The I\>fu/ t i> A'//////)-- 313 



than that of destroyer? What is religion ? Manifestly a 

 collection of beliefs and emotions founded upon erroneous 

 views of the construction and methods of operation of this 

 ami other worlds. Spencer teaches a true cosmos. He 

 must therefore destroy religion wherever he impinges upon 

 it. How could any conclusion be other than a "bald nega- 

 tion" ? When it is shown that religion vanishes in the 

 presence of science, what can you do but write finis then 

 and there ? The affair is closed. The job is done. To a 

 mind comprehending the facts and theories of science and 

 (I will add) understanding the writings of Spencer, "re- 

 ligion " can no more be entertained than a hobgoblin. It 

 becomes a zero, an excommunicated x, a nothing floating 

 /'// i' a cuo. 



From this mess of crudity one might readily infer 

 that Youmans would have had no use for the writer's 

 article. If he had deemed it necessary to answer this 

 letter, he would probably have gently conveyed some 

 intimation of the fact that the writer was very far 

 from " understanding the writings of Spencer." 



After the new magazine had been running about a 

 year and a half Youmans wrote to Spencer: 



There can be no doubt that the Monthly is doing an 

 important work in this country. We continue to print 

 12,000, although the monthly demand fluctuates around 

 11,000, and seems to be stationary for the last few months. 

 But the bound volumes sell steadily though moderately, 

 and new subscribers frequently order from the beginning. 

 We have, however, worked up a very deep feeling of hos- 

 tility, and hear constantly of people who " won't have it in 

 the house." I call your attention to a promised series of 

 articles, of which the first will be in the October number on 

 The Primary Concepts of Modern Physical Science, by a 



