diff options
Diffstat (limited to '3279-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 3279-0.txt | 1962 |
1 files changed, 1962 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/3279-0.txt b/3279-0.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..ffb326a --- /dev/null +++ b/3279-0.txt @@ -0,0 +1,1962 @@ +The Project Gutenberg eBook, Canterbury Pieces, by Samuel Butler, Edited +by R. A. Streatfeild + + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most +other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions +whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of +the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at +www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have +to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. + + + + +Title: Canterbury Pieces + + +Author: Samuel Butler + +Editor: R. A. Streatfeild + +Release Date: July 26, 2019 [eBook #3279] +[This file was first posted May 24, 2001] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: UTF-8 + + +***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CANTERBURY PIECES*** + + + + +Transcribed from the 1914 A. C. Fifield edition by David Price, email +ccx074@pglaf.org + + [Picture: Public domain cover] + + + + + + CANTERBURY PIECES + + + By + Samuel Butler + Author of “Erewhon,” “The Way of All Flesh,” etc. + + * * * * * + + Edited by R. A. Streatfeild + + * * * * * + + London: A. C. Fifield + 1914 + + + + +CONTENTS + + PAGE +Darwin on the Origin of Species 149 + A Dialogue 155 + Barrel-Organs 164 + Letter: 21 February 1863 167 + Letter: 14 March 1863 171 + Letter: 18 March 1863 173 + Letter: 11 April 1863 175 + Letter: 22 June 1863 177 +Darwin Among the Machines 179 +Lucubratio Ebria 186 +A Note on “The Tempest” 195 +The English Cricketers 198 + +Darwin on the Origin of Species + + +Prefatory Note + + +_AS the following dialogue embodies the earliest fruits of Butler’s study +of the works of Charles Darwin_, _with whose name his own was destined in +later years to be so closely connected_, _and thus possesses an interest +apart from its intrinsic merit_, _a few words as to the circumstances in +which it was published will not be out of place_. + +_Butler arrived in New Zealand in October_, 1859, _and about the same +time Charles Darwin’s_ ORIGIN OF SPECIES _was published_. _Shortly +afterwards the book came into Butler’s hands_. _He seems to have read it +carefully_, _and meditated upon it_. _The result of his meditations took +the shape of the following dialogue_, _which was published on_ 20 +_December_, 1862, _in the_ PRESS _which had been started in the town of +Christ Church in May_, 1861. _The dialogue did not by any means pass +unnoticed_. _On the_ 17_th of January_, 1863, _a leading article_ (_of +course unsigned_) _appeared in the_ PRESS, _under the title_ +“_Barrel-Organs_,” _discussing Darwin’s theories_, _and incidentally +referring to Butler’s dialogue_. _A reply to this article_, _signed +A.M._, _appeared on the_ 21_st of February_, _and the correspondence was +continued until the_ 22_nd of June_, 1863. _The dialogue itself_, _which +was unearthed from the early files of the_ PRESS, _mainly owing to the +exertions of Mr. Henry Festing Jones_, _was reprinted_, _together with +the correspondence that followed its publication_, _in the_ PRESS _of +June_ 8 _and_ 15, 1912. _Soon after the original appearance of Butler’s +dialogue a copy of it fell into the hands of Charles Darwin_, _possibly +sent to him by a friend in New Zealand_. _Darwin was sufficiently struck +by it to forward it to the editor of some magazine_, _which has not been +identified_, _with the following letter_:— + + _Down_, _Bromley_, _Kent_, _S.E._ + _March_ 24 [1863]. + + (Private). + + _Mr. Darwin takes the liberty to send by this post to the Editor a + New Zealand newspaper for the very improbable chance of the Editor + having some spare space to reprint a Dialogue on Species_. _This + Dialogue_, _written by some_ [_sic_] _quite unknown to Mr. Darwin_, + _is remarkable from its spirit and from giving so clear and accurate + a view of Mr. D._ [_sic_] _theory_. _It is also remarkable from + being published in a colony exactly_ 12 _years old_, _in which it + might have_ [_sic_] _thought only material interests would have been + regarded_. + +_The autograph of this letter was purchased from Mr. Tregaskis by Mr. +Festing Jones_, _and subsequently presented by him to the Museum at +Christ Church_. _The letter cannot be dated with certainty_, _but since +Butler’s dialogue was published in December_, 1862, _and it is at least +probable that the copy of the_ PRESS _which contained it was sent to +Darwin shortly after it appeared_, _we may conclude with tolerable +certainty that the letter was written in March_, 1863. _Further light is +thrown on the controversy by a correspondence which took place between +Butler and Darwin in_ 1865, _shortly after Butler’s return to England_. +_During that year Butler had published a pamphlet entitled_ THE EVIDENCE +FOR THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST AS GIVEN BY THE FOUR EVANGELISTS +CRITICALLY EXAMINED, _of which he afterwards incorporated the substance +into_ THE FAIR HAVEN. _Butler sent a copy of this pamphlet to Darwin_, +_and in due course received the following reply_:— + + _Down_, _Bromley_, _Kent_. + _September_ 30 [1865]. + + _My dear Sir_,—_I am much obliged to you for so kindly sending me + your Evidences_, _etc._ _We have read it with much interest_. _It + seems to me written with much force_, _vigour_, _and clearness_; _and + the main argument to me is quite new_. _I particularly agree with + all you say in your preface_. + + _I do not know whether you intend to return to New Zealand_, _and_, + _if you are inclined to write_, _I should much like to know what your + future plans are_. + + _My health has been so bad during the last five months that I have + been confined to my bedroom_. _Had it been otherwise I would have + asked you if you could have spared the time to have paid us a visit_; + _but this at present is impossible_, _and I fear will be so for some + time_. + + _With my best thanks for your present_, + + _I remain_, + + _My dear Sir_, + + _Yours very faithfully_, + _Charles Darwin_. + +_To this letter Butler replied as follows_:— + + 15 _Clifford’s Inn_, _E.C._ + _October_ 1_st_, 1865. + + _Dear Sir_,—_I knew you were ill and I never meant to give you the + fatigue of writing to me_. _Please do not trouble yourself to do so + again_. _As you kindly ask my plans I may say that_, _though I very + probably may return to New Zealand in three or four years_, _I have + no intention of doing so before that time_. _My study is art_, _and + anything else I may indulge in is only by-play_; _it may cause you + some little wonder that at my age I should have started as an art + student_, _and I may perhaps be permitted to explain that this was + always my wish for years_, _that I had begun six years ago_, _as soon + as ever I found that I could not conscientiously take orders_; _my + father so strongly disapproved of the idea that I gave it up and went + out to New Zealand_, _stayed there for five years_, _worked like a + common servant_, _though on a run of my own_, _and sold out little + more than a year ago_, _thinking that prices were going to + fall_—_which they have since done_. _Being then rather at a loss + what to do and my capital being all locked up_, _I took the + opportunity to return to my old plan_, _and have been studying for + the last ten years unremittingly_. _I hope that in three or four + years more I shall be able to go on very well by myself_, _and then I + may go back to New Zealand or no as circumstances shall seem to + render advisable_. _I must apologise for so much detail_, _but + hardly knew how to explain myself without it_. + + _I always delighted in your_ ORIGIN OF SPECIES _as soon as I saw it + out in New Zealand_—_not as knowing anything whatsoever of natural + history_, _but it enters into so many deeply interesting questions_, + _or rather it suggests so many_, _that it thoroughly fascinated me_. + _I therefore feel all the greater pleasure that my pamphlet should + please you_, _however full of errors_. + + _The first dialogue on the_ ORIGIN _which I wrote in the_ PRESS + _called forth a contemptuous rejoinder from_ (_I believe_) _the + Bishop of Wellington_—(_please do not mention the name_, _though I + think that at this distance of space and time I might mention it to + yourself_) _I answered it with the enclosed_, _which may amuse you_. + _I assumed another character because my dialogue was in my hearing + very severely criticised by two or three whose opinion I thought + worth having_, _and I deferred to their judgment in my next_. _I do + not think I should do so now_. _I fear you will be shocked at an + appeal to the periodicals mentioned in my letter_, _but they form a + very staple article of bush diet_, _and we used to get a good deal of + superficial knowledge out of them_. _I feared to go in too heavy on + the side of the_ ORIGIN, _because I thought that_, _having said my + say as well as I could_, _I had better now take a less impassioned + tone_; _but I was really exceedingly angry_. + + _Please do not trouble yourself to answer this_, _and believe me_, + + _Yours most sincerely_, + + _S. Butler_. + +_This elicited a second letter from Darwin_:— + + _Down_, _Bromley_, _Kent_. + _October_ 6. + + _My dear Sir_,—_I thank you sincerely for your kind and frank + letter_, _which has interested me greatly_. _What a singular and + varied career you have already run_. _Did you keep any journal or + notes in New Zealand_? _For it strikes me that with your rare powers + of writing you might make a very interesting work descriptive of a + colonist’s life in New Zealand_. + + _I return your printed letter_, _which you might like to keep_. _It + has amused me_, _especially the part in which you criticise + yourself_. _To appreciate the letter fully I ought to have read the + bishop’s letter_, _which seems to have been very rich_. + + _You tell me not to answer your note_, _but I could not resist the + wish to thank you for your letter_. + + _With every good wish_, _believe me_, _my dear Sir_, + + _Yours sincerely_, + _Ch. Darwin_. + +_It is curious that in this correspondence Darwin makes no reference to +the fact that he had already had in his possession a copy of Butler’s +dialogue and had endeavoured to induce the editor of an English +periodical to reprint it_. _It is possible that we have not here the +whole of the correspondence which passed between Darwin and Butler at +this period_, _and this theory is supported by the fact that Butler seems +to take for granted that Darwin knew all about the appearance of the +original dialogue on the_ ORIGIN OF SPECIES _in the_ PRESS. _Enough_, +_however_, _has been given to explain the correspondence which the +publication of the dialogue occasioned_. _I do not know what authority +Butler had for supposing that Charles John Abraham_, _Bishop of +Wellington_, _was the author of the article entitled_ “_Barrel-Organs_,” +_and the_ “_Savoyard_” _of the subsequent controversy_. _However_, _at +that time Butler was deep in the __counsels of the_ PRESS, _and he may +have received private information on the subject_. _Butler’s own +reappearance over the initials A.M. is sufficiently explained in his +letter to Darwin_. + +_It is worth observing that Butler appears in the dialogue and ensuing +correspondence in a character very different from that which he was later +to assume_. _Here we have him as an ardent supporter of Charles Darwin_, +_and adopting a contemptuous tone with regard to the claims