T IN HUMAN SOCIETY. 217 



reward as men may fairly look to? And what 

 dweller in the slough of want, dwarfed in body 

 and soul, demorahzed, hopeless, can reasonably be 

 expected to possess these qualities? 



Any full and permanent development of the 

 productive powers of an industrial population, 

 then, must be compatible with and, indeed, based 

 upon a social organization which will secure a fair 

 amount of physical and moral welfare to that pop- 

 ulation; which will make for good and not for 

 evil. Natural science and religious enthusiasm 

 rarely go hand in hand, but on this matter their 

 concord is complete; and the least sympathetic 

 of naturalists can but admire the insight and the 

 devotion of such social reformers as the late Lord 

 Shaftesbury, whose recently published " Life and 

 Letters " gives a vivid picture of the condition of 

 the working classes fifty years ago, and of the pit 

 which our industry, ignoring these plain truths, 

 was then digging under its own feet. 



There is, perhaps, no more hopeful sign of 

 progress among us, in the last half-century, than 

 the steadily increasing devotion which has been 

 and is directed to measures for promoting physical 

 and moral welfare among the poorer classes. Sani- 

 tary reformers, like most other reformers whom 

 I have had the advantage of knowing, seem to 

 need a good dose of fanaticism, as a sort of moral 

 coca, to keep them up to the mark, and, doubt- 

 less, they have made many mistakes; but that the 



