A REJOINDER 157 



under the set conditions," but rather of the elimina- 

 tion of individuals, because they are not adapted to 

 those conditions. The one implies a positive act 

 which is not operating, and the other a negative 

 one which is. 



My second objection is to the assumed superiority 

 of man over Nature implied in the sentence : " Can 

 we trust Nature to select such qualities as we shall 

 approve ? " Now I am curious to know who are the 

 " We." Miss Wodehouse quoted a sentence of mine 

 containing the phrase " corruptions of a Royal 

 Court," and added a comment of her own, " where 

 the time-server and flatterer succeed and survive." 

 I will not stop to remind her that this type of person 

 is found elsewhere than in Royal Courts, and that 

 elsewhere they are so unfit in their art that they are 

 unmasked by their own crude craft. But I would like 

 to ask whether the " We " means the uncultured 

 and hormonic demagogue, who, incapable because 

 of his inherent defects of acquiring either knowledge 

 or property of his own inflames the passions of 

 equally unculturable masses against citizens whose 

 biological attributes have enabled them to acquire 

 such things ? Are the " We " those men who, envious 

 of the honourable achievements, marked success, 

 and noble family traditions of others, endeavour to 

 hold them up to the ridicule of the " great unwashed " 

 of democracy — which is still unwashed in spite 

 of the fact that there is now no tax on soap 

 and education is free — by calling them the " great 

 rats " ? Who cling to office at the cost of broken 



