical arts, likely to be encumbered by a wife or though not possessed of an exclusive gear, in crossing rivers or any other dif­ faculty for either. All sacrifices of mares ficulties : they will learn by degrees to and horses, not at stated times, but as respect you. In a word, as you treat occasion requires, such as a birth, death, them so they will treat you. � 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 &amp; 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 At home with the Patagonians II Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Musters, George Chaworth Description An account of the resource Place of publication: [Philadelphia] Collation: 390-402 p. : ill. ; 24 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. From Lippincott's Monthly Magazine, 9 (April 1872). Attribution: Virginia Clark's catalogue. Printed in double columns. Please note that this pamphlet contains language and ideas that may be upsetting to readers. These reflect the time in which the pamphlet was written and the ideologies of the author. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available [J. B. Lippincott & Co.] Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [1872] Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5307 Subject The topic of the resource Ethnology Patagonia 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 (At home with the Patagonians II), 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 Ethnology Press Tehuelche People https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/6986f5f5e5bd26c78aa13ba0b35faae6.pdf?Expires=1777507200&Signature=k2tT0Q5NntrJk7CriTYUNazq3gHEH8jCvuefjJ0-Kr4t8CmGzYFKAs7HxFhVStlPufHUSE6lwN8TNLGKeOB8Y5H5K%7EDAKJ4ornNWk7wK2E0DgqCME6TMF-4sbB7dffyJT60T2NaYnV1UR4pHz-bEs8mBg6I5RS15xTJ9MtZwzAMtZD4Qo7aMKNIvK27C-N4CkIcAlOiBgbAqmIMOw%7Eff0ljEn7-eIxklE7lFQwLWzb3vepmago27HDwnCUlZAkTNqmFYwh9FINwZkpQafNVkTtWPQJsGq%7EWJU6C38PxNsXaWmBl62sieQe7j2pcsSy%7EKEJCOxJZinO1YeLdCkB46sg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 8058501fc74cf62702d00cfca2e7af55 PDF Text Text “ Wit f urbibme of (to.” A SERMON, PREACHED AT ST. GEORGE’S HALL, LANGHAM PLACE, JANUARY 11TH, 1873, BY the REV. CHARLES VOYSEY. [From the Eastern Post, January Ylth, 1874.] On Sunday (January 11,) at St. George’s Hall, the Rev. C. Voysey took his text from Acts xv., 18, “ Known unto God are all his works, from the beginning of the world.” He sai(i—I wish to set you thinking upon a subject that has occupied my own mind a great deal, but upon which I find it very difficult to come to a conclusion.. It is the Providence of God. The question is often put, “Do you believe in Providence?” when more correctly it should be asked, “ Do you believe in a special and peculiar Providence watching over yourself different to the general and universal order of Nature ?” To the question put in this form, I confess myself ready to give a prompt denial. I in no way believe myself, or any other person, to be a favourite of Heaven, or the object of God’s peculiar care. It is much more congenial to think and speak in the spirit of those words of Jesus, “Not a sparrow falleth to the ground without the will of our Father.” One of the most striking changes we have witnessed in this age is the abandonment of those views which flatter individual vanity—of that mode’of thought which cherishes personal conceit in dwelling upon our relation to God. We no longer take any pleasure in the thought that God’s loving kindness is our peculiar inheritance; we should be loth to accept, even at the Divine hands, gifts and privileges which all our brethren might not share. It would make us miserable to believe that God loved us more than others, or was preparing for us mansions in the sky from ■which any of our fellow-men were to be shut out. It has.become �2 a cardinal assumption with us that it must be all or cone. That whatever the favour of God may consist in, and whatever be the happiness of Heaven hereafter, they belong by right to all mankind or to none. If thedifferencesin human lot, and in human culture, on earth, present any difficulty we soon waive it out of our path by remembering that there everyone will be made perfectly holy, perfectly happy; and that even now these differences are no tokens of the favour or disfavour of God, no measures of a varying love. Just as we are assured of God’s love to ourselves whether we are. in prosperity or adversity, in health or in sickness; so we are assured of His love to all, whatever their lot may be. Hence we discard entirely the notion of Special Providence, in so far as it implies partiality or favouritism on God’s part, or any special worthiness on our own. But the difficulty still remains to determine what is Providence and what is not—to settle whether every minutest event in our lives is, as it were, ordained and regulated by a conscious determining will, or that the events of our life are for the most part fortiutous, or brought about by ourselves. For some, it may be natural to say “Our lives are regulated in great measure by our own wills and by the native qualities we possess acted upon by the people and circumstances by which we are surrounded. We see no need for the interposition of Providence, things have taken their natural course, and we cannot admit the necessity for any theory of Providence, special or otherwise.” But forothers it is quite as natural to say, ‘‘Our lives have been so eventful, so full of rare perils, of hair-breadth escapes; of trials in mind body and estate so deep, and of deliverances so unexpected, so timely, so independent of ourselves, that it looks as though an eye of Love had been watching over us, and an unseen hand had been leading us and supplying our wants, forestalling our griefs and necessities. We do not say or dream that this protection has been peculiar to ourselves, but we believe that everyone is guarded and helped in the same way; but it has been brought home to us in such a manner that we should be blind and ungrateful not to acknowledge it. Moreover, we should feel the same to the end of our days, if instead of mercies and deliverances, the cause of �events should be reversed and bitter misfortunes be henceforward our lot.” This is no fancy picture, this is the real history of many and many a happy and unhappy life. It is the history of nations as well as of men. For the whole Jewish people whether in prosperity or adversity have persistently acknowledged the good providence of God through their chequered career. Of course they were wrong, like the Puritan Christians, and the Roman Catholics, in claiming the divine favour exclusively for themselves, but this narrowness has been to a great extent broken down. The point to observe, however, is that great numbers of men and women have been impressed with the idea tnat they were under the care and guidance of a most loving will, and have been forced to own it after their greatest sorrows had led them to doubt it. The great question before us is then, are our lives over-ruled and ordered by a divine will, or not ? If not, how can we account for certain events too manifestly the result of forethought to be attributed to chance 1 If there is no Providence, no will above us which controls and arranges the course of human lot, we are brought face to face with difficulties infinitely greater still, with footprints on the sands of time which must have made themselves, with marks of evident design and order which would have to be attributed to unreflecting, unreasoning, chance. If we attribute everything to Nature, and spell it with a capital “ N,” admitting skill, or wisdom, or any quality of mind to be manifest in any of its operations, we simply give up the contest; and “Nature” so regarded becomes so far synonymous with God or Providence. But call it what we will, we cannot deny that the intelligent action of something underlies certain indisputable facts of human life. I am as far as possible from assuming the airs of a philosopher, or wishing to tread the unfamiliar ground of metaphysics; but from the stand-point of common-sense, I am led to believe inthe sequence of cause and effect. We are what we are through an inconceivably long chain of antecedents, which, if followed out far enough, would lead us to trace our origin to the sun, or what was once the sun when it occupied the whole space now bounded by the orbit of the �most distant planet. I am forced to admit that this is at least true op everything within the solar system which is visible, or which can be apprehended by chemical, electrical and kindred science. I do not know what my mind is or how it originated, but it must be quite safe to say that the mind, like the bcdy, is the product of something else, the effect of some preceding causes. We are, therefore, entirely the results of causation, and we in turn must affect the condition of posterity; nay, they and their entire lives must be only and completely what they will be, in consequence of what we are. But of one thing I am yet doubtful. What is the extent of the disturbing element called man’s free will? We know for certain that there is some measure of choice allotted to each individual; but we are equally certain that the limits within which choice can be exercised are very narrow. A bird must have a bird’s will, and not the will of a beast; the beast cannot have the will of the insect or the will of the fish. In like manner man can only have the will belonging to his nature. That is the first and most obvious limit to freedom of choice. And when we come to individuals, we find the will again limited by the personal characteristics, the inherited tendencies, the surrounding influencies of circumstance and association. So easy does it seem for us to choose that we quite forget that our choice is almost forced upon us, and that we have little left of freedom of will but the empty name. Still if we have any freedom at all, it is enough to become what I called a disturbing element in the course of event?. And this is exhibited in action when we find to our surprise someone turning out in character or in conduct the direct opposite to what we should have expected from the ordinary rule of nature. We do, now and then, take each other by surprise and present striking exceptions to universal law. The effect of these considerations has been to make me not metely question, but entirely deny, the interference of God by what is often called “ Providence ” in the course of human or any other destiny. (1.) Because it is manifestly unnecessary. (2.) Because it would be an admission on His part that His fore­ thought had been deficient, or His materials inadequate. �(3.) Because it would have a disastrous effect upon men’s minds to imagine that God would so interfere; for they would claim that interference in every difficulty instead of putting their own shoulders to the wheel, and those who had no such favour might reasonably accuse God of partiality, and therefore of injustice. If then by “ Providence ” be understood in the least degree, a patching up, or mending, or supplementing a defect in, any part of the universe by an act of divine interference, then, I for one, declare mj utter disbelief in it, as unnecessary, derogatory to our idea of God, and injurious to mankind. But just as we discarded the old conception of God, because we had found and embraced one inconceivably more exalted, so we discard the common action o± Proridence for an idea infinitely higher. Taking as a motto, “ Known unto Him are all things from the beginning,” we conceive of Providence as the action of an intelligent and loving Being who, whether or not he be the cause of the universe, is one for whom it exists, and by whom all its issues are controlled. Not like a great mechanician making an engine for use, nor a giant carpenter fitting pieces of clumsy material together, nor a builder fashioning a house, nor an artificer inventing a toy. We .know nothing whatever of God’s relation to the visible world, and would not venture on the folly of even speculating as to how it was originated, or whether it was ever originated at all. But we are guided by our intuitions, and permitted by our reason, to attribute the course of the universe to some intelligent and beneficent guide, who, having cognisance of all that would happen in it, or be evolved out of it; having cognisance of, and special regard to, the various natures of the living creatures which would occupy it, was responsible for—not their mere pleasure—but their welfare, their truest and most lasting good. Is not Providence—to use a figure of speech—the fiat of such a Being. The word once spoken, “ Let all things be very good ?” And they are good. Is not Providence simply the eternal and unchangeable will of Him who “ is loving unto every man, and whose tender mercy is over all His works ?” Is it not our �6 guarantee that nothing shall ever happen by chance, or without the prevision of His far-seeing wisdom and love ? When we receive tokens of a watchful Providence—such as I alluded to just now—tokens which seem to bring God down into our very homes and families, and remind us that ‘in Him we live and move, and have our being,” and “ The very hairs of our head are numbered,” which is the grander thought? That He, watching over us like an anxious parent, was attracted by our distress, and busied himself to find means for our deliverance, while next door to us, perhaps, distress worse than our own was being left to remedy itself, or work its bitter way through the aching hearts of our neighbours; or, to think of Him as one to whom every possible contingency that might arise in the life of every creature in all time was well known, its effects for pain or pleasure all carefully measured, every possible consequence provided for—only not by calculation and skilful arrangement which are our only conceptions of forethought—but by stamping on the whole from the beginning the one eternal law, that “ all things should work together for good,” that the universe should be so evolved that nothing really evil should abide therein, and for every passing sorrow there should be everlasting joy ? Such a view of God's providence, however, does greater things than these. In our childish state we were wont to look only upon God’s deliverances as marks of His love, and our misfortunes as due only to the course of nature. Now we take the clouds and storm, as well as the blessed sunshine, as the gifts of His bounty; the night not less the day bears witness of His regard. Our tears and sorrows, and sad partings— all, all are His precious memorial** of a loving care quite as much as the joys and pleasures and blessed meetings which make life so glad. In that kind of Providence, let me ever believe, then no sorrow can overwhelm my soul, no joy or deliverance can make me forge-fc my God. But what, if after all, this has a tendency to a kind of fatalism which in all ages has been found detrimental to virtue, and paralysing to the moral powers ? Here is uncertainty again. If all has been planned from the beginning, every event in life known and �provided for, an unworthy soul might say ‘det thingstake their course we will just do what we must, it is sure to come right.” There would be dangei' in this, indeed, were it not for one element which no theories can destroy. Still we feel our responsibility, still we have our undying sense of duty, still we hear our brothers’ cry for help and pity, and the heart of man as God has made i t, is by nature neither base nor ungrateful. We shall not love God the less for knowing His good purposes towards us ; we shall not be less kind to one another when we know their glorious destiny ; we shall not be less diligent in duty when we perceive that the very ends which God has in view can on'y be accomplished with the consent of our free will. To make earth all that is fair and lovely, and pure, and happy, each moral denizen thereof must first become so. To make eternal bliss in heaven, each soul must first be made eternally holy. There is no more miracle, no more special providenee, no more Divine interference. We have been launched on the wide ocean of human lot, and we must bring our bark safe to land. The breezes may blow, now for us, now against us, and angry waves may rise and threaten us with their foaming jaws; but over the billows we must rise and conquer even adverse winds, keeping our eye stedfastly on the compass at our feet, or on the stars above our heads, bound for that haven which God has promised to the brave and the true. If indeed it be true that “A Providence doth shape our ends Rough hew them how we will.” it only means that we have not absolute control over the small or even the great, events of life; but it never was written to dis­ courage manly independent action of an honest heart aiming only at what is right and good. Depend upon it, until we work out our path into holy life and liberty God will not interfere to help us to find it, or give us one moment’s rest until it is found. The Providence which has made man the author of his own destinies—every one of which destinies is to be eternally good_ will not abandon such a glorious scheme of salvation, or defraud �8 one human being of the painful and costly honour of being his own Saviour. Finally, as we cannot be always in the clouds of the orizing and controversy about fate and freewill, let us give free play to our religious emotions, and day by day learn better to recognize the Providence of God as it is working before us in every event of life. If we begin by lifting grateful hearts to God for every thing we deem a joy and a blessing, we shall soon learn to welcome with a calm and reasonable thankfulness those events which under another light, or fn the darkness of unbelief, we deem to be evils and curses. Let each one of us sing in the words of the poet, “May £ remember that to Thee Whate’ei I have I owe And back in gratitude from me May all thy bounties flow. And though thy wisdom takes away Shall I arraign thy will ? No 1 let me bless thy name and say The Lord is gracious still.” .. ■‘ j<> oho y - nof'-Hcdji .1 lb>- EASTERN Tost Steam Printing Works, 89 Worship Street, Finsbury, E.C. � 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 &amp; 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 The providence of God: a sermon, preached at St. George's Hall, Langham Place, January 11th, 1873 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Voysey, Charles [1828-1912] Description An account of the resource Place of publication: [London] Collation: 8 p. ; 17 cm. Notes: Part of Morris Miscellaneous Tracts 6. Printed by Eastern Post, January 17th 1874. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available [Eastern Post] Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [1874] Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G3413 Subject The topic of the resource God Sermons 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 (The providence of God: a sermon, preached at St. George's Hall, Langham Place, January 11th, 1873), 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 God Morris Tracts Press https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/d4984616994646a139e69ff145a7333b.pdf?Expires=1777507200&Signature=Qrtr6VaiNT8fclj0gF0-fMWXeAfvTznHQ9jUuU-rTbKpw-Kb5GJ3GO3Z9YGMJMz%7ErxOSRTPpkdIAXPlVaO%7EczNJyiZSZ5Cv5HuNQvj69lnHIbqhhJqaemk5m6o29NNCQ3NWA0X-tzu5PtRJX9PZ88DhkIx4ZQsKpT3A7XsCTIfd3syAfEThGnnzFzNOqrP5OJ8WfWN1V4VHdFZtBINsw6WmucFwjKg9G6mqA6z4vts9wnsKCdt7L6AueMbuyp409werhTLp%7E6rNfBOXs31g7IIHLGtU48sT7PYVtsl9VuR2wTK-UMWWCUSIwwsb0gJGXaEW7zDVQ8Vtb%7EP2pvKD4Gw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 78555919476e18da67ce162c35f47c20 PDF Text Text SECOND ANNUAL ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT / TO THE PHILOLOGICAL SOCIETY, Delivered at the Anniversary Meeting, Friday, 16th May, 1873. BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, Esq. SUMMARY OF CONTENTS. Introduction ..........................................................................................................' ... Report by the President on Phonology ........... Report by the President on the Papers read before the Philological Society in the three years ending 31st December, 1872 ............................ Report by the President, assisted by Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte, on Basque .......................................... Report by A. J. Patterson, Esq., on Hungarian..................... Report by J". Muir, Esq., of Edinburgh, on Sanscrit Lexicons ............ Report by Prof. Aufrecht, of Edinburgh, on Sanscrit Grammars .................... Report by J. Peile, Esq., Tutor of Christ's College, Cambridge, on Greek ... Report by Dr. W. Wagker, of the Johanneum, Hamburg, on Latin ...... Report by F. J. Furnivall, Esq., on Parly English, p. 35, with an Appendix by Rev. W. W. Skeat ........................................................................................ Report by the President on the formation of an English Hialect Society ... Report by the President on Professor Max Miiller’s latest views of the Philosophy of the Origin of Language ........................ PAGE 1 3 9 12 16 19 22 26 29 45 47 48 �PHILOLOGICAL SOCIETY COUNCIL, 1873-4. President. ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. Vice-Presidents. THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY. THE ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN. THE BISHOP OF ST. DAVID’S. EDWIN GUEST, ESQ., LL.D., Master of Caius College, Cambridge. T. HEWITT KEY, ESQ. WHITLEY STOKES, ESQ. THE REV. DR. RICHARD MORRIS. Ordinary JOSEPH PAYNE, ESQ. (Chairman). TH. AUFRECHT, ESQ. E. L. BRANDRETH, ESQ. C. CASSAL, ESQ. C. B. CAYLEY, ESQ. THE REV. B. DAVIES. II. H. GIBBS, ESQ. J. W. HALES, ESQ. E. R. HORTON, ESQ. THE REV. DR. KENNEDY. Members. HENRY MALDEN, ESQ. J. MUIR, ESQ. JAS. A. H. MURRAY, ESQ. RUSSELL MARTINEAU, ESQ. HENRY NICOL, ESQ. J. PEILE, ESQ. CHARLES RIEU, ESQ. THE REV. W. W. SKEAT. HENRY SWEET, ESQ. HENSLEIGH WEDGWOOD, ESQ Treasurer. DAN BY P. FRY, ESQ., Local Govt. Board, Gwydr House, Whitehall, S.W. Hon. Secretary. FREDK. J. FURNIVALL, ESQ., 3, St. George’s Square, Primrose Hill, N.W. Extracts from the Philological Society's Pules. “The Philological Society is formed for the investigation of the Structure, the Affinities, and the History of Languages; and the Philological Illustration of the Classical Writers of Greece and Rome.” “Each Member shall pay two guineas on his election, one guinea as entrance fee, and one guinea for his first year’s contribution. The Annual Subscription shall become due on the 1st of January in each year. Any Member may compound for his contribution by the payment of Ten Guineas, exclusive of his entrance-fee.” Members are entitled to a Copy of all Papers issued by the Society, and to attend, and introduce a friend to, the Meetings of the Society, on the first and third Fridays in every month, from November to June. Subscriptions are to be paid to the Treasurer, or to the Society’s Bankers, Messrs. Ransom, Bouverie, & Co., 1, Pall Mall East, W. Applications for admission should be made to the Honorary Secretary, F. J. Furnivall, Esq., 3, St. George’s Square, Primrose Hill, N.W. �SECOND ANNUAL ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT TO THE PHILOLOGICAL SOCIETY, Delivered at the Anniversary Meeting, Friday, 16th May, 1873. By ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, Esq. SUMMARY OF CONTENTS. PAGE Introduction ............................. 1 Report by the President on. Phonology ............ 3 Report by the President on the Papers read before the Philo­ logical Society in the three years ending 31st December, 1872 .................................... 9 Report by the President, assisted by Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte, on Basque ... 12 Report by A. J. Patterson, Esq., on Hungarian............................ 16 Report by J. Muir, Esq., of Edin­ burgh, on Sanscrit Lexicons ... 19 Report by Prof. Aufrecht, of Edinburgh, on Sanscrit Gram- Report by J. Peile, Esq., Tutor of Christ’s College, Cambridge, on Greek............... Report by Dr. W. Wagner, of the Johanneum, Hamburg, on Latin ............... Report by F. J. Furnivall, Esq., on Parly English, p. 35, with an Appendix by Rev. W. W. Skeat ..................................... Report by the President on .the formation of an English Dialect Society ........... Report by the President on Professor Max Muller’s latest views of the Philosophy of the Origin of Language ...... 26 29 45 47 48 Introduction. Ladies and Gentlemen, Members of the Philological Society,— The address I delivered at the last Anniversary was con­ fessedly merely an introduction to that series of Annual Reports upon the Progress of Philology which our late esteemed President, Dr, Groldstiicker, bequeathed as an obliga­ tion to his successors in this Chair. In endeavouring to carry out his views, I feel how just was his estimation of the diffi­ culties of the task proposed, which are indeed sufficient to prevent any President from carrying it out single-handed. The necessity for seeking assistance from others who should 1 �2 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 be Members of the Society was in Dr. Goldstiicker’s eyes the very essence of his plan. I have not been able to carry out this limitation strictly, but, as an experiment, I have en­ deavoured to do so as far as possible. On other occasions circumstances may induce your President to seek assistance in any accessible quarter rather than abstain from laying desirable information before the Society. On the present occasion I have been very careful in distinguishing con­ tributed adornments from my own web. My original intention was to supplement the valuable summary given by Pott in the last edition of his “ Etymologische Forsch ungen” at the close of 1869, and bring down the account of philological research to the close of 1872. This intention I soon abandoned. I found not only that it would require special laborious research, for which my other duties left me no leisure, but that, if I attempted to compress the account into the limits of an address, it would probably result in a mere catalogue of books, tedious to listen to, and impossible to remember. It then occurred to me that as this was to be practically the first Report presented to the Society, it should rather deal with the present state of philology, than with its special progress during the last three years. But even this design I have been unable to carry out as I could have wished. On future occasions it will be open to my successors either to review the whole history of the pre­ ceding year, or to take up some special parts, which may have become prominent during that time, or to which the President has been naturally led to pay more attention. We must, I think, never attempt too much. Few things are more tedious to listen to than a scramble over a wide subject. Notwithstanding the kind assistance of many friends, to whom I here tender my best thanks on the part of the Society, my present Report, although almost unreasonably long, is very defective and even fragmentary. Our Homer is too plethoric for any nutshell. The illness or other en­ gagements of Members from whom I hoped to receive assistance have also led me to abandon several special branches, some of which will I hope be taken up next year. �(DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 3 My present Report is therefore merely an attempt, not a model. “ On le peut; je l'essaye; un plus savant le fasse.” But enough of exordium which threatens to bear a whaleshead proportion to the body of my address. Phonology. Phonology (to begin with my own department) is the side where philology touches physics. Philology overflows into many regions. Language is essentially the visible symbol of man’s views of natural relations. It teems with incunabular metaphysics and logic. It bears the impress of changing civilisation. It is the only indisputable tradition. And the science of language, when constituted, must meander through all these regions. But language is first of all a col­ lection of audible sounds generated by a special apparatus. How it is generated, and how when generated it is appre­ ciated, is consequently the first problem of philology, and it is purely physical and physiological. Until it is solved, better than by the first cunning alphabet-maker, we cannot understand how it has been solved by his numerous com­ peers, each no doubt with his own theory founded on his own narrow knowledge and local habits. And until this is ac­ complished, we do not know the-words we see, that is, we do not know the most rudimentary facts on which the science we contemplate must be established. How far are we ad­ vanced towards the solution of this problem ? The research is almost entirely of modern growth in Europe, and it has had much to contend with in the passage of an Aryan language through a Semitic symbolisation utterly inadequate to represent any of the numerous phonetic systems which are in practical daily European use. Men first attacked the problem for its practical value—to teach the deaf and dumb to speak, to teach a foreigner to pro­ nounce, to make a child learn reading more easily. Kempelen’s speaking machine, which has been reproduced by Wheatstone, and to which Faber’s was mainly due, made the sounds of language a physical phenomenon, independent ’ �4 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 of life. Johannes Muller’s researches, followed by those of Willis, Briicke, Merkel, Helmholtz, and Donders, aided by the beautiful apparatus of Konig, have made them a physio­ logical phenomenon. The especial requirements of the singer led to Garcia’s laryngoscope, which in the hands of Czermak, Merkel, Madame Seiler, and Herr Behnke of Birmingham,1 has quite recently thrown new light upon some of the obscurest problems of speech-sounds, by making the actual motions of the glottis visible. The necessities of correcting defective utterance have given occasion for the closest observations upon convulsive, nervous actions in the various mobile cavities whence speech issues, and in their natural interceptors. None seem to have turned their obser­ vations on these matters to better account than Mr. Melville Bell, whose Visible Speech marks an era in phonology, and contrasts most favourably with the purely physiological contemporary alphabets of Briicke and Merkel. The neces­ sities of missionary enterprise have rendered imperative the actual reduction of unwritten languages to a visible form, and no system has found more favour in this respect than Lepsius’s. In the pure interest of comparative linguistics, Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte has endeavoured to find signs for all the sounds which he has heard actually pro­ nounced. But his most recent collection of sounds, far larger than any of those hitherto formed by his predecessors in the same field of research, has not yet been published. The great care with which these sounds have been actually ascertained to form parts of spoken language, as distinguished from the possibilities of theorists, makes them an indispens1 See Czermak’s papers read before the Vienna Academy, especially: Sitzungsberichte, Matb. Cl. Band xxix, No. 12, 29th April, 1858, pp. 557-584, and Band lii, Abth. 2, Heft x, 7th Dec., 1865, pp. 623-641. Merkel: Die Funktionen des menschlichen Sehlundund Kehlkopfes, 1862. Mad. Seiler: Aites und Neues uber die Ausbildung des Gesangorganes, 1861, of which a revised English translation was pub­ lished in Philadelphia, U.S., in 1871, under the title of: The Voice in Sing­ ing. Herr Emil Behnke has twice lec­ tured on this subject before the Tonic Sol-fa College: once to the medical students of University College (re­ ported in the Lancet for Feb. 8, 1873), and once to a musical audience there. He has the rare power of shewing his glottis reflected in the laryngoscope while he is in the act of singing, and of hence demonstrating the meaning of the registers of the human voice. �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 5 able thesaurus for future phonologists, the value of which is greatly increased by its skilful arrangement. It is to be hoped that the key-words at least of this tabular arrange­ ment will be made accessible to all phonologic students. I have personally to thank the Prince for the kindness with which he has made it accessible to me, both in a laborious transcription, and by oral communication. With the Russian extensions of the Cyrillian alphabet to meet the wants of their comparative philologists, I am unfortunately not ac­ quainted. Lepsius’s alphabet is also meant for philology, but both his, Prince L. L. Bonaparte’s and the Russian system—as also Bell’s, Briicke’s, and Merkel's, in a still greater degree—labour under typographical difficulties. It was to obviate these, without proposing any system of phonology, that I introduced my own Palaeotype, from which the commonest jobbing printer can set up a repre­ sentation of sounds, that can be transliterated almost exactly into Bell’s, and, with certain modifications, into Lepsius’sj Briicke’s, or Merkel’s. But we have within the last few years reached such an advanced stage of phonological re­ search, that the fundamentally different habits and views of nations respecting speech-sounds, formerly quite overlooked, become sensible. It is the inability of English and Germans to understand one another as to the most common sounds in their own languages which creates the difficulty. The dif­ ference is really one of great philological importance. It is at the base of the whole difficulty of mediae et aspiratae. It will, when thoroughly overcome, probably lead to the ex­ planation of Grimm’s law. The difficulty is not indeed felt only between England and Germany; German phonologists in different districts misunderstand each other.1 Naturally 1 The following passage contained in a note from Mr. Henry Sweet, received (Sth March, 1873) while I was en­ gaged in preparing this address, forcibly illustrates my meaning. “ I find that Ivar Aasen (who has written the first ■Norwegian Grammar) actually takes the description given by the Danes of their glottal catch, and by a little alteration makes it so utterly unin­ telligible, that he is able to apply it to the modulative Norse tones! This shews us what we may expect from . written accounts of sounds. I may note that Aasen is on the whole de­ cidedly above the philological average in describing sounds.” Now the Nor­ wegian modulation (consisting in a �6 THE PRESIDENT S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 we Northern Europeans all misunderstand Romance and Indian phonologists. Now I think this very satisfactory—of course not as an end, but as a means. The present stage of phonology is that of an acknowledged and felt necessity for more inquiry, more observation, more experiment, especially