EDITOR'S TABLE. 



819 



the outcome of continual fighting among 

 species of anthropoid animals involving 

 the continual destruction of the weaker 

 by the stronger and the constant selec- 

 tion of the fittest to survive. It is cu- 

 rious to note that it is not those most 

 distantly below us in the scale that we 

 are chiefly eager to destroy. It is gen- 

 erally those who more nearly approach 

 to us in gradation and who consequently 

 clash with us, that we destroy. Those 

 whose complete inferiority prevents us 

 from fearing them escape. At the pres- 

 ent time, Nature is doing much more by 

 human agency to destroy Eed Indians 

 and native Australians than to exter- 

 minate gorillas. No links have so great 

 a tendency to disappear altogether as 

 those which are nearest to ourselves in 

 the chain. As man ascends the ladder 

 he kicks off those who stand on the next 

 step below him. This habit has in time 

 created an immense gap between us and 

 some of those through whose condition 

 our race has once passed — a gap so wide 

 as to make it almost impossible for any 

 but studious men to realize that there 

 is indeed any solidarity between us and 

 the lowly forefathers ascribed to our 

 species." 



There is much truth, no doubt, in this 

 view of the operations of Nature, but 

 it is far from the whole truth as relates 

 to the morality of war. It certainly 

 will not do to excuse private violence 

 and offer a defense of crime on the 

 ground that Nature is also ruthless and 

 violent. And if individuals may not 

 plead the example of Nature to justify 

 their injurious interference with others, 

 neither may nations. Tliat war was 

 indispensable in the lower stages of 

 society when brute force predominated, 

 and became a means of enforcing those 

 subordinations which led to social order, 

 may be freely admitted. But if old 

 practices are to go on for ever, what 

 becomes of progress? The essence of 

 evolution is transformation — the substi- 

 tution of higher agencies for lower in the 

 unfolding economy of the world. War 



is one of the things that must certainly 

 be left behind if there is to be any ad- 

 vancing or upward movement. It is 

 the old and deadly enemy of the pacific 

 and constructive forces of society, which 

 have nevertheless made way against it, 

 and which may be expected in the fu- 

 ture to gather a strength that will re- 

 deem society from the baneful influence 

 of the military spirit. 



AN HIS7VRIAIPS NOTION OF LINGUAL 

 STUDY. 



We referred last month to the re- 

 vival of the old classical controversy 

 consequent upon the proposal to drop 

 compulsory Greek from the curriculum 

 of the University of Cambridge, in Eng- 

 land. The controversy grows warm in 

 various quarters. Mr. Freeman, the his- 

 torian, comes forward in the " Fort- 

 nightly Eeview" to discuss the ques- 

 tion, " Shall we give up Greek ? " and 

 uses the occasion to go into the general 

 subject. He regards the present spasm 

 of controversy as not very serious, in- 

 asmuch as he has had experience of 

 such things before, and thinks it is 

 merely part of a system of curious in- 

 tellectual cycles, the causes of which 

 would perhaps form fit subject for the 

 philosophical statistician. Mr. Freeman 

 says there was a sharp brush over the 

 question in 1871, in which he took a 

 part, and that we are now engaged in 

 merely reproducing the old arguments 

 and the old answers. 



But Mr. Freeman betrays, in his 

 treatment of the subject, the conscious- 

 ness that it is advancing, and that these 

 rhythmic disputes are bringing about 

 very serious changes of opinion. He 

 pleads strongly for Greek, but seems 

 to feel that it is doomed, and is decided 

 in his conviction that, if but one of the 

 classical tongues is to be retained, it 

 must be Latin. 



His general position in relation to 

 the question is much the same as that 

 so elaborately put forth by John Stuart 