of Erasmus +Darwin to have sown the seed which was afterwards raised to maturity by +his grandson_. _It would be interesting to know if it was this +correspondence that first turned Butler’s attention seriously to the +works of the older evolutionists and ultimately led to the production of_ +EVOLUTION, OLD AND NEW, _in which the indebtedness of Charles Darwin to +Erasmus Darwin_, _Buffon and Lamarck is demonstrated with such compelling +force_. + + + +A Dialogue + + + [From the _Press_, 20 December, 1862.] + +F. So you have finished Darwin? Well, how did you like him? + +C. You cannot expect me to like him. He is so hard and logical, and he +treats his subject with such an intensity of dry reasoning without giving +himself the loose rein for a single moment from one end of the book to +the other, that I must confess I have found it a great effort to read him +through. + +F. But I fancy that, if you are to be candid, you will admit that the +fault lies rather with yourself than with the book. Your knowledge of +natural history is so superficial that you are constantly baffled by +terms of which you do not understand the meaning, and in which you +consequently lose all interest. I admit, however, that the book is hard +and laborious reading; and, moreover, that the writer appears to have +predetermined from the commencement to reject all ornament, and simply to +argue from beginning to end, from point to point, till he conceived that +he had made his case sufficiently clear. + +C. I agree with you, and I do not like his book partly on that very +account. He seems to have no eye but for the single point at which he is +aiming. + +F. But is not that a great virtue in a writer? + +C. A great virtue, but a cold and hard one. + +F. In my opinion it is a grave and wise one. Moreover, I conceive that +the judicial calmness which so strongly characterises the whole book, the +absence of all passion, the air of extreme and anxious caution which +pervades it throughout, are rather the result of training and +artificially acquired self-restraint than symptoms of a cold and +unimpassioned nature; at any rate, whether the lawyer-like faculty of +swearing both sides of a question and attaching the full value to both is +acquired or natural in Darwin’s case, you will admit that such a habit of +mind is essential for any really valuable and scientific investigation. + +C. I admit it. Science is all head—she has no heart at all. + +F. You are right. But a man of science may be a man of other things +besides science, and though he may have, and ought to have no heart +during a scientific investigation, yet when he has once come to a +conclusion he may be hearty enough in support of it, and in his other +capacities may be of as warm a temperament as even you can desire. + +C. I tell you I do not like the book. + +F. May I catechise you a little upon it? + +C. To your heart’s content. + +F. Firstly, then, I will ask you what is the one great impression that +you have derived from reading it; or, rather, what do you think to be the +main impression that Darwin wanted you to derive? + +C. Why, I should say some such thing as the following—that men are +descended from monkeys, and monkeys from something else, and so on back +to dogs and horses and hedge-sparrows and pigeons and cinipedes (what is +a cinipede?) and cheesemites, and then through the plants down to +duckweed. + +F. You express the prevalent idea concerning the book, which as you +express it appears nonsensical enough. + +C. How, then, should you express it yourself? + +F. Hand me the book and I will read it to you through from beginning to +end, for to express it more briefly than Darwin himself has done is +almost impossible. + +C. That is nonsense; as you asked me what impression I derived from the +book, so now I ask you, and I charge you to answer me. + +F. Well, I assent to the justice of your demand, but I shall comply with +it by requiring your assent to a few principal statements deducible from +the work. + +C. So be it. + +F. You will grant then, firstly, that all plants and animals increase +very rapidly, and that unless they were in some manner checked, the world +would soon be overstocked. Take cats, for instance; see with what +rapidity they breed on the different runs in this province where there is +little or nothing to check them; or even take the more slowly breeding +sheep, and see how soon 500 ewes become 5000 sheep under favourable +circumstances. Suppose this sort of thing to go on for a hundred million +years or so, and where would be the standing room for all the different +plants and animals that would be now existing, did they not materially +check each other’s increase, or were they not liable in some way to be +checked by other causes? Remember the quail; how plentiful they were +until the cats came with the settlers from Europe. Why were they so +abundant? Simply because they had plenty to eat, and could get +sufficient shelter from the hawks to multiply freely. The cats came, and +tussocks stood the poor little creatures in but poor stead. The cats +increased and multiplied because they had plenty of food and no natural +enemy to check them. Let them wait a year or two, till they have +materially reduced the larks also, as they have long since reduced the +quail, and let them have to depend solely upon occasional dead lambs and +sheep, and they will find a certain rather formidable natural enemy +called Famine rise slowly but inexorably against them and slaughter them +wholesale. The first proposition then to which I demand your assent is +that all plants and animals tend to increase in a high geometrical ratio; +that they all endeavour to get that which is necessary for their own +welfare; that, as unfortunately there are conflicting interests in +Nature, collisions constantly occur between different animals and plants, +whereby the rate of increase of each species is very materially checked. +Do you admit this? + +C. Of course; it is obvious. + +F. You admit then that there is in Nature a perpetual warfare of plant, +of bird, of beast, of fish, of reptile; that each is striving selfishly +for its own advantage, and will get what it wants if it can. + +C. If what? + +F. If it can. How comes it then that sometimes it cannot? Simply +because all are not of equal strength, and the weaker must go to the +wall. + +C. You seem to gloat over your devilish statement. + +F. Gloat or no gloat, is it true or no? I am not one of those + + “Who would unnaturally better Nature + By making out that that which is, is not.” + +If the law of Nature is “struggle,” it is better to look the matter in +the face and adapt yourself to the conditions of your existence. Nature +will not bow to you, neither will you mend matters by patting her on the +back and telling her that she is not so black as she is painted. My dear +fellow, my dear sentimental friend, do you eat roast beef or roast +mutton? + +C. Drop that chaff and go back to the matter in hand. + +F. To continue then with the cats. Famine comes and tests them, so to +speak; the weaker, the less active, the less cunning, and the less +enduring cats get killed off, and only the strongest and smartest cats +survive; there will be no favouritism shown to animals in a state of +Nature; they will be weighed in the balance, and the weight of a hair +will sometimes decide whether they shall be found wanting or no. This +being the case, the cats having been thus naturally culled and the +stronger having been preserved, there will be a gradual tendency to +improve manifested among the cats, even as among our own mobs of sheep +careful culling tends to improve the flock. + +C. This, too, is obvious. + +F. Extend this to all animals and plants, and the same thing will hold +good concerning them all. I shall now change the ground and demand +assent to another statement. You know that though the offspring of all +plants and animals is in the main like the parent, yet that in almost +every instance slight deviations occur, and that sometimes there is even +considerable divergence from the parent type. It must also be admitted +that these slight variations are often, or at least sometimes, capable of +being perpetuated by inheritance. Indeed, it is only in consequence of +this fact that our sheep and cattle have been capable of so much +improvement. + +C. I admit this. + +F. Then the whole matter lies in a nutshell. Suppose that hundreds of +millions of years ago there existed upon this earth a single primordial +form of the very lowest life, or suppose that three or four such +primordial forms existed. Change of climate, of food, of any of the +circumstances which surrounded any member of this first and lowest class +of life would tend to alter it in some slight manner, and the alteration +would have a tendency to perpetuate itself by inheritance. Many failures +would doubtless occur, but with the lapse of time slight deviations would +undoubtedly become permanent and inheritable, those alone being +perpetuated which were beneficial to individuals in whom they appeared. +Repeat the process with each deviation and we shall again obtain +divergences (in the course of ages) differing more strongly from the +ancestral form, and again those that enable their possessor to struggle +for existence most efficiently will be preserved. Repeat this process +for millions and millions of years, and, as it is impossible to assign +any limit to variability, it would seem as though the present diversities +of species must certainly have come about sooner or later, and that other +divergences will continue to come about to the end of time. The great +agent in this development of life has been competition. This has culled +species after species, and secured that those alone should survive which +were best fitted for the conditions by which they found themselves +surrounded. Endeavour to take a bird’s-eye view of the whole matter. +See battle after battle, first in one part of the world, then in another, +sometimes raging more fiercely and sometimes less; even as in human +affairs war has always existed in some part of the world from the +earliest known periods, and probably always will exist. While a species +is conquering in one part of the world it is being subdued in another, +and while its conquerors are indulging in their triumph down comes the +fiat for their being culled and drafted out, some to life and some to +death, and so forth _ad infinitum_. + +C. It is very horrid. + +F. No more horrid than that you should eat roast mutton or boiled beef. + +C. But it is utterly subversive of Christianity; for if this theory is +true the fall of man is entirely fabulous; and if the fall, then the +redemption, these two being inseparably bound together. + +F. My dear friend, there I am not bound to follow you. I believe in +Christianity, and I believe in Darwin. The two appear irreconcilable. +My answer to those who accuse me of inconsistency is, that both being +undoubtedly true, the one must be reconcilable with the other, and that +the impossibility of reconciling them must be only apparent and +temporary, not real. The reconciliation will never be effected by +planing a little off the one and a little off the other and then gluing +them together with glue. People will not stand this sort of dealing, and +the rejection of the one truth or of the other is sure to follow upon any +such attempt being persisted in. The true course is to use the freest +candour in the acknowledgment of the difficulty; to estimate precisely +its real value, and obtain a correct knowledge of its precise form. Then +and then only is there a chance of any satisfactory result being +obtained. For unless the exact nature of the difficulty be known first, +who can attempt to remove it? Let me re-state the matter once again. +All animals and plants in a state of Nature are undergoing constant +competition for the necessaries of life. Those that can hold their +ground hold it; those that cannot hold it are destroyed. But as it also +happens that slight changes of food, of habit, of climate, of +circumjacent accident, and so forth, produce a slight tendency to vary in +the offspring of any plant or animal, it follows that among these slight +variations some may be favourable to the individual in whom they appear, +and may place him in a better position than his fellows as regards the +enemies with whom his interests come into collision. In this case he +will have a better chance of surviving than his fellows; he will thus +stand also a better chance of continuing the species, and in his +offspring his own slight divergence from the parent type will be apt to +appear. However slight the divergence, if it be beneficial to the +individual it is likely to preserve the individual and to reappear in his +offspring, and this process may be repeated _ad infinitum_. Once grant +these two things, and the rest is a mere matter of time and degree. That +the immense differences between the camel and the pig should have come +about in six thousand years is not believable; but in six hundred million +years it is not incredible, more especially when we consider that by the +assistance of geology a very perfect chain has been formed between the +two. Let this instance suffice. Once grant the principles, once grant +that competition is a great power in Nature, and that changes of +circumstances and habits produce a tendency to variation in the offspring +(no matter how slight such variation may be), and unless you can define +the possible limit of such variation during an infinite series of +generations, unless you can show that there is a limit, and that Darwin’s +theory over-steps it, you have no right to reject his conclusions. As +for the objections to the theory, Darwin has treated them with admirable +candour, and our time is too brief to enter into them here. My +recommendation to you is that you should read the book again. + +C. Thank you, but for my own part I confess to caring very little +whether my millionth ancestor was a gorilla or no; and as Darwin’s book +does not please me, I shall not trouble myself further about the matter. + + + +Barrel-Organs + + + [From the _Press_, 17 January, 1863.] + +Dugald Stewart in his _Dissertation on the Progress of Metaphysics_ says: +“On reflecting on the repeated reproduction of ancient paradoxes by +modern authors one is almost tempted to suppose that human invention is +limited, like a barrel-organ, to a specific number of tunes.” + +It would be a very amusing and instructive task for a man of reading and +reflection to note down the instances he meets with of these old tunes +coming up again and again in regular succession with hardly any change of +note, and with all the old hitches and involuntary squeaks that the +barrel-organ had played in days gone by. It is most amusing to see the +old quotations repeated year after year and volume after volume, till at +last some more careful enquirer turns to the passage referred to and +finds that they have all been taken in and have followed the lead of the +first daring inventor of the mis-statement. Hallam has had the courage, +in the supplement to his _History of the Middle Ages_, p. 398, to +acknowledge an error of this sort that he has been led into. + +But the particular instance of barrel-organism that is present to our +minds just now is the Darwinian theory of the development of species by +natural selection, of which we hear so much. This is nothing new, but a +_réchauffée_ of the old story that his namesake, Dr. Darwin, served up in +the end of the last century to Priestley and his admirers, and Lord +Monboddo had cooked in the beginning of the same century. We have all +heard of his theory that man was developed directly from the monkey, and +that we all lost our tails by sitting too much upon that appendage. + +We learn from that same great and cautious writer Hallam in his _History +of Literature_ that there are traces of this theory and of other popular +theories of the present day in the works of Giordano Bruno, the +Neapolitan who was burnt at Rome by the Inquisition in 1600. It is +curious to read the titles of his works and to think of Dugald Stewart’s +remark about barrel-organs. For instance he wrote on “The Plurality of +Worlds,” and on the universal “Monad,” a name familiar enough to the +readers of _Vestiges of Creation_. He was a Pantheist, and, as Hallam +says, borrowed all his theories from the eclectic philosophers, from +Plotinus and the Neo-Platonists, and ultimately they were no doubt of +Oriental origin. This is just what has been shown again and again to be +the history of German Pantheism; it is a mere barrel-organ repetition of +the Brahman metaphysics found in Hindu cosmogonies. Bruno’s theory +regarding development of species was in Hallam’s words: “There is nothing +so small or so unimportant but that a portion of spirit dwells in it; and +this spiritual substance requires a proper subject to become a plant or +an animal”; and Hallam in a note on this passage observes how the modern +theories of equivocal generation correspond with Bruno’s. + +No doubt Hallam is right in saying that they are all of Oriental origin. +Pythagoras borrowed from thence his kindred theory of the metempsychosis, +or transmigration of souls. But he was more consistent than modern +philosophers; he recognised a downward development as well as an upward, +and made morality and immorality the crisis and turning-point of change—a +bold lion developed into a brave warrior, a drunken sot developed into a +wallowing pig, and Darwin’s slave-making ants, p. 219, would have been +formerly Virginian cotton and tobacco growers. + +Perhaps Prometheus was the first Darwin of antiquity, for he is said to +have begun his creation from below, and after passing from the +invertebrate to the sub-vertebrate, from thence to the backbone, from the +backbone to the mammalia, and from the mammalia to the manco-cerebral, he +compounded man of each and all:— + + Fertur Prometheus addere principi + Limo coactus particulam undique + Desectam et insani leonis + Vim stomacho apposuisse nostro. + +One word more about barrel-organs. We have heard on the undoubted +authority of ear and eyewitnesses, that in a neighbouring province there +is a church where the psalms are sung to a barrel-organ, but +unfortunately the psalm tunes come in the middle of the set, and the jigs +and waltzes have to be played through before the psalm can start. Just +so is it with Darwinism and all similar theories. All his fantasias, as +we saw in a late article, are made to come round at last to religious +questions, with which really and truly they have nothing to do, but were +it not for their supposed effect upon religion, no one would waste his +time in reading about the possibility of Polar bears swimming about and +catching flies so long that they at last get the fins they wish for. + + + +Darwin on Species +[From the _Press_, 21 February, 1863.] + + + To the Editor of the _Press_. + +Sir—In two of your numbers you have already taken notice of Darwin’s +theory of the origin of species; I would venture to trespass upon your +space in order to criticise briefly both your notices. + +The first is evidently the composition of a warm adherent of the theory +in question; the writer overlooks all the real difficulties in the way of +accepting it, and, caught by the obvious truth of much that Darwin says, +has rushed to the conclusion that all is equally true. He writes with +the tone of a partisan, of one deficient in scientific caution, and from +the frequent repetition of the same ideas manifest in his dialogue one +would be led to suspect that he was but little versed in habits of +literary composition and philosophical argument. Yet he may fairly claim +the merit of having written in earnest. He has treated a serious subject +seriously according to his lights; and though his lights are not +brilliant ones, yet he has apparently done his best to show the theory on +which he is writing in its most favourable aspect. He is rash, evidently +well satisfied with himself, very possibly mistaken, and just one of +those persons who (without intending it) are more apt to mislead than to +lead the few people that put their trust in them. A few will always +follow them, for a strong faith is always more or less impressive upon +persons who are too weak to have any definite and original faith of their +own. The second writer, however, assumes a very different tone. His +arguments to all practical intents and purposes run as follows:— + +Old fallacies are constantly recurring. Therefore Darwin’s theory is a +fallacy. + +They come again and again, like tunes in a barrel-organ. Therefore +Darwin’s theory is a fallacy. + +Hallam made a mistake, and in his _History of the Middle Ages_, p. 398, +he corrects himself. Therefore Darwin’s theory is wrong. + +Dr. Darwin in the last century said the same thing as his son or grandson +says now—will the writer of the article refer to anything bearing on +natural selection and the struggle for existence in Dr. Darwin’s +work?—and a foolish nobleman said something foolish about monkey’s tails. +Therefore Darwin’s theory is wrong. + +Giordano Bruno was burnt in the year 1600 A.D.; he was a Pantheist; +therefore Darwin’s theory is wrong. + +And finally, as a clinching argument, in one of the neighbouring +settlements there is a barrel-organ which plays its psalm tunes in the +middle of its jigs and waltzes. After this all lingering doubts +concerning the falsehood of Darwin’s theory must be at an end, and any +person of ordinary common sense must admit that the theory of development +by natural selection is unwarranted by experience and reason. + +The articles conclude with an implied statement that Darwin supposes the +Polar bear to swim about catching flies for so long a period that at last +it gets the fins it wishes for. + +Now, however sceptical I may yet feel about the truth of all Darwin’s +theory, I cannot sit quietly by and see him misrepresented in such a +scandalously slovenly manner. What Darwin does say is that sometimes +diversified and changed habits may be observed in individuals of the same +species; that is that there are eccentric animals just as there are +eccentric men. He adduces a few instances and winds up by saying that +“in North America the black bear was seen by Hearne swimming for hours +with widely open mouth, thus catching—almost like a whale—insects in the +water.” This and nothing more. (See pp. 201 and 202.) + +Because Darwin says that a bear of rather eccentric habits happened to be +seen by Hearne swimming for hours and catching insects almost like a +whale, your writer (with a carelessness hardly to be reprehended in +sufficiently strong terms) asserts by implication that Darwin supposes +the whale to be developed from the bear by the latter having had a strong +desire to possess fins. This is disgraceful. + +I can hardly be mistaken in supposing that I have quoted the passage your +writer alludes to. Should I be in error, I trust he will give the +reference to the place in which Darwin is guilty of the nonsense that is +fathered upon him in your article. + +It must be remembered that there have been few great inventions in +physics or discoveries in science which have not been foreshadowed to a +certain extent