more internation­ ality. Writers like Rumpelt and Scherer/ who seek to turn Brucke to philological account, because he is an acute physi­ ologist, are rather too hasty. It is a healthy sign that philologists should seek such help, but it is a pity that they do not also go beyond their own national, or rather local habits. Philology deals especially with geographical trans­ missions, and with hereditary tendencies to pronounce in certain ways, at least as marked as other linguistic and racial characteristics. We shall never understand comparative philology till these are properly weighed and understood. We are still seeking the path through a shifting bog of ignorance. This also complicates some phonological questions which are exciting much interest at the present day. How did our ancestors speak in Europe ? In other words, what is the value of their letters ? Grimm was unfortunately no phonologist. “ Die Luft ist zu diinn,” was his celebrated phrase. Hence the whole Gothic, Teutonic, and Scandinavian languages have still to be investigated. Mr. Sweet’s recent paper on Danish pronunciation will serve to shew you what difficulties have to be here encountered, and the necessity of attending to what outsiders are apt to consider as absurdly minute distinctions, forgetting that all beginnings are minute, and that development must be studied in cell-growth, not in adult forms. Corssen’s ponderous work on Latin pronuncia­ tion is a great mine, but is deficient in comparative phonology; he is evidently a German speaking Romance. Roby’s Latin change of pitch while uttering sounds) is a substitute for the Danish glottal catch (consisting in a momentary stoppage of voice by complete closure of the glottis), but is of an utterly different character. Mr. Sweet is for­ tunately familiar with both, and hence can detect the confusion. But fancy an uninformed Englishman endeavour­ ing to discover the facts amid this fog! 1 Rumpelt: Das natiirliche System der Sprachlaute, 1869. Scherer: Zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache, 1868. �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 7 grammar endeavours to make use of the most recent English phonology, but (as he so often quotes my own writings, I feel a right to say as much) modern English and ancient Latin sounds had probably such different bases, that the modern restoration may be very unlike the ancient edifice. The investigation is going on. . The Oxford and Cambridge profes­ sors have issued a syllabus of Latin Pronunciation for schools, and we shall probably soon be speaking in a way which a Roman Rip van Winkel, with sinological anticipations, might call “ pigeon Latin.” Still all these are steps in the right direction. The danger is dogmatism. In modern languages I may mention in passing my own attempts to reach Early English, which have this vantage-ground, that the modern and ancient phonological systems in this case are at least genealogically related. Much still remains to be done in the Romance languages, Diez notwithstanding. Greek is almost a terra incognita. We talk of the glorious sounds of that language, which we read in a way that would be, no doubt, as unintelligible to ancient, as it certainly is to modern Greeks, and about as pleasant to both as is to us a Frenchman’s attempt at reading English before he has learned the alphabet. And all Europe utters equally insane cries, and thinks it spouts Homer and Aeschylus. One word on the direction of phonological inquiry which is now specially needed. It is not so much more analysis and systematisation that we require. In fact we rather labour under a load of systems of universes, themselves un­ explored. It is a careful examination of the synthesis of sounds in different nations, and even small localities, that is principally wanted. Whether in proceeding from (p) to (aa), we commence with an open or closed glottis, and, if with the latter, whether we insert a dull non-vocal intrapharyngeal thud, or whether we come on the vowel smoothly or explosively, or even with a jerk accompanied by a puff,— these are questions of real philological importance. These varieties in progression from sound to sound generate new sounds, which lead to various linguistic transformations. Hence we should obtain information about them if possible �8 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNEAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 first hand, by observations on the life. The different theories hitherto propounded by philologists, from the depths or rather the shallows of their own limited experience, are mere ignes fatui. Alphabetists have uniformly shirked the whole inquiry. The various actual results produced from the same apparent combinations of letters under different national habits are as surprising as they are important for comparative philologists to understand with accuracy. It is with great satisfaction that I can turn to two papers read before our own Society, as exemplifying in the happiest manner the kind of phonetic research which philology now urgently requires,—the intelligent, practical, minute, ex­ haustive analysis of existing usage. Of Mr. Jas. A. H. Murray’s treatise on “ The Dialect of the Southern Counties of Scotland,” read at the close of 1869, but only just pub­ lished as the Second Part of the Philological Transactions for 1870-2, further mention will be made in the Report on Early English, as respects its linguistic value. But I would here draw attention to the admirable manner in which the real Scotch sounds have been for the first time presented to an English reader, their historical relations considered, and their dialectal differences explained, on pp. 93 to 149, and 237 to 248 of that work. The only piece of phonological work on dialects comparable with this is Schmeller’s Mundarten Bayerns, 1821, which is, however, greatly inferior in phonetic knowledge and powers of discrimination, though more minute in local details. The two works together form models on which to base future dialectal work. The paper of Mr. Henry Sweet on Danish Pronunciation '{Philological Transactions for 1873-4, pp. 94-112), which I have already mentioned in passing, is one of the acutest phonological investigations of recent times. Mr. Murray was writing of his own native pronunciation, and comparing it with Southern English, with which he had been for years familiar. Mr. Sweet spent a summer over an entirely new language, in which the orthography offered no assistance, and pronouncing dictionaries did not exist. He had with his own spade, as it were, to dig the pronunciation of every �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 9 word out of the native mine; first to bring his ear to recog­ nize the novel sounds and their very remarkable synthesis, and then to determine when and where they had to be used. Mr. Sweet fortunately began his phonetic career by a study of Mr. Bell’s Visible Speech, and he was already a good Scandinavian scholar before he attacked the modern lan­ guage. This paper shews what we may look for from such a combination. It will, I hope, some day be enlarged to the dimensions of a book. The clear account of the Danish and Norwegian systems of tones, their contrast and relation; the discrimination of the exceedingly curious anomalies in the labialised vowels; the original rules, deduced from ex­ haustive lists made by himself, for the peculiar distinctive use of close and open vowels; the degradations of the consonants into the second elements of diphthongs; the whole treatment of initial and final consonants; the remarkable determinations of the comparative lengths of consonants after long and short vowels in Danish and English; each observation enough to make an observer’s reputation;—will stamp this paper as a classical example of the phonological treatment of language. Philology in the Philological Society. Our own Society has certainly developed a decided inclina­ tion for phonologic research. Of the 51 papers which have been read during the three years ending last December, 15 or nearly 30 per cent, are more or less closely connected with Phonology. Prof. Hewitt Key gave us three papers on Latin Accent and Rhythm. Mr. Sweet criticised the late Prof. Koch’s theory of the Anglo-Saxon ea, and gave us that valuable paper on Danish pronunciation already characterised. Mr. Cayley treated the hard and soft consonants and discre­ pancies in early alphabets. Dr. Weymouth raised a theory of old English and Anglo-Saxon pronunciation, in opposition to one I had ventured to propose. Mr. Brandreth expatiated on vowel-intensification. Mr. Nicol selected the old French labials, and Prof. Cassal the modern French accent tonique. �10 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 And finally I troubled the Society with my paper on Glossic and some conversational remarks on accent, quantity, and diphthongs. My Glossic paper was indeed related to one by Mr. Fry on improving English orthography ; and these two papers, arising out of many meetings in committee, finally gave rise to a two-nights’ discussion, which confessedly left the matter where it would have probably continued to lie whatever had been our decision—namely with the conservativism, negligence, fancifulness, pedantry, purism, or radicalism of individual scribes. As to the languages with which we dealt during the same time, Prof. Hewitt Key’s papers on Latin accent and rhythm, already referred to, and three others on some errors and omissions in Latin dictionaries, with another on the com­ pression of Latin words (which I might have classed among the phonetic papers), and a short paper on an ode of Horace by Mr. Schonemann, gave Latin the preference over English. But our own language had several papers by Prof. Joseph Payne, especially in relation to the origination of many pro­ vincial English words through the Norman. Mr. Murray illustrated Shakspere’s usages from modern dialects, and re­ marked on the dialectic varieties of the prose works attributed to Hampole. Mr. Fry dealt with “ Chinee” and kindred words; Dr. Morris read some notes on English grammar and the old Kentish dialect, and amused us with detailing various eccentricities in the older and newer forms of our language; and Mr. Wedgwood contributed a few additional etymolo­ gies. Mr. Yates wrote on the orthography of past tenses and participles. Mr. Sweet finally gave us an interesting paper on the special characteristics of the Anglo-Saxon language of the time of Alfred. These were our main subjects. But French in its old form was treated by Dr. E. Mall in a paper on Marie de France, and in its modern form by Mr. Dawson, and afterwards by Prof. Cassal for genders, in addition to his phonetic re­ searches. The Celtic and Sanscrit were the only other languages which had more than a single contribution. We had a paper on the accusative plural in the British language �DEmVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 11 and on the Irish verb by Dr. Whitley Stokes, and one on Welsh affixes by Mr. Powell. I think that my passing notice on scoring sheep in Yorkshire belongs rather to this head. Sanscrit was treated two or three times by Dr. Goldstiicker, Pennsylvania German by Prof. Haldeman, Danish by Mr. Sweet, the Mosquito dialect by Messrs. Charnock and Blake. The other papers were more general. Mr. Wheatley gave us some more reduplicated words, Dr. Weymouth treated Euphuism, Dr. Goldstiicker spoke of the derivation of words from sound, Dr. Oppert discussed the Graal, and I read my address on the relation of thought to sound. As our friend Dr. Wagner’s extra volume on Mediaeval Greek does not come under consideration, we have nothing in our list relating to Greek or Hebrew, nothing about Gothic, Teutonic, or Old Horse, almost nothing about the older Romance languages, and nothing at all about aggluti­ native or monosyllabic languages. Native Asiatic, African, and American are ignored. Egyptian and Assyrian re­ searches have had no interest for us. It is evident therefore that several of our Members who are well qualified to give us the result of their studies on some of these languages, have been either absent or too busy to prepare papers. The fifty-one papers have been read by or for twenty-seven authors, all of whom, however, were not Members of our Society.1 This summary shews the active state of philology among ourselves. The passive mine is much richer, but owing to circumstances not workable. There will always be some prevalent study in such societies. We began with classics. For the last three years we have not cared to touch Greek. The First Part of our Transactions for 1873-4, which has just been delivered to Members, contains three , 1 The following is an alphabetic list of the authors, the figures annexed shew the number of the papers. When a paper was divided into parts read on different evenings, each part has been counted as a separate paper, The two evenings devoted to discus­ sions have not been reckoned:—Bran- dreth 1, Cassal 2, Cayley 2, Charnock and Blake 1, Dawson 1, Ellis 5, Fry 2, Goldstiicker 3, Haldeman 1, Jere­ miah 1, Key 7, Mall 1, Morris 2, C. Murray 1, J. A. H. Murray 2, Nicol 1, Oppert 1, Payne 5, Powell 1, Schonemann 1, Stokes 2, Sweet 3, Wedgwood 1, Weymouth 1, Yates 1. �12 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 papers read this year, and omits many of those already menJ tioned. This partly arose from the circumstance that many of the other papers were not ready for press, and it was desirable to issue this Part before our anniversary. But as our year terminates in December, it will be convenient to defer noticing such papers as have been read subsequently, till the next address of the President. And now let us look to the outside world. Basque. Education in English schools was contrived when I was a boy,—and though somewhat improved, I am glad to think, during the intervening forty years, yet, like the tree, it preserves its old bend, and may therefore be still regarded as contrived, undesignedly of course, and perhaps unconsciously (which makes amendment not particularly hopeful),—to bring * up a boy’s mind in the one Aryan faith, of the one Aryan linguistic mode of thought. The instrument was mainly the Latin grammar, to which even all other Aryan heresies were made to succumb. Boswell reports a speech of Johnson which puts the feeling thus generated in a very strong light. “I always said,” quoth the oracle, “ Shakspere had Latin enough to grammaticise his English” (anno 1780, aet. 71). We know now what to conclude of Johnson’s own knowledge of English grammar. Latin and Greek, eternally ground in, with French as an “ extra,” and English merely as a medium for “ construing,” is the received English prepara­ tion for linguistic study. Well, we have got out of it a little. Thanks to Christianity, some people had to learn Hebrew, and the Semitic verb at least ought to have opened our eyes. But if any philologist wishes to see how truly all Aryanism and Semiticism are merely the favoured literary dialects of the world, how extremely remote they are from representing all logical connections of thought, to indicate which inflections and insertions, reduplications, guna, and umlaut and ablaut, conjugational forms and voices, and the other paraphernalia developed by these systems of language in different proportions, are supposed to have been constructed, �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 13 in ways which different scholars have wanted words laudatory enough to characterise ; if any philologist wishes to see radiearianism and hereditary preservation of forms of words break utterly down, and find a system of language which preserves its individuality by its mere mode of grammatical construction, let him study the Basque. We are indebted to the personal labour, critical acumen, and unwearied perse­ verance of Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte, for our only trustworthy knowledge of this extraordinary language. Gifted with great power of appreciating sounds, and having long studied their representation, he has been able to write them down intelligibly from oral delivery. The phonetie peculiarities of Basque, especially in the sibilants, are such as never occurred to our a priori alphabetists, and require considerable phonetic acrobatism to imitate. The Prince has lately presented our Society with his linguistic maps of the Basque provinces, which he has promised to explain at our next meeting, and he has also furnished us with copies of almost all his publications on the Basque languages, in­ cluding his recent remarkable studies on the Basque verb, perhaps the most complicated in existence, some of the peculiarities of which he will, doubtless, point out, as they form the criteria for dialectic separation. These I will not anticipate. The Society is, as I have said, through the kindness of the Prince, in possession of these works, usually extremely difficult to procure, and can therefore peruse them at leisure. That Aryan scholars should be put into a position to study such remarkable phenomena in their libraries, in­ stead of hunting them through mountain and vale, from village to village, and mouth to mouth, is a great gain to philology. The Prince has not completed his task, although he has completed his collections, and it must be the desire of all linguistic scholars that he will have life and health, as he has the desire and the intellectual power and requisite patience, to accomplish a task he has so worthily begun.1 1 Besides his account of the Basque verb and his map of the Basque dialects, the Prince has published numerous works, either written hy himself or by his direction, forming materials for the study of the language. His second �14 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 The Basque language is one of the most ancient in the world; but it has no literature. The oldest existing trace of the Basque language is a list of forty words, incidentally introduced into a work by Marineo Siculo in 1530. The oldest book is a short set of poems, in rhyme, by Bernard Dechepare, rector of St. Micbel-le-Vieux, partly devotional, partly erotic, printed at Bordeaux in 1545, of which only one copy is known to exist, being Y 6194 P in the National Library at Paris.1 The next in date, and the only one really of value, is a Protestant translation of the New Testament, with Liturgy and Catechism, printed at Rochelle in 1571.2 Another edition of the Catechism with Calendar was printed the same year, with a different form of the so-called dative plural, which is extremely rare. The more recent Basque works seem to be chiefly prayers, hymns, catechisms, and devotional or ascetic works. Many, though not the most important, of its words have materially changed in the course of time. It has a power of adopting and in­ corporating new and foreign words with ease. Its' different dialects sometimes use totally different words for even the commonest objects, such as sun and moon. But the immense majority of words are of course common, with mere variations of form, to all the dialects. The Basque is an agglutinative language, but is widely different from the other great agglu­ tinative families, with which it scarcely shares more than the negative properties of being non-Aryanic and non-Semitic. The peculiar construction of its verb, which, with sharply marked distinctions, runs through all the dialects, binds catalogue, extending to the year 1862, has 25 entries respecting Basque, and I find 24 more in the additions to that catalogue. These consist of translations into various Basque dia­ lects of the Song of the Three Children, the Lord's Prayer, a text of John, Dialogues, Genesis to Leviticus, the whole Gospel of St. Matthew, the Re­ velations, Doctrina Cristiana, the Books of Ruth and Jonah, Song of Songs, Miserere, Catechism, the whole of the French-Basque Bible, together with a Vocabulary, Comparison of Basque and Finnish, Basque Sermon preserved at Arbonne, Note on supposed genitives and datives plural, and the great work on the Basque verb, with maps, already mentioned. It is the labour of a life­ time devoted to linguistic science. 1 Reprinted and translated into French, so far as decency allowed, in 1847. 2 The first complete Bible in the Basque language, comprising both the Old and New Testaments, is that in the dialect of Labourd, brought out by Prince L. L. Bonaparte, begun m 1859 and concluded in 1865. �DEuJpvERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 15 them firmly together, and separates them clearly and defi­ nitely from all other languages.1 These investigations into Basque mark then a great step in philology. . They give us a new visual instrument for seeing the circula­ tion of the blood corpuscules of language. We must not be in too great a hurry to systematise and genealogise. It is said that Adam and Eve spoke Basque in Paradise. I can’t disprove it. But if so, the descendant tongues of to-day are not so like their parents as man is to the gorilla. I cannot conclude this reference to Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte’s labours on Basque, without special reference to the magnificent donation which he has made to our Society, not merely of his works on this particular subject, but of an almost unique collection of all his linguistic works on Uralian, Albanian, Celtic, French, Spanish, Italian, and English dialects, phonetics, and other linguistic researches, comprising 138 out of his 162 distinct publications, the missing twentyfour being generally such as were printed in very limited numbers, or consisting of cancelled editions.2 Even of those which are presented, there are many that he could not replace if lost. Probably no such collection of his works exists in England, except at the British Museum, the Athenaeum Club, 1 Not being myself acquainted with the Basque, I have submitted the above statement of characteristics to Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte; and I believe that it will be found substantially correct. 2 An analysis of the numbers in the printed catalogues of the Prince’s works gives the following results. A “number” is any distinct paper or work, from a single page to 1376 pages (as in the case of the French Basque Bible). For the classification of these languages see below, p. 17 note. Polyglot Basque Celtic Modern Greek Albanian Italian Spanish Portuguese French German English Friesic Russian Uralian Total in Presented to Catalogue. Philo. Soc. 5 49 7 1 3 36 1 2 7 1 35 3 1 11 3 35 5 1 3 35 1 1 6 1 32 3 1 11 Catalogues, etc. Maps, Verb, Dialects, Bible, etc. Cornish, etc. Corsican Mai’not.—St. Matthew. St. Matthew. Italian and Sardinian.—St. Matthew. Asturian.—St. Matthew. Galician.—St. Matthew. Picard, Provenqal, etc.—St. Matthew. Transylvanian.—Song of Solomon. St. Matthew and Song of Solomon. St. Matthew. Song of Solomon. Karelian, Livonian, Syrjanian, Permic, etc.—St. Matthew. �16 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 and on his own shelves; nor could he form another. Originally destined for the Library of the Louvre, the Prince determined, after the burning of that Library during the time of the Commune, to present this collection to a linguistic society. We must all feel much gratified at the choice which he has made ; and I hope that we shall be stimulated to return our thanks to the donor in the way which, I am sure, will be most pleasing to himself,—by prosecuting the studies for which he has given us such ample materials. Hungarian. There is another non-Aryan tongue, surrounded by Aryanism, but unlike the last, with a literature full of life, the language of a nation which is growing into political im­ portance, becoming indeed, as the principal portion of the Austrian empire, one of the great powers of Europe. The Magyar or Hungarian language is very little known or studied by linguists. But it is the most accessible and literary of the so-called agglutinative languages, with speakers pos­ sessing all European culture, and perfectly acquainted with the principal European tongues—men who can speak in English as Kossuth spoke to us awhile ago—and it is written with Roman letters after a system readily under­ stood, which puts our own orthography to shame, whereas its Dravidian congeners, which are scarcely studied by any but Madras officials, have entirely new systems of writing, and its Turkish cousin is of all tongues spoken in Europe the worst spelled. Our Society, thanks to a former member, Mr. Pulszky, possesses a fine collection of Magyar books, and I should be glad to find some member taking up so important a study, and furnishing us with a comparative view of Hun­ garian and Aryan forms of thought as traceable in linguistic structure. Thus the absence of grammatical gender, the same word d serving for he, she, or it, must correspond to a direction of thought entirely different to the Aryanic. The Hungarians have devoted much attention to their own philo­ logy, 80 that materials are abundant. I am indebted to Mr. Arthur J. Patterson, an eminent English authority on this �17 DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. remarkable language, which, by the bye, presents several curious phonetic characters, for the following account of the recent philological activity of the Hungarians. tf Perhaps the most fruitful advance that has been made in philological study in Hungary during the last two years has been the establishment, at the commencement of 1872, of a new philological periodical, entitled Magyar Nyelvor. Its title is formed on the analogy of the German compound Sprachwart, and may be translated Watchman of the Hunga­ rian Language. As it concerns itself with Hungarian etymology, questions of Hungarian grammar, corrections of mistakes made in the current literature of the day, the ex­ amination of remains of old Hungarian literature, and the recording of popular songs, proverbs, dialectical peculiarities, etc.,—reference to the cognate Ugrian languages 1 being 1 In a brochure recently published, summing up the researches that have been made in the field of the FinnUgrian family of languages, Dr. Donner, of Helsingfors, divides that family into five branches: (1) the Finnish proper, including the Karelian, Estonian, etc.; (2) the Lapp dialects; (3) the Syrjanian; (4) the Permic dialects; (5) the Ugrian, properly so called, comprising the Ostiak, Vogul, and Magyar languages. Dr. Donner’s brochure has been carefully analyzed by M. Edouard Sayous in the Revue Critique for the first quarter of 1873.— A. J. P. Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte’s classification is as follows, shewing more exactly the position of this group of languages. It is taken from his “ Classification Morphologique des Langues Europeennes,” with MS. ad­ ditions. “ Premiere Classe. A. Souche basque: 1 Basque. B. Souche altaique. . . a. Famille ouralique.—a) Sousfamille tchoude: i. Branche finnoise : 2 Finnois. 3 Esthonien. 4 Livonien. n. Branche laponne: 5 Lapon.—b) Sous-famille permienne: 6 Permien et zyriain. 7 Votiak.-c) Sous-famille volgaique: i. Branche tche'remisse: 8 Tcheremisse. ii. Branche morduine: 9 Morduin.-«Z) Sous-famille oi'goure : I. Branche hongroise : 10 Hongrois. ii. Branche Vogoule: 11 Vogoule. iii. Branche ostiaque : 12 Ostiaque. (N.B. Le finnois avec 1’esthonien et le li­ vonien, different du lapon a peu pres comme le grec differe du latin. Il en est de meme du tchdremisse par rapport au morduin, et du hongrois, du vogoule et de 1’ostiaque entre eux.) . ... fl. Famille samoyede, y. Famille tartare, 8. Famille tongouse, e. Famille mongole, avec leur sous-familles et leur branches. C. Souche Dravidienne, etc. D. Souche caucasique occidental?, etc. E. Souche Caucasique orientale, etc. F. G. H., etc., etc. Autres Souches tres-diffdrentes entre elles, quoique appartenant a cette pbemi^re classe.” The remainder of this classification is subjoined, as being important to the Members of the Philological Society, in connection with the works presented to them by the Prince, and analyzed in the footnote to p. 15. “ Deuxieme classe. A. Souche indo-germanique. (N.B. Les noms des langues mortes sont imprimes en caracteres italiques.) . ... a. Famille celtique: i. Branche gaelique: 13 Gaelique. n. Branche bretonne :—a. 14 Gallois.—b. 15 Cornouaillais.—c. 16 Breton................ j9. Famille greco-latine: i. Branche albanaise: 17 Albanais. ii. Branche grecque: 18 Grec. 19 Grec moderne. iii. Branche latine :—a. 20 Latin.— b. 21 Italien. [22. Espagnol. 23 Portugais].—c. 24 Franqais. 25 Ro- 2 �18 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 strictly subordinated to the above objects,—it is of a more popular character and appeals for support to a wider public than the philological journal of an older standing—Philologiai Kozlony (Philological Gazette), which came to an end with the year 1872. The editor of Magyar Nyelwr, Mr. Szarvas, whose speciality is the study of the remains of mediaeval Hungarian, has published during the last year a treatise on the tenses of the Hungarian verb. “ Dr. Budenz has, during the period in question, read some interesting papers before the Hungarian Academy, one of them being an elaborate critique of Dr. Vambery’s treatise on the words common to the Hungarian and Turkish lan­ guages. But it is understood that he has in an advanced stage of preparation a work on the words common to the Hungarian and Ugrian languages, somewhat on the model of Curtius’ Griechische Etymologie. Dr. Budenz is also preparing a short Finnish Grammar and Beading-book, for the use of Hungarian students, which will soon be pub­ lished. “ Another Ugrian scholar, Mr. Paul Hunfalvy, has recently brought out a book on the dialect of the Vogul language spoken on the banks of the Konda, in Siberia. It contains a grammar and glossary of the translation of the Gospel of St. Matthew into the Konda Vogul dialect, executed by M. Popov, and revised by Professor Wiedemann, of St. Peters­ burg, and published by Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte.1 Before this translation the only specimens of the Vogul language that Mr. Hunfalvy had to work on were two series of questions and answers on the Lord’s Prayer and the Ten Commandments, communicated by Satigin, the representaman. 26 Rhetique.—d. 27 Valaque. . . . y. Famille germano-scandinave. i. Groupegermanique.—a. 28 Gothique. 29 Allemand ancien. 30 Bas-allemand ancien. 31 Anglo-Saxon. 32 Frison. —b. 33 Allemand. [34 Bas-allemand. 35 Hollandais.] 36 Frison moderne. —c. 37 Anglais, ii. Groupe scandinave.—a. 38 Islandais.—b. [39 Suedois. 40. Danois]............... 8. Famille slavo-lettonienne. i. Branche slave.— a. 41 Slavon. 42 Russe. [43 Illyrien. 44 Slovene.] 45 Bulgare.— b. 46 Polonais. 47 Boheme. 48 Lusaeien. 49 Folabe. (N.B. Le dialecte cassubien est encore parle.) ii. Branche lettonienne.—a. 50 Li­ thuanian.—b. 51 Frussien.— c. 52 Letton.”—A. J. E. 1 This work is among those pre­ sented to the Philological Society by the Prince.—A. J. E. �BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 19 Bye of the independent Vogul princes, to. the Hungarian traveller, Reguly. In his preface Mr. Hunfalvy shews that although the translator of the Gospel is a Russian, the Vogul of the version is much less Russianised than that of Satigin, and consequently proportionably more valuable for philologists. Of course, too,, the Gospel affords a much larger store of linguistic materials. “ Lastly it may be mentioned,, as a sign of increased in­ terest in philology, that a translation of the Finnish epic Kalevala into Hungarian verse, by M. Barna, appeared in 1871. It was reviewed by Dr. Budenz in the Academy, September 15th, 1871, with especial reference to the lin­ guistic side of the work, and the relation of Magyar to Finnish.” Sanscrit. Passing at once to the Aryan languages, we naturally turn first to Sanscrit. As my predecessor, Dr. Goldstiicker, was an eminent Sanscrit scholar, who had devoted himself especially to Sanscrit lexicography, on which he held pecu­ liar opinions with great tenacity, I was anxious to secure a communication on this especial subject from one in whom Dr. Goldstiicker himself had confidence. Mr. John Muir, of Edinburgh, a Member of our Council, a friend of Dr. Goldstucker, and an eminent .Sanscrit scholar, has kindly furnished me with the following contribution on this sub­ ject. “In 1843 a ‘Notice of European grammars and lexicons of the Sanskrit language,’ written by the late Prof. H.. H. Wilson, appeared in our Transactions. Since that time contributions to Sanskrit lexicography have been made by Professors Benfey,. Goldstiicker, Max Muller, Aufrecht, Grassmann, and others. But I must pass over the labours of these scholars, in order to be able to notice at more length the Sanskrit Worterbuch of Messrs. Bohtlingk and Roth, compiled with the co-operation of Professors Weber, Whitney, Schiefner, Stenzler, Kuhn, and Kern, and at one time of Prof. Aufrecht, begun in 1852 and steadily .continued to the �20 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 present time. Of this work six quarto volumes have alreadyappeared, and it will apparently be completed in one other volume. This great and epoch-making Thesaurus, by far the most important work of its kind which has yet been published, whether as regards its compass or its intrinsic .value, contains, as far as it has come out, 7976 columns^: 3988 pp. Not only is the number of words greatly in excess of those in Wilson’s second edition (though a few are omitted, and some of the significations of those retained are excluded as without authority), but the senses of the words are more systematically and scientifically arranged. In particular, the compound verbs, which are ranged alphabetically after the simple roots, are far more copiously expounded. Refer­ ences are given either to the native Dictionaries in which the words are found, or to the passages of the books in which the different meanings occur. “The most interesting feature in this work is, perhaps, the interpretation of words occurring in the hymns of the Veda, many of them obsolete, or employed in different senses, in later Sanskrit. For this portion of the work Prof. Roth is avowedly responsible. The principles upon which he proceeds are stated in the introduction to the first volume.1 He asserts that the native interpreters of the Vedic hymns, living in comparatively modern times, when the ideas, re­ ligion, and institutions of the people of India had undergone a long series of modifications, and holding all the opinions current in their own age,—destitute (it may be added) of the faculty (only recently acquired even by European thinkers) of transporting themselves into the past, of entering into its feelings, and thinking its thoughts,—did not possess the quali­ fications requisite for the correct comprehension of those hymns, which not only represent a far more ancient set of con­ ceptions and beliefs, but are full of obsolete words. He con­ siders that the writings of these commentators do not form a rule for the scientific expositor, but are merely one of those 1 See a translation of his remarks in the Journal Royal Asiatic Society, vol. ii., new series, pp. 307 ff, and Prof. Roth’s article, Reber GelehrteTradition u.s.w. in the Zeitschrift der morgenlandischen Gesellschaft, xxi. 1, ff.