JuLT n, 1885.] 



♦ KNOVV^LEDGE 



But, I know another acliool— all interna — of gentlemanly nice 

 fellows, wliose masters wero ignorant, ill-bred muCfs. One of the 

 senior students told me that the moral state of the place was 

 excellent; whereas, when he came, a youngster o£ eight, it was a 

 sink of iniquity. Now, the change here was certainly not wrought 

 by the masters. Morals are like epidemics. I have no doubt that 

 iu the cases cited by Mr. Proctor the change did emanate from 

 the masters. But that must have been by accident. It is as in 

 society. The standard of morals is always fixed by the laity — 

 whatever they determine on doing, the clergy must sanction even- 

 tually, or else they would have no adherents. Of course, they 

 ought to submit to that disaster; but then they don't. 



I felt pained at the admission of Ur. Stokoe that he did not 

 know of the bullying in question ; but I feel sure there must have 

 been, sonie special cause for his ignorance. It seems a pity, any- 

 how,, to increase, at this moment, the very deep concern be must 

 feel. Hallyards. 



r" (from 



" THE COMITy OF NATIONS." 



[1817]— I always understood this to mean " that mutual 



comis, polite). But in April, 1S71, a great lawyer made 

 speech, in which he spoke several times of the " comity of nations " 

 as synonymous with " community of nations." I turned up Johnson 

 and others, but could find no trace of the word comity other than 

 as above. The Times based a leader on the speech, and repeated 



letters. I wrote to the Times expostulating, but was not inserted. 



Now, in the Saturday Review for May 30, p. 718, I find " Japan's 

 policy aims at the adoption of the fruits of Western civilization, 

 and the attainment of a status of recognised equality in the comity 

 of nations." Here is the self-same error. 



There might, of course, be a word cortii(y = company, from 



inconvenient to have two words of identical spelling, but diverse 

 derivation and meaning ; for then we might praise a judge and a 

 riding-master, each for his equity — the one for a-quitax, the other 



"PRINTf]RS' DEVILRY." 



[1818]— That "Hallyards" is a moat exceedingly learned man, 

 I have no earthly doubt ; but (letter 1811) he does not seem to bo 

 quite so well acquainted with the writings of "the Divine 

 William " as he might be, or else he would have known that the 

 Saturday was quoting from Mrs. Quickly, " Henry V.," act ii., 

 scene 3: — " Nay, sure, he's not in hell; he's in Arthur's bosom, if 

 ever man went to Arthur's bosom." G. Si 



GEORGE ELIOT. 



[1819] — There is still a necessitv, I think, for another word to 

 be spoken in connection with George Eliot and her partner. The 



and too much defended by Mr. Proctor. While sympathising with 

 a great many observations ably expressed by the latter, I cannot 

 help thinking that he has allowed his love and reverence for the 

 writer to plead on behalf of what has always been considered 

 reprehensible in Sand and Chopin. It is .surely a healthy senti- 

 ment which demands from our teachers a higher morality than 

 exists in the multitude. If there is virtue in our laws, surely it is 

 right for one wlio could create for na an Adam Bede to make a 

 sacrifice on their Ii.]!:ili. 1. i^ :ill v-iy well to say that if Eliot and 

 Lewes wronged m. ..i |. t n was justifiable. In the first 



place, a wrong mi. i Inn. In the second place, the 



question, I think, n ni.i u^^ii-i ..n.'. Do such acts discredit the 

 law, and is such an e.-.>uiiiile a.-.alui;uy one for society ? While, no 

 doubt, many things can bo urged iu defence of the happy fellow- 

 ship of these celebrated peojile, surely a more heroic line would 

 hate been more in harmony with their teaching. Gamm.v. 



A LONti SPELL. 

 [1820]-In your -G,«sip" in KN„w,,F,,.,a.: you sny, "It 



DIVERS EEJOINDEKS. 



[1821]— ConiZur 40 ft. from tip to tip of wings.* I saw this about 

 forty years ago, noted on the fly-leaf of a book, by my father, from 

 (I think) Humboldt. It struck me so much that I have never for- 

 gotten it. I could wish it verified. It is not likely my father was 

 wrong, as he had succeeded, before he was twenty-four, in having 

 his name given to two places on the earth's surface ; which, as 

 "'ai'^pwi' 'tTTKJiai'oJy Tcaaa lit) Td(poc," is certainly the neatest way of 

 appearing on the tombstone. (Could I live in libraries, I would 

 make a dictionary of all men in like case, with brief notice. This 

 would be a geographical peerage, and useful companion to every 

 geography.) 



HcUellites. Jupiter and Saturn certainly have some larger than 

 the moon in ajipacenf diameter; but, as J. and S. are held to be 

 not yet condensed, and to bo yoiny tu he very much smaller than 

 they are at jiresent, is it not reasonable to supposo that their 

 satellites are iu a similar puffy state ?t Now, tlie one'thing certain 

 about the moon is that slio is solid, and final, at all events. 



Injintte divisibility. I am unable to see why one should be able 

 to halve everything, without getting to a point indivisible. If we 

 could, then I might say that because I have a pound in my pocket, I 

 shall always have some money, because, however small the balance, 

 I can always halve it. (This is flippant, of course.) 



Haxlyabjjs. 



BENEDICITE! 



[1822]— I am deeply pained to find from Mr. Proctor's note on 

 p. 11 that I have (it seems) wasted valuable space on nonsense. 

 The only exit seems to bo " the Hundreds." " I guess I shall jiue 

 a church this fall," as Artemus Ward says (or, stay— perhaps it 

 was some other A. W.— Archbishop Whatily, for instance.) 



I was perfectly certain the two statements in question had been 

 made by Mr. Proctor; I cannot tell where, nor does it matter, 

 since (at any rate) they do not represent his opinion. But this 

 defect of apprehension convinces me that it is not only my sight 

 that is failing me, and that I am not much in the right place in 



I remember Mr. Proctor writing of me years ago " by no means 

 a fool, but fitter to be taught than teach." I never tried to do 

 that. I have ventured to put certain sceptical ideas on paper, 

 supposing that the acting Editor would not print absolute bosh. 



The fact that a scientific opinion is universally received in no 

 way proves its truth. Mr. Proctor himself (am I mistaken here?) 

 showed that all astronomers had been childishly wrong about 

 resolvable nebula; being galaxies ; and that Sir G. Airy was also in 

 error as to a transit of Venng. He also wrote a paper called "A 

 Menacing Comet," which frightened numbers of people. He has 

 since explained that no comet, in his opinion, is likely to do any 

 harm. If that bo so, what did it " menace" ? In spite of my almost 

 extravagant admiration for him, I could not help feeling that the 

 S.xturdayReviev v,-,ia on the side of reason about "the Specfafor's 

 comet." 



As regards the reply to me on p. 14, I should be really obliged 

 if the following emasculated (but is that admissible ?) statement 

 be allowed to apjiear. The Editor severely snubbed a corre- 

 spondent who wrote about what the Editor calls " a savage rite," 

 and said it did no good. I wrote, showing, not only that it was 

 invented by the beginners of all c-ivilisatiou, but that it is 

 alleged to produce the most serimis inni;il and j.^vsiral benefit. My 

 language was carefully chosen- ii :"m''> put li- ,■'<•- tluiugh it U 

 absurd to regard any such restriitiMUs in a s, iiiuilie .lisiussion. — it 

 is like fighting with one arm tie.l and iho VAhw l.uikes my letter. 

 Probably he does right; but it deies seem to nie liard en tho corre- 

 spondent who was originally snubbed, and to whom our good 

 Editor now devotes sixteen lines of disquisition on the merits ot 

 the rite in question, which he allows no one to dcfcnd.t 



I am extremely obliged to Mr. Putlor for his courteous note and 

 sketch of a buff spider, but it i^ i ; I'l .r; -:■. ' ^ as mine, 

 d with a lens. V . ', , v , ' ■ are five 



■ shotaCond.ir. I : -e tip of 