by speculators who were indeed mistaken, but were yet more +or less on the right scent. Day is heralded by dawn, Apollo by Aurora, +and thus it often happens that a real discovery may wear to the careless +observer much the same appearance as an exploded fallacy, whereas in fact +it is widely different. As much caution is due in the rejection of a +theory as in the acceptation of it. The first of your writers is too +hasty in accepting, the second in refusing even a candid examination. + +Now, when the _Saturday Review_, the _Cornhill Magazine_, _Once a Week_, +and _Macmillan’s Magazine_, not to mention other periodicals, have either +actually and completely as in the case of the first two, provisionally as +in the last mentioned, given their adherence to the theory in question, +it may be taken for granted that the arguments in its favour are +sufficiently specious to have attracted the attention and approbation of +a considerable number of well-educated men in England. Three months ago +the theory of development by natural selection was openly supported by +Professor Huxley before the British Association at Cambridge. I am not +adducing Professor Huxley’s advocacy as a proof that Darwin is right +(indeed, Owen opposed him tooth and nail), but as a proof that there is +sufficient to be said on Darwin’s side to demand more respectful +attention than your last writer has thought it worth while to give it. A +theory which the British Association is discussing with great care in +England is not to be set down by off-hand nicknames in Canterbury. + +To those, however, who do feel an interest in the question, I would +venture to give a word or two of advice. I would strongly deprecate +forming a hurried opinion for or against the theory. Naturalists in +Europe are canvassing the matter with the utmost diligence, and a few +years must show whether they will accept the theory or no. It is +plausible; that can be decided by no one. Whether it is true or no can +be decided only among naturalists themselves. We are outsiders, and most +of us must be content to sit on the stairs till the great men come forth +and give us the benefit of their opinion. + + I am, Sir, + + Your obedient servant, + A. M. + + + +Darwin on Species +[From the _Press_, March 14th, 1863.] + + + To the Editor of the _Press_. + +Sir—A correspondent signing himself “A. M.” in the issue of February 21st +says:—“Will the writer (of an article on barrel-organs) refer to anything +bearing upon natural selection and the struggle for existence in Dr. +Darwin’s work?” This is one of the trade forms by which writers imply +that there is no such passage, and yet leave a loophole if they are +proved wrong. I will, however, furnish him with a passage from the notes +of Darwin’s _Botanic Garden_:— + +“I am acquainted with a philosopher who, contemplating this subject, +thinks it not impossible that the first insects were anthers or stigmas +of flowers, which had by some means loosed themselves from their parent +plant; and that many insects have gradually in long process of time been +formed from these, some acquiring wings, others fins, and others claws, +from their ceaseless efforts to procure their food or to secure +themselves from injury. The anthers or stigmas are therefore separate +beings.” + +This passage contains the germ of Mr. Charles Darwin’s theory of the +origin of species by natural selection:— + +“Analogy would lead me to the belief that all animals and plants have +descended from one prototype.” + +Here are a few specimens, his illustrations of the theory:— + +“There seems to me no great difficulty in believing that natural +selection has actually converted a swim-bladder into a lung or organ used +exclusively for respiration.” “A swim-bladder has apparently been +converted into an air-breathing lung.” “We must be cautious in +concluding that a bat could not have been formed by natural selection +from an animal which at first could only glide through the air.” “I can +see no insuperable difficulty in further believing it possible that the +membrane-connected fingers and forearm of the galeopithecus might be +greatly lengthened by natural selection, and this, as far as the organs +of flight are concerned, would convert it into a bat.” “The framework of +bones being the same in the hand of a man, wing of a bat, fin of a +porpoise, and leg of a horse, the same number of vertebræ forming the +neck of the giraffe and of the elephant, and innumerable other such +facts, at once explain themselves on the theory of descent with slow and +slight successive modifications.” + +I do not mean to go through your correspondent’s letter, otherwise “I +could hardly reprehend in sufficiently strong terms” (and all that sort +of thing) the perversion of what I said about Giordano Bruno. But “ex +uno disce omnes”—I am, etc., + + “THE SAVOYARD.” + + + +Darwin on Species +[From the _Press_, 18 March, 1863.] + + + To the Editor of the _Press_. + +Sir—The “Savoyard” of last Saturday has shown that he has perused +Darwin’s _Botanic Garden_ with greater attention than myself. I am +obliged to him for his correction of my carelessness, and have not the +smallest desire to make use of any loopholes to avoid being “proved +wrong.” Let, then, the “Savoyard’s” assertion that Dr. Darwin had to a +certain extent forestalled Mr. C. Darwin stand, and let my implied denial +that in the older Darwin’s works passages bearing on natural selection, +or the struggle for existence, could be found, go for nought, or rather +let it be set down against me. + +What follows? Has the “Savoyard” (supposing him to be the author of the +article on barrel-organs) adduced one particle of real argument the more +to show that the real Darwin’s theory is wrong? + +The elder Darwin writes in a note that “he is acquainted with a +philosopher who thinks it not impossible that the first insects were the +anthers or stigmas of flowers, which by some means, etc. etc.” This is +mere speculation, not a definite theory, and though the passage above as +quoted by the “Savoyard” certainly does contain the germ of Darwin’s +theory, what is it more than the crudest and most unshapen germ? And in +what conceivable way does this discovery of the egg invalidate the +excellence of the chicken? + +Was there ever a great theory yet which was not more or less developed +from previous speculations which were all to a certain extent wrong, and +all ridiculed, perhaps not undeservedly, at the time of their appearance? +There is a wide difference between a speculation and a theory. A +speculation involves the notion of a man climbing into a lofty position, +and descrying a somewhat remote object which he cannot fully make out. A +theory implies that the theorist has looked long and steadfastly till he +is clear in his own mind concerning the nature of the thing which he is +beholding. I submit that the “Savoyard” has unfairly made use of the +failure of certain speculations in order to show that a distinct theory +is untenable. + +Let it be granted that Darwin’s theory has been foreshadowed by numerous +previous writers. Grant the “Savoyard” his Giordano Bruno, and give full +weight to the barrel-organ in a neighbouring settlement, I would still +ask, has the theory of natural development of species ever been placed in +anything approaching its present clear and connected form before the +appearance of Mr. Darwin’s book? Has it ever received the full attention +of the scientific world as a duly organised theory, one presented in a +tangible shape and demanding investigation, as the conclusion arrived at +by a man of known scientific attainments after years of patient toil? +The upshot of the barrel-organs article was to answer this question in +the affirmative and to pooh-pooh all further discussion. + +It would be mere presumption on my part either to attack or defend +Darwin, but my indignation was roused at seeing him misrepresented and +treated disdainfully. I would wish, too, that the “Savoyard” would have +condescended to notice that little matter of the bear. I have searched +my copy of Darwin again and again to find anything relating to the +subject except what I have quoted in my previous letter. + + I am, Sir, your obedient servant, + + A. M. + + + +Darwin on Species +[From the _Press_, April 11th, 1863.] + + + To the Editor of the _Press_. + +Sir—Your correspondent “A. M.” is pertinacious on the subject of the bear +being changed into a whale, which I said Darwin contemplated as not +impossible. I did not take the trouble in any former letter to answer +him on that point, as his language was so intemperate. He has modified +his tone in his last letter, and really seems open to the conviction that +he may be the “careless” writer after all; and so on reflection I have +determined to give him the opportunity of doing me justice. + +In his letter of February 21 he says: “I cannot sit by and see Darwin +misrepresented in such a scandalously slovenly manner. What Darwin does +say is ‘that SOMETIMES diversified and changed habits may be observed in +individuals of the same species; that is, that there are certain +eccentric animals as there are certain eccentric men. He adduces a few +instances, and winds up by saying that in North America the black bear +was seen by Hearne swimming for hours with widely open mouth, thus +catching, ALMOST LIKE A WHALE, insects in the water.’ THIS, AND NOTHING +MORE, pp. 201, 202.” + +Then follows a passage about my carelessness, which (he says) is hardly +to be reprehended in sufficiently strong terms, and he ends with saying: +“This is disgraceful.” + +Now you may well suppose that I was a little puzzled at the seeming +audacity of a writer who should adopt this style, when the words which +follow his quotation from Darwin are (in the edition from which I quoted) +as follows: “Even in so extreme a case as this, if the supply of insects +were constant, and if better adapted competitors did not already exist in +the country, I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered by +natural selection more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, +with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous +as a whale.” + +Now this passage was a remarkable instance of the idea that I was +illustrating in the article on “Barrel-organs,” because Buffon in his +_Histoire Naturelle_ had conceived a theory of degeneracy (the exact +converse of Darwin’s theory of ascension) by which the bear might pass +into a seal, and that into a whale. Trusting now to the fairness of “A. +M.” I leave to him to say whether he has quoted from the same edition as +I have, and whether the additional words I have quoted are in his +edition, and if so whether he has not been guilty of a great injustice to +me; and if they are not in his edition, whether he has not been guilty of +great haste and “carelessness” in taking for granted that I have acted in +so “disgraceful” a manner. + + I am, Sir, etc., + “The Savoyard,” or player + on Barrel-organs. + +(The paragraph in question has been the occasion of much discussion. The +only edition in our hands is the third, seventh thousand, which contains +the paragraph as quoted by “A. M.” We have heard that it is different in +earlier editions, but have not been able to find one. The difference +between “A. M.” and “The Savoyard” is clearly one of different editions. +Darwin appears to have been ashamed of the inconsequent inference +suggested, and to have withdrawn it.