—J. M. �DELIVERED B¥ ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 21 helps of which the latter will avail himself for the execution of his difficult task, a task which is not to be accomplished at the first onset, or by any single individual. He therefore seeks to proceed philologically to derive from the texts themselves the sense which they contain by a juxtaposition of all the passages which are cognate in diction and contents. This method is no doubt a correct one, though everything depends on its proper application. This scheme of interpretation, though approved by all, or most, other eminent Sanskritists,1 was emphatically condemned by our late President,2 who main­ tained that the Indian commentators were quite as able as European scholars to bring together and compare all the passages in which particular words occur, that in the case of hapax legomena the guesses of the former were as good as those of the latter, and that their methods of procedure were not purely ^etymological, but involved a reference to an ancient and genuine tradition. In support of his own views on the interpretation of the Veda, Prof. Goldstiicker read a paper before the Koyal Asiatic Society in answer to one by my­ self, of which nothing more than a meagre abstract (pub­ lished in the Athenceum at the time) ever appeared. It is to be regretted that this paper was never elaborated by the author, and his views supported by the great learning and ingenuity of which he was master, as, although it may be doubted if he would have gained many converts among scholars able to form a correct judgment, he would prob­ ably have brought together much important information, and thrown additional light on many questions connected with Indian antiquity. 1 To the previous supporters of this view may now be added Mr. A. C. Burnell, who, in the valuable preface to his edition and translation of the VamQa Brahmana (Mangalore, 1873), —in which he gives much information regarding Sayana, and identifies him with Madhava and Vidyaranya,—ex­ presses himself as follows: “ The great controversy which has prevailed so long respecting Sayana’s competence to ex­ plain the Vedas, is fast approaching its end; the above sketch of his life and works will shew that the followers of the ‘ German school ’ are historically right. That they are so theoretically, is established by an amount of proof offered by Max Miiller, Weber, Whit­ ney, Roth, Muir, and others that has long vanquished all reasonable hesita­ tion on the part of the Sanskritists who were once inclined to prefer Sayana and Indian precisians to the results of com­ parative philology.”—J.M. 2 See his Panini, pp. 241 ff.—J. M. �22 the president’s annual ADDRESS FOR 1873 “Prof. Goldstiicker’s own Dictionary, ‘extended and im­ proved from the second edition’ of Wilson’s, has unfortunately remained a mere fragment, embracing only a portion of the words beginning with the first letter of the alphabet. The first fasciculus was published in 1856, and the sixth and last in 1864. The scale on which it is composed, as compared with Wilson’s, may be understood from the fact that its 480 pages reach no further than p. 66 of the latter. The number of words is greatly increased, and the explanations of many of them are far more elaborate than in Wilson. Some of the articles are of encyclopaedic dimensions. Perhaps the most important parts of the work are those which define the mean­ ings of the technical terms of Indian philosophy, in which the author was a high proficient. But the entire work, so far as it goes, is of great value. “The only other work calling for notice is that of Prof. Monier Williams, published last summer (containing 1186 4to. pp., much more closely printed than the 988 pp. of Wilson’s), which supplies, in a practical manner, the want, so long felt, of a complete Sanskrit and English Dictionary, and will tend greatly to facilitate and promote the study of Sanskrit in this country. It includes an immense number of words not to be found in Wilson, and embodies in a con­ densed form the new materials to be found in the parts of Bohtlingk and Roth’s work published up to the time of its appearance.” Prof. Aufrecht, of Edinburgh, who is also a Member of our Council, has kindly supplemented the preceding lexico­ graphical remarks of Mr. Muir by the following relating to Sanscrit Grammaticography. “ Sanskrit Grammar is based on the grammatical aphorisms of Panini, a writer now generally supposed to have lived in the fourth eentury b.c. At that time, Sanskrit had oeased to be a living language, and was only kept up artificially by being made the vehicle for the education of the upper classes. It would be interesting to know what style of language Panini chose as the standard of his observations. It was certainly not the idiom of the Vedas, as he seldom treats �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 23 this with his usual accuracy, and only mentions it in order to show its discrepancies from the classical style, or, as he terms it, the language of the world. We believe that long before his own time a scientific and poetical literature had already sprung up, and that a certain number of writers were chosen by him and his predecessors as the representatives and patterns of the classical language. Panini was himself a poet, and the great commentary on his grammatical rules contains many fragments of early poetry. Treatises on law, long anterior to the law-book of Manu, are still in existence, and names of ancient writers on other than sacred subjects are frequently cited. However this may be, it is quite certain that the so-called classical Sanskrit, as taught by Panini and his numerous commentators and imitators, is not a language which had its foundation in the colloquial usage of an entire nation or the educated portion of it, but rather in the confined sphere of grammatical schools which fed themselves on the rich patrimony of previous illustrious ages. This development of the Sanskrit finds a striking analogy in the Rabbinic language, which’also is to be traced back to the endeavours of religious scholars to endue with new life an idiom rapidly dying out. “ The introduction of Sanskrit lore into Europe forms a new epoch in the study of the language. The European Grammarians tried from the very first to arrange Sanskrit grammar, not according to the chaotic manner of the Natives, but after the models of their own Greek and Latin grammars. They used more or less fully and accurately the native sources, but tried to free themselves from the trammels of a system which for its comprehension required years of study. It is principally owing to the genius of Bopp that Sanskrit grammar has become as lucid as that of any other ancient or modern language which we are in the habit of studying. But Bopp was not satisfied with the compara­ tively easy task of digesting the principles of Sanskrit grammar according to European models ; this had been done before him in a very satisfactory way by Wilkins. But his principal merit consists in having brought to bear on his �24 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 subject the light of his philological discoveries, and in basing his rules on purely scientific principles. His aim was to trace everywhere the genesis of the grammatical forms, not to content himself with a mere classification. Advanced scholars might from time to time discover, and have some­ times too severely criticised, the want of a thorough know­ ledge of the native grammarians, and the mistakes which in consequence here and there disfigured his grammar. Never­ theless, it may be said that all the distinguished Sanskrit scholars of the present time have learned from him their Sanskrit; and Bopp was not slow to correct in subsequent editions any mistakes which had been pointed out to him. Bopp’s Grammar appeared in six editions,1 five in German, and one in Latin. Its principal defect is the absence of Syntax. Wilson and Williams are the only scholars who, to some extent, have tried to supply this deficiency. “ Bohtlingk, the editor of Panini, published in 1843 and 1844 two essays on Sanskrit Declension and Accent, both based solely on native sources. The latter essay is of some historical importance, as having first called attention to a subject entirely unknown before. Benfey, in a review, entered more fully on the latter topic, availing himself for this purpose of the few then accessible accentuated texts of the Vedas. Bopp, in a separate book, showed the agreement between the Sanskrit and Greek accent. Aufrecht published an essay on the accent in Sanskrit Compounds, and Whitney wrote a treatise on the system of accentuation in the Atharva Veda.1 2 “Professor Boiler, of Vienna, published in 1847 a Sanskrit Grammar, in which an attempt was made to give the ma­ terial, as supplied by the native grammarians, in some completeness, and to accentuate every part of the grammar. This work does not seem to have attracted much notice, although it is done both accurately and systematically. “ A more ambitious aim was pursued by Professor Benfey 1 The fourth edition of his smaller Grammar appeared after his death in 1868. 2 An account of Prof. Whitney’s view of Sanscrit accent is given in the last footnote to my paper on “Accent and Emphasis,” in the Philological Trans­ actions for 1873-4, p. 163.—A. J. E. �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 25 in his Complete Grammar of Sanskrit, Leipzig, 1852. Ac­ cording to his own statement, it was his object to show precisely and clearly all that is forbidden and allowed in Sanskrit, and to render fully the native exposition of gram­ mar. There can be no doubt that Benfey has brought together a heap of material for the erection of a palace, but, unfortunately, in endeavouring to outvie all that had been done before him, he has not sufficiently separated cumbersome rubbish from the really valuable bricks and stones. The beginner, wishing to learn Sanskrit from this book, would arrive at the conviction that it is a language in which the exception forms the rule; and the advanced scholar will find it an easier task to consult his Panini, than to have recourse to this exposition of the native system. We have to speak with more praise of the Practical Grammar by the same author, brought out in English by Messrs. Trubner, although experience has proved to us that the epithet ‘practical’ is hardly justified. A grammar in which declension is placed at the end of the book, and which in all earnest contains a de­ clension of sutus, said to mean ‘ well shining,’ a word sprung up in the muddled brain of a crazy grammarian, would, at least in this country, not be called practical. “ Professor Stenzler has put together in 42 pages (Breslau, 1868) the Essentials of Sanskrit Grammar in a most satisfactory manner, and we know of no other book so well adapted to the use of those who wish to learn the elements of the language. “ Within the last thirty years, several grammars have been published in England, and have gone through new editions. The grammars of Professors Wilson, Williams, and Muller are too well known to require a special criticism. But we cannot conclude without drawing attention to Pro­ fessor Kielhorn’s Grammar, printed at Bombay in 1870. Both for clearness and accuracy we consider it the best gram­ mar hitherto published in the English language. “ The books we have hitherto spoken about were written for practical purposes. But a historical grammar, after the model of Grimm’s Deutsche Grammatik, still remains a de­ sideratum. We should like to see a work which would trace �26 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 the language through the different stages of the Vedical writings down to the great Epics and Puranas, and show the gradual development of Sanskrit into the ancient and modern popular dialects, which have arisen on its ruins. Materials for such a task are gradually accumulating, and it requires only a master-spirit to complete and properly digest them.” • Greek. For the following account of recent researches on Greek I am indebted to Mr. John Peile, Tutor of Christ’s College, Cambridge, a Member of our Council. Allow me in especial to direct your attention to the phonetic questions which arise in them, and to the concluding observations upon general syntactical transformation in language: the former shew the impossibility of advancing in philology without much increased knowledge of phonology; the latter bring the solidarity of languages strikingly before us, and warn us against the confusion of development with decay. “ A careful discussion of the Ionic dialect has been given by Erman in Curtius’ Studien. This has been long wanted. The results are not very full, but they at least shew how much can be certainly known. Erman has printed all the prose Ionic inscriptions which we possess: those of the Corpus, and those edited more lately by Newton, and by Lenormant: he has also availed himself of the labour of Kirchhoff (Studien zur Gfeschichte des Gfriechischen Alphabets}. We thus have the inscriptions of the sixth and fifth centu­ ries—those of Magna Graecia and Euboea, of the twelve Ionic cities, and of Thasos, Halicarnassus, etc.: then those of the fourth century, in number 40. To these inscriptions he rightly attributes much greater importance than to the MSS. of Herodotus, which sometimes shew Atticisms, some­ times hyper-Ionicisms. His principal conclusion is, that the later Ionic dialect differed much less from the Attic than is commonly supposed. But he shews considerable divergence (as might be expected) among the western Ionians from the typical form : and in that form itself some slight variations, �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 27 the natural result of time. Among other results of his in­ vestigation is a clear proof that the v e^eX/cvo-rifcov was found in older Ionic (a fact commonly denied), with precisely the same irregularity as in Attic, and more rarely in the later inscriptions. . The Euboean inscriptions shew the natural influence of Hellas proper, in the preservation of a in some words where Ionia weakened it into y. He thinks that a difference of sound underlies the variants e and ei found nross-wise in both Attic and Ionic, though not com­ monly, ei being the usual spelling : one sound he thinks belonged to the true diphthong arising from the meeting of e and t, or from the intensification of i; the other to the merely compensatorily lengthened e. It is not probable that the diphthongal sound was long preserved pure : it possibly sank first into the close e-sound followed by a glide, though denoted still by ec: while e probably denoted the close e pure, and the open e. With respect to the absence of contracted vowels, which is commonly assumed to be peculiar to Ionic, Erman has shewn conclusively that contraction was common to all the branches, except that of Thasos, as early as the 5th century. u In the same journal Siegismund has an exhaustive paper on Greek metathesis. The facts are admirably arranged. In Greek, as in other languages, the greater number of the sounds so transposed are liquids; and Siegismund rightly explains the fact by the nature of the sound. He thinks it probable that the liquid expanded itself (so to speak) into a liquid and vowel: it thus stood between two vowels,—the original vowel of the root, and its own offspring:1 and either of these could be dropped: so that the place of the liquid was altered if the original vowel was the one that suffered. Undoubted examples of vowels thus engendered are seen in 1 “ An r is combined -with a halfrnora [or measure, svaramo.tra] in the middle of the vowel mora of the rvowel, just as a nail is with the finger; like a pearl on a string, some say; like a worm in grass, say others.” Native commentator on the rule i. 37 in the Atharva-Veda Prati<;akhya, as translated by Prof. Whitney. This in­ terposition of an r in the midst of a vowel, ready therefore to obliterate either end, as in old Sanscrit ar and later ri, corresponds precisely to the view in the text.—A. J. E. �28 the president’s annual ADDRESS FOR 1873 rap{a))(r]—fromVrap^, and paX(a)Kos—fromVpaXtc: but here both vowels remained. Other cases of metathesis are excel­ lently explained by Siegismund as due to a principle which we see in daily operation, i.e. that in pronouncing a word hastily, when we have each component part of it in our mind, we sometimes in our hurry anticipate one element, and so bring it forward out of its proper place: thus, e.p., he would explain the curious form apidpos for apifipos attributed to Simonides, and found (in the form of a verb aptOpeoy) in Callimachus and Theocritus. No doubt this is but one operation of the ordinary principle of phonetic change. “ Prof. Campbell, in the preface to his edition of Sophocles, has called attention to the character of the Greek language in the fifth century, which differs from the uniformity found alike in Epic construction and (rather differently) in the Attic orators. It was (as he says) a creative period, when the resources of the language were fully felt, and not yet limited by grammarians; when each author developed, not only his thought, but also the instrument of its expression, as he pleased;—a transition-time, when the original instinct of language breaks forth afresh, and throws the old materials into new combinations impossible in a more advanced literary period. Striking examples of this force are to be seen in Pindar, Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Thucydides : in all of these we see creative power, not merely of thought, but also of language, breaking out in a tentative, irregular, and often incomplete way. Written composition was still a novelty: the writers were conscious of their manner of expression, as well as of their matter: they analyzed their language; and thus arose a mass of minute distinctions in expression be­ longing rather to the language than to the thought: they concentrated their language ; whence came considerable obscurity : lastly they gave free play to their language ; and thus came change of construction in the very middle of a sentence, so that the connection of the words is natural, rather than grammatical. No doubt, each of these authors struck out a different path from each of the others: but all �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 29 were subject to the same influences, and the common result is very noticeable. tf Much light may be thrown by studies like these, not only upon the syntax of a particular language, but also on the history of syntax as a whole: that is upon the limits in expression imposed upon itself by human thought. In Greek we thus ascertain approximately the accretions of the Sophoclean era: we may apply the same kind of calculus to the Epic dialect, so far as is possible under the uncertainty of the age of some of the poems: and in the Iliad and Odyssey, whatever the age of each poem may be, it seems to me at least certain that the syntax is old. We may thus eliminate from each of these periods the special, and ascertain their common, element; and so find out the simply Greek form of expres­ sion natural to it from its earliest beginnings as a separate language. We might then compare this residuum with a similar (not equally rich) result to be gained from the Latin: then compare this Graeco-Italian form of expression with the result of tracing the much simpler development of Sanskrit syntax from the plays back to the Vedas. Lastly a still smaller representation of the growth of North Europe might be gained from the Lithuanian: no Teutonic language is at once sufficiently pure from foreign admixture and in possession of a sufficiently rich inflexional system. We should thus arrive at a starting-point, from which to investi­ gate the common syntax of the Indo-European family.” Latin. Our old colleague in the Council, Dr. W. Wagner, whose absence we have had much cause to regret since he has been re­ called to his own country to hold a position at the Johanneum in Hamburg, has kindly consented to come among us in spirit if not in body, and has sent us a short resume of Latin philology. And we must be the more indebted to him, that he has not hesitated to rewrite it for us, after his original paper miscarried by post, and undaunted by this misfortune, promises a longer contribution on another occasion. He says:— �30 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 “.Latin philology has been advancing steadily within the last year. The powerful impulse given to a more careful study of the Latin language and its literature by Ritschl and Lachmann is still producing new effects, and the school of philologers trained by Ritschl are developing a surprising activity. The great collection of inscriptions originally undertaken at the suggestion of Ritschl and Mommsen is proceeding with a rapidity far surpassing the rival publica­ tion of the Corpus inscriptionum Graecarum. A collection of the Pompeian inscriptions, executed by Dr. Zangemeister, appeared only two years ago, and we have already received a new instalment of the work, comprising the inscriptions of the regio decima of Italy, edited by Th. Mommsen himself. Besides its linguistic interest, this volume may also be con­ sidered an important contribution to the ancient geography of the district, as it has been possible to. ascertain the exact situation of more than one place by means of these in­ scriptions. “ Among the various editions of authors published last year, we may mention in the first place Lucian Muller’s edition of the fragments of Lucilius, a stout volume with a most careful index and prolegomena. A collection of the important fragments of the earliest Roman satirist, the model of Horace, had been promised by Lachmann, but his prema­ ture death had not allowed him to publish more on the subject than a few very suggestive treatises prefixed to the indices lectionum of the Berlin University. Other scholars having been deterred from the attempt by M. Haupt’s re­ peated insinuations that he was going to publish Lachmann’s edition left in MS., L. Muller has done wisely not to delay his work, as the more than twenty years elapsed since Lach-I mann’s death and the procrastination peculiar to Haupt rendered vain any further hope to obtain Lachmann’s work. In an author so difficult as Lucilius, it is but natural that we should not always agree with the Editor’s suggestions and emendations, but we owe him a debt of gratitude for fur­ nishing us with a scholarly edition of Lucilius. “ The editions of Horace, Catullus, Tibullus, Propertius, �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 31 and Rutilius Numatianus, lately published by the same scholar, are merely intended as forerunners of his contem­ plated great Corpus poetarum latinorum, which is to supersede the antiquated Corpus by Weber, and the unscholarly work of Sidney Walker generally current in England. L. Muller’s criticism in his edition of the erotic poets will of necessity frequently provoke contradiction, but there still remains a great deal of what is new and original, much that is sugges­ tive, and some that is true. His Propertius seems to be the least satisfactory part; but this is a most difficult author, and one that requires repeated study to become familiar with his peculiar manner. Mr. Paley’s edition of Propertius, with English notes, is convenient for practical use, but lacks actual scholarly insight, and displays a peculiar want of critical faculty in an editor who seems to be so thoroughly at home in his tragedians, but less familiar with Latin scholarship. “ In speaking of Latin literature, we must needs mention the firm of Teubner at Leipzig, to whose exertions so many valuable works are due. They have lately published a new volume of the Latin grammarians (by Keil), containing that most important writer Marius Vic.torinus, whose work in­ cludes such valuable notices on archaic Latin. Among the new publications of the Bibliotheca Scriptorum Lat. et Graec. Teubneriana, we notice chiefly an excellent edition of the Controversiae of the elder Seneca (Seneca rhetor) by Pro­ fessor M. Kiessling of Greifswald, an edition containing many sagacious emendations of the text, and excellent in­ dexes ; an important edition of Cicero’s Letters (in two volumes) by the Danish scholar Wesenberg, whose separate treatises and occasional observations communicated to his friend Madvig had previously excited much interest, and who has now placed before us what may be called a sur­ prising performance in point of familiarity with Cicero’s diction and Latin style in general. This edition , is to be followed up by a fasciculus containing the arguments justi­ fying the principal emendations. The editions of Dictys and Dares, the two fabulous historians of the Trojan War, by F. Meister, belong likewise to the Bibl. Teubn. The edition �32 the president’s annual ADDRESS FOR 1873 of Dares contains an interesting review of the influence exercised by this author upon the writers and poets of the middle ages, and will therefore be acceptable to a wider circle of readers. “ In the Tauchnitz collection of Latin authors we may mention A. Riese’s edition of Ovid, the second volume of which contains a valuable edition of the Metamorphoses, with the best and most concise critical commentary to be had for this work. “ In the grammatical investigation of the Latin language a new system has been successfully adopted of late. The comprehensive works of Vossizts and Rudimanmis, which seem to embrace the whole of Latin literature, belong to a naive period which held it still possible that one man should exhaust the whole literary life of the language ; of late, we have preferred detailed and minute investigation to issuing new grammars of the whole language. The pronunciation and letter-changes of Latin have been carefully investigated by Corssen, Latin spelling has been historically revised by Brambach (who has also made his results accessible to teachers in his Kulfsbuclilein fur lateinische Rechtschreibung'), and two important monographs have been published on the syntax of quom by Lubbert and Autenrieth. Liibbert’s method is sta­ tistical, and has led to important results. The distinction made by our grammars between quom causal and quom tem­ poral did not, as he shews, exist in early Latin; it was only gradually forming in the time of Plautus and Terence, neither of whom ever uses quom temporal with the subjunctive im­ perfect and pluperfect. The historical and statistical method is also employed in Drager’s Kistorische Syntax, a work greatly to be recommended for its accuracy and careful elabo­ ration. The author gives nothing but what he himself has collected, and this is perhaps the only point to which excep­ tion might be taken. His work would be more complete had he also utilised the labours of his predecessors. By the same author we possess a valuable monograph on the style of Tacitus, and a very good work on Apuleius and African Latin has lately been published by Koziol, an Austrian scholar. �83 DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. The best work, however, of this kind, is Kuhnast’s Hauptpunkte der Livianischen Syntax (Berlin, Weber, 1872), quite a masterly work in every respect. A similar work on Cicero would be quite a boon to the student of Latin. It is in­ credible how many erroneous statements concerning Cicero and classical Latin keep floating through our grammars, one of which always carefully copies the errors of its predecessors. Kiihnast shews that many phrases and constructions, dis­ dained by over-anxious purists, are most excellent Latin, but somehow have not got admitted into dictionaries and grammars. “ The texts of the principal authors of the Latin language have been so much changed and improved by the labours of this Century, that there is now a wide field for energetic young philologers in cultivating the historical grammar of the language. In return, textual criticism will also be bene­ fited by these detailed investigations, and the nice shades of thought will be brought out by this kind of study. We have passed the stage of a sentimental admiration of the ancient authors, such as we find it in the editions of Heyne and his school; our eyes are fully open to the shortcomings and failings of Latin literature when considered aestheti­ cally, nor do we any longer attribute to this literature the ‘ humanizing ’ influence so naively believed in by former centuries—there is among us very little of that which may be termed elegant scholarship—which is all very nice, but perfectly useless—in fact, we do not work like ladies, but like men mindful of a serious purpose, which is in the first line : to trace the intellectual life of the great Roman nation in its literature; and secondly to shew and follow the con­ necting links between this literature and the other nations of Europe and Asia. To attain this end it is necessary to pursue the most minute investigations, but not to generalize without sufficient data and foundations. But the days in which it was held the height of Latin scholarship to write a splendid Ciceronian style, and to turn neat Latin verses, are past, and will never return.”1 Owing most probably to some incompletness in the expression of my intentions, Dr. Wagner has confined his remarks to the contributions to 3 �34 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 Our friend Dr. Wagner gauges woman’s work by the old standard. But when we find a lady, like Miss Anna Swan- 1 wick, translating JEschylus; another, like Miss Stockwell, taking the first Greek prize at Antioch College, U.S., against all the 700 young men there; and another, like Miss White, at the same College, solving a problem in mathematics in which 1500 male students had failed; we may remember past times when Hypatia taught at Alexandria, or more recent days when Mrs. Somerville translated Laplace, and own that superficiality does not depend on sex, but on habits of civilization, which may change, and we hope will change for the better—if indeed it be true that two heads are better than one, and that in literature and science as well as sociality, it is not good for man to be alone. The above account of the two American ladies is given on the authority of Miss Beedy, herself a graduate of Antioch, who justly remarked that of course such successes did not necessarily represent the general powers of American women, as naturally only the most capable had as yet availed them­ selves of the recently granted University privileges. But as it was suggested to me that some information should be obtained respecting the progress of ladies at Cambridge in England—Cambridge in America is still closed to them—I applied to Mr. Henry Sidgwick himself, whose name is widely known in connexion with ladies’ studies at Cambridge, and he has kindly sent me the following account: “ The facts as to our young ladies are these. Two have been examined by the examiners for our Classical Tripos, • one of whom would have obtained a second class and the other a third; one other, similarly, by the mathematical examiners, who would have obtained a second class. So the result is not exactly triumphant, though sufficiently en­ Latin Philology in 1872. Hence his omission of all English publications except Paley’s Propertius. He, how­ ever, wishes me to state that there are very few English scholars for whom he entertains a higher respect than Prof. Munro, whose Lucretius was published in 1866. Roby’s grammar, of which the first volume in its first edition came out in 1871, and the second has not yet appeared, Conington’s Virgil, and Robinson Ellis’s Catullus, have conse­ quently been passed over. It was im­ possible to alter this arrangement in time for the anniversary.—A. J. E. �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 35 couraging. It ought, however, to be borne in mind, that they had not been to classical schools, like the young men. I believe the quality of their work was in all cases better than what would be expected from their places, as they had not learnt to answer questions as quickly as the young men. The quality of Miss Cook’s work (the 2nd class classic) was especially commended. I have not myself taught any classics to ladies, but my experience of two years’ teaching of philosophy is that they (my pupils at least) quite equal the best young men in the closeness and thoroughness of their study.” Mr. Peile, who informed me that he has taught Greek, by correspondence only, to a few ladies during the past two years, although of course finding it difficult to arrive at any definite conclusion from such small data, has been led to “ believe that with a similar training women could become fully as good scholars as most of our first-class men at Cam­ bridge,” although, under the circumstances, of course, he “ cannot prove it.” It would be out of place to go into the general question of the intellectual rivalry of the sexes, but the preceding re­ marks and information respecting the aptitude of the female mind for the severer forms of University study in comparison to that displayed by young men of the same age engaged on the same subjects, although suggested by a passing allusion in Dr. Wagner’s contribution, while enforcing an opinion in which all earnest philologists must cordially agree, cannot be considered inappropriate in addressing a Philological Society, which, like our own, numbers ladies among its members. Early English. The great attention which our Society has paid to the early stages of our home-grown language, from the time that it was more or less distinctly separable from the imported tongues whence it was elaborated, as a cultivated plant from a wild flower, requires me to devote a large section of this Report to its consideration, and this I have been more easily able to effect, owing to the necessity of deferring especial �36 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 reference to its incunabula, Anglosaxon (including Gothic and the other Teutonic branches), Old Norse (including the other Scandinavian forms), and Old Norman (with the older Romance languages). The Members of our Society could not desire a better reporter on Early English than their own Honorary Secretary, Mr. Eurnivall, the Director of the Early English Text and Chaucer Societies; and I have great pleasure in presenting them with the following sketch from his pen. “As the revival of the study of Early English, which has been such a marked feature of linguistic inquiry of late years, originated with the Philological Society, I may, perhaps, be allowed to reach back some years, and remind our Members that delay on the part of our late much-lamented President, Prof. Goldstiicker, in producing his Sanskrit Affix paper for our Transactions of 1858, led to the printing of my Early English Poems and Lives of Saints early in 1862; that this encouraged Dr. Richard Morris to edit the Liber Cure Cocorum later in 1862; and in 1863 to begin, with Hampole’s Pricke of Conscience, that series of dialectal texts, accompanied by treatises on their peculiarities, which has done so much for his own renown, and for the firm founda­ tion of Early English work. In 1862 Dr. Whitley Stokes edited for the Society The Play of the Sacrament; in 1864 Dr. Weymouth followed with his critical edition of the Castel off Loue; and in the latter year was-founded the Early English Text Society, to carry on the publication of Early English Texts, which the Philological Society had so well begun, but, from want of funds, had been forced to abandon. “ Since that time the work at Early English, viewed philologically or linguistically, has been continued mainly in four directions :—I. the development of the characteristics of our early dialects ; II. the clearing-up of the limits and ‘ notes ’ of the several periods of our language ; III. its lexicography; IV. its pronunciation at different periods. “ I. Dialectal Characteristics.