198 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



phrases of praise or blame, generally to be pronounced excessive; 

 the irresponsible rhetoric of fancy and caprice. Nor do we need, in 

 illustrating this point, to confine ourselves to everyday intercourse. 

 Literature furnishes numerous examples of the vice of overcoloring, 

 even w^here v^^e ought least to expect to find them — in the writings of 

 historians. Witness Carlyle and Macaulay. The work of the former 

 is frequently rendered unveracious not only by personal passion, but 

 also through the abuse of his enormous vocabulary of invective ; that 

 of the latter, as well by willingness to sacrifice the finer shades of 

 analysis to the production of brilliant antithetical effects, as by the 

 occasional irruption of bias and prejudice. Of neither of these men 

 could it be rightly said, in Mrs. Browning's splendid phrase, that he 

 possessed in full degree " the conscience of the intellect." 



Pushing the matter still further, we should say that the concep- 

 tion of veracity involves, in the second place, not simply the habit of 

 keeping close to what we believe to be fact, but due inquiry into the 

 basis of such belief. It is one thing to stick consistently to what we 

 take to be truth; another, but equally important thing, to make cer- 

 tain that we are fully justified in accepting and proclaiming it as 

 such. There are many people who, in the daily intercourse of the 

 world, will never be found guilty of willful prevarication or mis- 

 statement, but who none the less seldom take the time or trouble 

 necessary to sift the stories they hear and repeat, and test the exact 

 relation between what is reported and Avhat has actually occurred. 

 As " evil is wrought by want of thought as well as want of heart," 

 so also are we often confused and misled, sometimes regarding issues 

 of serious moment, by the mental laxity, inertness, or inattention 

 of ourselves or others, no less than by positive falsehood or malicious 

 dissimulation. How little this side of the question appeals to most 

 of us is clearly shown by the circumstance that the defense, '' I 

 thought is was so and so," or, " Well, I didn't know any better at the 

 time," or " Such and such a person told me so," is currently urged 

 and accepted as sufficient answer, when any statement, subsequently 

 proved to be incorrect, is traced back to its immediate source. But 

 no such excuse is ethically valid. The proper rejoinder in all such 

 cases is : " You ought to have known ; you ought not to have made 

 allegations or offered opinions until you had been at proper pains to 

 convince yourself of the soundness of what you said." Matthew 

 Arnold once remarked that the English are very good in following 

 their consciences; where they are not good is in finding out first of 

 all whether their consciences are leading them right or wrong. But, 

 in view of the fully developed principle of veracity, we must hold a 

 man responsible, up to the uttermost limit of his opportunity, for 

 knowing the truth as well as for speaking it; for investigating the 