—Ed. the _Press_.) + + + +Darwin on Species +[From the _Press_, 22nd June, 1863.] + + + To the Editor of the _Press_. + +Sir—I extract the following from an article in the _Saturday Review_ of +January 10, 1863, on the vertebrated animals of the Zoological Gardens. + +“As regards the ducks, for example, inter-breeding goes on to a very +great extent among nearly all the genera, which are well represented in +the collection. We think it unfortunate that the details of these +crosses have not hitherto been made public. The Zoological Society has +existed about thirty-five years, and we imagine that evidence must have +been accumulated almost enough to make or mar that part of Mr. Darwin’s +well-known argument which rests on what is known of the phenomena of +hybridism. The present list reveals only one fact bearing on the +subject, but that is a noteworthy one, for it completely overthrows the +commonly accepted theory that the mixed offspring of different species +are infertile _inter se_. At page 15 (of the list of vertebrated animals +living in the gardens of the Zoological Society of London, Longman and +Co., 1862) we find enumerated three examples of hybrids between two +perfectly distinct species, and even, according to modern classification, +between two distinct genera of ducks, for three or four generations. +There can be little doubt that a series of researches in this branch of +experimental physiology, which might be carried on at no great loss, +would place zoologists in a far better position with regard to a subject +which is one of the most interesting if not one of the most important in +natural history.” + +I fear that both you and your readers will be dead sick of Darwin, but +the above is worthy of notice. My compliments to the “Savoyard.” + + Your obedient servant, + +May 17th. + + A. M. + + + +Darwin Among the Machines + + +“_Darwin Among the Machines_” _originally appeared in the Christ Church_ +PRESS, 13 _June_, 1863. _It was reprinted by Mr. Festing Jones in his +edition of_ THE NOTE-BOOKS OF SAMUEL BUTLER (_Fifield_, _London_, 1912, +_Kennerley_, _New York_), _with a prefatory note pointing out its +connection with the genesis of_ EREWHON, _to which readers desirous of +further information may be referred_. + +[To the Editor of the _Press_, Christchurch, New Zealand, 13 June, 1863.] + +SIR—There are few things of which the present generation is more justly +proud than of the wonderful improvements which are daily taking place in +all sorts of mechanical appliances. And indeed it is matter for great +congratulation on many grounds. It is unnecessary to mention these here, +for they are sufficiently obvious; our present business lies with +considerations which may somewhat tend to humble our pride and to make us +think seriously of the future prospects of the human race. If we revert +to the earliest primordial types of mechanical life, to the lever, the +wedge, the inclined plane, the screw and the pulley, or (for analogy +would lead us one step further) to that one primordial type from which +all the mechanical kingdom has been developed, we mean to the lever +itself, and if we then examine the machinery of the _Great Eastern_, we +find ourselves almost awestruck at the vast development of the mechanical +world, at the gigantic strides with which it has advanced in comparison +with the slow progress of the animal and vegetable kingdom. We shall +find it impossible to refrain from asking ourselves what the end of this +mighty movement is to be. In what direction is it tending? What will be +its upshot? To give a few imperfect hints towards a solution of these +questions is the object of the present letter. + +We have used the words “mechanical life,” “the mechanical kingdom,” “the +mechanical world” and so forth, and we have done so advisedly, for as the +vegetable kingdom was slowly developed from the mineral, and as in like +manner the animal supervened upon the vegetable, so now in these last few +ages an entirely new kingdom has sprung up, of which we as yet have only +seen what will one day be considered the antediluvian prototypes of the +race. + +We regret deeply that our knowledge both of natural history and of +machinery is too small to enable us to undertake the gigantic task of +classifying machines into the genera and sub-genera, species, varieties +and sub-varieties, and so forth, of tracing the connecting links between +machines of widely different characters, of pointing out how subservience +to the use of man has played that part among machines which natural +selection has performed in the animal and vegetable kingdoms, of pointing +out rudimentary organs {180} which exist in some few machines, feebly +developed and perfectly useless, yet serving to mark descent from some +ancestral type which has either perished or been modified into some new +phase of mechanical existence. We can only point out this field for +investigation; it must be followed by others whose education and talents +have been of a much higher order than any which we can lay claim to. + +Some few hints we have determined to venture upon, though we do so with +the profoundest diffidence. Firstly, we would remark that as some of the +lowest of the vertebrata attained a far greater size than has descended +to their more highly organised living representatives, so a diminution in +the size of machines has often attended their development and progress. +Take the watch for instance. Examine the beautiful structure of the +little animal, watch the intelligent play of the minute members which +compose it; yet this little creature is but a development of the cumbrous +clocks of the thirteenth century—it is no deterioration from them. The +day may come when clocks, which certainly at the present day are not +diminishing in bulk, may be entirely superseded by the universal use of +watches, in which case clocks will become extinct like the earlier +saurians, while the watch (whose tendency has for some years been rather +to decrease in size than the contrary) will remain the only existing type +of an extinct race. + +The views of machinery which we are thus feebly indicating will suggest +the solution of one of the greatest and most mysterious questions of the +day. We refer to the question: What sort of creature man’s next +successor in the supremacy of the earth is likely to be. We have often +heard this debated; but it appears to us that we are ourselves creating +our own successors; we are daily adding to the beauty and delicacy of +their physical organisation; we are daily giving them greater power and +supplying by all sorts of ingenious contrivances that self-regulating, +self-acting power which will be to them what intellect has been to the +human race. In the course of ages we shall find ourselves the inferior +race. Inferior in power, inferior in that moral quality of self-control, +we shall look up to them as the acme of all that the best and wisest man +can ever dare to aim at. No evil passions, no jealousy, no avarice, no +impure desires will disturb the serene might of those glorious creatures. +Sin, shame, and sorrow will have no place among them. Their minds will +be in a state of perpetual calm, the contentment of a spirit that knows +no wants, is disturbed by no regrets. Ambition will never torture them. +Ingratitude will never cause them the uneasiness of a moment. The guilty +conscience, the hope deferred, the pains of exile, the insolence of +office, and the spurns that patient merit of the unworthy takes—these +will be entirely unknown to them. If they want “feeding” (by the use of +which very word we betray our recognition of them as living organism) +they will be attended by patient slaves whose business and interest it +will be to see that they shall want for nothing. If they are out of +order they will be promptly attended to by physicians who are thoroughly +acquainted with their constitutions; if they die, for even these glorious +animals will not be exempt from that necessary and universal +consummation, they will immediately enter into a new phase of existence, +for what machine dies entirely in every part at one and the same instant? + +We take it that when the state of things shall have arrived which we have +been above attempting to describe, man will have become to the machine +what the horse and the dog are to man. He will continue to exist, nay +even to improve, and will be probably better off in his state of +domestication under the beneficent rule of the machines than he is in his +present wild state. We treat our horses, dogs, cattle, and sheep, on the +whole, with great kindness; we give them whatever experience teaches us +to be best for them, and there can be no doubt that our use of meat has +added to the happiness of the lower animals far more than it has +detracted from it; in like manner it is reasonable to suppose that the +machines will treat us kindly, for their existence is as dependent upon +ours as ours is upon the lower animals. They cannot kill us and eat us +as we do sheep; they will not only require our services in the +parturition of their young (which branch of their economy will remain +always in our hands), but also in feeding them, in setting them right +when they are sick, and burying their dead or working up their corpses +into new machines. It is obvious that if all the animals in Great +Britain save man alone were to die, and if at the same time all +intercourse with foreign countries were by some sudden catastrophe to be +rendered perfectly impossible, it is obvious that under such +circumstances the loss of human life would be something fearful to +contemplate—in like manner were mankind to cease, the machines would be +as badly off or even worse. The fact is that our interests are +inseparable from theirs, and theirs from ours. Each race is dependent +upon the other for innumerable benefits, and, until the reproductive +organs of the machines have been developed in a manner which we are +hardly yet able to conceive, they are entirely dependent upon man for +even the continuance of their species. It is true that these organs may +be ultimately developed, inasmuch as man’s interest lies in that +direction; there is nothing which our infatuated race would desire more +than to see a fertile union between two steam engines; it is true that +machinery is even at this present time employed in begetting machinery, +in becoming the parent of machines often after its own kind, but the days +of flirtation, courtship, and matrimony appear to be very remote, and +indeed can hardly be realised by our feeble and imperfect imagination. + +Day by day, however, the machines are gaining ground upon us; day by day +we are becoming more subservient to them; more men are daily bound down +as slaves to tend them, more men are daily devoting the energies of their +whole lives to the development of mechanical life. The upshot is simply +a question of time, but that the time will come when the machines will +hold the real supremacy over the world and its inhabitants is what no +person of a truly philosophic mind can for a moment question. + +Our opinion is that war to the death should be instantly proclaimed +against them. Every machine of every sort should be destroyed by the +well-wisher of his species. Let there be no exceptions made, no quarter +shown; let us at once go back to the primeval condition of the race. If +it be urged that this is impossible under the present condition of human +affairs, this at once proves that the mischief is already done, that our +servitude has commenced in good earnest, that we have raised a race of +beings whom it is beyond our power to destroy, and that we are not only +enslaved but are absolutely acquiescent in our bondage. + +For the present we shall leave this subject, which we present gratis to +the members of the Philosophical Society. Should they