PAP AVER RHOEA8. 65 



pression which, if the reader considers, must imply certainly 

 the existence of an opposite idea of possible ^'//-becoming- 

 ness,' of an apparel which should, in just as accurate a 

 sense, belong appropriately to the creature invested with it, 

 and yet not be glorious, but inglorious, and not well-becom- 

 ing, but ill-becoming. The mandrill's blue nose, for instance, 

 already referred to, can we rightly speak of this as ' evTrptTma ' ? 

 Or the stings, and minute, colourless blossoming of the nettle ? 

 May we call these a glorious apparel, as we may the glowing of 

 an alpine rose ? 



You will find on reflection, and find more convincingly the 

 more accurately you reflect, that there is an absolute sense 

 attached to such words as ' decent/ ' honourable,' ' glorious," 

 or * KctAos/ contrary to another absolute sense in the words 

 'indecent/ 'shameful/ 'vile/ or 'ato-^pos.' 



And that there is every degree of these absolute qualities 

 visible in living creatures ; and that the divinity of the Mind 

 of man is in its essential discernment of what is /<a/W from 

 what is aivxpov, and in his preference of the kind of creatures 

 which are decent, to those which are indecent ; and of the 

 kinds of thoughts, in himself, which are noble, to those which 

 are vile. 



4. When therefore I said that Mr. Darwin, and his school,* 

 had no conception of the real meaning of the word ' proper/ 

 I meant that they conceived the qualities of things only as 

 their 'properties/ but not as their ' becomingnesses ; ' and see- 

 ing that dirt is proper to a swine, malice to a monkey, poison 

 to a nettle, and folly to a fool, they called a nettle but a nettle, 

 and the faults of fools but folly ; and never saw the difference 

 between ugliness and beauty absolute, decency and indecency 

 absolute, glory or shame absolute, and folly or sense absolute. 



Whereas, the perception of beauty, and the power of defin- 

 ing physical character, are based on moral instinct, and on the 

 power of defining animal or human character. Nor is it pos- 

 sible to say that one flower is more highly developed, or one 

 animal of a higher order, than another, without the assump- 



* Of Vespertilian science generally, compare ' Eagles' Nest,' pp. 23 

 and 126. 



