756 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



that Lord Bacon, though a truly clever man, was a mere dabbler in 

 inductive science, the true methods of which he quite misapprehended. 

 At best, he put into elegant and striking language an estimate of the 

 tendency of science toward experimentalism, and a forecast of the 

 results to be obtained. The regeneration of these last centuries is due 

 to a long series of philosophers, from Copernicus, Galileo, Descartes, 

 Newton, Leibnitz, down to Watt, Faraday, and Joule. Such men fol- 

 lowed a procedure very different from that of Francis Bacon. 



Now we come to the point of our inquiry. Is the experimental 

 method necessarily restricted to the world of physical science ? Do 

 we sufficiently apply to moral, social, and political matters those 

 methods which have been proved so invaluable in the hands of physi- 

 cal philosophers '? Do our legislators, in short, appeal to exi^eriment 

 in a way which excepts them from the definition of Erasmus Darwin ? 

 English legislation, no doubt, is usually preceded by a great amount 

 of public discussion and Parliamentary wrangling. Sometimes there 

 is plenty of statistical inquiry — plenty, that is, if it were of the right 

 sort and conducted according to true scientific method. Nevertheless, 

 I venture to maintain that as a general rule Parliament ignores the 

 one true way of appealing directly to experience. Our Parliamentary 

 Committees and Royal Commissions of Inquiry pile up Blue-books 

 full of information which is generally not to the point. The one bit 

 of information, the actual trial of a new measure on a small scale, is 

 not forthcoming, because Parliament, if it enacts a law at all, enacts it 

 for the whole kingdom. It habitually makes a leap in the dark, 

 because I suppose it is not consistent with the wisdom and dignity 

 of Parliament to grope its way, and feel for a safe footing. Now, I 

 maintain that, in large classes of legislative affairs, there is really no- 

 thing to prevent our making direct experiments upon the living social 

 organism. Not only is social experimentation a possible thing, but it 

 is in every part of the kingdom, excepting the palace of St. Stephen's, 

 the commonest thing possible, the universal mode of social progress. 

 It would hardly be too much to say that social progress is social ex- 

 perimentation, and social experimentation is social progress. Changes 

 effected by any important act of Parliament are like storms, earth- 

 quakes, and cataclysms, which disturb the continuous course of social 

 growth. Sometimes they do much good ; sometimes much harm ; but 

 in any case it is hardly possible to forecast the result of a considerable 

 catastrophic change in the social organism. Therefore I hold unhesi- 

 tatingly that, whenever it is possible, legislation should observe the 

 order of nature and proceed tentatively. 



Social progress, I have said, is social experimentation. Every new 

 heading that is inserted in the London Trades' Directory is claimed 

 by those private individuals who have tried a new trade and found it 

 to answer. The struggle for existence makes us all look out for 

 chances of profit. We are all pei'haps in some degree inventors, but 