consent to avail +themselves of the vast field which we have pointed out, we shall +endeavour to labour in it ourselves at some future and indefinite period. + + I am, Sir, etc., + + CELLARIUS + + + + +Lucubratio Ebria + + +“_Lucubratio Ebria_,” _like_ “_Darwin Among the Machines_,” _has already +appeared in_ THE NOTE-BOOKS OF SAMUEL BUTLER _with a prefatory note by +Mr. Festing Jones_, _explaining its connection with_ EREWHON _and_ LIFE +AND HABIT. _I need therefore only repeat that it was written by Butler +after his return to England and sent to New Zealand_, _where it was +published in the_ PRESS _on July_ 29, 1865. + + [From the _Press_, 29 July, 1865.] + +THERE is a period in the evening, or more generally towards the still +small hours of the morning, in which we so far unbend as to take a single +glass of hot whisky and water. We will neither defend the practice nor +excuse it. We state it as a fact which must be borne in mind by the +readers of this article; for we know not how, whether it be the +inspiration of the drink or the relief from the harassing work with which +the day has been occupied or from whatever other cause, yet we are +certainly liable about this time to such a prophetic influence as we +seldom else experience. We are rapt in a dream such as we ourselves know +to be a dream, and which, like other dreams, we can hardly embody in a +distinct utterance. We know that what we see is but a sort of +intellectual Siamese twins, of which one is substance and the other +shadow, but we cannot set either free without killing both. We are +unable to rudely tear away the veil of phantasy in which the truth is +shrouded, so we present the reader with a draped figure, and his own +judgment must discriminate between the clothes and the body. A truth’s +prosperity is like a jest’s, it lies in the ear of him that hears it. +Some may see our lucubration as we saw it, and others may see nothing but +a drunken dream or the nightmare of a distempered imagination. To +ourselves it is the speaking with unknown tongues to the early +Corinthians; we cannot fully understand our own speech, and we fear lest +there be not a sufficient number of interpreters present to make our +utterance edify. But there! (Go on straight to the body of the +article.) + +The limbs of the lower animals have never been modified by any act of +deliberation and forethought on their own part. Recent researches have +thrown absolutely no light upon the origin of life—upon the initial force +which introduced a sense of identity and a deliberate faculty into the +world; but they do certainly appear to show very clearly that each +species of the animal and vegetable kingdom has been moulded into its +present shape by chances and changes of many millions of years, by +chances and changes over which the creature modified had no control +whatever, and concerning whose aim it was alike unconscious and +indifferent, by forces which seem insensate to the pain which they +inflict, but by whose inexorably beneficent cruelty the brave and strong +keep coming to the fore, while the weak and bad drop behind and perish. +There was a moral government of this world before man came near it—a +moral government suited to the capacities of the governed, and which +unperceived by them has laid fast the foundations of courage, endurance, +and cunning. It laid them so fast that they became more and more +hereditary. Horace says well _fortes creantur fortibus et bonis_, good +men beget good children; the rule held even in the geological period; +good ichthyosauri begot good ichthyosauri, and would to our discomfort +have gone on doing so to the present time had not better creatures been +begetting better things than ichthyosauri, or famine or fire or +convulsion put an end to them. Good apes begot good apes, and at last +when human intelligence stole like a late spring upon the mimicry of our +semi-simious ancestry, the creature learnt how he could of his own +forethought add extra-corporaneous limbs to the members of his own body, +and become not only a vertebrate mammal, but a vertebrate machinate +mammal into the bargain. + +It was a wise monkey that first learned to carry a stick, and a useful +monkey that mimicked him. For the race of man has learned to walk +uprightly much as a child learns the same thing. At first he crawls on +all fours, then he clambers, laying hold of whatever he can; and lastly +he stands upright alone and walks, but for a long time with an unsteady +step. So when the human race was in its gorilla-hood it generally +carried a stick; from carrying a stick for many million years it became +accustomed and modified to an upright position. The stick wherewith it +had learned to walk would now serve to beat its younger brothers, and +then it found out its service as a lever. Man would thus learn that the +limbs of his body were not the only limbs that he could command. His +body was already the most versatile in existence, but he could render it +more versatile still. With the improvement in his body his mind improved +also. He learnt to perceive the moral government under which he held the +feudal tenure of his life—perceiving it he symbolised it, and to this day +our poets and prophets still strive to symbolise it more and more +completely. + +The mind grew because the body grew; more things were perceived, more +things were handled, and being handled became familiar. But this came +about chiefly because there was a hand to handle with; without the hand +there would be no handling, and no method of holding and examining is +comparable to the human hand. The tail of an opossum is a prehensile +thing, but it is too far from his eyes; the elephant’s trunk is better, +and it is probably to their trunks that the elephants owe their sagacity. +It is here that the bee, in spite of her wings, has failed. She has a +high civilisation, but it is one whose equilibrium appears to have been +already attained; the appearance is a false one, for the bee changes, +though more slowly than man can watch her; but the reason of the very +gradual nature of the change is chiefly because the physical organisation +of the insect changes, but slowly also. She is poorly off for hands, and +has never fairly grasped the notion of tacking on other limbs to the +limbs of her own body, and so being short lived to boot she remains from +century to century to human eyes _in statu quo_. Her body never becomes +machinate, whereas this new phase of organism which has been introduced +with man into the mundane economy, has made him a very quicksand for the +foundation of an unchanging civilisation; certain fundamental principles +will always remain, but every century the change in man’s physical +status, as compared with the elements around him, is greater and greater. +He is a shifting basis on which no equilibrium of habit and civilisation +can be established. Were it not for this constant change in our physical +powers, which our mechanical limbs have brought about, man would have +long since apparently attained his limit of possibility; he would be a +creature of as much fixity as the ants and bees; he would still have +advanced, but no faster than other animals advance. + +If there were a race of men without any mechanical appliances we should +see this clearly. There are none, nor have there been, so far as we can +tell, for millions and millions of years. The lowest Australian savage +carries weapons for the fight or the chase, and has his cooking and +drinking utensils at home; a race without these things would be +completely _feræ naturæ_ and not men at all. We are unable to point to +any example of a race absolutely devoid of extra-corporaneous limbs, but +we can see among the Chinese that with the failure to invent new limbs a +civilisation becomes as much fixed as that of the ants; and among savage +tribes we observe that few implements involve a state of things scarcely +human at all. Such tribes only advance _pari passu_ with the creatures +upon which they feed. + +It is a mistake, then, to take the view adopted by a previous +correspondent of this paper, to consider the machines as identities, to +animalise them and to anticipate their final triumph over mankind. They +are to be regarded as the mode of development by which human organism is +most especially advancing, and every fresh invention is to be considered +as an additional member of the resources of the human body. Herein lies +the fundamental difference between man and his inferiors. As regard his +flesh and blood, his senses, appetites, and affections, the difference is +one of degree rather than of kind, but in the deliberate invention of +such unity of limbs as is exemplified by the railway train—that +seven-leagued foot which five hundred may own at once—he stands quite +alone. + +In confirmation of the views concerning mechanism which we have been +advocating above, it must be remembered that men are not merely the +children of their parents, but they are begotten of the institutions of +the state of the mechanical sciences under which they are born and bred. +These things have made us what we are. We are children of the plough, +the spade, and the ship; we are children of the extended liberty and +knowledge which the printing press has diffused. Our ancestors added +these things to their previously existing members; the new limbs were +preserved by natural selection and incorporated into human society; they +descended with modifications, and hence proceeds the difference between +our ancestors and ourselves. By the institutions and state of science +under which a man is born it is determined whether he shall have the +limbs of an Australian savage or those of a nineteenth-century +Englishman. The former is supplemented with little save a rug and a +javelin; the latter varies his physique with the changes of the season, +with age and with advancing or decreasing wealth. If it is wet he is +furnished with an organ which is called an umbrella and which seems +designed for the purpose of protecting either his clothes or his lungs +from the injurious effects of rain. His watch is of more importance to +him than a good deal of his hair, at any rate than of his whiskers; +besides this he carries a knife and generally a pencil case. His memory +goes in a pocket-book. He grows more complex as he becomes older and he +will then be seen with a pair of spectacles, perhaps also with false +teeth and a wig; but, if he be a really well-developed specimen of the +race, he will be furnished with a large box upon wheels, two horses, and +a coachman. + +Let the reader ponder over these last remarks and he will see that the +principal varieties and sub-varieties of the human race are not now to be +looked for among the negroes, the Circassians, the Malays, or the +American aborigines, but among the rich and the poor. The difference in +physical organisation between these two species of man is far greater +than that between the so-called types of humanity. The rich man can go +from here to England whenever he feels inclined, the legs of the other +are by an invisible fatality prevented from carrying him beyond certain +narrow limits. Neither rich nor poor as yet see the philosophy of the +thing, or admit that he who can tack a portion of one of the P. and O. +boats on to his identity is a much more highly organised being than one +who cannot. Yet the fact is patent enough, if we once think it over, +from the mere consideration of the respect with which we so often treat +those who are richer than ourselves. We observe men for the most part +(admitting, however, some few abnormal exceptions) to be deeply impressed +by the superior