134 
relations”? If I tell him that he has neither will he not 
Cert that he has both? Will he then accuse that thread of 
consciousness of telling lies? If consciousness can never be a 
vXd witness how does he know it? Simply by appealing to 
It 1 pSe That is, he believes it tells the truth that it 
never tells the truth. If consciousness can never he a valid 
witness how does he know that he found fault with Mr. Mill 
for favouring the psychological method? How does he know 
that he is the Dr. Maudsley that wrote on the - physiology and 
noth oIob-v of the mind ” ? How, in short, does he know anything, 
Ff conscfdusness be not a valid witness? Mr. Mill has said that 
“ whatever is known to us by consciousness is known beyond 
nossihility of doubt.” These “ memories and expectations 
Fre known to us by consciousness, and surely science is doing 
a wrong thing when it seeks to seduce reason into the denial of 
^Spiritual cravings of which men are conscious, are 
dealt with in a very superficial way by Dr. Huxley. Natuia ‘ 
knowledge,” says he, - seeking to supply natural wants, has 
found the ideas which can alone still spiritual cravings, an 
Sring to ascertain the laws of comfort has been driven to 
discover that of conduct, and to lay the foundations of a new 
morality.” But what are those - spiritual cravings to which 
Dr Huxley's theories would point? Is art, or song, or seen }, 
or ’science 7 the object of those cravings? Is it a cr£ T. n P 
simply for thought from which all angles are gone, and which 
is rounded into consistency with all other thoughts that a e 
entertained? Is it a craving for intercourse and sympathy 
with a fellow-creature, who may die any day ? T “ s * s ® u ? 
but to touch the surface of the spiritual .cravings of which ^man 
is conscious. How high in character is a man hke y to rise 
whose cravings are towards a standard set on the foundations 
of this “ new morality ” ? Are the “ expectations ” strung 
upon the “ thread of consciousness ” confined to the temporary 
fruits of prudence, of culture, and of what passes for g°° 
breeding? Ellicott may well say, “Science may teach us 
much ; but when we gaze far into the past, or far into the 
future we must always observe that it signally fails us, w 
{an find that between the farthest point to which its deductions 
may help to lead us, and the beginning or the end, there 
is a chasm that cannot be bridged over. ( Destiny 
Creature. ^ ag Mr Spencer does, “ that slowly but surely 
evolution brings about an increasing amount of happiness, a, 
evils being incidental,” is to say little that can meet ou 
spiritual cravings. It is just Biichner’s immortality m anothe. 
