CHAP, xii DARWINISM IN POLITICS BAGEHOT 117 



tiated ? We assume an original unity of the human 

 race ; from whence then the differences ? Bagehot is to 

 deal with the minor causes, which are mainly political. 

 Beyond and behind their range, other very obscure 

 causes must have been at work to separate, not nation 

 from nation, but race from race ; to differentiate negroes 

 or Mongolians from white men ; presumably we might 

 add, to differentiate Aryans from Semites. But, apart 

 from a single reference to views held by Mr. A. R. 

 Wallace, Bagehot does not enter upon this question at 

 all. Granted race evolution, he asks how political 

 evolution proceeds. Do we encounter in it the workings 

 of inheritance and natural selection ? If so, what forms 

 do they take ? 



But even within the political region two problems 

 are entangled together if, indeed, I ought not rather 

 to say that there are two different ways of conceiving 

 the one political problem. This doubleness of aspect or 

 of parts is embarrassing ; yet it is a difficulty we 

 often encounter as we follow evolutionary discussions, 

 especially those which bear upon man. Does evolution 

 mean progress, or does it simply mean differentiation ? 

 By wedding " Physics," i.e. biology, and " Politics," are 

 we seeking to explain the cause of political changes or 

 rather of political improvement? Parts of Bagehot's 

 book deal with the latter point, especially his closing 

 chapters. On the other hand, are we simply trying to 

 explain the origin, from one common stock, of the 

 immensely divergent assemblage of national constitu- 

 tions which history records or living experience 

 manifests ? This question is also in his view. Perhaps 

 we ought to say that he wishes to study both phases of 

 his theme, but that he is chiefly interested in the laws 

 of true progress. 