organisation of those who have money. It is wrong to +attribute this respect to any unworthy motive, for the feeling is +strictly legitimate and springs from some of the very highest impulses of +our nature. It is the same sort of affectionate reverence which a dog +feels for man, and is not infrequently manifested in a similar manner. + +We admit that these last sentences are open to question, and we should +hardly like to commit ourselves irrecoverably to the sentiments they +express; but we will say this much for certain, namely, that the rich man +is the true hundred-handed Gyges of the poets. He alone possesses the +full complement of limbs who stands at the summit of opulence, and we may +assert with strictly scientific accuracy that the Rothschilds are the +most astonishing organisms that the world has ever yet seen. For to the +nerves or tissues, or whatever it be that answers to the helm of a rich +man’s desires, there is a whole army of limbs seen and unseen attachable; +he may be reckoned by his horse-power, by the number of foot-pounds which +he has money enough to set in motion. Who, then, will deny that a man +whose will represents the motive power of a thousand horses is a being +very different from the one who is equivalent but to the power of a +single one? + +Henceforward, then, instead of saying that a man is hard up, let us say +that his organisation is at a low ebb, or, if we wish him well, let us +hope that he will grow plenty of limbs. It must be remembered that we +are dealing with physical organisations only. We do not say that the +thousand-horse man is better than a one-horse man, we only say that he is +more highly organised and should be recognised as being so by the +scientific leaders of the period. A man’s will, truth, endurance, are +part of him also, and may, as in the case of the late Mr. Cobden, have in +themselves a power equivalent to all the horse-power which they can +influence; but were we to go into this part of the question we should +never have done, and we are compelled reluctantly to leave our dream in +its present fragmentary condition. + + + + +A Note on “The Tempest” +Act III, Scene I + + +_The following brief essay was contributed by Butler to a small +miscellany entitled_ LITERARY FOUNDLINGS: VERSE AND PROSE, COLLECTED IN +CANTERBURY, N.Z., _which was published at Christ Church on the occasion +of a bazaar held there in March_, 1864, _in aid of the funds of the +Christ Church Orphan Asylum_, _and offered for sale during the progress +of the bazaar_. _The miscellany consisted entirely of the productions of +Canterbury writers_, _and among the contributors were Dean Jacobs_, +_Canon Cottrell_, _and James Edward FitzGerald_, _the founder of the_ +PRESS. + +WHEN Prince Ferdinand was wrecked on the island Miranda was fifteen years +old. We can hardly suppose that she had ever seen Ariel, and Caliban was +a detestable object whom her father took good care to keep as much out of +her way as possible. Caliban was like the man cook on a back-country +run. “’Tis a villain, sir,” says Miranda. “I do not love to look on.” +“But as ’tis,” returns Prospero, “we cannot miss him; he does make our +fire, fetch in our wood, and serve in offices that profit us.” Hands +were scarce, and Prospero was obliged to put up with Caliban in spite of +the many drawbacks with which his services were attended; in fact, no one +on the island could have liked him, for Ariel owed him a grudge on the +score of the cruelty with which he had been treated by Sycorax, and we +have already heard what Miranda and Prospero had to say about him. He +may therefore pass for nobody. Prospero was an old man, or at any rate +in all probability some forty years of age; therefore it is no wonder +that when Miranda saw Prince Ferdinand she should have fallen violently +in love with him. “Nothing ill,” according to her view, “could dwell in +such a temple—if the ill Spirit have so fair an house, good things will +strive to dwell with ’t.” A very natural sentiment for a girl in +Miranda’s circumstances, but nevertheless one which betrayed a charming +inexperience of the ways of the world and of the real value of good +looks. What surprises us, however, is this, namely the remarkable +celerity with which Miranda in a few hours became so thoroughly wide +awake to the exigencies of the occasion in consequence of her love for +the Prince. Prospero has set Ferdinand to hump firewood out of the bush, +and to pile it up for the use of the cave. Ferdinand is for the present +a sort of cadet, a youth of good family, without cash and unaccustomed to +manual labour; his unlucky stars have landed him on the island, and now +it seems that he “must remove some thousands of these logs and pile them +up, upon a sore injunction.” Poor fellow! Miranda’s heart bleeds for +him. Her “affections were most humble”; she had been content to take +Ferdinand on speculation. On first seeing him she had exclaimed, “I have +no ambition to see a goodlier man”; and it makes her blood boil to see +this divine creature compelled to such an ignominious and painful labour. +What is the family consumption of firewood to her? Let Caliban do it; +let Prospero do it; or make Ariel do it; let her do it herself; or let +the lightning come down and “burn up those logs you are enjoined to +pile”;—the logs themselves, while burning, would weep for having wearied +him. Come what would, it was a shame to make Ferdinand work so hard, so +she winds up thus: “My father is hard at study; pray now rest +yourself—_he’s safe for these three hours_.” Safe—if she had only said +that “papa was safe,” the sentence would have been purely modern, and +have suited Thackeray as well as Shakspeare. See how quickly she has +learnt to regard her father as one to be watched and probably kept in a +good humour for the sake of Ferdinand. We suppose that the secret of the +modern character of this particular passage lies simply in the fact that +young people make love pretty much in the same way now that they did +three hundred years ago; and possibly, with the exception that “the +governor” may be substituted for the words “my father” by the young +ladies of three hundred years hence, the passage will sound as fresh and +modern then as it does now. Let the Prosperos of that age take a lesson, +and either not allow the Ferdinands to pile up firewood, or so to arrange +their studies as not to be “safe” for any three consecutive hours. It is +true that Prospero’s objection to the match was only feigned, but Miranda +thought otherwise, and for all purposes of argument we are justified in +supposing that he was in earnest. + + + + +The English Cricketers + + +_The following lines were written by Butler in February_, 1864, _and +appeared in the_ PRESS. _They refer to a visit paid to New Zealand by a +team of English cricketers_, _and have kindly been copied and sent to me +by Miss Colborne-Veel_, _whose father was editor of the_ PRESS _at the +time that Butler was writing for it_. _Miss Colborne-Veel has further +permitted to me to make use of the following explanatory note_: “_The +coming of the All England team was naturally a glorious event in a +province only fourteen years old_. _The Mayor and Councillors had_ ‘_a +car of state_’—_otherwise a brake_—‘_with postilions in the English +style_.’_ Cobb and Co. supplied a six-horse coach for the English +eleven_, _the yellow paint upon which suggested the_ ‘_glittering chariot +of pure gold_.’ _So they drove in triumph from the station and through +the town_. _Tinley for England and Tennant for Canterbury were the +heroes of the match_. _At the Wednesday dinner referred to they +exchanged compliments and cricket balls across the table_. _This early +esteem for cricket may be explained by a remark made by the All England +captain_, _that_ ‘_on no cricket ground in any colony had he met so many +public school men_, _especially men from old Rugby_, _as at +Canterbury_.’” + + [To the Editor, the _Press_, February 15th, 1864.] + +SIR—The following lines, which profess to have been written by a friend +of mine at three o’clock in the morning after the dinner of Wednesday +last, have been presented to myself with a request that I should forward +them to you. I would suggest to the writer of them the following +quotation from “Love’s Labour’s Lost.” + + I am, Sir, + + Your obedient servant, + S.B. + +“You find not the apostrophes, and so miss the accent; let me supervise +the canzonet. Here are only numbers ratified; but for the elegancy, +facility, and golden cadence of poesy, _caret_ . . . _Imitari_ is +nothing. So doth the hound his master, the ape his keeper, the tired +horse his rider.” + + Love’s Labour’s Lost, Act IV, S. 2. + + HORATIO . . . + + . . . The whole town rose + Eyes out to meet them; in a car of state + The Mayor and all the Councillors rode down + To give them greeting, while the blue-eyed team + Drawn in Cobb’s glittering chariot of pure gold + Careered it from the station.—But the Mayor— + Thou shouldst have seen the blandness of the man, + And watched the effulgent and unspeakable smiles + With which he beamed upon them. + His beard, by nature tawny, was suffused + With just so much of a most reverend grizzle + That youth and age should kiss in’t. I assure you + He was a Southern Palmerston, so old + In understanding, yet jocund and jaunty + As though his twentieth summer were as yet + But in the very June o’ the year, and winter + Was never to be dreamt of. Those who heard + His words stood ravished. It was all as one + As though Minerva, hid in Mercury’s jaws, + Had counselled some divinest utterance + Of honeyed wisdom. So profound, so true, + So meet for the occasion, and so—short. + The king sat studying rhetoric as he spoke, + While the lord Abbot heaved half-envious sighs + And hung suspended on his accents. + + CLAUD. But will it pay, Horatio? + + HOR. Let Shylock see to that, but yet I trust + He’s no great loser. + + CLAUD. Which side went in first? + + HOR. We did, + And scored a paltry thirty runs in all. + The lissom Lockyer gambolled round the stumps + With many a crafty curvet: you had thought + An Indian rubber monkey were endued + With wicket-keeping instincts; teazing Tinley + Issued his treacherous notices to quit, + Ruthlessly truthful to his fame, and who + Shall speak of Jackson? Oh! ’twas sad indeed + To watch the downcast faces of our men + Returning from the wickets; one by one, + Like patients at the gratis consultation + Of some skilled leech, they took their turn at physic. + And each came sadly homeward with a face + Awry through inward anguish; they were pale + As ghosts of some dead but deep mourned love, + Grim with a great despair, but forced to smile. + + CLAUD. Poor souls! Th’ unkindest heart had bled for them. + But what came after? + + HOR. Fortune turned her wheel, + And Grace, disgracéd for the nonce, was bowled + First ball, and all the welkin roared applause! + As for the rest, they scored a goodly score + And showed some splendid cricket, but their deeds + Were not colossal, and our own brave Tennant + Proved himself all as good a man as they. + + * * * * * + + Through them we greet our Mother. In their coming, + We shake our dear old England by the hand + And watch space dwindling, while the shrinking world + Collapses into nothing. Mark me well, + Matter as swift as swiftest thought shall fly, + And space itself be nowhere. Future Tinleys + Shall bowl from London to our Christ Church Tennants, + And all the runs for all the stumps be made + In flying baskets which shall come and go + And do the circuit round about the globe + Within ten seconds. Do not check me with + The roundness of the