—As in his Preface to Ham­ pole’s Pricke of Conscience Dr. Richard Morris had, in 1863, gathered together the distinctive marks of the great Northern �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 37 dialect, so, in 1864, in his Early English Alliterative Poems (written perhaps about 1360 a.d., and edited from the unique MS. Cotton Nero A x.), he collected the characteristic signs of the Western division of that Midland dialect,1 which afterwards became the groundwork of our standard English speech. In 1865 Er. Morris edited, from the unique MS. in Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, The Story of Genesis and Exodus, written about 1250 a.d. in the East-Midland dialect; and in his Preface to this work he shewed, not only what were the differences between the Eastern and Western divi­ sions of the Midland dialect, but also those' between the Southern and Northern parts of the East-Midland speech. He assigned the Genesis and Exodus1 to the Southern section. 2 By contrasting both Southern and Northern East-Midland forms and vocabulary with those of the Southern dialect, he was able to shew the large influence of Danish in the lan­ guage of our Mid-Eastern counties. “ In 1866> Er. Morris dealt with the third great division of our dialects, the Southern (in which he included the speech of the district formerly called Western), as shewn by the Kentish treatise of Dan Michel, of St. Austin’s, Canter­ bury, The Ayenbite of Inwyt, 1340 a.d. As this was written in the South, just about the time that Richard Rolle of Hampole wrote his Pricke of Conscience in the North, Dr. Morris, in a long Grammatical Introduction to the Ayenbite, carefully contrasted the distinctive peculiarities of the Southern and Northern dialects,—a task to which he devoted 70 pages,—and then,, after shortly noticing the lexicogra­ phical differences of the two dialects, gave, in pp. 72-85, full ‘ Outlines of Kentish Grammar, a.d. 1327-40.’ “Dr. Morris’s results were soon summarized, and addi1 An extract from the West-Midland, version of the Cursor Mundi is printed in Dr. Morris’s “ Legends- of the Moly Hood," 1871, pp. 108-161. In his First Series of Old English Homilies, “The Wooing of our Lord” contains West-Midland peculiarities which are discussed in the Preface.—F. J. F.. 2 The Bestiary, from the unique Arundel MS., re-edited by Dr. R. Morris in his Old English Miscellany, 1872, be­ longs also to the Southern section of the East-Midland dialect, while the Ormulum belongs to the Northern. A fragment on p. 200 of this Old English Miscellany is like in dialect to the Genesis and Exodus; and a copy of the Moral Ode in Dr. Morris’s Old English Homilies, Series II., 1873, has EastMidland peculiarities.—F. J. F. �38 the president’s ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 tional illustrations of his positions added, in a short treatise by Dr. Wm. T. P. Sturzenbecker, of Copenhagen, called ‘ Some Notes on the leading Grammatical Characteristics of the principal Early-English Dialects.’ This was drawn up at the suggestion of Prof. George Stephens, the well-known Professor of English in the University of Copenhagen, of whom Dr. Sturzenbecker had been a pupil. But in 1867 Dr. Morris had the opportunity of summing-up his own results in the Grammatical Introduction to his ‘ Specimens of Early English, selected from the chief English Authors, a.d. 1250-1400,’ in the Clarendon Press Series of School and College Class-books, which gave the English public for the first time in their history a general view of their early gram­ mar and language, and introduced them to a number of authors and works they had hardly heard of before. On the edition becoming exhausted, Dr. Morris arranged to increase the book in size, and extend it upward to Anglo-Saxon times, so as to join on to Thorpe’s Analecta. He therefore divided the work into two parts, and put the second into the Rev. W. W. Skeat’s hands to re-edit. A second edition of this second part (which was itself a second edition) is now in the press ; but the re-edited enlarged edition of Part I. has not yet appeared, though the text of it is all printed. In 1872 Dr. Morris made a further contribution to our knowledge of the early Southern dialect by his short sketch of the grammatical forms in five Old Kentish Sermons of the 13 th century, which he edited from the unique MS. Laud 471, in his Old English Miscellany, 1872. He also pointed out the differences between the forms in these Sermons and those in the Ayenbite a hundred years later. “A very valuable sketch of the Northern dialect as a whole, and its subsequent fortunes in Scotland, to which country it was, as a literary language, confined after the fifteenth century, is contained in Mr. J. A. H. Murray’s Historical Introduction to his ‘Dialect of the Southern Counties of Scotland,’ forming Part II. of the Society’s Transactions for 1870-2. The merits of Mr. Murray’s thorough discussion and description of the South-Scotch �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 39 dialect, its history and present characteristics, are too well appreciated by our Members to need further confirmation by me. Dr. Kaufmann, in his Inaugural Dissertation1 for ■his Doctor’s degree last year, summarized and discussed the grammatical and phonetic characteristics of the language of the Scotch poet William Dunbar, who wrote in the beginning of the 16th century. “ II. Linguistic Periods.—The second part of Dr. Morris’s great services to the knowledge of English historically was seen in 1867, when he produced his First Series of Old English Homilies and Homiletic Treatises of the 12th and 13th centuries. In his Grammatical Introduction to this work he dealt with the specially transitional period of the formation of English inflexions, which Sir Frederic Madden had termed Semi-Saxon,2 as being half-way between AngloSaxon and Early English. Dr. Morris showed that the lan­ guage of the 12th century must be divided into two halves, in the former of which the older Anglo-Saxon forms prevailed, while in the latter the modern forms had the predominance; and that in the former the unsuspected and unobserved phenomenon appeared, of a number of different endings (five for the genitive only) struggling for ascendancy, till the language settled down into the comparative peace of the first version of Layamon’s Brut, the early period of the victorious final e, which had been before supposed to repre­ sent the preceding fermenting period as well as its own. “ In 1872 Dr. Morris laid the results of his ten years’ work before the public in a much condensed form, in his ‘ Historical Outlines of English Accidence,’ which—with appendices based on the admirable work of our late Honorary Member, Dr. C. Friedrich Koch, ‘Die Historische Grammatik der Englischen Sprache,’ 1863-1869, and incorporating much of the excellent Grammars of Matzner and Sachs and Fiedler—has far 1 Traite de la Langue du Poete Ecossais William Dunbar, precede d’une Esquisse de sa Vie et de ses Poemes, et d’une Choix de ses Poesies: par Johannes Kaufmann, Docteur en Philosophie a El­ berfeld. Bonn,E. Weber, 1873.—F.J.F. 2 This name has been much ridiculed by a newspaper writer, whose know­ ledge of the details of English histori­ cally is ludicrously beneath what Sir Frederic’s was.—F. J. F. �40 THE PRESIDENT S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 surpassed any work of like kind in English, and proved the superiority of the historical treatment over all others.1 This book is to be followed by ‘ Historical Outlines of English Syntax’; and then I trust that Dr. Morris will enlarge his Accidence by a series of examples of every word and con­ struction in each of our three dialects, somewhat after Burguy’s manner in his Grammaire de la Langue d'O'il. “Mr. Murray’s researches have likewise resulted in the establishment of distinct stages in the development of the Low­ land Scotch, which he has designated the Early, the Middle, and the Modern periods respectively; the first of these ends about 1475, the second with the union of England and Scotland, and the disuse of the Scotch as a literary medium. Mr. Murray has pointed out numerous characteristics by which genuine specimens of the early period may be at once distinguishedfrom those of the 16th century, and thus works which have been vaguely thrown together as ‘ Old Scots ’ satisfactorily arranged in chronological order. In many respects this is perhaps the most important result of his investigations. “ In the present year Dr. Morris has issued a Second Series of Old English Homilies, from the unique MS. in Trinity College, Cambridge, which he has shewn to have been copied by a scribe who adapted them to his own dialect,8 that of the Southern division of the East Midland, so that these Homilies rank with the Bestiary, Genesis and Exodus, and Havelok. “To the many other publications of the Early English Text Society, Mr. Skeat’s excellent edition of the FourText St. Mark,3 etc., I do not allude, as they rather offer material for the philologist to deal with hereafter, than advance his knowledge now, save so far as they work out Dr. Morris’s views. Still, in Mr. Skeat’s Prefaces to his Havelok, William of Palerne, Partenay, and Joseph of 1 Compare the latest Grammar by Dr. Wm. Smith and Mr. T. D. Hall, in which muster is given as an example of the feminine ending ster; and kine is called a contraction of cow-en!—F.J.F. 2 The original version of these Homilies was in the Southern or West-Saxon dialect.—F. J. F. 3 The latest of these Texts, the Hatton MS. 38, illustrates the same period as the First Series of Old English Homilies.—F. J. F. �DEWOSKED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 41 Arimathie, will be found very valuable independent discus­ sions of the dialectal and grammatical peculiarities of these several Texts, while in his Preface to Text B of ‘William’s Vision of Piers the Plowman,’ Mr. Skeat has shewn how widely the practice of his author and the best scribes of the B Text, in their treatment of the final e of the perfect tense, etc., differs from the accepted theories on this subject. Mr. Henry Sweet’s important essay on the characteristics of the Anglo-Saxon of Alfred’s time, Prof. March’s Anglo-Saxon Grammar, etc., belong to the subjects deferred. “ III. Dictionaries.—The admirably full Glossaries of the late Sir Frederic Madden to Havelok, William and the Were­ wolf, Sir, Gfawayne, Layamon, the Wicliffite Versions of the Bible, etc., together with those of Dr. Morris, Mr. Skeat, Mr. Brock, and other Early-English-Text-Society editors, offered a capital foundation for any scholar to build up a Dictionary on. The first1 to raise such a structure was Dr. F. H. Stratmann, of Krefeld, the second edition of whose ‘ Dictionary of the Old English Language, compiled from writings of the xn, xm, xiv, and xv centuries,’ 1871-3, is just completed. So far as the Vocabulary goes, the book is admirably trust­ worthy and careful; but unluckily Dr. Stratmann did not conceive that his duty was to register all the words found in our printed texts from MSS. of the dates assigned in his title: and I believe that his book must be at least trebled in bulk (or number of entries), before it can supply the student with all he requires in a real Early-English Dictionary. Dr. Stratmann is now hard at work on a Supplement to his excellent book, so that the defect I have pointed out is in course of being remedied. Of Dr. E. Matzner’s EarlyEnglish Dictionary only the first part has yet appeared. It 1 Our friend Herbert Coleridge’s ‘ Glossarial Index to the printed Eng­ lish Literature of the Thirteenth Cen­ tury,’ Triibner & Co. 1859, led the way; but it was confined to the half century 1250-1300 a.d. Mr. Way’s profusely annotated and excellently edited Promptorium, and Mr. Thomas Wright’s Volume of Vocabularies for Mr. Joseph Mayer, are universally known as most valuable contributions to Early English Lexicography. Mr. Wright’s second volume of Vocabularies from the 10th to the 15th century is just ready. "Ultimately the two are to be amalgamated, and sold to the general public.—E. J. F. �42 the president’s ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 unfortunately has a misleading title: 1 Altenglische Sprachproben, nebst einern Worterbuche. Zweiter Band: Worterbuch. Erste Lieferung.’ This has led many people to sup­ pose that it is only a dictionary to the words in the editor’s excellent Altenglische Sprachproben, or Specimens of Early English (Part I. in verse, Part II. in prose, the only desidera­ tum in which is, that the texts should have been compared with their MSS.). But such is not the case. The Worterbuch covers the whole range of Early English, and is refreshingly full in vocabulary and quotations, with careful distinctions of the shades of meaning in the uses of every word—a point in which Dr. Stratmann’s work is defective. The only fault that I see in Dr. Matzner’s book is, that the quotations are not arranged in either strictly chronological or dialectal order, so that the student gets confused as to the history and locality of the forms of a word; and the only drawback I know to an Englishman’s use of the book is, that the meanings of the early words are given in Grennan only, instead of both German and English. But it is very grati­ fying to us Englishmen to see how soon, and how zealously, our Teutonic brethren have come forward to share our work at our own branch of the common tongue. If only we can persuade our German kin to abstain from “ re-writing ” all Early English texts, and turning them, full of the variations of individuality and nature, into monstrosities of uniformity, impossibilities of systematic spelling and form, we shall have nothing but cause to rejoice at the help of the grand German legion of learning whose fame fills the world. “ To general English Lexicography many important con­ tributions have of late years been made. The first edition of Mr. Hensleigh Wedgwood’s English Etymology was fol­ lowed by Eduard Mueller’s excellent etymological English Dictionary, Kothen, 1865-7. This, by the revised edition of Webster, to which Dr. E. Mahn, of Berlin, contributed the etymologies — a wonderful improvement on the author’s, making the new Webster the most generally useful Dic­ tionary that I have come across. This again, by Mr. Wedg­ wood’s second and thoroughly revised and enlarged edition �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 43 of his ‘Dictionary of English Etymology? a book which, notwithstanding occasional weaknesses,—though departing from the historical method that it generally pursues,—is yet full of suggestiveness, of research, and happy insight, and points always to the discovery of those answers which the philo­ logist longs to find, for his questions to every root, ‘ Where did you spring from ? What did you first mean ? Tell me for help to know the history of mind and man.’ Dr. Latham’s new edition of Todd’s Johnson scarcely calls for notice here, as hardly any Early English was added to it, and its etymology is miserably meagre; but its enlarged vocabulary and additional quotations (though these are not always arranged chronologically) are points in its favour. The small dictionaries of Mr. Donald for Messrs. Chambers, and Mr. Stormonth for Messrs. Blackwood, are, on the whole, creditable performances. “ In special English Lexicography, the most noteworthy books are Mr. J. C. Atkinson’s Glossary of the Cleveland Dialect, 1868; those in our Society’s Transactions—Mr. Barnes’s Grammar and Glossary of the Dorset Dialect, 1864; Mr. Gregor’s Dialect of Banffshire and Glossary of Words not in Jamieson’s Dictionary, 1866; Mr. Edmon­ ston’s Glossary of the Shetland Dialect, 1866; Mr. Peacock’s Glossary of the Lonsdale Dialect, 1867. The ‘ Etymological and Comparative Glossary of the Dialect of East Anglia,’ by John Greaves Hall (London, 1866), I have not seen.1 “IV. Pronunciation.—Mr. Bichard Grant White made an exaborate attempt to ascertain Elizabethan pronunciation by means of rhymes, puns, and misspellings, in 1861,2 and 1 The Manchester Literary Club have printed and circulated, for com­ ments and additions, sheets of the A, B, and C words of the collections for their “ Glossary of the Lancashire Folk-Speech”; and state that having, “since the issue of the B sheets, re­ ceived from Mr. James Pearson, of Milnrow, a manuscript list of dialectal words current in the Fylde of Lanca­ shire, the Club Committee intend in future lists, as in the C sheets, to mark those words which are believed to be peculiar to the Fylde, Furness, Lons­ dale, and other districts, leaving it to be understood that the words not specially so denoted are current either in South and East Lancashire or generally throughout the county.”— F. J. F. Arrangements have been made for placing copies of this Glossary in the hands of members of the English Dialect Society, mentioned on p. 47.— A. J. E. s A full abstract of Mr. Grant White’s appendix to vol. 12 of his �44 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 Messrs. Noyes and Peirce applied the works of the 16th century orthoepists to the same purpose in 1864; although, unfortunately, these two writers were not acquainted with the best of them, Salesbury.1 But a connected history of the pronunciation of English had never been attempted— probably never thought of—until our present President, Mr. Ellis, took it up, and in 1867 produced the First Part of his ‘Early English Pronunciation, with Especial Reference to Shakspere and Chaucer,’ followed in 1869 by Part II., and in 1871 by Part III., while it is confidently anticipated that Part IV., completing the work, will appear early in 1874? Considering that Mr. Ellis has to read this Report himself, I will confine myself to saying that I rejoice that our Society has been the means of producing it. These phonetic investi­ gations have been worthily supplemented by Mr. J. A. H. Murray’s treatise, lately issued by our Society, on the Dialect of the Southern Counties of Scotland.” You will have doubtless noticed one curious omission in Mr. Furnivall’s contribution. The American abolitionist, Garrison, is reported to have said, that he had so much to do in saving the bodies of the slaves that he had no time to think of his own soul. Mr. Furnivall has been so much occupied in recording the work done by others that he has had no time to think of the mainspring, his own unceasing labours in setting others to work, and in setting others the example of how to work, on Early English. The extra volumes of our Society are mainly due to his suggestion, and have been produced under his stimulus. The Early English Text, the Chaucer, and the Ballad Societies are really his creations, and live by his life. I omit to notice his editions edition of Shakspere, containing these researches, is given in my Early English Pronunciation, pp. 966-973.—A. J. E. 1 In the North .Amer. Rev., April, 1864, pp. 342-369. All the authorities cited by them are mentioned in my E. E. Pron., p. 917, note, and all their re­ sults are given in the footnotes to pp. 975-980 of the same work.—A. J. E. 2 The state of the work is as follows. Part IV. will consist of four chapters and the indexes. The two first of these will be sent for press on 1 June. The third will probably be completed in MS. by the end of June. One of the most laborious sections of the last is com­ plete in draft. How long the indexes will take it is impossible to say, but I hope, if the many adverse circumstances which I am obliged to allow for as possible, are good enough to permit me, to have the text printed by 1 Sept., and if so the fourth part ought to be ready before our next Anniversary.—A. J. E. �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 45 of Robert of Brunne, the Babees Book, and other minor works, to draw especial attention to his great contribution to accurate English philology, the magnificent Six-Text Edition of Chaucer, still in progress, which I regard as entirely his own in conception and execution. Mr. Furnivall has in this work inaugurated a new era in philology. No one will henceforth be satisfied with collations of important works. An editor may patch up a text to shew his own particular views, and defend them in elaborate comments. But students, who wish to know what the works are like, will now require the lively counterfeits of their oldest existent forms placed side by side for actual comparison one with another and each part with its whole; not a mosaic presentment of disaccordant patches. This is what Mr. Furnivall has done for our first English poet, mostly with his own hand, entirely by his own thought, and no notice of Early English philology read from this Chair can be complete without fitting mention of this great philological work accomplished by our own Honorary Secretary. Mr. Skeat, whose admiration for the English language is certainly not founded on ignorance, for few have ex­ amined its documents more minutely, has supplemented Mr. Furnivall’s sketch by the following plea for the due position of English scholarship :— “ The careful and acute researches of Dr. Morris with respect to questions of dialect well illustrate the new method which has arisen of regarding our old literature, not as a compilation of unintelligible monstrosities of forms, but as representing modes of speech which were actually in the mouths of men in the olden times. Yet this is only one side of the matter. Equally careful work has been expended upon questions of etymology, both by Dr. Morris and by other editors. Perhaps few have contributed so much to forming habits of strict scholarly accuracy as the late Sir Frederic Madden. He clearly regarded our English speech as worthy of the same kind of exact critical study—both in kind and degree—as it has generally been the English habit to reserve for the study of the “ classical languages ” only. �46 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 This principle has been conscientiously followed out by most of the editors for the Early English Text Society, with the hope that wild etymological speculations and guess-work derivations that set at defiance all known laws of language may soon become things of the past. The due recognition of this important principle, now that it has once been per­ mitted to see the light, must never more be lost sight of. It is not for us to make premature guesses, but patiently to in­ vestigate. Our own tongue yields to none other in copious­ ness, in versatility, in many-sidedness; and there is no reason why English scholarship should not be as critical, as exact, as minute, and in every way as sound as any other. It is just because our English editors have at last begun both to per­ ceive this and to act upon it, that the Glossaries to our texts have also begun to have a solid value, very different from that of those in some old editions wherein the editor fre­ quently refrained from indicating by references to what passages his explanation referred ; in order, we may suppose, that the reader might not so easily be enabled to catalogue, and in some cases to rectify, his blunders.” Finally, English takes a prominent place in the Proceed­ ings of the American Philological Association. In those for 1871, there is an important paper by the late Prof. James Hadley, of Yale College, Connecticut, U.S., on “English Vowel Quantity in the Thirteenth Century and the Nine­ teenth,” and another by Prof. Francis A. March, of Easton, Pennsylvania, on “Anglo-Saxon and Early English Pro­ nunciation.” In those for 1872, Prof. Hadley, who was then a Vice-President, read a paper on “ The Byzantine Pronun­ ciation of Greek in the Tenth Century, as illustrated by a Manuscript in the Bodleian Library,” which I had adduced as collateral evidence of Anglo-Saxon Pronunciation (Early English Pronunciation, pp. 516-527). This was Professor Hadley’s last paper. Prof. Whitney, of Yale College, in sending me a copy of it, says: “You will see what a loss English studies, as well as classical and comparative philplogy, have suffered by his death. No more painful and disabling blow, certainly, could have fallen on our com­ �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 47 munity of American scholars.” To Prof. Hadley we owe, according to Prof. Whitney, “ a clear and succinct view of the history and connections of English Speech, prefixed to the latest edition of Webster’s Dictionary,”1 and I must record my personal obligations to him for an appreciative and disc.riminating review of the first two parts of my Early English Pronunciation in the North American Review (April 1870, pp. 420-437). English philology can ill spare so able a worker in her vineyard. Among other papers read before this American Philological Association in 1871, I notice Dr. Fitz Edward Hall on “the imperfect tenses of the passive voice in English,” presented by Prof. Whitney, notes on my Early English Pronunciation by Mr. Bristed, and Mr. Trumbull on “ a mode of counting, said to have been used by the Wawenoc Indians of Maine,” which is my Yorkshire Sheep-scoring, already referred to. In the session for 1872, we have Mr. Bristed on “ erroneous and doubtful uses of the word such’' Mr. W. Worthington Fowler on “ the derivation of English monosyllabic personal surnames,” Mr. Trumbull on “ English words derived from Indian lan­ guages of North America.” Prof. March inquires: “Is there an Anglo-Saxon Language ? ” and follows this up by a paper on “ some irregular verbs in Anglo-Saxon,” shewing that he had no doubt on his own mind. Finally Prof. S. S. Haldeman read a paper on “Some Points of English Pro­ nunciation and Spelling.” English Dialects. In connection with English studies, I am delighted to have ’it in my power to announce that the Rev. W. W. Skeat, a‘ Member of our Council, to whom our own and the Early English Text Society are so deeply indebted for long, la­ borious, and accurate work, has started, and with his usual promptitude and vigour actually set on foot, an English Dialect Society. Many of you are aware that I mooted this question in the introduction to the Third Part of my 1 “Language and the Study of Language,” 1867, p. 211. See also the last two lectures of this work with reference to Prof. Max Miiller’s theories, infra p. 49. �48 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 Early English Pronunciation. But I have never felt vigorous enough to carry it out. It is to me a matter of faith that we cannot at all properly understand varied Early English—which consists solely of dialects—without under­ standing the varied English of to-day, whether in phonetical or grammatical construction, and I have long felt that time is running distressingly short. Intercommunication is draw­ ing a wet sponge over the living records of our nascent tongue. The intentions of the English Dialect Society started by Mr. Skeat are—1) to bring together those in­ terested in Provincial English, that is, every one interested in the history of our language, 2) to combine the labours of collectors by providing a common centre and means of record, 3) to publish, subject to proper revision, MS. col­ lections of words, and 4) to supply information to collectors. One of the first labours of the Society will be to form a complete catalogue of all existing works on the subject, and I am greatly pleased to announce that Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte has agreed to allow his private collection of nearly 700 works—from little pamphlets to large books—in, on, and about the English dialects, to be catalogued for the use of this Society. I am sure that merely to mention the launching of such a scheme under such guidance, is to recommend it to every Member of our own Society, and I hope that there will not only be a general cry of good speed! but an early and general promise of co-operation.1 Origin of Language. In my last year’s address considerations of the relations of thought to sound as the pivot of philological research, natu­ rally brought me face to face with some of the theories of the origin of language, as the pooh pooh I bow wow ! and ding 1 The Treasurer is the Rev. J. W. Cartmell, Christ’s College, Cambridge; the Subscription, half a guinea only; Tankers, J. Mortlock & Co., Cam­ bridge, whose London correspondents are Messrs. Smith, Payne, & Smith, 1, Lombard Street; Hon. Secretary, Rev. W. W. Skeat, 1, Cintra Terrace, Cambridge, to whom all communica­ tions on dialects are to be addressed, and who will supply printed rules of directions for collecting and recording words. Early adhesions are of great importance. �49 DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. together with the notion of roots. In this country Prof. Max Muller has long been favourably and popularly known as the defender of radicarianism, or the hypothesis of roots. He has just completed a course of lectures at the Royal Institution (22 and 29 March, and 5 April, 1873), on what he termed “ Mr. Darwin’s Philosophy of Language,” but which, after hearing, I think should have been entitled:— ■ the Annihilation of Mr. Darwin’s theory of evolution, by Prof. Max Muller’s philosophy of language.” The object of the lectures was indeed to shew that language, as conceived by Prof. Max Muller, formed an impassable barrier between the ape and man. i( Ho animal speaks,” said the lecturer, quoting with serious approval Schleicher’s joke, “ if a pig were to say to me, I am a pig, he would thereby cease to be a pig.” In which case, perhaps, a logician might doubt whether it was a pig before it spoke. But in order to arrive at this result, Prof. Max Muller had to separate language into two domains, emotional and rational. The first he admitted to be common to man and animal. The second he considered the appanage of man. But this rational language he made to consist in using phonetic forms to represent general concepts. These general concepts were asserted to be in fact the peculiarity of man. The Professor seems to consider that they are obtained a, priori. “ You cannot say, this is green, unless you have first the idea of green,” were the words he used. In this case I fear that when I, for one, say “this is green,” I speak like a parrot. I own not to having “the idea of green,” not even to guessing what it is. I know of course the disputes about primary colours, whether green is simple or mixed, primary or secondary. I know grass green, pea green, sea green, arsenical green. When I bought penny colours as a child I knew bice green, chrome green, sap green. When I mixed prussian blue and gam­ boge I made blue greens and yellow greens. I have since learned to recognize red greens, brown greens, purple greens, neutral greens; in fact, a whole bunch of greens. But I have no “idea of green,” that is, of “green absolutely,” nothing separable from light passing into and being reflected 4 �50 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873 from a definite absorber, or passing through a definite re­ fracting medium with a definite angle of incidence, or from a mixture, natural or artificial, of several such beams. And when I look upon all these greens I see that the name has passed from one to another by a process of joint consimilation and differentiation, all entirely a posteriori, nothing at all a priori. And I have had several friends who, through colour-blindness, saw resemblances wher,e I saw differences, and put among the greens what I put among the reds, and conversely. So having no general concept of green, I doubt whether I have a general concept of anything else. And then I come to think, whether upon Prof. Max Muller’s theory, the people who class me among men may not be committing a mistake entirely similar to that of my colour­ blind friends, whether in fact I am not a gorilla myself, or at most the missing link. Seriously, these questions are not, so far as I can see, to be solved d priori. Animals, to my mind, have concepts, with quite as much a right to be termed general as any which I possess myself, the difference being one of degree. As to the impossibility of speechless animals ever becoming speaking men, I feel that this is a mere postulate. The embryonic man passes through foetal stages of lower animalism.1 The born man passes from 1 See, M. Serres, Principes d’ Embryogenie, de Zoogenie et de Teratogenie, forming vol. 25 of the M emoires de l’Academie des Sciences de l’lnstitut Imperial de France, 1860, 4to. pp. 942, with 25 plates. On p. 380 we find: “ S’il est curieux de voir, comme nous venons de l’indiquer, l’anatomie comparee reproduire 1’embryogenie humaine, combien n’est-il pas plus im­ portant de voir celle-ci repeter a son tour, sur d'autres points, l’organisation des animaux! Quoi de plus remarquable et de moins remarque, avant nos travaux, que ce singulier prolongement caudal que presente l’embryon de l’homme de la cinquieme a la sixieme et septieme semaine ? Si un caractere saillant distingue l’homme des mammiferes et des quadrumaines, c’est assurement l’absence du prolongement caudal. Or voici que l’embryon nous reproduit ce prolongement, nous decelant, pour ainsi dire, par un signe tout exterieur, les ressemblances qui le lient plus profondement a la chaine des etres dont il constitue le dernier anneau. Ce caractere presente meme cette particularite veritablement saississante, que c’est lors de sa manifestation et pendant sa dure'e que se reproduisent les repetitions organiques de l’anatomie comparee. . . . c’est alors enfin que l’encephale