. 
 LIBRARY' 
 
 '"K TIIK ^ 
 
 
 
 
 UN .1 T Y ' OF CALI FOR N f A'. 
 
 
 .. t* ** 
 
 'V,,v/ 
 
 . /( s;s > 
 
 i Aa^-4^<'X4 / ' Kfiel/ 1&'^ 
 
 i. 
 
Seventh Edition, Revised and Enlarged. 
 
 THE UNSEEN UNIVERSE; 
 
 OR 
 
 Physical Speculations on a Future State. 
 
 BALFOUR STEWART AND P. G. TAIT. 
 
 Crown Svo. 6s. 
 
 MACMILLAN AND CO., LONDON. 
 
PARADOXICAL PHILOSOPHY. 
 
From floating elements in chaos hurl'd, 
 Self-form'd of atoms, sprang the infant world. 
 No great First Cause inspired the happy plot, 
 But all was matter, and no matter what. 
 Atoms, attracted by some law occult, 
 Settling in spheres, the globe was the result ; 
 Pure child of Chance, which still directs the ball, 
 As rotatory atoms rise or fall. 
 
 I sing how casual bricks in airy climb 
 Encountered casual horse-hair, casual lime, 
 How rafters, borne through wondering clouds elate, 
 Kissed in their slope blue elemental slate. 
 
 Oh ! happy age when convert Christians read 
 
 No sacred writings but the Pagan creed, 
 
 Oh ! happy age when, spurning Newton's dreams, 
 
 Our poets'. sons recite Lucretian themes, 
 
 Abjure the idle systems of their youth, 
 
 And turn again to atoms and to truth ! HORACE SMITH. 
 
 Yesterday, when weary with writing, and my mind quite dusty with 
 considering these atoms, I was called to supper, and a salad I had asked 
 for was set before me. ' It seems then,' said I aloud, ' that if pewter 
 dishes, leaves of lettuce, grains of salt, drops of water, vinegar and oil, and 
 slices of eggs, had been floating about in the air from all eternity, it might 
 at last happen by chance that there would come a salad.' ' Yes,' says my 
 wife, ' but not so nice and well-dressed as this of mine is,' KEPLER. 
 
PARADOXICAL PHILOSOPHY 
 
 A SEQUEL TO 
 
 THE UNSEEN UNIVERSE 
 
 In te, Domine, speravi, non confundar in asternum. 
 
 SECOND EDITION 
 
 
 MACMILLAN AND CO. 
 
 MDCCCLXXIX. 
 
EGO SVM RESVRRECTIO ET VITA 
 
 QVI CREDIT IN ME ETIAM SI MORTVVS FVERIT 
 
 VIVET. 
 
 'Almighty God, give us grace that we may cast away the works o 
 darkness, and put upon us the armour of light, now in the time of thi, 
 mortal life, in which thy Son Jesus Christ came to visit us in great humility 
 that in the last day, when he shall come again in his glorious Majesty U 
 judge both the quick and dead, we may rise to the life immortal, througf 
 him who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Ghost, now and ever, 
 Amen.' 
 
TO 
 
 THE PRESENT AND FORMER PRESIDENTS 
 AND THE^ OTHER MEMBERS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 PARADOXICAL, 
 
 THIS BRIEF ACCOUNT OF THE SOCIETY'S JUBILEE MEETING 
 
 IS DEDICATED BY 
 
 THE EDITORS. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 A WORD or two may perhaps be necessary as 
 to the form in which this book is cast. 
 
 The exigencies of the subject, and not any 
 thought of imitating Peacock, Helps, or Mallock 
 far less Christopher North, Bunyan, or Plato 
 absolutely dictated the conversational style. 
 
 The Paradoxical Society is a real and living 
 power, well known far beyond its membership ; 
 and the Editors have to record with gratitude 
 the assistance rendered to them by various 
 members of that body in the compilation of this 
 little volume. 
 
 October ; 1878. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 HAGE 
 
 THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY, . . i 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT, 17 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 DR. STOFFKRAFT OPENS THE DEBATE, . 55 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 THE REPLY, ..... 85 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 THE CONFERENCE IN THE YEW TREE AVENUE, . 123 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE, . . .142 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR, . . .203 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 
 
 ' All concord 's born of contraries.' 
 
 BEN JONSON, Cynthia's Revels. 
 
 AT the time when our tale commences the 
 Paradoxical Society had almost arrived at the 
 mature age of fifty years, having been brought 
 into being in 1826 by the well-known Isaac 
 Fairbank. 
 
 On so solemn an occasion the time- 
 honoured custom of celebrating by a feast 
 multiples and sub-multiples of centuries of life 
 could not of course be omitted. 
 
 The founder of the society had long since 
 been gathered to his fathers, but his only son 
 Stephen was allowed on all sides to be no un- 
 worthy descendant of that sagacious old lover 
 of truth and fair play. 
 
2 THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 
 
 Stephen had in his youth achieved distinc- 
 tion in one of our great English Universities, 
 and as a logical consequence he was not dis- 
 posed to pass the remainder of his life without 
 taking an active part in the work of the world. 
 
