74 Contemporary Evolution. 



played so great a one as that, the disintegration of which 

 we are engaged in considering. 



It is evident that naked self-assertion is a relatively 

 feeble base for a national theocracy, and that some 

 objective testimony is requisite to sustain, for any pro- 

 longed period, the claim of any man or body of men to 

 supernatural authority. 



This testimony did exist in mediaeval Christendom. 

 The government of each nation could appeal to a vene- 

 rated external witness, namely, to the Church, as existing 

 in other nations, and to the supreme head of that Church, 

 whose decisions were accepted as final. No such testi- 

 mony exists for any of the competing systems which claim 

 a divine authority to-day such as that of the Russian 

 czar or of the Prussian monarchy, as understood by its 

 king. It is also difficult to conceive that any similar 

 testimony can come to be made use of by any non- 

 Christian theocracy hereafter to arise. 



It would thus seem that the social systems of the future 

 must come to repose merely upon natural and intuitive 

 right, unless mankind should revert to some form of 

 Christian theocracy. 



But what basis of natural right can be devised which 

 the different races will agree to regard as of unquestionable 

 solidity ? 



Those who agree in affirming that man's intellect has 

 a power of apprehending " right " and " wrong " as dis- 