humain se deguisent sous les formes de'volues aux poissons, aux reptiles et aux oiseaux. Et ce qui complete la chose, c’est que ce pro­ longement caudal n’a qu’une existence dphemere, comme toutes les ressem­ blances organiques de l’embryon, il disparait dans le cours du troisieme mois; et c’est aussi a partir de cet instant que l’homme, laissant derriere lui tous les etres organises, s’avance a grands pas vers le type d’organisation qui le constitue dans sa vie exterieure.” �DELIVERED BY ALEXANDER J. ELLIS, ESQ. 51 speechlessness to speech—provided he can hear, and with Prof. Whitney I put in a plea for the deaf and dumb. The rapidity with which the bom man, his transitional stages passed, develops into a speaking animal under favourable circumstances of audition and environment, is what the evo­ lutionary hypothesis would lead us to anticipate. But, with all that, he is usually twelve months dumb, less amenable to command at first than most adult dogs. Then in another twelve months he slowly acquires extremely concrete or par­ ticular concepts. The general concepts, under favourable circumstances, grow rapidly, but in twenty years they are seldom very distinct or numerous. After forty years he begins to clarify them. At sixty, which I am fast approach­ ing, he ceases to be surprised at their paucity, but rather wonders at their mere existence, and sometimes doubts that. Yet he has then conversed, according to the usual accept­ ation of the term, for half a century. The belief in a necessity of general concepts for the formation of roots, and thence of language (itself to be considered as connate with thought, so that all four, general concepts, roots, lan­ guage, and thought, are but phases of one act, which is the theory I understand Prof. Max Muller to maintain), seems to me dissipated by the mere history of talking man. Space does not allow me to treat such a subject with the necessary detail or necessary seriousness. I mention it, as one of the most recent statements put forth by a well-known philologist. But I conceive such questions to be out of the field of philology proper. We have to investigate what is, we have to discover, if possible, the invariable unconditional relations under which language, as we observe it, forms, de­ velops, changes, or at least to construct an empirical state­ ment of definite linguistic relations, and ascertain how far that statement obtains in individual cases. Real language, the go-between of man and man, is a totally different organism from philosophical language, the misty ill-understood expo­ nent of sharp metaphysical distinctions. Our work is with the former. We shall do more by tracing the historical growth of one single work-a-day tongue, than by filling �52 THE PRESIDENT’S ANNUAL ADDRESS FOR 1873. waste-paper baskets with reams of paper covered with specu­ lations on the origin of all tongues. What enormous work is wanted for the historical investigation of one single branch of philology is shewn by the labours of Grimm and his compatriots in Germany, supplemented by the existing inves­ tigations of Early English explorers. What still greater work is required for the comparison of a single family of related languages, is shewn by the work which Bopp initiated and Pott is unweariedly carrying on for Aryanism. The danger is that we should shut ourselves up in one little “clearing,” and not see the primeval forest in which we work for the fine trees that immediately surround us. Societies like ours are intended to obviate this defect, and addresses like the present are meant in some small degree to focus inquiry, that we may better see one in all and all in one. I regret much that the work has not fallen at first into abler hands, but I would raise up my own feeble voice, which I feel acutely to be the voice of an outsider in philology, to beg philologists to relegate these philosophical questions on origins to a period when more is known of actualities and development, and to work, with “ a long pull, a strong pull, and a pull altogether,” to make the real living organism intelligible, and to track its growth day by day as it can now be watched, in order to understand not only-how it has reached its present state from anterior conditions traceable in existing monuments and documents, but how its present state will hereafter change, whether such changes have or have not conduced to the improvement of language as the expression of thought, and what connection there is between the development of man, and the chief instrument by which it can be recorded. When I think of what all this implies, I may well repeat the Horatian invocation, recalling the Queen of Fair Speech from the heaven of speculation to the earth of investigation, from the trump divine to the pipe human, and proclaiming the comparative endlessness of the task before her— “Descende caelo, et die, age, tibia Regina longum, Calliope, melos.” � 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 &amp; 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 Second annual address of the President to the Philological Society delivered at the anniversary meeting, Friday, 16th May, 1873 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ellis, Alexander John Description An account of the resource Place of publication: London Collation: 34 p. ; 22 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Inscription on front page: M D Esq from the author 1 June 1873. Includes bibliographical references. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Philological Society Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1873 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5276 Subject The topic of the resource Philology Language 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 (Second annual address of the President to the Philological Society delivered at the anniversary meeting, Friday, 16th May, 1873), 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 Philology Press https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/1d0521f44b23a84e944e755a24ea3214.pdf?Expires=1777507200&Signature=Dqx5l4v58qBugVC6xaNkx4WviIE0siyvBvz93BeepOHUFT8iYm-sErgsb1IDzYQEqdrU8N6-ZRrUwCSTgeEFA4R3px-VEvJRRjzz-lxG6r4tnVS9bhsSiby5M%7EDzpJ9cFhPeyFdIoEe%7EaRXfeRNQ-Efyb-yvMgAXxYRuzRYUCte%7ETmt1trIN0SADlgIuxygQQKFA6Qv1AjVludG%7ElJackMziVD18grpgwETdpTlcR5CDJziBrmDK09iW%7EmSUAZ1-NnDcXCh0sW0Z4CPAN7NNpocoO08BLpTEqfk2Bnged45PPGCBNkKKINuFgogIgB7Qyp7pTtFaz8SPwKPD4sqgPw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM d527e740618d38347cbef7bc99f9611e PDF Text Text ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 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 &amp; 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 Platform protectionism: a reply to Mr. Bonar Law, M.P. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Brunner, Karl (ed) Description An account of the resource Place of publication: London Collation: 70 p. : 19 cm. Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Annotations in pencil. Signature on title page: 'H.J. Peck [?] 1909, 49 Shaftesbury Road, W'. Tentative date of publication from KVK (OCLC WorldCat). Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available The Free Trade Union Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource [1908?] Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context H259 Subject The topic of the resource Free trade 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 (Platform protectionism: a reply to Mr. Bonar Law, M.P.), 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 Andrew Bonar Law Free Trade Press Protectionism https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/cd4f89d5a9eb142348ce83cbdb3e571b.pdf?Expires=1777507200&Signature=UN-qubLo7yeXMX%7EBG39wRuPfkpVXJq0XDgLNtEdcqnjAj1liS3uSkkM2g6AZOkKaVMu03a%7ET9Tdc%7Egic-x3Ygwudf38%7EjOT3Fx7MeTnRlveKKlqdXRQCqeazbRiviy-406fRb9ifo69Lec3JOrbPOAsMIa7O-UDBhEQPZcqLLHsaTWj-TqyTTASIbgUyxlDPW53w32UCL2tjnbxiylu5fgYYEn-ts4nTUansNYfTeTXgGSkpuaRXXcm43VijWbimlJAwtPpUCUbU-mExx%7EOwgLNUg5OnF9CLnfYg5SH3iQYEuSSpY9Rd22kQe8oqaaeynT26tkG6YiHDuaWkc0Z0yA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 34b0379aee51fcf95b2df4e35fbe578e PDF Text Text THE THREE PHILANTHROPISTS BY ROBERT G. INGERSOLL Price Twopence, LONDON: PROGRESSIVE PUBLISHING COMPANY, 28 Stonecutter Street, E.O. 1892. �LONDON: PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY G. W. FOOTE, 28 STONECUTTER STREET, E.C. �The Three Philanthropists By Robert Gr. Ingersoll. I. “ Well, while I am a beggar, I will rail, And say there is no sin but to be rich.” Mr. A. lived in the kingdom of------ -. He was a sincere professional philanthropist. He was absolutely certain that he loved his fellow men, and that his views were humane and scientific. He concluded to turn his attention to taking care of people less fortunate than himself. With this object in view he investigated the common people that lived about him, and he found that they were extremely ignorant, that many of them seemed to take no particular interest in life or in business, that few of them had any theories of their own, and that, while many had muscle, there was only now and then one who had any mind worth speaking of. Nearly all of them were destitute of ambition. They were satisfied if they got something to eat, a place to sleep, and could now and then indulge in some form of dissipation. They seemed to have great confidence in to-morrow—trusted to luck, and took no thought for the future. Many of them were extravagant, most of them dissipated, and a good many dishonest. Mr. A. found that many of the husbands not only failed to support their families, but that some of them lived on the labor of their wives; that many of the wives were careless of their obligations, knew nothing �4 The Three Philanthropists. about the art of cooking, nothing of keeping house 1 and that parents, as a general thing, neglected their children or treated them with cruelty. He also founj that many of the people were so shiftless that they died of want and exposure. After having obtained this information, Mr. A. made up his mind to do what little he could to better theif condition. He petitioned the king to assist him, and asked that he be allowed to take control of five hundred people in consideration that he would pay a certain amount into the treasury of the kingdom. The king, being satisfied that Mr. A. could take care of these people better than they were taking care of themselves, granted the petition. Mr. A., with the assistance of a few soldiers, took these people from their old homes and haunts to a plantation of his own. He divided them into groups, and over each group placed a superintendent. He made certain rules and regulations for their conduct. They were only compelled to work from twelve to fourteen hours a day, leaving ten hours for sleep and recreation. Good and substantial food was provided. Their houses were confortable and their clothing sufficient. Their work was laid out from day to day and from month to month, so that they knew exactly what they were to do in each hour of every day. These rules were made for the good of the people, to the end that they might not interfere with each other, that they might attend to their duties, and enjoy themselves in a reasonable way. They were not allowed to waste their time, or to use stimulants or profane language. They were told to be respectful to the superintendents, and especially to Mr. A.; to be obedient, and, above all, to accept the position in which Providence had placed them, without complaining, and to cheerfully perform their tasks. Mr. A. had found out all that the five hundred persons had earned the year before they were taken control of by him—just how much they had added to �The Three Philanthropists. 5 the wealth of the world. He had statistics taken for the year before with great care showing the number of deaths, the cases of sickness and of destitution, the number who had committed suicide, how many had been convicted of crimes and misdemeanors, how many days they had been idle, and how much time and money they had spent in drink and for worthless amusements. During the first year of their enslavement he kept like statistics. He found that they had earned several times as much ; that there had been no cases of desti­ tution, no drunkenness; that no crimes had been committed; that there had been but little sickness, owing to the regular course of their lives; that few bad been guilty of misdemeanors, owing to the certainty of punishment; and that they had been so watched and superintended that for the most part they had travelled the highway of virtue and industry. Mr. A. was delighted, and with a vast deal of pride showed these statistics to his friends. He not only demonstrated that the five hundred people were better off than they had been before, but that his own income was very largely increased. He congratulated himself that he had added to the well-being of these people not only, but had laid the foundation of a great fortune for himself. On these facts and these figures he claimed not only to be a philanthropist, but a philo­ sopher ; and all the people who had a mind to go into the same business agreed with him. Some denounced the entire proceeding as unwar­ ranted, as contrary to reason and justice. These insisted that the five hundred people had a right to live in their own way, provided they did not interfere with others; that they had the right to go through the world with little food and with poor clothes, and to live in huts, if such was their choice. But Mr. A. had no trouble in answering these objectors. He insisted that well-being is the only good, and that every human being is under obligation, not only to take care of him­ self, but to do what little he can towards taking care of �6 The Three Philanthropists. others; that where five hundred people neglect to take care of themselves, it is the duty of somebody else, who has more intelligence and more means, to take care of them; that the man who takes five hundred people and improves their condition, gives them on the average better food, better clothes, and keeps them out of mischief, is a benefactor. “These people,” said Mr. A., “were tried. They were found incapable of taking care of themselves. They lacked intelligence, or will, or honesty, or industry, or ambition, or something, so that in the struggle for existence they fell behind, became stragglers, dropped by the wayside, died in gutters; while many were destined to end their days eithei’ in dungeons or on scaffolds. Besides all this, they were a nuisance to their prosperous fellow citizens, a perpetual menace to the peace of society. They increased the burden of taxation; they filled the ranks of the criminal classes, they made it necessary to build more jails, to employ more policemen and judges ; so that I, by enslaving them, not only assisted them, not only protected them against themselves, not only bettered theii’ condition, not only added to the well-being of society at large, but greatly increased my own fortune.” Mr. A. also took the ground that Providence, by giving him superior intelligence, the genius of command, the aptitude of taking charge of others, had made it his duty to exercise these faculties for the well-being of the people and for the glory of God. Mr. A. fre­ quently declared that he was God’s steward. He often said he thanked God that he was not governed by a sickly sentiment, but that he was a man of sense, of judgment, of force of character, and that the means employed by him were in accordance with the logic of facts. Some of the people thus enslaved objected, saying that they had the same right to control themselves that Mr. A. had to control himself. But it only required a little discipline to satisfy them that they were wrong. �The Three Philanthropists. 1 Some of the people were quite happy, and declared that nothing gave them such perfect contentment as the absence of all responsibility. Mr. A. insisted that all men had not been endowed with the same capacity ; that the weak ought to be cared for by the strong; that such was evidently the design of the Creator, and that he intended to do what little he could to carry that design into effect. Mr. A. was very successful. In a few. years he had several thousands of men, women, and children working for him. He amassed a large fortune. He felt that he had been intrusted with this money by Providence. He therefore built several churches, and once in a while gave large sums to societies for the spread of civilisation. He passed away regretted by a great many people—not including those who had lived under his immediate administration. He was buried with great pomp, the king being one of the pall-bearers, and on his tomb was this: HE WAS THE PROVIDENCE OF THE POOR. �8 The Three Philanthropists. II. “ And, being rich, my virtue then ehall be To say there is no vice but beggary.” Mr. B. did not believe in slavery.. He despised the institution with every drop of his blood, and was an advocate of universal freedom. He held all of the ideas of Mr. A. in supreme contempt, and frequently spent whole evenings in denouncing the inhumanity and injustice of the whole business. He even went so far as to contend that many of A.’s slaves had more intel­ ligence than A. himself, and that, whether they had intelligence or not, they had the right to be free. He insisted that Mr. A.’s philanthropy was a sham ; that he never bought a human being for the purpose of bettering that being’s condition ; that he went into the business simply to make money for himself; and that his talk about his slaves committing less crime than when they were free was simply to justify the crime committed by himself in enslaving his fellow-men. Mr. B. was a manufacturer, and he employed some five or six thousand men. He used to say that these men were not forced to work for him; that they were at perfect liberty to accept or reject the terms ; that, so far as he was concerned, he would just as soon commit larceny or robbery as to force a man to work for him. “ Every laborer under my roof,” he used to say, “ is as free to choose as I am.” Mr. B. believed in absolutely free trade; thought it an outrage to interfere with the free interplay of forces; said that every man should buy, or at least have the privilege of buying, where he could buy cheapest, and should have the privilege of selling where he could get the most. He insisted that a man who has labor to sell has the right to sell it to the best ad­ vantage, and that the purchaser has the right to buy it at the lowest price. He did not enslave men—he hired them. Some said that he took advantage of their necessities, but he answered that he created no neces- �The Three Philanthropists. 9 sities, that he was not responsible for their condition-, that he did not make them poor, that he found them poor and gave them work, and gave them the same wages that he could employ others for. He insisted that he was absolutely just to all; he did not give one man more than another, and he never refused to employ a man on account of the man’s religion or politics; all that he did was simply to employ that man if the man wished to be employed, and give him the wages, no more and no less, that some other man of like capacity was willing to work for. Mr. B. also said that the price of the article manu­ factured by him fixed the wages of the persons em­ ployed, and that he, Mr. B., was not responsible for the price of the article he manufactured; consequently he was not responsible for the wages of the workmen. He agreed to pay them a certain price, he taking the risk of selling his articles, and he paid them regularly just on the day he agreed to pay them, and if they were not satisfied with the wages, they were at perfect liberty to leave. One of his private sayings was, “ The pool’ ye have always with you.” And from this he argued that some men were made poor so that others could be generous. “ Take poverty and suffering from the world,” he said, “ and you destroy sympathy and generosity.” Mr. B. made a large amount of money. Many of his workmen complained that their wages did not allow them to live in comfort. Many had large families, and therefore but little to eat. Some of them lived in crowded rooms. Many of the children were carried off by disease; but Mr. B. took the ground that all these people had the right to go, that he did not force them to remain, that if they were not healthy it was not his fault, and that whenever it pleased Providence to remove a child, or one of Lhe parents, he, Mr. B., was not responsible. Mr. B. insisted that many of his workmen were extravagant; that they bought things that they did not �10 The Three Philanthropists. Qeecl; that they wasted in beer and tobacco money that they should save for funerals; that many of them visited places of amusement when they should have been thinking about death, and that others bought toys to please the children when they hardly had bread enough to eat. He felt that he was in no way account­ able for this extravagance, nor for the fact that their wages did not give them the necessaries of life, because he not only gave them the same wages that other manufacturers gave, but the same wages that other workmen were willing to work for. Mr. B. said—and he always said this as though it ended the argument—and he generally stood up to say it: “ The great law of supply and demand is of divine origin; it is the only law that will work in all possible or conceivable cases ; and this law fixes the price of all labor, and from it there is no appeal. If people are not satisfied with the operation of this law, then let them make a new world for themselves.” Some of Mr. B/s friends reported that on several occasions, forgetting what he had said on others, he did declare that his confidence was somewhat weakened in the law of supply and demand; but this was only when there seemed to be an over-production of the things he was engaged in manufacturing, and at such times he seemed to doubt the absolute equity of the great law. Mr. B. made even a larger fortune than Mr. A., because when his workmen got old he did not have to care for them, when they were sick he paid no doctors, and when their children died he bought no coffins. In this way he was relieved of a large part of the expenses that had to be borne by Mr. A. When his workmen became too old, they were sent to the poor-house; when they were sick, they were assisted by charitable societies ; and when they died, they were buried by pity. In a few years Mr. B. was the owner of many millions. He also considered himself as one of God's �The Three Philanthropists. H stewards; felt that Providence had given him the intelligence to combine interests, to carry out great schemes, and that he was specially raised up to give employment to many thousands of people. He often regretted that he could do no more for his laborers without lessening his own profits, or, rather, without lessening his fund for the blessing of mankind the blessing to begin immediately after his death. He was so anxious to be the providence of posterity that he was sometimes almost heartless in his dealings with contem­ poraries. He felt that it was necessary for him to be economical, to save every dollar that he could, because in this way he could increase the fund that was finally to bless mankind. He also felt that in this way he could lay the foundations of a permanent fame—that he could build, through his executors, an asylum to be called the “ B. Asylum,” that he could fill a building with books to be called the “ B. Library,” and that .he could also build and endow an institution of learning to be called the “ B. College,” and that, in addition, a large amount of money could be given for the purpose of civilising the citizens of less fortunate countries, to the end that they might become imbued with that spirit of combination and manufacture that results in putting large fortunes in the hands of those who have been selected by Providence, on account of their talents, to make a better distribution of wealth than those who earned it could have done. Mr. B. spent many thousands of dollars to procure such legislation as would protect him from foreign com­ petition. He did not believe the law of supply and demand would work when interfered with by manufac­ turers living in othei’ countries. Mr. B., like Mr. A., was a man of judgment. He had what is called a level head, was not easily turned aside from his purpose, and felt that he was in accord with the general sentiment of his time. By his own exertions he rose from poverty to wealth. He was born in a hut and died in a palace. He was a patron �12 The Three Philanthropists. of art and enriched his walls with the works of the masters.. He insisted that others could and should follow his example. For those who failed or refused he had no sympathy. He accounted for their poverty and wretchedness by saying: “These paupers have only themselves to blame.” He died without ever having lost a dollar. His funeral was magnificent, and clergy­ men vied with each other in laudations of the dead, over his dust rises a monument of marble with the words: HE LIVED FOR OTHERS. III. “ But there are men who steal, and vainly try To gild the crime with pompous charity.” There was another man, Mr. C., who also had the genius for combination. He understood the value of capital, the value of labor; knew exactly how much could.be done with machinery ; understood the economy of things ; knew how to do everything in the easiest and shortest way. And he, too, was a manufacturer and had in his employ many thousands of men, women, and children. He was what is called a visionary, a sentimentalist, rather weak in his will, not very obstinate, had but little egotism ; and it never occurred to him that he had been selected by Providence, or any supernatural power, to divide the property of others. It did not seem to him that he had any right to take �The Three Philanthropists. 13 from other men their labor without giving them a full equivalent. He felt that if he had more intelligence than his fellow men he ought to use that intelligence not only for his own good but for theirs ; that he cer­ tainly ought not to use it for the purpose of gaining an advantage over those who were his intellectual inferiors. He used to say that a man strong intellectually had no more right to take advantage of a man weak intellec­ tually than the physically strong had to rob the physi­ cally weak. He also insisted that we should not take advantage of each other’s necessities; that you should not ask a drowning man a greater price for lumber than you would if he stood on the shore; that if you took into consideration the necessities of your fellow man, it should be only to lessen the price of that which you would sell to him, not to increase it. He insisted that honest men do not take advantage of their fellows. He was so weak that he had not perfect confidence in the great law of supply and demand as applied to flesh and blood. He took into consideration another law of supply and demand: he knew that the working man had to be supplied with food, and that his nature demanded something to eat, a house to live in, clothes to wear. Mr. C. used to think about this law of supply and demand as applicable to individuals. He found that men would work for exceedingly small wages when pressed for the necessaries of life; that under some circumstances they would give theii’ labor for half of what it was worth to the employer, because they were in a position where they must do something for wife or child. He concluded that he had no right to take advantage of the necessities of others, and that he should in the first place honestly find what the work was worth to him, and then give to the man who did the work that amount. Other manufacturers regarded Mr. C. as substan­ tially insane, whilst most of his workmen looked upon �14 The Three Philanthropists. him as an exceedingly good-natured man, without any particular genius for business. Mr. C., however, cared little about the opinions of others, so long as he main­ tained his respect for himself. At the end of the first year he found that he had made a large profit, and thereupon he divided this profit with the people who had earned it. Some of his friends said to him that he ought to endow some public institution; that there should be a college in his native town ; but Mr. C. was of such a peculiar turn of mind that he thought justice ought to go before charity, and a little in front of egotism and a desire to immortalise one’s self. He said that it seemed to him that of all persons in the world entitled to this profit were the men who had earned it, and the men who had made it by their labor, by days of actual toil. He insisted that, as they had earned it, it was really theirs, and if it was theirs, they should have it and should spend it in their own way. Mr. C. was told that he would make the workmen in other factories dissatisfied, that other manufacturers would become his enemies, and that his course would scandalise some of the greatest men who had done so much for the civilisation of the world and for the spread of intelligence. Mr. C. became extremely un­ popular with men of talent, with those who had a genius for business. He, however, pursued his way, and carried on his business with the idea that the men who did the work were entitled to a fair share of the profits ; that, after all, money was not as sacred as men, and that the law of supply and demand, as under­ stood, did not apply to flesh and blood. Mi*. C. said : “ I cannot be happy if those who work for me are defrauded. If I feel I am taking what belongs to them, then my life becomes miserable. To feel that I have done justice is one of the necessities of my nature. I do not wish to establish colleges. I wish to establish no public institution. My desire is to enable those who work for me to establish a few �The Three Philanthropists. 15 thousand homes for themselves. My ambition is to enable them to buy the books they ready want to read. I do not wish to establish a hospital, but I want to make it possible for my workmen to have the services of the best physicians physicians of their own choice. It is not for me to take their money and use it for the good of others or for my own glory. It is for me to give what they have earned to them. After I have given them the money that belongs to them, I can give them. my advice—I can tell them how I hope they will use it; and after I have advised them, they will use it as they please. You cannot make great men and great women by suppres­ sion. Slavery is not the school in which genius is born. Every human being must make his own mistakes for himself, must learn for himself, must have his own ex­ perience ; and if the world improves, it must be from choice, not from force; and every man who does justice, who sets the example of fair dealing, hastens the coming of universal honesty, of universal civilisation.” Mr. C. carried his doctrine out to the fullest extent, honestly and faithfully. When he died, there .were at the funeral those who had worked for him, their wives and their children. Their tears fell upon his grave. They planted flowers and paid to him the tribute of their love. Above his silent dust they erected a monu­ ment with this inscription : HE ALLOWED OTHERS TO LIVE FOR THEMSELVES. �WORKS BY COLONEL R. G. INGERSOLL. MISTAKES OF MOSES ... ... ... 1 o Superior edition, in cloth ... ... ... 1 g Only Complete Edition published in England. DEFENCE OF FREETHOUGHT ... ... 0 6 Five Hours’ Speech at the Trial of 0. B. Reynolds for Blasphemy. REPLY TO GLADSTONE. With a Biography by J. M. Wheeler ... ... ... .. 0 4 ROME OR REASON ? Reply to Cardinal Manning 0 4 CRIMES AGAINST CRIMINALS ........................ 0 3 AN ORATION ON WALT WHITMAN ............... 0 3 FAITH AND FACT. Reply to Rev. Dr. Field ... 0 2 GOD AND MAN. Second Reply to Dr. Field ... 0 2 THE HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH ... ... 0 2 LOVE THE REDEEMER. Reply to Count Tolstoi 0 2 THE LIMITS OF TOLERATION ... ... 0 2 A Discussion with Hon. F. D. Coudert and Gov. S. L. Woodford THE DYING CREED . o 2 DO I BLASPHEME ? ... ....................0 2 THE CLERGY AND COMMON SENSE ... 0 2 SOCIAL SALVATION ... ... ... 0 2 MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE ... ... 0 2 GOD AND THE STATE ... ... ... 0 2 WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC ? ... ... 0 2 WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC ? Part II. ... 0 2 ART AND MORALITY ... ... ... 0 2 CREEDS AND SPIRITUALITY ... 0 1 CHRIST AND MIRACLES . . ... ... 0 1 THE GREAT MISTAKE ... ... ... 0 1 LIVE TOPICS . 0 1 MYTH AND MIRACLE . . ... 0 1 REAL BLASPHEMY ... ... ... 0 1 REPAIRING THE IDOLS ... ... ... 0 1 “ THE FREETHINKER,” the only penny Freethought paper in England; sixteen pages; edited by G. W. Footk. Published every Thursday. Should be read by all reformers and lovers of progress. R. Forder, 28 Stonecutter-street, London, E.O. � 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 &amp; 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 The three philanthropists Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ingersoll, Robert Green [1833-1899] Description An account of the resource Place of publication: London Collation: 15 p. ; 19 cm. Notes: Part of the NSS pamphlet collection. Works by Colonel R.G. Ingersoll listed on back cover. Reprinted from North American Review Vol. 153. December 1891. No. 79a in Stein checklist. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Progressive Publishing Company Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1892 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context N403 Subject The topic of the resource Liberalism 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 (The three philanthropists), 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 Liberalism NSS Press https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/049e15269cfc71c0d494c3f1b7baf7f2.pdf?Expires=1777507200&Signature=CDO%7El4RbZz7FqRYhMvd0bOaaHZrHtmOsBSasCMYU6yXOFj0XA87qePYtcCaQ2ZGyKtKq96o656JSsEEuYw-AlaaeBj0aP2w7TgvQhFWwToYlnDHEVwz2CQdilGNmljDngnPI8tkwoO97x-1LD5MNWxir7BmooFJjG3s2pyJlKtYIZbaArNXd-GIKwI-WHCKnu8LQL4ZEXxAyD8CfK7tlYyNyaEDYZzebwXk-8X0xfYms3Y54SDiU5IQLwLBMFQ-4tlQq9bItEyf7YpphUf8rO%7E7hLCxsOLgyVRVDiYxnxdItVXWVaUmTPp2ETPLlegWz%7Ev7tgeEu9yaVocr5RTLRuA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 44c946fd7f703de275b94c7ee0f393c1 PDF Text Text CONTRADICTIONS OF LORD PALMERSTON IN REFERENCE TO POLAND AND CIRCASSIA, ■Snr,;II< £(7 ' -a “ Russia can be reached only in her instruments.” The Crisis, Paris, 184,0. LONDON: HARDWICKE, 192, PICCADILLY. August, 1863. Price One Shilling. '* �/v <■ SIM £ H ' "■' A d A £’•'.'■•.• H '’■•ATAM jasas Of won' iHl IO ClWMA&tAiL M1W >•■ PZ>’1Z1’100 if M >h *fa a® . .- . * j4 . ■ la T4>.-iT 9«l|ji'.- .. .,.'