THE FALSEHOOD OF EXTREMES. 
~’45 
sufficient grounds for the assertion. Still more recently, the 
Kev. J. Stratton has taken the Bishop of Nottingham to task 
for having defended “ moderate ” sport ; and has advanced the 
view that there is really more to be said for vivisection, which 
the Bishop denounces, than for what is called “ sport ” in any 
form. There are Selbornians who object in toto to the collection of 
natural history specimens — an objection which, if carried to its 
logical conclusion, would prevent the study of natural science 
and shut up our museums. And others go to even greater 
lengths. It is not so long ago that, in the course of a discussion 
at an educational club, a plea was put forward for the rights of 
vegetables. “ How do we know,” said the fair advocate of 
these rights, “ that plants don’t feel ? we have never been 
plants ourselves.” And on the same occasion we were told of 
“ educationists ” who will not allow children studying botany to 
dissect flowers, lest they should commit, or at least encourage, 
vivisection ! 
This article has already run to too great a length, or we 
should like to have said something about the appalling e.xtremes 
into which the dog-worship of the present day is allowed to run. 
This, to all right-minded persons, is no whit less alarming than 
the cruelty towards animals which every Selbornian agrees to 
deprecate. At the time of agrarian disturbances in Ireland it 
was said with bitterness, but with a certain amount of truth, that 
the sympathies of English ladies were more easily excited by the 
cutting-off of a cow’s tail than by the unhousing of a country 
side. It is certain that those whose vagaries regarding their pets 
were recorded lately in the Strand Magazine, spend upon their 
dogs an amount of money which would place many a poor and 
deserving family beyond the reach of want. 
This view cannot fail to force itself upon thinking people, and 
it is finding expression — witness the following from a letter lately 
published in the Echo : “ In these days, when there are ‘ homes 
for lost dogs,’ ‘ starving cats,’ and a ‘ society for the protection of 
birds,’ our fellow-creatures (many of them lost and starving too) 
might have a little of our consideration, as well as the dogs, cats, 
and birds.” 
We are not saying, and we do not think, that those who love 
animals are wanting in affection for their fellow-creatures — St. 
Francis is a standing example to the contrary : but we cannot 
help feeling that there is a certain disproportion in the sympathy 
bestowed upon the two classes. It is in the interest of Sel- 
bornian principles, and from a conviction that these are endan- 
gered by exaggeration, that we have written these lines. 
The Editor. 
