However, these remarks relate only to two famous writers on the subjects with which this History is concerned. If the work had been brought to a close with the year 1850 instead of 1860, I should hardly have found it necessary to give them so prominent a position in it. Their names are Charles Darwin and Karl Nägeli. I would desire that whoever reads what I have written on Charles Darwin in the present work should consider that it contains a large infusion of youthful enthusiasm still remaining from the year 1859, when the ‘Origin of Species’ delivered us from the unlucky dogma of constancy. Darwin’s later writings have not inspired me with the like feeling. So it has been with regard to Nägeli. He, like Hugo von Mohl, was one of the first among German botanists who introduced into the study that strict method of thought which had long prevailed in physics, chemistry, and astronomy; but the researches of the last ten or twelve years have unfortunately shown that Nägeli’s method has been applied to facts which, as facts, were inaccurately observed. Darwin collected innumerable facts from the literature in support of an idea, Nägeli applied his strict logic to observations which were in part untrustworthy. The services which each of these men rendered to the science are still
The current-less waters are dead and still,
He could, of course, be dead. All this could be the fantasies of a cooling brain.
Not to chase the roebuck, nor shoot the pheasant,
It was in March 1857, when Bu-chan-an had his in-au-gu-ral ad-dress all writ-ten out with care, and he was read-y to take his seat as Chief in the land, that he was told that a great step was a-bout to be tak-en by the “Su-preme Court,” the high-est court of law in the land. It seems that the jud-ges were then to de-cide in a case which dealt with the rights of men who held slaves un-der the Con-sti-tu-tion.
sent, as a Whig, in 1846, to the Con-gress of the U-ni-ted States, and he was the sole Whig mem-ber from Il-li-nois.
“This is Captain Lyall, who will fly you over to France. He can start at once.”
The formulæ of Anarchism and Socialism are, no doubt, almost diametrically opposed; Anarchism denies government, Socialism would concentrate all controls in the State, yet it is after all possible in different relations and different aspects to entertain the two. When one comes to dreams, when one tries to imagine one’s finest sort of people, one must surely imagine them too fine for control and prohibitions, doing right by a sort of inner impulse, “above the Law.” One’s dreamland perfection is Anarchy—just as no one would imagine a policeman (or for the matter of that a drain-pipe) in Heaven. But come down to earth, to men the descendants of apes, to men competing to live,详情 ➢
Copyright © 2020