THE SCIENTIFIC LAW 8i 



fact we maintain an important body, Parliament, the chief 

 function of which is to modify and adapt our laws, so that 

 they shall be best fitted at each period to assist the com- 

 munity in its struggle for existence. Of the changes in 

 moral law we are, perhaps, less conscious, but they are 

 none the less real. There are very few acts which have 

 not been moral at some period in the growth of one or 

 other society, and there are in fact many questions with 

 regard to which our moral judgment is totally different 

 from that of our grandfathers. It is the relativity, or 

 variability with age and community, of civil and moral 

 law, which led Austin, I think, to speak somewhat strongly 

 of the speculation which confuses such law with law in 

 the absolute sense of science. A law in the legal or moral 

 sense holds only for individuals and individual communities, 

 and is capable of repeal or modification. A law of science 

 will be seen in the sequel to hold for all normal human 

 beings so long as their perceptive and reasoning faculties 

 remain without material modification. The confusion of 

 these two ideas is productive of that " muddy speculation " 

 which finds analogies between natural laws and those of 

 the spiritual or moral world. 



Now if we find that two quite distinct ideas unfortu- 

 nately bear the same name, we ought, in order to avoid 

 confusion, to re-name one of them, or failing this we ought 

 on all occasions to be quite sure in which of the two senses 

 we are using the name. Accordingly, in my first chapter, 

 in order to keep clear of the double sense of the word law, 

 I endeavoured to replace it, when spoken of scientifically, 

 by some such phrase as the "brief statement or formula 

 which resumes the relationship between a group of facts." 

 Indeed it would be well, were it possible, to take the term 

 formula, as already used by theologians and mathematicians, 

 and use it in place of scientific or natural law. But the 

 latter term has taken such root in our language that it 

 would be hard indeed to replace it now. Besides, if the 

 word law is to be used in one sense only, we may ask 

 why it is the scientist rather than the jurist who is to 

 surrender his right to the word ? The jurists say that 



6 