intervening world, + The winds, the mountain ranges, and the seas— + These hinder nothing; for the leathern sphere, + Like to a planetary satellite, + Shall wheel its faithful orb and strike the bails + Clean from the centre of the middle stump. + + * * * * * + + Mirrors shall hang suspended in the air, + Fixed by a chain between two chosen stars, + And every eye shall be a telescope + To read the passing shadows from the world. + Such games shall be hereafter, but as yet + We lay foundations only. + + CLAUD. Thou must be drunk, Horatio. + + HOR. So I am. + + + + +Footnotes + + +{180} We were asked by a learned brother philosopher who saw this +article in MS. what we meant by alluding to rudimentary organs in +machines. Could we, he asked, give any example of such organs? We +pointed to the little protuberance at the bottom of the bowl of our +tobacco pipe. This organ was originally designed for the same purpose as +the rim at the bottom of a tea-cup, which is but another form of the same +function. Its purpose was to keep the heat of the pipe from marking the +table on which it rested. Originally, as we have seen in very early +tobacco pipes, this protuberance was of a very different shape to what it +is now. It was broad at the bottom and flat, so that while the pipe was +being smoked the bowl might rest upon the table. Use and disuse have +here come into play and served to reduce the function to its present +rudimentary condition. That these rudimentary organs are rarer in +machinery than in animal life is owing to the more prompt action of the +human selection as compared with the slower but even surer operation of +natural selection. Man may make mistakes; in the long run nature never +does so. We have only given an imperfect example, but the intelligent +reader will supply himself with illustrations. + + + + +***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CANTERBURY PIECES*** + + +******* This file should be named 3279-0.txt or 3279-0.zip ******* + + +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: +http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/3/2/7/3279 + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will +be renamed. + +Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright +law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, +so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United +States without permission and without paying copyright +royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part +of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm +concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, +and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive +specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this +eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook +for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, +performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given +away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks +not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the +trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. + +START: FULL LICENSE + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full +Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at +www.gutenberg.org/license. + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or +destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your +possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a +Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound +by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the +person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph +1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this +agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the +Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection +of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual +works in the collection are in the public domain in the United +States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the +United States and you are located in the United States, we do not +claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, +displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as +all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope +that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting +free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm +works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the +Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily +comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the +same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when +you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are +in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, +check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this +agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, +distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any +other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no +representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any +country outside the United States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other +immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear +prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work +on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, +performed, viewed, copied or distributed: + + This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and + most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no + restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it + under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this + eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the + United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you + are located before using this ebook. + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is +derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not +contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the +copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in +the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are +redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply +either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or +obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm +trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any +additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms +will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works +posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the +beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including +any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access +to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format +other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official +version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site +(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense +to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means +of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain +Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the +full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +provided that + +* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed + to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has + agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project + Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid + within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are + legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty + payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project + Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in + Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg + Literary Archive Foundation." + +* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all + copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue + all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm + works. + +* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of + any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of + receipt of the work. + +* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than +are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing +from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The +Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm +trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project +Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may +contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate +or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other +intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or +other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or +cannot be read by your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium +with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you +with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in +lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person +or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second +opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If +the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing +without further opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO +OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT +LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of +damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement +violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the +agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or +limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or +unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the +remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in +accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the +production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, +including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of +the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this +or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or +additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any +Defect you cause. + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of +computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It +exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations +from people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future +generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see +Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at +www.gutenberg.org + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by +U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the +mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its +volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous +locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt +Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to +date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and +official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact + +For additional contact information: + + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND +DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular +state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To +donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project +Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be +freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and +distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of +volunteer support. + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in +the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not +necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper +edition. + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search +facility: www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + |