1884. 
Question of Evolution. 
663 
laily, without the complex and often apparently capricious 
adtion of ferments. It struck them that this process might 
be applied in indigo-blue dyeing, and they succeeded, ren- 
dering the process henceforth easier and more economical. 
In like manner it might be shown that the chief improve- 
ments^n other arts have sprung from those whom the world 
C ih 7 ™ en T of J Sc,ence /’ but to whom Mr. S. Butler refuses 
iat title. Indeed it seems scarcely uncharitable to suggest 
that Mr. Butler would never have launched into his depreci- 
ation of conscious knowledge, save with a purpose — perhaps 
scarcely conscious— of dealing a side-blow at the scientific 
world, with whom his relations are not too amicable. 
us ’ ^ 01 i nsta nce, weigh the following passages: — 
Our conception of the words ‘ Science ’ and ‘ Scientific ’ 
must undergo some modification. We should recognise 
more distinctly than we do that there are two distinct classes 
of scientific people. . . . The one class is deeply versed in 
those sciences [it should be arts ] which have already become 
the common property of mankind ; enjoying, enforcing, per- 
petuating, and engraining still more deeply into the mind of 
EL acquisitions already approved by common experience.” 
‘ Enforcing, perpetuating, and engraining” — the work of 
the pedant. J . . . “ While the other class is chieflv intent 
upon pushing forward the boundaries of Science,' and is 
comparatively indifferent to what is known save in so far as 
necessary for purposes of extension. . . . Surely the class 
which knows thoroughly well what it knows, and' which ad- 
juaicates upon the value of the discoveries made by the 
pioneers, — surely this class has as good a right, or better 
to be called scientific than the pioneers themselves.” The 
author is here, surely, carrying his love of the paradoxical 
to an unwarrantable extent ! But we find somethin^ yet 
more deplorable to follow. Mr. Butler thinks that the class 
whom he designates “ scientific people ” are “ neither pro- 
gressive nor aggressive, but quite peaceable people, who wish 
to live and let live as their fathers before them. . . . Others 
whose services in this last capacity [discovery] have been of 
inestimable value, are noticeably ignorant of the sciences 
which have already become current with the larger part of 
mankind, — in other words, they are ugly, rude, and dis- 
agreeable people, very progressive, it may be, but very 
aggressive to boot.” J 
It would be difficult to imagine a wider departure from 
the truth. The man of pure Science is of all men the least 
aggressive. So long as you do not deprive him of time and 
materials he will never interfere with you or your ways 
