230 [Oct. 19, 
Brinton. ] 
conversation to Law, and undoubtedly on him it reacted disastrously, as 
it did on Amiel, whose Journal Intime bears constant traces of it. 
Our friend was a lover of good cheer, but it was far from filling the 
requirements of his nature. No one could content himself with humbler 
fare or cared less to pamper himself with luxuries. Yet no one appreci- 
ated more highly the delights of a nobly spread board, and the merits of 
a bottle of sound wine, when combined with friendly companionship and 
intellectual conversation. Any one capable of appreciating the best 
qualities of heart and mind, who met Mr. Law at such times, could not 
fail of bearing away sentiments of affection and respect for him. 
He was careless with reference to dress, and this not only as matter of 
habit, but of avowed principle. He shared Carlyle’s contempt for clothes, 
and maintained that fora man to attach much importance to his garb is a 
sign of mental backwardness. He referred to the picturesque and beauti- 
ful costumes of men of past centuries, and explained their disappearance 
asa mark of evolution. That women are as devoted as ever to such fine 
feathers he adduced as evidence in favor of his avowed belief in their 
mental inferiority as a sex. He was an earnest advocate of the virile 
power, as against feminine influence. He thoroughly agreed with Thacke- 
ray’s opinion, as expressed in ‘‘ Henry Esmond,”’ that a man or a country 
ruled by the influence of priests or women is on the high road to decad- 
ence, 
In politics Mr. Law was a Democrat, and in political economy a Free- 
trader. These were not merely inherited opinions. He had read very 
widely the authors on modern political history, and set forth clearly both 
the many fallacies of the protective theory as a national policy and also 
that it is in open conflict with the brotherhood of man. The doctrine 
that each nation should take care of its own interests, without reference 
to its neighbors, he characterized as on the same level of morals as the 
common expression, ‘‘ Every man for himself and the devil take the hind- 
most,’”’ both absolutely at issue with the grand Comtian motto, Vivre pour 
qutrui. Altruism, he contended, is the highest moral principle both for the 
individual and the State, and its repudiation by either will work no ulti- 
mate good result. National selfishness he condemned as just as unphilo- 
sophical, and for that matter just as un-Christian, as individual selfish- 
ness. 
At the time of his death, Mr. Law was not yet fifty ; but he had already 
reached an age greater than the average of his male ancestors in either 
branch as far as they*could be traced. None had attained advanced years, 
and thoroughly acquainted as he was with the doctrine of heredity as 
applied to longevity, he did not flatter himself with the expectation of 
long life. When I left for Europe in February last, he expressed serious 
doubts whether he would be alive on my return, as he was not. This 
anticipation was not owing to physical debility. He was of a large, pow- 
erful frarae, weighing about 210 pounds, and had never been sick except 
on one occasion, from a temporary surgical affection. His death was sud- 
