290 Evolution and Social Hefonn : 



Now, this is merely fustian. If the theory of evolution is 

 true, the man primarily has a natural right to his place on 

 the soil simply and solely as the vegetable has a right to 

 its place. If the oak in a fertile spot, striking its roots 

 broadly and deeply and spreading its giant arms in air, is 

 entitled to its position and entitled to crowd out other 

 plants, then and for the same reason is man entitled to his. 

 They obtained their right through the same rule of the sur- 

 vival of the fittest as the effect of universal laws, each 

 holds it by the right of might, and may be called upon to 

 yield it to the same right. To say that in certain instances 

 in innumerable instances there Avas violence exercised in 

 obtaining this control, is to say that Avhich is substantially 

 true of all property and of every line of progress when a 

 sufficiently comprehensive view is taken of it. If we as- 

 sume a certain theory of justice to be true of all circum- 

 stances and of all times, then is our past but a sorry one. 

 If we adopt a certain point of view as correct let us be true 

 to what it demands ^ let us recognize the fact that the idea 

 of equality of opportunity is the child of to-day, and, though 

 the best beloved perhaps, to be nurtured in accordance with 

 the demands of the principle which governs development. 



With the developing man, mental and moral forces came 

 to supplement physical forces, and law was gradually form- 

 ulated, touching alike the relation of man to land and his 

 relation to other things. When the race reached a full 

 conception of the right of individual property it made its 

 first great stride in civilization. And this was equally 

 so in the case of the ownership of land as in the case of 

 other things. The lines of change in different countries 

 have varied but change has been steadily from the common 

 to the individual, with ever-increasing value to the race. 

 As I look back over the history of the past, the develop- 

 ment of agriculture with all that has followed therefrom 

 would be perfectly inconceivable except through the private 

 ownership of land as that private ownership is defined and 

 limited in civilized countries. For it must always be borne 

 in mind that absolute private ownership of land is recog- 

 nized by no civilized people. What is called ownership of 

 land is only a more or less extended riffht of use. The 

 right of eminent domain is universally conceded as resting 

 in the nation as a whole, but this right, it is generally 

 understood by modern peoples, should not be exercised ex- 