■ ■■? *■ eb» A5^/h;' ,^« y * 4^C fr . fc '■’ .i’'> A r/£ oA S$W f>%O ^n- wA'y. L y *’’ hrjufii'.A.n.'Az. ■ > z ■ '.''J 4^5 :'Z Ar:;.'? .taiiS . . :•:••■ L „•» ' £ Wi ?■- ir-il---- : -Wi.bbB *• '. • ' •' . ' , . . . “ . '. * lb W1 'A ai-lMpt " rc\" > ■b? * tH • •>. . 9«Ci’U”-.':..T '? f/j . . r .“ -. < fa iMjgjffijff/f-•■ - , < ■■ . -. bOjfcK ?‘^s'uy a> ., A. •'« T mil * o ?i • •iis‘;jtK • j bu r » • . « * - \ '1'■ '■ . f!Wl-t . . W'i 'W .’T < . b-,- >.'•• -<_ % hissed A A ' ■.' < . 1U£{ J x;': tjS . j | * �FALSEHOOD AS A METHOD OF GOVERNMENT. 17, 1863. An event took place towards the end of the recent Session of Parliament unprecedented in the history of this country. The First Minister of the Crown was deliberately charged by Mr. Cobden with three falsehoods. The three falsehoods had all been told in the House, and one was a wilful perversion, after his death, of a speech delivered by a rival. The purpose in the three cases was to involve the House in expenditure. On the 30th of July, 1845, Lord Palmerston had announced that the invention of steam-ships had destroyed the maritime supremacy of England; Sir Robert Peel had scouted the notion as a ridiculous absurdity. On the 23rd of July, 1860, Lord Palmerston attributed to Sir Robert Peel this very state­ ment—namely, that steam had bridged the Channel, and that as regards security from aggression, England had ceased to be an island. On.the 10th July, 1862, Mr. Cobden, on the authority of quotations from Hansard, called on Lord Palmerston to admit that his assertion was a mistake, stating that, in order to be Par­ liamentary, he used the word “ inexactness^ Lord Palmerston refused to enter on the subject. Mr. Cobden’s constituents and several. other bodies have since addressed him on the subject, conveying their approbation of his conduct. The effect of Mr. Cobden’s accusation is, therefore, to raise the objeet of it above all Parliamentary control. This alarming state of things would be at once reversed if the laws were enforced. The former practice of the expulsion from the House of Commons of those who stated what was not true,. REPORT OF ST. PANCRAS COMMITTEE, APRIL �would not- only stop the scandal but prevent the malversation which these falsehoods are employed to disguise. The first Memoir hereto appended is on Falsehood as dealt with by the forms of the House of Commons. The second is on the Falsehoods of .Lord Palmerston, giving some idea of the extent to which Falsehood is carried on in the management of the Country. Signed by order of the Committee, and on their behalf. C. D. Collet, Chairman. C. F. Jones, Secretary. I. How to deal with Falsehood by the Forms of the House of Commons. For some generations back it has been held as an axiom that Members of the Legislature were incapable of falsehood. Since the year 1847, however, accusations of this offence have not only circulated without the walls of Parliament, but have on several occasions made their way into the House of Commons. These accusations have always been directed against the same person—Lord Palmerston. Hitherto they have always been incidental to Motions respecting some foreign State. Such Motions have generally been got rid of by means of a u countout” or the dropping of an order of the day, so that the issue has been evaded. The recent charges laid against Lord Palmerston, by Mr. Cobden, having been made under cover of the word <( inex­ actness,” have neither presented to the House a dilemma to be evaded nor to individual members an opportunity to be seized. The remedy is therefore to reverse the act of Mr. Cobden, and to bring forward a Motion in the House, dealing with the act by its proper name, and inflicting the ancient Parliamentary punish­ ment for that offence. An inspection of the Journals of the House shows that this punishment consists in expulsion. In the cases selected, the motive to falsehood appears unim­ portant; namely, to obtain the privilege of Parliament for some person not entitled to it. The sole point at issue was whether the Member had spoken the truth or not. The first of these two cases is that of Colonel Wanklyn, who was summarily expelled. The second, that of Sir John Prettiman, who was suspended, and afterwards restored on submission, is still more instructive, because it shows the pains taken to examine into and to prevent prevarication, always more difficult to deal with than direct false­ hood. �7 CASE OF COLONEL WANKLYN. A.D. 1677} 30 Charles II. Friday, February 1.—A Motion being made against the frequent and irregular granting of Paper Protections by Mem­ bers of this House; and A Petition of Angela Margaretta Cottington being read, complaining of Mr. Wanklyn, a Member of this House, for granting a Protection to Charles Cottington, Esq., her husband, as his menial servant, whereby she was hindered in her prosecution at law against him; And the House being also informed that the said Mr. Wanklyn had granted another Protection to one Jones, whereby to hinder the execution of a writ of restitution awarded by the Court of King’s Bench; And Mr. Wanklyn being present, and standing up in his place, and an­ swering for himself, and to several questions which were propounded to him by Mr. Speaker ; And being withdrawn by Order, and the matter debated; Resolved, &c., nem. contradicente, That Colonel Wanklyn in granting Protection to Mr. Cottington and Mr. Jones, not being his menial servants, has violated the justice and honour of this House. . The Question being put, That Mr. Wanklyn, for granting such Protec­ tions, shall be expelled this .House; The House divide; The Yeas go forth ; TeUor, TeBers the } for the Noes’ 109- And so it was resolved in the Affirmative. The Question being put, That Mr. Wanklyn shall receive his sentence at the Bar standing; It was resolved in the Affirmative. Mr. Wanklyn being brought to the Bar by the Seijeant-at-Arms attend­ ing the House, Mr. Speaker, in the name of the House, pronounced the said sentence. Ordered, That Mr. Speaker do issue out his warrant to the Clerk of the Crown to make out a new writ for the election of a Member to serve in this present Parliament for the Borough of Westbury in the County of Wilts, in the room of Thomas Wanklyn, Esq., who was this day expelled the * House. CASE OF SIR JOHN PRETTIMAN. A.D. 1669, 21 Charles II. Wednesday, December 1.—Upon complaint made of a Breach of Privilege committed by one * * in arresting of Robert Humes, a menial servant of Sir John Prettiman, a Member of this House; Ordered, That it be referred to Mr. Speaker to examine the matter com­ plained of, and give such order therein as he shall find just. Saturday, December 4.—Mr. Speaker reports the case of Robert Humes, servant to Sir John Prettiman, arrested and in the prison of the King’s Bench: that he was heretofore a merchant, but left off his trade about five years since, and that in August last he was entertained a servant to Sir John Prettiman at twelve pounds per annum wages : and was employed in recovering his rents; and was arrested in four several actions of the case, of a hundred pounds a piece. * Journals of the House of Commons, vol. ix. pp. 430-31. �8 The Question being put, That privilege be allowed to Robert Humes, menial servant to Sir John Prettiman ; ’ The House divided; The Yeas went out; poMheYeas.29. I . 19. And so it was resolved in the Affirmative. Ordered, That the Marshal of the King’s Bench do discharge Robert Humes, menial servant to Sir John Prettiman (being arrested in breach of privilege) out of prison. Monday, March 21, 1670 (New Style.')—Two Petitions being tendered against Sir John Prettiman, one from Dame Theodosia Prettiman, and the other from Elizabeth Humes ; Ordered that the Petitions be read to-morrow morning; and that Sir John Prettiman have notice to attend then. Wednesday, March 30.—A Petition of Elizabeth Humes, wife of Robert Humes, was read; Resolved, &c., That the Petition be committed to [here follow twenty names], or any five of them ; and they are to meet to-morrow morning, at seven of the clock, in the Speaker’s Chambers, and to examine the matter of the Petition, and report it, with their opinions therein, to the House; and to send for persons, papers, and records. Thursday, April 7.—Sir Gilbert Talbot reports from the Committee to which the Petition of Elizabeth Humes was committed, the whole state of the matter and evidence therein : And that the Committee did leave it to the House, to do what they should think fit therein. And the Question, upon the whole matter, being, whether the said Humes ought to be allowed privilege as the menial servant of Sir John Pretti­ man ; Resolved, &c., That the matter be recommitted to the former Committee, to examine whether Sir John Prettiman did know of the condition of the said Humes, and what accusations were against Humes, when he entertained him for his servant; and whether he knew he was a prisoner for any criminal matter, or under bail for the good behaviour, when he did entertain him; and whether he were so when the Motion was made for his privilege ; and whether he were arrested, or in prison, for a real debt, or whether the actions against him were not feigned: And Sir John Prettiman is to attend the Committee, and make it appear that he^was arrested and detained prisoner for debt, after he was retained his servant: And the Committee is revived, and to sit this afternoon : And the Keeper of the prison of the King’s Bench is to attend the Committee, to give an account of the arresting and detaining of the said Humes in prison: And all that shall come to the Committee are to have voices : And [here follow eight names] are added to the Committee : And the care of the matter is recommended to Mr. Crouch. Friday, April 8.—Mr. Crouch reports from the Committee to whom the Petition of Mrs. Humes was committed, That they had, in pursuance of the order of recommitment, examined the whole matter of fact thereby directed, relating to Sir John Prettiman’s protection, and moving the House for giving privilege to Robert Humes, as his menial servant. Upon stating whereof to the House, it appeared that the House had been ill-dealt with by Sir John Prettiman in his concealing the truth of the case, and that Humes was released out of prison, from actions depending against him, by the miscarriage of Sir John Prettiman, as his menial servant, when in truth he was not. �Sir John Prettiman being withdrawn into the Speaker’s Chambers; Resolved, &c., nemine contradicente, That Sir John Prettiman be suspended his sitting in this House, and from all privileges Its a Member thereof, until he shall produce Robert Humes. Resolved, &c., That he be called to the Bar of this House, and receive from Mr. Speaker this sentence upon his knees. The House being informed that the said Sir John Prettiman was not to be found in the Speaker’s Chambers, ordered that the Serjeant-at-Arms at­ tending this House do bring the said Sir John Prettiman to the Bar of this House to-morrow morning, to receive his sentence as aforesaid. Resolved, &c., That the back door of the Speaker’s Chambers be nailed up, and not opened during any sessions of Parliament. Saturday, April 9.—Ordered, that it be referred to Colonel Bird, Sir Thomas Meeres, Colonel Reames, Mr. Coleman, Colonel Talbot, to see a true entry made in the Journal, of the matters concerning Sir John Pret­ timan. Resolved, &c., That no Member of this House do grant any protection to any but such only as are their menial servants. And that all protections already granted to any other persons besides menial servants be forthwith withdrawn and called in. Resolved, &c., That all protections and written certificates of the Members of this House be declared void in Taw, and be forthwith withdrawn and called in, and that none be granted for the future; and that the privilege of Mem­ bers for their menial servants be observed according to Law; and that, if any menial servant shall be arrested and detained contrary to privilege, he shall, upon complaint thereof made, be discharged by order from the Speaker. Same day, afternoon.—Resolved, &c., That a day be given to Sir John Prettiman to appear and receive the judgment of the House against him. Resolved, &c. That the day be the second Tuesday at the next meeting after the Recess. Monday, April 11, 1670.—(The King having made a speech to the Two Houses) Mr. Speaker reports the effects of His Majesty’s Speech: And that it was His Majesty’s pleasure the House should adjourn till the 21th of October next. And accordingly the House adjourned till the 24th of October next. Monday, October 31, 1670.—A Petition of Sir John Prettiman being tendered to the House; Ordered, That the Petition of Sir John Prettiman be read on Thursday morning, nine of the clock. Triday, November 11.—The Petition of Sir John Prettiman, Knight, was read. The Petition of Elizabeth Humes was also read. Resolved, &c., That the Serjeant-at-Arms attending this House do, accord­ ing to former order, bring Sir John Prettiman to the Bar of this House on Monday next, to receive the judgment of the House against him. Monday, November 14.—In pursuance of the former order of this House, Sir John Prettiman was, by the Serjeant-at-Arms, brought to the Bar of the House; who there, upon his knees, received from Mr. Speaker the judgment and sentence of the House, for his being suspended sitting in this House, and of all privileges, as a Member thereof, until he shall produce Robert Humes. Resolved, &c., that Sir John Prettiman be heard at the Bar of this House on Monday next upon his Petition, and the Petition of Mrs. Humes, both formerly read; and that the Seijeant do give them notice hereof. Wednesday, November 23.—The House then, according to former Order, did proceed to the hearing of the matter between Sir John Prettiman and �10 Mrs. Humes. And the Petitions on both sides being again read; and the counsel for Sir John Prettiman, and the parties and witnesses on both sides, being heard; it being made appear, on the behalf of Sir John Prettiman, that he had, since the last recess, used his utmost endeavour to apprehend and bring in Humes, the husband of Mrs. Humes ; and nothing of the sug­ gestions of Mrs. Humes, her Petition being made out ; upon Debate of this matter; Resolved, &c., That Sir John Prettiman be restored; and have his pri­ vilege, to attend the duty of his place, as a Member of this House. * J From the passage in italics it appears that detection was fol­ lowed not only by the punishment of the offender, but by a pro­ vision to ensure the non-recurrence of similar acts. The restora­ tion of the practice of punishing offences would now, as then, be accompanied by provisions to prevent them, or, rather, the pro­ visions already made by the laws would cease to be ineffective the moment it was known that punishment would be the result of their infraction. il The Falsehoods of Lord Palmerston. From the diplomatic history of the last thirty-six years we propose to select such cases of falsehood as are most glaring, and such as may be dealt with without entering into the objects for which they were told. The cases brought forward by Mr. Cobden have, of course, to be narrated first, and a careful consideration will show that two of these were, beyond all others, appropriate ones for the House to deal with. The list then extends in the inverse order of time. ' REGARDING THE MILITARY FORCES OF FRANCE. (mb. cobden’s first charge.) On Monday, July 7, Mr. Cobden laid before the House a comparative statement of the forces of England and France, both naval and military, showing that never had the naval superiority of England been so great, or the military superiority of France so small, as at the present time. He complained of the habitual i( inexactness ” of Lord Palmerston as the cause of the panic, and consequently of the increase in the expenditure. He made special reference to his having added 200,000 men to the real numbers of the French army:— “ But the noble Lord lias not confined his statements to the navy. He has also given, us some facts and figures respecting the land forces of Erance ; but in his statement there was an inexactness of a very grave kind, for he exceeded the amount of the Trench force by two hundred thousand men, which called * Journals of the House of Commons, vol. ix. pp. 114—169. J �11 down a correction from the Moniteur. I must complain of the habitual in­ exactness of the noble Lord as to these matters, and if the China debate should come on to-morrow I should have to recite another grave inaccuracy. On the 24tli (23rd) of May the noble Lord, in speaking of the land forces of France, said: ‘ On the 1st of January, 1862, the French army consisted’— these are the corrected figures which the noble Lord afterwards gave—‘ of 446,348 men under arms. There was a reserve of 170,000 men, liable to be called out at a fortnight or three weeks’ notice, malting altogether 616,348 ’ not 816,000 as the noble Lord really said. “ Lord Palmerston.—No. I never said anything of the kind. “Mr. Cobden.—I beg the noble Lord’s pardon, this was not a mistake of ■a figure. There was addition and subtraction, and the statement was the same all through. The noble Lord proceeded‘ In addition to this force actually under arms, or liable to be called out for service, I stated that there were 268,417 National Guards, making a total available force of 884,765.’ ”—Times, July 8. Lord Palmerston replied.-.— “ The hon. Member accuses me of great exaggeration. Now, I utterly deny that I have been guilty of any exaggeration. Now, with regard to the French army, I stated on a recent occasion that the French army on the 1st January, consisted of 446,000 men under arms, and 170,000 men of the reserve, making a total of 616,000 men. I was reported to have made that total 816,000. It is very seldom that those gentlemen who report our debates in this House commit an error, and an error in one figure is not unnatural.”—Times, July 8. This was on the 7th July. Lord Palmerston speaks of a recent occasion, but there had been two occasions. The first was on the 19th May, the second was on the 23rd, and purported to be a correction not of the former speech but of the erroneous report of it. On the 19th May Lord Palmerston said:— “ On the 1st of January last, France had 646,000 men, I think, at all events upwards of 640,000 men under arms. She had, in addition, 170,000 men of reserve, liable to be called back to the ranks at a fortnight’s notice. Besides that she has upwards of 200,000 National Guards. Therefore, her regular forces under arms, or liable to be called to the ranks at a fortnight’s notice, are about 816,000 to our 100,000. The French Government had since determined that towards the end of the year 31,000 of the 646,000 should be transferred from the active army to the reserve, making no difference in the amount available, but diminishing the expense without diminishing the eventual efficiency. I should say, besides the 646,000, there were 70,000 of the con­ scription of the present year, which might be called out at any moment if necessary.”—Times, May 20. On May 23rd, Lord Palmerston said:— “ The lion. Gentleman (Sir R. Clieton) read a report of something which I had said here on a former occasion, in which, notwithstanding its general ac­ curacy, there was a mistake of a figure. On the 1st of January, the French army consisted of 446,348 men under arms. There was, besides, a reserve of 170,000 men, liable to be called out at a fortnight or three weeks’ notice, making altogether 616,348 men under arms or liable to be called out for service; there were 268,417 National Guards, making a total available force of 884,705. And I stated that besides these there were 70,000 men of the conscription for the present year, liable to be called out if their services should be required. I also stated that of the 446,000 it was intended at the time to transfer between 30,000 and 40,000 from the number under arms io the reserve, making no dif- �12 ference in the really available force, though the change is attended with a certain amount of economy.”—Times, May 24. It is thus evident that the reporters had made no mistake. Lord Palmerston says only one figure was wrong, meaning it to be believed that an 8 was substituted by the reporters for a 6. After making a variety of minor corrections of a statement in which he professed that only one figure was wrong, he says, “Making a total available force OF 884,765.” What he had said before was, “ Therefore her regular forces under arms or liable to be called to the ranks at a fortnight?s notice, are about 816,000, against our 100,000.” The reporters, therefore, according to him, substituted, not a 6 for an 8, but the words in italics for those in small capitals. The occasion of this correction has to be taken into considera­ tion. It was made on the night of Friday, the 23rd May. The' next morning the following denial appeared at Paris, in the Monileur:— “ In the sitting of the House of Commons of the 19th instant, Lord Pal­ estimated the strength of the Trench. army on the 1st of January, 1862, at 816,000 men, of whom 646,000 were under arms, and 170,000 under reserve. This estimate contains an error sufficiently serious to require a recti­ fication. On the 1st of January, 1862, the effective strength of the army was not 646,000, but 447,000 men—a difference of 199,000 men. The reserve counted, at the same date, not 170,000 men, but 165,000—a difference of 5000. The total error is, therefore, 204,000 men, or one quarter of the estimate made in the House of Commons. Since the 1st of January the number of men of the active army who have been allowed to go into the reserve is not 31,000, but exceeds 38,000. This brings the reserve to 203,000 men, and reduces the effective strength of the active army to 409,000 men.- Total, 612,000.” merston If Lord Palmerston had been misreported, it was his duty to have corrected the error the next day. It was also open to him to inform the French Government what he had really said. But the Moniteur corrects not the reporters, but Lord Palmerston. Before taking so serious a step, the French Government must have demanded an explanation, and have failed to obtain it. The Moniteur addresses itself to England, for in France it is no crime to have a quarter of a million extra soldiers in arms. Lord Pal­ merston corrects the reporters just in time to nullify the effect in England of the protest in the Moniteur. That protest is then a cry of distress. Lord Palmerston tyrannises over the French Emperor in this matter, just as M. Thouvenel domineers over Lord Russell in the affairs of Mexico. This is the one Cabinet, of which “ some members live on the banks of the Seine, and others on the banks of the Thames.”* The case, however, is not complete without Lord Palmerston’s description of the notice in the Monileur. On the 7 th July he said:— * Lord Palmerston in 1856. �13 “ But my statement was 616,000, and not 816,000. The French. Moniteur corrected my statement, and what was that correction ? It charged me with having made a little error both in the force under arms and in reserve, and the aggregate was stated by the Moniteur to be 612,000 instead of 616,000. That was the correction of the Moniteur, which completely and substantially affirmed the statement that I had made.”—Times, July 8. Lord Palmerston pretends that the Moniteur accuses him of an error of only 4000 men; but the Moniteur expressly says: “ The total error is 204,000 men.” Mr. Cobden terms this “ inexactness.” The issue between them was the simplest in the world. Lord Palmerston said it was a mistake of a single figure. Mr. Cobden said it was not a mistake of a single figure. Lord Palmerston’s words prove Mr. Cobden’s case. On this Mr. Cobden drops the matter. REGARDING THE RATIFICATION OF THE TREATY OF TIEN-TSIN. (mr. cobden’s second charge.) The next day occurred the China debate, and, according to his promise, Mr. Cobden brought up another case of “ inexactness.” He proved that Lord Palmerston had first declared that the Emperor of China had ratified the Treaty of Tien-Tsin, and had afterwards declared that the war of 1859 was made to obtain the ratification of that Treaty. Here are the two statements:— Lord Palmerston, March 16, 1860. “ A Treaty has been concluded with China. That Treaty has been approved by the Emperor. We want the ratifications to be exchanged; we want the Treaty to become a formal and acknowledged compact between the two countries.”—Mansard, vol. 157, p. 807. Lord Palmerston, February 14,1861. “ It is well known that the operations in China arose from the refusal of the Chinese Government to ratify the Treaty of Tien-Tsin, which has been con­ cluded between the two countries. It became necessary to obtain the ratifica­ tion of that Treaty.—Mansard, vol. 161, p. 401. Lord Palmerston said in March, I860, “ That Treaty has been approved by the Emperor.” That is, it had been ratified by him at Pekin, as it had been by Queen Victoria in London. On reference to the Blue-books it will be found that in China this had been publicly done. An edict had appeared respecting the Treaty, and it had actually been put in operation before the arrival of Mr. Bruce. His visit was to exchange the ratifications, which the Treaty had specially provided must be done at Pekin, although that exchange could have taken place just as well at London, or at any Chinese port. When Lord Palmerston contradicts Mr. Cobden on this point, on the 8th July, he makes his former as­ sertion still plainer. For he says, “It (the last expedition) was �14 Q not undertaken solely because Mr. Brtjce was not allowed to go to Pekin (another falsehood); but because the Emperor refused to ratify certain articles of that Treaty, which he said must be changed before they could be carried out ” On the 10th July, when Mr. Cobden answered what Lord Palmerston had said on the 8th, he (Mr.. Cobden) repeated, “ I stated that the Treaty had been ratified, and that all that had to be done was to exchange the ratifications. ’ The truth, as appears in the documents published by the Eng­ lish Government itself, is that not only had the Emperor of China publicly assented to the Treaty, not only were the English actually trading at some of the new ports opened to them by it before Mr. Bruce’s arrival and the attack on the Peiho forts, but that no objection was ever offered to the formal act of exchanging the ratifications of the two Sovereigns, whether at Pekin or elsewhere. Lord Palmerston is so sensible of the falsehood he is stating that he carefully mixes up “ ratification” and il exchange of ratifica­ tions,” and by doing so asserts that what Mr. Cobden read confirmed his statement. This was on the 10th, as we shall pre­ sently see. No war having been declared, the Treaty of Tien-Tsin was un­ lawfully obtained, and is not binding upon China. Whether it was obtained by one or by two lawless expeditions is of no im­ portance here. What is of importance is, that, in this as in other matters, Lord Palmerston’s statements are diametrically op­ posed to each other. REGARDING STEAM HAVING DESTROYED ENG­ LAND’S NAVAL SUPREMACY. (mr. cobden’s third charge.) On the 10th of July, Mr. Cobden brought a third accusation of inexactness” against Lord Palmerston. He had quoted Sir Robert Peel as concurring with him instead of being op­ posed to him on the subject of steam, the cause of the destruction of England’s naval supremacy. Mr. Cobden said:— “ At an early period of my experience in this House a circumstance hap­ pened to which I must refer, because it affords another example—a flagrant example of the inexactness and carelessness of the noble Lord in the state­ ments which he makes to us. It occurred in 1845. On that occasion the noble Lord had already mounted this hobby of his, that steam was the great danger of this- country. He was fond of saying that the application of steam to navigation had spanned the Channel with a steam bridge. That simile occurs a dozen times in his speeches from 1842 downwards. Let nobody undervalue the force of these repetitions of a phrase, because by dint of them we come at last to believe them ourselves, and we make others believe them also. In 1845 the noble Lord, in a harangue intended to induce Sir R. Peel �15 to increase our armaments in some direction, launched this favourite idea of his. Sir R. Peel controverted it. That led to the noble Lord rising again to explain himself. I will read these passages. Outlie 30th of July, 1845, Lord Palmerston said:— “ ‘ In reference to steam navigation, what he (Lord Palmerston) said was, that the progress which had been, made had converted the ordinary means of transport into a steam bridge.’ “ Sir R. Peel, immediately following in reply, said “1 The noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) appeared to retain the impression that our means of defence were rather abated by the discovery of steam navi­ gation. He (Sir Robert Peel) was not at all prepared to admit that. He thought that the demonstration which we could make of our steam navy was one which would surprise the world ; and as the noble Lord (Lord Palmerston) had spoken of steam bridges, he would remind him that there were two parties who could play at making them.’ Now comes this flagrant specimen of the noble Lord’s inexactness. I pur­ posely use that long and rather French word because I wish to be Parlia­ mentary in what I say. (Laughter.) The noble Lord, in speaking of this very Fortifications Bill when he brought it in on the 23rd of July, 1860, said, still reiterating the same argument:—“ e And, in fact, as I remember Sir R. Peel stating, steam had bridged the Channel, and for the purposes of aggression had almost made this country cease to be an island.” “ Now, I happened to hear all that myself, but I am afraid to say so, because I may be contradicted. (“ Hear,” and laughter.) But now T will make a sug­ gestion to the noble Lord. Will he send one of his junior Lords of the Trea­ sury to the library to get Hansard? I give him the volumes:—Hansard, vol. 82, p. 1233, and vol. 160, p. 18. The noble Lord will probably speak again, as we are in committee, and it would be a grateful thing if he would get Hansard to satisfy himself of that gross inaccuracy. Moreover, it would only be just to the memory of a great Statesman, and it is also due to. this House that he should admit his error and recant it. There would be a novelty about such a proceeding that would be quite charming. (Laughter.) Let him admit that he is wrong. _ I will forgive him the China business if he will only get Hansard, and admit that he was wrong, that it was a fiction—quite a mistake of memory. (“ Hear, hear,” and laughter.) But the serious question is what kind of opinion shall we form of the noble Lord’s judgment.”—Times-, July 11, 1862. Observe, Mr. Cobden says the serious question is Lord Pal­ judgment, not his integrity, which he had just proved not to exist. Lord Palmerston evades; the charge:— merston’s “ It is very curious that my hon. Friend accuses me of inexactitude, and refers me to Hansard to prove my error. I do not feel much disposed to follow his example, because he and I differed the other evening on a matter of historical fact. He contended that the Emperor of China had ratified the Treaty of Tien-Tsin. I said he had not. After two or three days’ delay, my hon. Friend brought down a Blue-book to confirm his assertion, and proceeded to read a passage which completely substantiates my statement. [Mr. Cobden intimated dissent.] Let my hon. Friend read it again if he pleases. I did not the other night read the whole of the case; but the fact was just as he read it, and as I stated it. The Emperor of China wrote one of his mandarins to say that he approved of the Treaty; but when he was called upon to ratify it, and exchange ratifications, which process alone could give it international value, he refused, and that which my hon. Friend read confirmed the statement I made.” (Cheers.)—Times, July 11, 1862. �16 Mr. Cobden had quoted not a Blue-book but Hansard. One of his quotations has already been extracted under the head “Lord Palmerston, March 16, 1860.” The other was from Lord John Bussell, February 13, 1860:— “ The Treaty of Tien-Tsin had been signed, and had received the special approval of the Emperor of China. Nothing but the ratification remained to be given, and it would have been impossible for us—because Her Majesty’s forces had suffered a loss, because 400 or 500 men had been killed or wounded —to give up a Treaty solemnly agreed to, or to retreat from conditions to which the Emperor of China had given his assent.”—Hansard, vol. 156, p. 945. Since this Memoir was published in its original form, Lord Palmerston has gone round again. In the Debate of July 9, on Fortifications, he used these words:— “The hon. Member for Rochdale has referred to something which passed between myself and the late Sir Robert Peel. When I said that steam had bridged the channel, Sir Robert replied, in a way suitable to a debate in this House, “ Ay, it may have bridged the Channel, but that is a game at which two can play.”—Times, July 10, 1863. The Prime Minister is charged by Mr. Cobden with three falsehoods. Two are proved; the proof being accompanied by fresh falsehoods: the third is admitted. This was a case to be submitted to the judgment of the House. Mr. Cobden had no option but a duty which he was bound to perform. In 1670 the House of Commons suspended Sir John Pretti­ man, for having only “ dealt badly with the House by conceal­ ing the truth” about a man for whom he had obtained privilege, by falsely representing him to be his menial servant. The offence was the falsehood. It is no mitigation of Lord Palmerston’s offence that it is in weighty, not in trifling matters, that he has “ dealt badly with the House by concealing the truth.” But this, which is no mitigation of the offence, is an aggravation of the danger. In 1670 the House resented an act of deception. In 1862 it courts such acts, in order to pretend that it is de­ ceived. No such deception exists any longer. GENERAL PRACTICE OF FALSEHOOD (charges brought by the queen and substantiated by EARL RUSSELL.) The falsehoods with regard to the French army were told with the view to excite alarm in England, so as to increase the military expenditure as against the aggressive power of France. At the same time the Cabinets of England and France are de­ clared to be so united as to form but one. * * A little while ago, Louis Napoleon was asked by an ecclesiastic, “Why �17 Lord Palmerston has, during his whole career, been engaged in increasing the military force of France, and in directing that force to illegal objects. , In 1835 the English navy having been increased, at the instance of William IV., as a precaution against Russia, Lord Palmerston suggested to France to increase hers. When France complied with this advice, he immediately made it a pretence for increased arma­ ments on the part of England as against France. He has since made France a partner in all his schemes of intervention. So long ago as 1837 the Times made the charge which we have here pressed home, namely, that Lord Palmerston makes use of falsehood, not to escape from an attack, but as a method of Government. The Times wrote, December 29, 1837: — “ England has been in the habit of receiving as truth the assertions of a Minister. We are now brought into the lamentable predicament of having to guard against deception, and to be armed against design in every phrase which escapes from the lips of the man who at present directs the Foreign Policy of Great Britain. . . What must be said of the Minister of England who now, after the display of the force which we have described (the Russian fleet in the Baltic), instead of taking steps to counteract her, (Russia) instead of remonstrating, protesting, and preventing, stands forward to justify the measure, and then to repudiate the responsibility, and, not content with this, perverts facts, and falsifies truth ?” Lord Palmerston has now associated France with England in the distant regions of China, and, pursuing the same course as in 1837, has brought her forces into the neighbourhood of dis­ turbed India, all the while arming in England against her. In 1848, on the election of Louis Napoleon to the Presidency of the French Republic, he wrote to Vienna that it was to be inferred from such a choice that France would enter on a course of aggression. To Lord Ponsonby, November 11, 1848:— “Important changes may take place in France; the election, which is • coming on next month, may bring other men into power in that country; with other men another policy may come in. Traditional maxims of policy connected with a busier action in regard to foreign countries may be taken up as the guide of the Government of France. Popular feeling in that country, which at present inclines to peace, might easily be turned in an opposite direction, and the glory, as it would be considered in France, of freeing the whole of Italy up to the Alps from the domination of Austria * might reconcile the French nation to many sacrifices and to great exer­ tions.”! do you not give out openly that you will defend the Pope against Gari­ baldi ?” He replied, “ If I were to do so, Palmerston would have me upset in a week.” The Committee insert this statement on the written testimony of a gentleman of high standing and character. * “Italy shall be free from the Alps to the Adriatic.”—Words of Louis Napoleon in 1859. T Correspondence respecting the Affairs of Italy, 1849, part iii. pp. 566, C �Such purposes of aggression were, however, not compatible with the then constituted order of things. Lord Palmerston, however, joined in the measures taken to render Louis Napoleon absolute, and thus overthrow all restraint upon that career whose aggressive tendencies he had prophesied. Throughout Europe it had been Lord Palmerston’s boast to have established (( Constitutional Government.” To this he had sacrificed the prerogatives of .every Crown, the usages of every people, the ancient village government of Greece, the fueros of the Basques, the old estates of Spain and Portugal. On the en­ actment of the coup dftat of the 2nd of December, 1851, he-has­ tened to sanction a massacre of unarmed and inoffensive citizens, the arrest of the members of the Assembly, and the restoration, by violence and perjury, of a form of government that had destroyed the liberty of the French people, and indemnified them for the loss by setting Europe in flames. When asked to give reasons, he replied, that the unity of purpose and of authority in the Presi­ dent was his object. He said in Parliament, February 3,1852:— “ Such was the antagonism arising from time to time between the French Assembly and the President that their long co-existence became impossible, and it was my opinion that if one or the other were to prevail it would be better for France, and, through the interests of France, better for the in­ terests of Europe, that the President should prevail than the Assembly, and my reason was, that the Assembly had nothing to offer for the substitution of the President, unless an alternative obviously ending in civil war or anarchy, whereas the President, on the other hand, had to offer unity of purpose and unity of authority, and if he were inclined to do so, might give to France internal tranquillity, with good and permanent government.” The “ unity of purpose” of Louis Napoleon had already been •shown in his invasion and occupation of a portion of Italy (Rome). It could not be the interest of England to confer i( unity of authority” upon such an individual by means of a * usurpation. The words of Lord Palmerston are unintelligible as those of a British Minister; they are merely the repetition of a passage on the same subject contained in a. Russian despatch a quarter of a century before. Count Pozzo di Borgo wrote from Paris, 22nd December, 1826:— “The ancient fortresses are repaired with a dilatoriness that keeps them still in a state of imperfection, and, consequently, of weakness, particularly as regards the completion of those raised on the opposite frontier; the great roads are falling into decay; the army itself and the marine are in a state that calls for additions and ameliorations ; without which it would be im­ possible to make them act with the unity and the power indispensable to * “Brunnow is said to have mentioned triumphantly the events of the second and third of December in Paris on the frst of that month, in his passage through Berlin. He was sure of the success of the plot before it took place.”—Private Letter, 1852. �19 their action and their movements............. A serious war and the sacrifices it would impose, would give rise, I fear, to all the effects of panic among the capitalists, indifference among a great portion of the nation, and revo­ lutionary sentiments, among many others............... In proportion as the situa­ tion is. delicate, it will require increased care and interest to guard it from the evils which menace it. Russia has re-established the French monarchy by her arms, she has continued to protect it by her generosity, she will preserve it, I dare hope, from the embarrassments and even misfortunes which seem to menace it, by her influence and her policy.” This letter was written soon after the invasion of Spain, into which, in spite of Mr. Canning, Russia was able to inveigle - France. Within four years afterwards, France had entered on the conquest of Algiers. It is impo^ible, except on the supposi­ tion that the military power of France is at the disposal of Russia, to account for the anxiety which a Russian Ambassador feels that France should be strong. It is impossible, except on the supposi­ tion that the British Minister has adhered to this scheme, to account for his efforts to increase that aggressive power of France which he predicted beforehand, and which he persists in holding up. to the English people as an object at once for alarm and imitation. Accordingly, it is on this very point that detection has over­ taken Lord Palmerston. On his giving his sanction—in defiance of the Queen and of his colleagues—to the coup d’etat of the 2nd December, he was removed from office by the Queen. On the opening of Parliament, Lord John Russell announced that this was not the first time he had been detected. He produced a memorandum addressed to himself by the Queen on a-former occasion, in which was consigned a description of the frauds and usurpations Lord Palmerston had been in the habit of practising, and a requirement that such practice should cease. Lord Pal­ merston did not reject the imputation; on the contrary, he accepted the terms on which his continuance in office then and for the future was to depend. He wrote to Lord John Russell:— “ I have taken a copy of this memorandum of the Queen, and will not fail to attend to the directions it contains.” Lord John Russell did not produce to Parliament the whole of the Queen’s letter, and at a later date, when requested, he refused to give the remaining portion. We are left in ignorance as to the. specific occasions in which Lord Palmerston “ failed in sin­ cerity.” We may, therefore, infer that specific instances were given only as an illustration of a general practice; this is borne out both by the reply of Lord Palmerston and by the terms of the Queen’s letter. The latter are as follows] “The Queen requires, first, that Lord Palmerston will distinctly state what he proposes to do in a given case, in order that the Queen may know as distinctly to what she is giving her royal sanction, c2 �20 Secondly, having once given Her sanction to a measure, that it he not arbitrarily altered or modified by the Minister. Such an act she must consider as failing in sincerity towards the Crown, and justly to be visited by the exercise of her constitutional right of dismissing that Minister, She expects to be kept informed of what passes between him and the foreign Ministers before important decisions are taken, based upon intercourse; to receive the foreign despatches in good time; and to have the drafts for her approval sent to her in sufficient time to makelherself acquainted with their contents before they must be sent off. The Queen thinks it best that Lord John Russell should show this letter to Lord Palmerston.” On the 3rd of February, 1852, Lord John Russell testified to the truth of the charges contained in the Queen’s letter, and made the application of them, using the following words:— “The noble Lord passed by the Crown, and put himself in the PLACE OF THE CROWN.” REGARDING THE ABANDONMENT OF OUR MARI­ TIME RIGHTS. (self-contradiction.) Mr. Cobden denounces as ridiculous Lord Palmerston’s pretence that steam has injured, or can injure the naval supremacy of England, but Mr. Cobden has prepared and is still preparing the way for Lord Palmerston to destroy the real source of that supremacy—the Right of Search. The subject has been so fre­ quently treated that it is necessary only to recite Lord Palmer­ ston’s three speeches on this head:— Lord Palmerston, November 7,1856. “ I cannot help hoping that these relaxations of former doctrines, which were established in the beginning of the war, practised during its continuance, and which have since been ratified by formal engagements, may perhaps be still further extended, and that, in the course of time, those principles of war which are applied to hostilities by land may be extended without exception to hostilities by sea, so that private property shall no longer be the object of aggression on either side.”—Times, November 8, 1856. Lord Palmerston, February 3,1860. “ A naval Power like England ought not to surrender any means of weaken­ ing her enemies at sea. If we did not seize their seamen on board their merchant vessels, we should have to fight them on board their ships of war. I deny that private property is spared in war on land any more than in war at sea. On the contrary, armies in an enemy’s country take whatever they want or desire, without the slightest regard to the right of property, as we shall find to our cost if a hostile army should ever succeed in landing in this country.”— Morning Star, Feb. 6, 1860. Lord Palmerston, March 17, 1862. “ The passage quoted as having been part of what I said at Liverpool, related to two matters. First of all to the exemption of private property at sea from capture; and, secondly, to the assimilation of the principles of war at sea to �21 the practice of war on land. I am perfectly ready to admit that I have entirely altered my opinion on the first point. Further reflection and deeper thinking has satisfied me that what at first sight is plausible—and I admit that it is plausible on the surface—is a most dangerous doctrine, and I hope that the honourable Member (Mr. Bright) will be kind enough to give weight to my thoughts, and also come round to those second thoughts which are proverbially the best.” “ My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham has very ably and very fully shown that it was a wise and politic measure on the part of the Go­ vernment to adopt the principle that a neutral flag should cover enemy’s goods. There is a principle upon which, as it appears to me, this doctrine must stand. We have lately maintained, at the risk of war, that a merchant ship at sea is a part of our territory, that that territory cannot be violated with impunity, that, therefore, individuals cannot be taken out of a mer­ chantman belonging to a neutral country. The same principle may be said to apply to goods as well as men.”—Times, March 18, 1862. The transmutation, by a “ principle,” of a ship, whose function is to move from place to place, and, therefore, to convey help to the enemy, into a territory whose peculiarity is that it remains fixed, and, therefore, cannot convey goods to the enemy, is a climax of absurdity. It covers contraband of war, despatches, everything. It transmutes the neutral into an enemy so much the more dangerous as he is himself exempted from all danger. It is, of course, a flagrant contradiction to the declaration of the 3rd of February, 1860, that “A naval Power like England ought not to surrender any means of weakening her enemies at sea.” REGARDING THE SUEZ CANAL. (SELF-CONTRADICTION’.) Up to 1857, there was no documentary evidence to show what had been Lord Palmerston’s conduct in this matter. Mr. Urquhart, in the il Progress of Russia,” published in 1853, had declared that Russia, through Lord Palmerston, had actively intrigued against it for twenty-five years. In 1857 this statement was confirmed by Lord Palmerston’s admission. In 1858, it received the further confirmation of his denial:— Lord Palmerston, July 7, 1857. “ For the last fifteen years her Majesty’s Government have used all the in­ fluence they possess at Constantinople and in Egypt to prevent that scheme from being carried into execution.”—Hansard, vol. 116, p. 1014. Lord Palmerston, Ju:ne 1, 1858. “ We are told now that for fifteen years we have been exercising a moral constraint upon the Sultan of Turkey to prevent him giving his sanction to this scheme. Now, I can assure those who hold that opinion that they are entirely mistaken.”—Hansard, vol. 150, p. 1381. �22 REGARDING- THE DANISH SUCCESSION. (CHARGE BY LORD ROBERT MONTAGU.) The succession to the Crown of Denmark is of course a matter in which England has no more right to interfere than in the election of the Governor of New York, or the form of Govern­ ment in France. This subject has, however, occupied the English Government for at least twelve years. The correspondence had filled, according to Lord Palmerston, in 1851, two thousand pages of letterpress, and has given rise to repeated contradictions on his part. The first statement was brought out by a question from Mr. Disraeli :— Lord Palmerston, February 4, 1850. “ There are grave questions to be determined. There is one relating to the succession to the Danish Crown; another, what should be the Constitution of the Duchy of Schleswig in relation to the other part of what we call the Danish Monarchy. . . . We must not expect that matters of that kind can be arranged so quickly as we could wish; and more especially considering that Her Majesty’s Government is only acting as mediator, and that we have no power to exercise authority in regard to these questions.”—Hansard, vol. 108, p. 283. The second was a reply to Mr. Urquhart, who “ begged to ask further, whether in this correspondence there had been any nego­ tiation as to the succession to the Crown of Denmark, or in respect to the succession in the Duchies”:— Lord Palmerston, March 20, 1851. “ A good deal had passed in regard to these points, that was to say, in regard to the succession to the Crown of Denmark • and, as connected with that, in regard to the arrangements for the order of succession in Schleswig.and Hol­ stein. But Her Majesty’s Government had studiously and systematically held themselves aloof from taking any share in these negotiations. Her Majesty’s Government have confined themselves strictly to the mediation which they under­ took, which was a' mediation for the purpose of bringing about a restoration of peace between Denmark and the German Confederation.”—Hansard, vol. 115, p. 221. In 1850, the Mediation included in its scope the settling of the Danish Succession; in 1851, it had always been confined to the restoration of peace between Denmark and Germany. Two years afterwards, Mr. Blackett asked a question which brought forth a third statement. This statement contradicted both the previous ones. According to the first statement, it was only as Mediator that England had anything to do with the Danish Succession; according to the third, it was her “ business” to alter that Suc­ cession. Lord Palmerston, August 12, 1853. ee As things stood, the succession to Denmark Proper went in the female line, the succession of Holstein went in the male line, the succession of Schleswig was disputed between two parties (!) ; and, therefore, on the death �23 of the King and his Uncle, who was the next heir, Denmark would have gone to the female heir, Holstein to the male, and Schleswig been divided between them. (!) It was the business of the British Government to prevent such a state of things, and it was thought an important object to keep together those three States which in common parlance were called the Danish Provinces. He was anxious to get renunciations also from that male branch which had claims on Holstein, and to combine the whole in some party who might equally claim all portions. That was accomplished by the Treaty.”—Hansard, vol. 129, p. 1680. On the 5th June, 1851, was signed the Protocol of Warsaw, which established the “ principle of the integrity of the Danish Monarchy.” On the 8th May, 1852, this was consigned to a European Treaty. This was prima facie evidence that Lord Palmerston’s statement of March, 1851, was false. The d«atj * mentary proof was not, however, made public till, on the 18th June, 1861, Lord Robert Montagu produced in the House the Draft of the original document:— Protocol of London, August 2, 1860. " Art. I.—The unanimous desire of the said Powers is that the state of the possessions actually united under the Crown of Denmark shall be maintained in its integrity.”—Hansard, vol. 163, p. 1266. ‘‘Thus,” to use the words of Lord R. Montagu, “the Pro­ tocol and the Treaty were conceived in subjection and were exe­ cuted in duplicity.” This was a charge of falsehood, but it was made as a prima facie case. Lord Robert Montagu challenged Lord Pal­ merston to rebut the evidence brought against him. Lord Pal­ merston could not disprove, but he did not then dare to avow his falsehood. He answered by a “ Count Out.” REGARDING THE FALSIFICATION OF THE AFFGHAN DESPATCHES. (CHARGE BY MR. DUNLOP.) The Danish Treaty places the eventual succession of Denmark in the Emperor of Russia, by cutting out nineteen of the inter­ vening heirs. The Affghan Forgeries, first denied by Lord Pal­ merston, are now justified by him on the ground that they were necessary to save the honour of Russia, and to induce her to act in accordance with the interests of England:— Lord Palmerston, March 1,1818. “ If any man will give himself the trouble of referring to those Debates, as recorded in Hansard, respecting the despatches of Sir Alexander Burnes, he will see that it is not true to assert that the papers produced to the House did not contain a faithful report of the opinions which that Gentleman gave to the Governor-General and the Board of Control. I do not mean to say that Sir A. Burnes did not himself subsequently alter those opinions, but the passages omitted contained opinions on subjects irrelevant to the question at issue.”— Hansard, vol. 97, p. 102. �24 Lord Palmerston, March 19,1861. “ The policy and conduct of the Government were regulated, not by the opinions of their subordinate agent at Caubul, but by the general knowledge which they possessed of the state of affairs in the East, of the aggressive views then entertained by Russia, and of the means by which that State was preparing to carry hostilities to the very frontiers of our Indian possessions. If that be so, the question is not the degree in which Parliament has been misled, or in which Lieutenant Burnes has been injured, by the omission of portions of his despatches in which his personal opinions, evidently arising from confusion of ideas, misconception and overcredulity were stated, at variance with the views justly entertained by the Government under which he was acting. . . .” “The opinions of Lieutenant Burnes, which are omitted from the de­ spatches form no elements in the policy which was adopted.”—Hansard, vol. 162, p. 63. Lord Palmerston on this occasion did not hesitate to charge with falsehood a faithful ally of the British Government, Dost Mahommed, on the ground not that he had evidence to prove it, but that to tell falsehoods was a very natural thing. “ I am sure' nothing can be more easily conceived than that the draught which was submitted to Lieutenant Burnes was one thing, and the letter which was sent off was of a totally different character.”—p. 60. In 1848, Lord Palmerston met the charge by asserting that the Papers did contain a faithful report of the opinions of Sir A. Burnes. In 18G1, defending himself against the same charge, he says his opinions were omitted because they were not acted upon. When the denial was made, the unmutilated Papers had not been published. At that time he could say that Lord Fitz­ gerald, the President of the Board of Control, “ having access to these documents, felt himself bound to state that he could not find any trace on the part of the then Government of concealing or misrepresenting the facts.” He could boldly challenge ex­ posure, and say, “ Sir, if any such thing had been done, what was to prevent the two adverse Governments who succeeded us in power from proclaiming the fact, and producing the real docu­ ments?” When the real documents are produced, and the omitted words are marked by brackets so as to render all further concealment impossible, he covers the confession by making it in the form of a justification. The omissions and alterations respecting Russia are acknowledged in the same manner. This point is worthy of par­ ticular attention, because it is the habitual practice and special art of Lord Palmerston. * * Mr. Dunlop thus addressed his constituents at Greenock on the 21st of October, .1861 “ The idea of my motion being considered an attack on the present Govern­ ment never entered my imagination; and the notion that Lord Palmerston would have resigned, had it been carried, must rest entirely on the assumption �25 “ I say it was perfectly right, in the letter which has been referred to, to substitute the words, ‘ the Russian Government’ for the words ‘ the Emperor,’ and to omit the words which would have identified the Emperor in person with the communication made to Dost Mahommed. . . . Nothing could have been more unwise than to pin them (the Russian Government) down to that which you wished them to disavow, and to make it impossible, consistently with their honour, to undo that which your remonstrances were especially in­ tended to induce them to retract.”—pp. 60-1. It would have been unworthy of Lord Palmerston to have admitted a forgery without justifying it by a falsehood. The Russian Government had already disavowed its agents. The disavowal had been forwarded to Calcutta, and it was after this that Vicovitch was sent to Caubul with the autograph letter of the Emperor of Russia. Sir Alexander Burnes wrote, December 20, 1837:— “ I shall take an early opportunity of reporting on the proceedings of this Russian agent, if he be so in reality; for, if not an impostor, it is a most un­ called for proceeding, after the disavowal of the Russian Government conveyed through Count Nesselrode, alluded to in Mr. McNeill’s letter on the 1st of June last.” This passage is one of those suppressed in the papers of 1839. * REGARDING CIRCASSIA. ' (MISQUOTATION OF TREATIES—SELF CONTRADICTION.) This portion of the world, so long thought of only as the region of fabulous romance, then brought into the light of day to be for­ gotten for a quarter of a century, is now seen to contain the key to the destinies of the world. Yet in 1837 and 1838, when England was sending an army across the Indus to oppose Russian influence, nobody would take the trouble to see that the real bul­ wark of India was to be preserved by supporting Circassia, not by destroying Caubul. On the contrary, when the Vixen was sacrificed by consent of Parliament, the general feeling was that a great danger—war with Russia—had been escaped at a small sacrifice—the honour of England. This sacrifice, however, could be accomplished only on the condition that somebody should veil it by a falsehood, namely, that the Bay of Soudjouk Kale was in the possession of Russia at the time the Vixen was seized there. This falsehood has not yet been retracted by Lord Palmerston, and cannot therefore be set down here, as it would require the statement of the whole case. It has, however, been supported by that he was undeniably guilty, and that he would not^have dared to stand an inquiry. I can truly say that I not only did not believe that he was participant in the falsification—though I admit that such belief would not have deterred me—but that till I heard his speech in answer to me, I had never entertained even a suspicion that he had been so.” * See Affghan Papers, 1849, p. 81. �26 subsequent falsehoods, capable of being dealt with on the plan said down for this Memoir, namely, simply as falsehoods, and without reference to the designs with which they are uttered. The Treaty of Adrianople, September 14, 1829, affected to confer on Russia the east coast of the Black Sea. Had Russia been able to conquer this territory, there would have been little difficulty about the matter. But Russia, not having conquered this coast, that is, Circassia, it remains very important that Turkey never had the right or made the attempt to possess it. Russia’s false claim, of thirty-three years standing, has to be backed up by false representations, so as to seclude the Circassians from the commerce of the world till Russia shall have really conquered the country. In two or three places on the coast the Turks had erected small forts, by permission of the Circassians. Had these been specified by name in the Treaty of Adrianople, there would have been some colour of a title on the part of Russia to these places, especially if she actually possessed them. But no such places are mentioned in the Treaty of Adrianople. On Monday, August 24, 1857, in the House of Commons, in reply to Lord Raynham, Lord Palmerston said:—“Thecoast of Circassia—that was to say, the eastern coast of the Black Sea —was ceded to Russia by Turkey at the Treaty of Adrianople— that treaty ceding certain points by name along the coast round to the Sea oj Azoff. The Russians were engaged in hositilities with, the Circassians on the northern part of the eastern coast, and it appeared that some of the cruisers which, by the Treaty of Paris, Russia was entitled to maintain in the Black Sea, had been sent to operate against the Circassians at Ghelendjik and Redout Kale. He did not apprehend that in so doing, the Russians had at all exceeded their powers under the Treaty of Paris.” The words of the Treaty of Adrianople, Art. IV., are:— “ The whole of the coast of the Black Sea, from the mouth of the Kuban as far as the port of St. Nicholas, inclusively, shall remain in perpetuity under the dominion of the Empire of Russia.” The Treaty, therefore, instead of ceding certain points by name along the coast round to the Sea of Azoff, specifies only the two * extremities. This falsehood of Lord Palmerston did not, however, first appear under the sanction of his name. In the debate of the 21st of June, 1838, on the sacrifice of the Vixen in the previous year, Lord John Russell said:— “ What is the case as. to the state of the port at which Mr. Belt’s vessel is reported to have arrived ? This port, apparently, did not belong to Russia * A copy of the Treaty of Adrianople will be found in the Collection of Treaties between Russia and Turkey published by the Government in 1854. �until the year 1783. Up to that period the fact was acknowledged that it belonged to Turkey in the map put forth by the Russian authorities, and this evening alluded to by the right hon. Gentleman. In that map, it is true, that a great part of Circassia was laid down as belonging to inde­ pendent tribes. But three of the places at that time so laid down as be­ longing to Turkey were, by the subsequent Treaty of Adrianople, transferred, by name, to Russia. These places were Soudjouk Kale, Poti, Anapa. They were named specially in the Treaty, and thence has arisen a claim on the part of Russia that the whole of that territory which had belonged to Turkey belongs, since, to her, and has been confirmed to, and comes under her do­ minion.”—Mirror of Parliament, p. 4999. Neither Anapa, nor Poti, nor Soudjouk Kale, is mentioned in the Treaty of Adrianople. Lord John Russell must have been whispered to by Lord Palmerston. He appears, however, to have read the Treaty after the Debate, since the words in italics quoted from the “ Mirror of Parliament” are not in Han­ sard. In defending himself against the charge of deceiving the owners of the Vixen, Lord Palmerston had recourse to a pro­ cess of fraud and falsehood unexampled in parliamentary history. Mr. Urquhart, on returning home from Constantinople, where he had been Secretary of Embassy, consigned in a letter to Lord Palmerston (dated September 20, 1837) a history of his con­ duct in regard to the Vixen, which was at once a statement and a charge. Sir Stratford Canning (June 16, 1838) requested Lord Palmerston to lay this letter on the table of the House. Lord Palmerston refused:— “With regard to that letter from Mr. Urquhart, it was written after that Gentleman had ceased to hold an official appointment, and is therefore to be regarded as a private communication. The letter contains, too, a number of misstatements and misrepresentations, and is, in fact, an attack upon my conduct. I have not replied to that letter ; and, considering that it is not official, I doubt whether it ought to be laid before the House.”—Ibid., p. 4831. Sir S. Canning then requested that that portion of the letter might be produced which referred to the FZrm. Lord Pal­ merston replied:— “ I believe that that part of the letter is connected with a false statement in the Petition, namely, that the voyage of the Vixen was undertaken in consequence of encouragement given to the undertaking by the Under Secretary of State. I really doubt whether such a document ought to be laid before Parlia­ ment.” To this Sir S. Canning rejoined :— “ I am informed that there are other portions of the letter having refer­ ence to the Vixen. The circumstance of the document not being official, induces the noble Lord to think that it ought not to be laid upon the table ; but I beg to ask the noble Lord whether he himself has any objection to the production of such parts of the communication as have reference to the Vixen, Mr. Urquhart having given his consent to its production.” �28 Lord Palmerston then said:— “The fact is, that Mr. Urquhart wrote me a loDg letter subsequent to his recal, which letter would, I believe, fill one of the volumes on the table, and which letter contains a number of misstatements and misrepresentations connected with transactions in which we had both been concerned. I have not had time to reply to that letter, or to enter into a controversy with Mr. Urquhart, and therefore the letter has remained wholly unanswered, but if I were to lay the document on the table of the House I should be obliged to accompany it with an answer from myself, in reference to the misstatements it contains. I do not know that there is any portion of the letter which has an important bearing on the affair of the Vixen ; but I shall look at it again, and inform the right honourable Gentleman whether such be the case or not, but if any part of it is to be produced, it will be necessary for me to write a reply, and to lay that reply also on the table of the House.” The letter was connected with a false statement in the petition, and therefore could not be published. The letter, nevertheless, had not an important bearing on the affair of the Vixen, though the false statement which it supported was the whole case referred to Parliament. Finally, though unimportant, the letter could not be published unless an answer could be written by Lord Palmerston, and laid on the table of the House. This conversation is quoted from the Mirror of Parliament. It is also reported in the Times of June 18, 1838. Not a trace of it is to be found in Hansard. Lord Palmerston did, after this, write a reply, but he never laid it on the table of the House. It was left for Mr. Urquhart to publish in the Times. But, on the day of the debate (June 21), Lord Palmerston did not hesitate to say that this reply, written after the lapse of six months, was written the day after he received Mr. Urquhart’s letter. “ But we now come to another part of these transactions, being that in which the right honourable Gentleman means to impute to me, personally, some considerable blame—I mean as to the matters which form the subject of a letter written by Mr. Urquhart, and published in the Times this morn­ ing. I beg, in the first place, to say that, during the little leisure which in­ disposition sometimes gives me, I wrote a letter to Mr. Urquhart, in answer1 to one I had received from him the day before ; a fact which I men­ tion to show the course that was taken in answering his communication.” Mr. Urquhart’s letter to Lord Palmerston was dated Sep­ tember 30, 1837 * Lord Palmerston’s reply is dated June 20, 1838.| On June 16, 1838, Lord Palmerston said:— “That letter has remained wholly unanswered.” On June 21, 1838, Lord Palmerston said of the same letter:—• * It will be found in the Times of June 21, 1838. j\ See the Times of July 26, 1838, which also contains Mr. Urquhart’s rejoinder. �29 . “ I wrote a letter to Mr. Urquhart in answer to one I had received from him the day before.” Everybody, surely, can understand a direct falsehood like this. It must be evident that if Lord Palmerston could not com­ pass his defence without having recourse to falsehood, he must have been guilty of something far worse than anything the Motion imputed to him. Such an extraordinary manoeuvre must have had a special ob­ ject; but the mode in which it was intended to operate can be explained only by some one personally cognisant at the time of the whole transaction. Lord Palmerston completed his task by repeating, and at the same time contradicting, what he had said about the private nature of Mr. Urquhart’s communica­ tion :— “It would ill become me to criticise the course that Gentleman has thought proper to take, but my objection is not what it has been sup­ posed to be by the noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire (Lord Stanley)—that his letter was a betrayal of official confidence ; my objection is exactly the reverse, namely, that it contains a great number of private and confidential communications between Mr. Urquhart and other people which I did not think fit or proper to be published.”—Ibid., p. 4990. What is a betrayal of official confidence ? Is it not the revelation by a public servant of private and confidential com­ munications made to him as such? Does Lord Palmerston mean to say that breach of official confidence means pub­ lishing that which the public ought to know? If he does not mean this, it is difficult to know what he does mean. But in this last contradiction, if the meaning is obscure the purpose is obvious. The North American Indians, in their warlike marches, leave to the last man the office of concealing the trail which may betray them. This feat seems to a European impos­ sible, but Lord Palmerston has learned to perform it with an ease and a perfection which far surpass those of the inhabitants of the forest. He guards against the danger of being detected and contradicted in his falsehoods by detecting and contradicting himself. REGARDING THE RELATIONS OF ENGLAND WITH RUSSIA. (self-contradiction.) Lord Palmerston lately proposed an assimilation between war and peace. From 1837 to 1840 he effected an assimilation between enmity and friendship. He combined with Russia on all European matters, while he made war upon Dost Mahomed merely for receiving at his Court a Russian Envoy. �30 Lord Palmerston, December 14, 1837. “ I say, therefore—not at all dissembling—that I think Russia does keep a larger force than is required for the defence of her own possessions, and than is consistent with the general well-being of other nations at peace with her . . that having no reason to believe that the intention of Russia is otherwise than friendly towards this country—having reason, on the contrary, to believe (whatever her policy or ultimate intentions may prompt) that she has no wish or design to embark in a war with England, I feel &c.”* Lord Palmerston, March 11, 1839. “Ido not like to touch this part of the subject,lest the possible supposition should be entertained that, in what I say, I am giving any countenance to an opinion that may be anywhere entertained, that we are now in a state in which a rupture with Russia is likely to arise. There is nothing in the relations be­ tween this country and Russia to justify such an opinion ; on the contrary, I believe that, on both sides, there is a strong and anxious desire to preserve the peaceful relations, and to maintain that friendship which at present exist. Lord Palmerston, March 19, 1861. “ Russia was then in a state of active hostility to England in regard to our Asiatic affairs............ The policy which the Governor-General had adopted required that Dost Mahomed should be treated as an enemy, because he was allied with those who were at ffiat time the enemies of England.”—Hansard, vol. 162, pp. 62—3. REGARDING THE RUSSIAN FLEET IN THE BALTIC. (self-contradiction.) Lord Palmerston’s contradiction of himself on this point is one of the most remarkable of his many contradictions. In 1837 there was, according to his statement at the time, a correspond­ ence between England and Russia, respecting the Russian Fleet in the Baltic. In 1848 he denied that any such correspondence had taken place. In'making this denial he affected to reply to a demand for papers on the part of Mr. Anstey. No such demand was made by Mr. Anstey in his speech, nor were the papers in question among those recited in his Motion:— Lord Palmerston, December 14, 1837. “ I am asked whether any measures have been adopted by the Government - to prevent Russia from proceeding with the naval armament at Cronstadt. Now, with regard to the building and equipping of a fleet, no Government is entitled to prescribe to another Power what fleets it shall build; but unques­ tionably when a Foreign Power is fitting out a considerable force, either by sea or land which indicates intentions calculated to give reasonable ground of uneasiness to another Power, or its allies, then the Government of such country has a right to demand for what purpose such force is intended; and certainly the presence and equipment of the Russian fleet, as it was collected in the Baltic two or three years ago, did lead to explanations between the Govern* Opinions and Policy of the Right Honourable Viscount Palmerston, G.C.B., M.P., &c., as Minister, Diplomatist, and Statesman, during more than Forty Years of Public Life; with a Memoir by George Henry Francis, Esq. Editor of “ Maxims and Opinions of the Duke of Wellington,” &c. London: Colburn and Co. 1852. P. 361. t Ibid. pp. 406-7. �31 ments of England and of Russia, but those explanations were satisfactory to the Government of this country • and although, since that time, a large number of vessels have been fitted out for the purpose of review, there has not been any such display of naval force in the Baltic as might be reasonably looked upon as indicating a hostile intention on the part of Russia towards any other Power.”* Loud Palmerston, March 1, 1848, “ The bon. Member (Mr. Anstey) asks for all the correspondence which may have passed from the year 1835 downwards on the subject of the Russian fleet in commission in the Baltic. I do not recollect that any particular communi­ cations took place on this subject between the British Government, on the one hand, and those of Russia or Erance on the other.”—Hansard, vol. 97, p. 120. REGARDING THE COMPARATIVE STRENGTH OF ENGLAND AND RUSSIA. (self-contradiction.) When a Minister avows that he has committed a forgery to save the honour of an enemy, it is natural to suppose that enemy to be strong. Lord Palmerston, however, when urged to arm against Russia, declared that she was weaker than England:— Lord Palmerston, December 14,1837.. " Does he suppose that Russia—ay, even that same Russia which he seems so desirous to convert into a general alarm-giver—is in a more warlike position as regards financial matters than Great Britain? I beg to tell him he is.quite as much mistaken in thinking that Russia at this moment could.find means to commence an offensive war, as he is in asserting that England is in such a state as to render her unable to provide for a defensive one. . . I assert that Russia would find it more difficult to undertake a war, which had not for its object self-defence, than England.”f England, then, was strong enough to cope with Russia if both stood alone; the only danger was lest England should be en­ cumbered by the assistance of allies—for instance, France and Poland:— Lord Palmerston, July 9, 1833. “I repeat that a general war must have taken place if England had interfered by arms; because, on one side there were Russia, Austria, and Prussia enter­ taining one opinion, and, on the other, England and Erance were united in a different interpretation. Austria and Prussia were both in possession of Polish provinces, and both were interested, or believed themselves interested (which is much the same thing), in establishing the interpretation put by Russia on the Treaty. And what was the state of the disposable army of these Powers? Russia had an army in Poland against which the Poles were scarcely able to make head; Austria had an army on the Austrian frontier of Poland; while Prussia had concentrated her forces on the Russian frontier;. and if the British Government had wished to make the fate of the Poles certain, and to involve them in a contest with forces so superior as to render resistance on their part for a week impossible, they had nothing to do but to declare that they would, by force of arms, compel Russia to maintain the Constitution of Poland.”^ Lord Palmerston succeeded in persuading the British Par­ liament that Austria was the enemy of Poland. That the reverse * Opinions of Lord Palmerston, pp. 356-7. f Ibid. pp. 362-3. J Ibid. pp. 244-5. �32 was the truth, has lately been established by the public testimony of a Polish Gentleman whose character and whose knowledge of the subject are alike unimpeachable:— Count Zamoyski, July 11, 1861. “ I remember, when the insurrection broke out in Warsaw, the people looked up to the Austrian Consul as their friend. There was no English Consul and no French Consul. No impediment was raised in the way of any man in Galicia passing the frontier and joining the army. We had several regiments formed of Galicians. Austria, at that very time, far from being offended at the Galicians, actually supported the insurrection. The Emperor of Austria issued a proclamation to the Province in which be announced that six months’ taxes would be.remitted as a token of gratitude for their conduct during the struggle. Their conduct .consisted in collecting money and men, and sending them to the Polish insurrection. The Plenipotentiary of the Austrian Govern­ ment at the Congress of Vienna was Prince Metternich. Now, the Prince, during the Polish insurrection of 1831, concealed himself from the Russian Embassy, but he saw the Polish Envoy every evening, receiving him by the back door of his house. He conferred with him, and expressed the greatest sym­ pathy with Poland, but regretted he could do nothing so long as England and France took no action. He actually ended every conference about Poland by saying to the Polish Envoy :— My dear friend, you lose your time here; you should go to the Govern­ ments of Paris and London. We cannot move without having the assurance and security that they are determined to do the tiling in earnest—to check Russia at once and for ever.’ . “The Emperor Francis II., of Austria, sent a message through his Mi­ nister to the Polish Envoy, and it was to this effect:— “ ‘ The Emperor feels that he is drawing near his end. He is about to ap­ pear before the great Judge. The possession of Galicia weighs upon his con­ science as a crime, and he would be happy to restore it to Poland, provided that it would not be amiexed to Russia.’ “A few years afterwards, the Plenipotentiary of England at Vienna was Lord Holland, who was then Mr. Henry Fox. He took occasion to observe to Prince Metternich that he was surprised Austria did not see the benefit which she would derive from the restoration of Poland, Not knowing what had happened before, he said Austria had remained quiet, not apprehending the immense interest she had in the restoration of Poland. This was in 1835. Metternich’s answer was:— “ ‘Do you think we do not know and understand that ? Give me the as­ surance that Poland will be restored in twenty-four hours, and I will subscribe to it at once. But do you think it is an easy matter to accomplish ? It wants the assistance, of you English and French. Give me the assurance that you are willing to do it, and I am ready. I will ask no compensation for Galicia. The compensation, of course, would be the re-establishment of the barrier between ourselves and Russia.’ “ The Polish Envoy at Vienna in 1831 was my own brother, so I have this from a good source.” REGARDING POLAND. (equivocation.) It was not enough to persuade the British Parliament that Austria was hostile to Poland, it was necessary to profess a be­ lief that Poland would continue to exist as a State. This was merely a matter of the careful placing of words. In 1832 it was �33 impossible to exterminate a large kingdom morally or politically. Nobody dared to say, “Your words are inappropriate, and therefore unmeaning.” Four years afterwards it was easy to say that what lie meant was, that it was impossible to exterminate a nation morally or physically, and as these words, by virtue of having a meaning, were the reverse of what he had formerly said, they were taken to mean the same:— Lord Palmerston, June 28, 1832. “ As to the idea which seems to be entertained by several gentlemen of its being intended to exterminate a large kingdom, either morally or politically, if it be seriously entertained anywhere, it is so perfectly impracticable that I think there need he no apprehension of its being attempted.”* Lord Palmerston, April 20, 1836. " What I, on the occasion referred to, said, was this—that it was impossible for Russia to exterminate, nominally^ or physically, a nation. I did not say king­ dom. A kingdom is a political body, and may be destroyed ; but a nation is an aggregate body of men; and what I stated was that if Russia did entertain the project, which many thinking people believe she did, of exterminating the Polish nation, she entertained what it was hopeless to accomplish, because it was impossible to exterminate a nation, especially a nation of so many millions of men as the Polish Kingdom, in its divided state, contained.”! The conduct of Lord Palmerston in respect to Poland cannot be better summed up than in the words of Mr. Hennessy, July 2, 1861: “ I have said that England has been to blame throughout the whole of this business. When Lord Clarendon touched the Polish question he did it damage. Lord Aberdeen and other British statesmen of our day injured it. But the Minister who has from the beginning to this hour done the most against Poland is the present Premier. It may surprise some hon. Members to be told that, when other great Powers were anxious to assist Poland, the noble Lord on behalf of England, stepped in and prevented them. Had I myself heard such a statement some time ago, I should probably have been surprised also. But this session I have seen many things which must lessen the confidence of the country in the noble Lord. I have observed him rise in his place and lose his temper when accused by one of his own supporters of falsifying Sir A. Burnes’s despatches. I have watched influential Members of the Liberal party recording their votes against the noble Lord when that grave charge was denied but not disproved. I have heard another supporter of the Govern­ ment, when he brought forward the case of the Baron de Bode, taunted by the noble Lord with bringing forward a case involviug fraud, and I have then seen, on that issue, the Minister defeated by a majority of this House, and the charge of fraud flung back upon the noble Lord. And, not the least dis­ graceful, I have seen the House counted out by the Government when charges equally serious were made against the noble Viscount by the noble Lord near me (Lord Robert Montagu.)” In reply to this charge, namely, that of having used the power of England against Poland, and having been guilty of acts which rendered his denial unworthy of belief, Lord Palmerston was not able to utter a syllable. * Opinions of Lord Palmerston, p. 202. + Azc. J Opinions of Lord Palmerston, p. 315. �34 REGARDING THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE TREATY OF VIENNA. (mental reservation.) _The only difficulty in the way of Lord Palmerston’s betrayal of Poland has lain in the Treaty of Vienna, by which we were bound to maintain Poland in the enjoyment of certain rights. Out of this difficulty Lord Palmerston easily extricates him­ self. On August 8, 1831, Mr. Hunt presented a petition pray­ ing the House of Commons to address the King to dismiss Lord Palmerston from his councils for not having assisted Poland. Mr. Hume said we were bound by treaty to see justice done to Poland:— “Lord Palmerston could not, consistently ■with his duty, give the hon. Member those explanations which he desired; but this, at least, he would undertake to say, that ichatever obligations existing Treaties imposed, would at all times receive the attention of Government.” On August 16, 1831, on a Motion for papers by Colonel Evans, after an attack by Mr. Hume:— “ Lord Palmerston hoped that nothing he had said, and nothing he had omitted to say, would lead any man to suppose that the British Government had forgotten any obligations imposed upon it by Treaties, or that it was not prepared to fulfil those Treaties.” This was before Warsaw had fallen, and while the cessation of intercourse between England and Russia might have saved Poland. He denied that England was bound to maintain the Treaty of Vienna by force. But then he coupled this doctrine with the hypothesis that England had to stand alone against the other Powers. On June 28, 1832, in reply to Mr. Cutlar Fergusson, he said:— “ England lay under no peculiar obligation, individually and independently of the other contracting parties, to adopt measures of direct interference by force.” At this time it was supposed in England that Austria and Prussia were ready to make war in concert with Russia, and that all the other Powers would have been neutral. Now, it is known that Austria, France, Turkey, Sweden, and Persia were on the side of Poland, and had to be restrained by Lord Palmerston. He, however, is quite equal to the emergency. Pie shifts his doctrine to the very simple one that a State making a joint Treaty is not bound to enforce it if one of the parties choose to violate it. On February 27, 1863, Lord Palmerston, in reply to Mr. Hennessy, said:— “ The hon. Member assumes that by the Treaty of Vienna we are under an obligation to interfere with the affairs of Poland. We have a right to interfere, but we are under no obligation to do so.” �35 When, therefore, Lord Palmerston told Mr. Hume that the British Government had not forgotten any obligations imposed upon it by Treaties, he made a mental reservation that there were no such obligations. Falsehood here emulates the simplicity of truth, and by that simplicity triumphs. REGARDING THE RUSSO-DUTCH LOAN. (FORGERY IN COLLUSION WITH THE RUSSIAN AMBASSADORS.) Connected with the Polish Revolution is the payment of the Russo-Dutch Loan, and with that again the separation of Belgium from Holland. The continued payment to Russia of this loan after it had lapsed by this separation, according to the Treaty of 1815, was obtained by a most elaborate falsehood concerted between Lord Palmerston and the Russian Ambassadors. This falsehood, told in 1832, is contrary to all the evidence, and especially to Lord Palmerston’s own prior statement. The substance of it was that Russia had been willing to ensure a compulsory observance of the Treaty of 1815, and had offered to march 60,000 men into Belgium for that purpose. The statement first appears in a note from the Russian Ambas­ sadors to Lord Palmerston, dated January 25, 1831. They declare, at the same time, that in all their conversations with Lord Palmerston they have reserved their right to the continuance of the payments as the condition on which they adhered to the Protocol of the 20th of December 1830. This Protocol they describe as one which “ does not yet take away the sovereignty of the King of the Netherlands.” - Yet the Protocol declares that u the very object of the UnioQ of Belgium with Holland finds itself destroyed, and that thenceforth it becomes indis­ pensable to recur to other arrangements to accomplish the in­ tentions to the execution of which the Union should have served as a means.” Loan Palmerston, February 18,1831. “ They (the Conference) were not to concern themselves with the question whether Belgium, having won her freedom with her arms, should or should not be subject again to Holland, and no such interference took place.”* The Protocol of the 20th December, 1830, like every other, was signed by Russia; she was therefore bound to adhere to it. The offer of the 60,000 men must, then, have been made not only before the 25th of January, 1831, but before the 20th of December, 1830—the date of the Protocol. The offer must also have been known to foreign Powers, since the Emperor abstained from following up this determination, 4<out of respect to the representations of his Alfies, and princiOpinions of Lord Palmerston, p. 156. �36 pally out of deference to the opinions and wishes of the Cabinet of London.” It was not till the 4th November, 1830, that the King of Hol­ land invoked the interference of the Five Powers; it was not till the 10th that he consented to an armistice. The offer must, therefore, have been made between the 10th November and the 20th December, 1830. The offer was not for many months com­ municated to the public, nor to the Parliament, nor to the Minis­ ters themselves. The letter of the 25th January appears to have lain (unanswered) in Lord Palmerston’s desk till the time came round for the December payment. The payments were made twice in the year, the one per cent, of the principal being paid in July, the interest in December. The Treaty stipulated for the lapse of a year before the payments should cease. The July payment was therefore made without hesitation. But the December one was beyond the stipulated term. The Comptroller of the Exchequer demurred to the pay­ ment. So grave was the objection which he raised, that the case was submitted to the Law Officers of the Crown. Then it was that Lord Palmerston first produced the letter of the Russian Ambassadors reciting this offer, and it was upon this letter that he obtained an opinion favourable to the Russian claim, and con­ sequently the payment of the usual December instalment. The legality of this payment was warmly contested in both Houses, and on several occasions. But in spite of this apparent pressure, the offer of the 60,000 men, which, according to the prevalent notions of the day, would have justified the payment to Parlia­ ment, was still kept in reserve. Sir Thomas Denman, it is true, referred to a Russian document which had influenced his own legal opinion, and the non-production of which he deplored. But the document was not produced. The motives which induced its suppression appear to have continued for fifteen years, after which period it was laid before Parliament and printed. The story of a proposed forcible intervention came out he France, on the opening of the Chambers in 1832, in the shape of a boast by M. Casimir Perier that he had threatened with war any Power that should presume to send forces into Belgium. He attributed the “ salvation of Belgium” to the promptitude of that declaration. The Duke of Wellington was indignant at this statement, and denounced it in the House of Lords as a falsehood. On the 16th March, 1832, he “ Most distinctly denied the assumption of M. Perier, namely, that other nations had evinced an intention of interfering by force. The British Govern­ ment had no such intention, nor had any of the other Powers ; and he would add that the French Government knew that such was the case.”—Hansard, vol. 11, p. 307. �37 Lord Grey confirmed the statement of the Duke of Wel­ lington. Some months afterwards, on the 12th of July, Lord Patbrought forward the Russian statement in Parliament for the first time:— merston “In the beginning of October, 1830, the King of the Netherlands applied to his Allies, telling them his authority had been overthrown in Belgium, and he asked for military assistance to enable him to re-establish it. Such an appli­ cation was made to Great Britain, to Austria, to Russia, and to Prussia. What was the answer—not of the present, but of the late Administration ? Why, they declined to afford the military assistance required of them. What, how­ ever, was the answer of the Emperor of Russia ? He signified to his Allies that he had 60,000 men on his frontiers, ready to march for the pur­ pose of re-establishing the authority of the King of the Netherlands, if the other contracting parties to the Treaty were of opinion that such a proceeding would be consistent with the general interest.”—Hansard, vol. 14, p. 326. The message of the King of Holland was dated the 4th No­ vember. By the 29th Russia required every man, whose services she could command, to defend herself in Poland, transferring them from the remotest stations, and leaving naked her most exposed frontiers. Nobody got up to question the reality of the offer, or to state the impossibility of its execution. The Duke-of Wel­ lington, who had contradicted the statement before it was put into a definite shape, remained silent. From that moment the assertion of Lord Palmerston has been accepted as truth. This assertion, so long delayed, has no other evidence than that it is made by the Russian Ambassadors in the letter above men­ tioned. That letter, marked “ confidential,” appears never to have been answered; an answer to it appears, however, to have been imperative, since it invokes the 11 spirit and the letter of the Treaty.” The new Treaty commences by declaring that com­ plete agreement between the spirit and the letter does not exceed On the grounds above stated there can be no doubt that the assertion of Lord Palmerston was false. Upon this falsehood was obtained the payment of the instal­ ment, and through it the payments have continued up to the present time. It therefore represented a value for Russia, limiting it to a pecuniary one, of l,837,500Z. It will also appear from the circumstances and context that the Russian note of the 25th January, 1831, never had existence. The need of something to show having arisen at a posterior date, such a document was forged. It was collusively assumed between the parties to have been presented by the one and ac­ cepted by the other at the time of its date. �38 .REGARDING RUSSIA AND TURKEY. (self-contradiction.) Nearly all the falsehoods already collected have reference to Russia, and were told for her interest. Secresy and intrigue have not sufficed to keep down Turkey in the interest of Russia. Direct falsehoods have been supplied. Among the most obvious of them is one about the Treaty of Adrianople. By this Treaty Russia obtained possession of the mouth of the Danube. Lord Palmerston actually denied that she had obtained by that Treaty any territory in Europe. He gave an argument in sup­ port of his assertion, namely, that she was under a Treaty obliga­ tion to make no such acquisition. The obligation, of course, had no geographical limits. This additional falsehood is important, because it shows at a glance that Lord Palmerston was not un­ acquainted with the truth, but wilfully perverted it. Lord Palmerston, August 7, 1832. “ If ever there was just ground for going to war, Russia had it for going to war with Turkey. She did not, however, on that occasion, acquire any increase of territory, at least in Europe. I know that there was a continued occupation of certain points, and some additional acquisitions on the Euxine, in Asia; but she had an agreement with the other European Powers, to the effect that suc­ cess in that war should not lead to any aggrandisement in Europe, I think the official situation I hold in this House renders it my duty to state facts like these.”* Lord Palmerston, April 20, 1836. “ Undoubtedly, when Russia acquired a portion of the Danube by the Treaty of Adrianople, that part of the river fell within the scope of the Treaty of Vienna, as being a part of Russia.” f REGARDING THE TREATY OF JULY 15, 1840. (ERASURE OF HANSARD.) The turning point in the career of Lord Palmerston, and in the history of the world, is the Treaty of 1840, for the Pacification of the Levant, by the four Powers to the exclusion of France. By this Treaty Russia was authorised to occupy Constantinople. The meaning of the transaction as regards Russia and Turkey was concealed by the device of the quarrel between the Sultan and the Pasha of Egypt. England affected to side with the former, France supported the latter. But though Englishmen were easily mystified as regards Russia and Turkey, they were not disposed to sacrifice the good understanding with France. It be­ came necessary to make it be believed in Parliament that no insult had been offered to France. Mr. Hume demanded the production of the Treaty. Lord Palmerston refused to produce it because it had not been ratified, and was therefore not yet valid, but he declared that the Treaty which he refused to the English Parlia­ * Opinions of Lord Palmerston, p. 216. f Ibid., p. 314. �39 ment he had already, as a mark of confidence, forwarded to the French Government. This statement was doubly false. No copy of the Treaty was sent to the French Government for two months after its signature. By a Protocol signed on the same day as the Treaty, it was to come into operation without waiting for ratifica­ tion. Loud Palmerston, Avgust 6,1840. “ My honourable Friend (Mr. Htjme) asked for a copy of the Convention that had been entered into with the great Powers: that a Convention had been entered into was certain, but it was not fulfilled until it was ratified and ex­ changed by each of the Powers that were parties to it; and until this was done it was impossible that the document could be made public, or that it could be laid before Parliament.”—Hansard, vol. 55, p. 1371. Extract erom Protocol oe July 15,1840. “ The said Plenipotentiaries, in virtue of their full powers, have agreed between them Xhat the preliminary measures mentioned in Article II. of the said Convention shall be put in execution immediately, without waiting for the exchange of ratifications; the respective Plenipotentiaries state formally by the present Act the assent of their Courts to the immediate execution of these measures.”* These measures were the employment of the British fleet against Mehemet Ali, and—if she had assisted him—against France. Lord Palmerston, August 6, ] 840. “ In the case of the Convention between France and England, with respect to Belgium, that Convention was not communicated to the Belgian Govern­ ment till after it was ratified; whilst, in the present case, the Treaty was for­ warded to France two days after it was signedTimes, August 7, 1840. Lord Palmerston to M. Guizot, September 16, 1840. “ The Undersigned had the honour, on the 17th July, to inform his Excellency M. Guizot, that a Convention upon the affairs of Turkey had been signed on the 15th of that month, &c. . . . The ratifications of that Convention having now been exchanged, the Undersigned has the honour of transmitting to M. Guizot, for the information of the French Government, a copy of that Conven­ tion and of its annexes.”! The falsehood of the 6 th August was told for the House of Commons. We quote it from the Times’ report of the next day. But, though the House of Commons accepted the statement without inquiry, there were others who could not be deceived by it. M. Guizot has just published the History of his Embassy to the Court of St. James in 1840. In it this passage occurs:— “ On the 16th of September, when all the ratifications had arrived and been exchanged in London, Lord Palmerston at length made known to us officially and textually the Treaty of the 15th of July.” The Appendix to the Correspondence contains the reply of M. Thiers to a Memorandum of Lord Palmerston of the 31st August, in which he (M. Thiers) says:— * Convention for the Pacification of the Levant, presented by command. 1841. f Correspondence relative to the Affairs of the Levant, Part II., p. 190. �40 “ All at once, on the 17th of July, Lord Palmerston calls to the Foreign Office the Ambassador of France, and informs him that a Treaty had been signed the day before yesterday; he tells him this without even communicating to him the text of the Treaty.” In another place, speaking of this Treaty, he says :— “ Which was not communicated to it until two months later.”—Pp. 453,455. M. Guizot says of this Despatch of M. Thiers:— “ I read it to Lord Palmerston, who had returned the same day from the country, and gave him a copy of it.”—P. 318. When, therefore, Lord Palmerston corrected his speech for Hansard, he erased the falsehood which had had such an effect in the House, and substituted the following indistinct and un­ meaning form of words:— “ The four Powers then determined, in accordance with the regulation already made with France, that they would join in carrying the arrangement into effect, and notice of the same was given to the French Minister two dags after it was completed. In the case of the Convention made between France and England alone, in reference to Belgium, notice of the same was not communicated to the other Powers till some time after.”—Hansard, vol 55, p. 1378. If this falsehood had been detected on the night of its utterance, the career of Lord Palmerston might have been closed. Lord Palmerston, ever since he has been Foreign Secretary, harS pretended a great regard for the independence and integrity of the Ottoman Empire. He said, 11th July, 1833:— “ The integrity and independence of the Ottoman Empire are necessary to the maintenance of the tranquillity, the liberty, and the balance of Power in the rest of Europe.”* No change has taken place in Lord Palmerston’s conduct to Turkey since he ventured to express a very different opinion. On the 5th of February, 1830, being in opposition, he for once spoke out his intentions:— “I object to the policy of making the integrity of the Turkish dominions in Europe an object essentially necessary to the interests of Christian and civilised Europe.”! These falsehoods are presented here disconnected from the con­ sideration of the subjects to which they relate. It is sufficient that the designs attempted require the use of falsehood for any honest man to condemn them; they might be arrested in their course by a nation which, though unable to comprehend treason, should at least resolve to punish falsehood. But this process will cease to be effective when, at length, the time shall have arrived in which falsehood shall no longer be necessary for the success of treason. * Opinions of Lord Palmerston, p. 246. C. WHITING, BEAUFORT HOUSE, STRAND. f Ibid., p. 131. � 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 &amp; 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 Contradictions of Lord Palmerston in reference to Poland and Circassia et caetera Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource St Pancras Committee on Foreign Affairs Description An account of the resource Place of publication: London Collation: 40 p. ; 22 cm. Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. The Report originally appeared under the title 'Falsehood as a Method of Government'. Printed by C. Whiting, London. Includes bibliographical references. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Hardwicke Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1863 Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context G5247 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 (Contradictions of Lord Palmerston in reference to Poland and Circassia et caetera), 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 Subject The topic of the resource Foreign Relations Great Britain Politics Conway Tracts Foreign Relations Great Britain-Politics and Government-1837-1901 Henry John Temple Press