 Indeed his father Isaac had always looked 
 to his son to maintain the credit of a large in- 
 dustrial concern which would naturally revert 
 to him as a species of patrimony. 
 
 What now was Stephen to do with this 
 inheritance ? Sell its fixtures and good-will, 
 buy acres and hunt ? Such a course did not 
 recommend itself to the son, nor indeed would 
 his father have readily suffered its adoption. 
 * If Stephen inherits my means he also inherits 
 my duties/ the old man was heard to say ; and 
 so after his university career, this worthy son of 
 a true alma mater, nothing loth, settled himself 
 down in his father's counting-house, and buckled 
 on his commercial armour just before business 
 hours. 
 
 Such filial piety did not remain unrewarded, 
 and the son's hours of leisure were soon solaced 
 
THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 3 
 
 by the distinguished privilege of admission into 
 the Paradoxical Society, which met regularly 
 once a month under the presidency of his father. 
 
 Stephen was most praiseworthy in his 
 attendance at all these meetings first as a 
 listener only afterwards as a speaker also. 
 
 Here he would sit for hours enchanted by 
 the pleasant flow of varied and good-natured 
 discussion, touching upon everything and yet 
 wounding no one. 
 
 Nothing was too great, nothing too small, 
 for these easy but not thoughtless philosophers. 
 They went over the whole house of knowledge 
 from attic to basement, preceded by their Presi- 
 dent, lantern in hand like a second Diogenes ; 
 they entered every room, they threw the rays 
 into every corner, they ransacked every cup- 
 board, they tapped every wall. 
 
 Meanwhile the well- arranged collections, 
 conveniently displayed in cabinets, received but 
 little attention ; indeed the old man had an 
 original and very simple theory on the subject 
 of these collections. 
 
4 THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 
 
 He imagined that in addition to its more 
 prominent furniture each room had its indivi- 
 dual b&te noire, its skeleton in the cupboard, its 
 little private weakness concealed from the 
 inquirer as sedulously as its strong points 
 were ostentatiously displayed before him, and 
 the search of the President was invariably after 
 these weaknesses, many of which he succeeded 
 in discovering during the course of a long and 
 persevering life. Need we add that whenever 
 he met with a triumph of this kind the trophy 
 was exhibited and discussed at the next meeting 
 of the Paradoxical. 
 
 But we must not imagine from all this that 
 the old man was a disbeliever in human honesty 
 and truth ; on the contrary, he was in reality 
 one of the most patient and humble seekers for 
 these two good things this world has ever seen. 
 
 Nor must we imagine that he was altogether 
 a cynic far from it ; he had doubtless a shrewd 
 eye for the weakness of his adversary, and a 
 quick wit to take advantage of it a combina- 
 tion which rendered him really dangerous. 
 
THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 5 
 
 Time however will overcome the best of us, 
 and at length this genial but yet terrible old 
 man was gathered to his fathers. 
 
 In due course the son was unanimously 
 chosen as President of the Paradoxical, and it 
 was then seen that he was in some respects 
 even better qualified than his father for the 
 duties of such a post. 
 
 He had not perhaps his father's genius, 
 nor was he able to detect at a glance the 
 weak points in his adversaries' harness. He 
 was not a collector of weaknesses, but on 
 the other hand he inherited and studied pro- 
 foundly the large mass of such materials which 
 his father had gathered together, and thus 
 through a kind of comparative anatomy he at 
 length attained a very comprehensive know- 
 ledge of the various schools of thought. But 
 along with their weakness he studied also their 
 strength, and a combined use of both gave him 
 ultimately a rare grasp of the subject before him. 
 
 The father was like the detective who brings 
 into court a list of the delinquencies of the 
 
6 THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 
 
 culprit, but the son was the judge who, when he 
 has listened to both sides of the question, sums 
 up the evidence convincingly for the benefit of 
 the jury. 
 
 Such, in the year 1876, was the owner of 
 Elmsly House, an old-fashioned residence 
 formerly belonging to a family now extinct. 
 But the ancient genius of the place still lingered 
 about it, not having suffered violent treatment 
 at the hands of the present proprietor at the 
 time when he adapted the house to the require- 
 ments of his family and of modern civilisation. 
 The old garden especially, with its broad 
 green walks, and the mile-long yew-tree 
 avenue, were relics of the past, fondly cherished 
 by their present owner. 
 
 Placed in a region of great natural beauty, 
 the usual course with an Englishman would have 
 been to circle his domain round with a wall as 
 high as he could afford to make it, on the same 
 principle that the good-wife of Broeck cleans 
 her parlour window to let the sun in, and then 
 closes the shutter to keep it out. 
 
THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 7 
 
 But Stephen Fairbank was an exception to 
 this rule. An ardent lover of nature, he had 
 opened up many delightful outlooks into the 
 beautiful distance from various parts of his 
 grounds. In this pleasant place, on the eve 
 of Whitsuntide 1876, great preparations were 
 being made for the approaching jubilee. The 
 members of the club had agreed in selecting 
 this time as the very best opportunity for its 
 celebration, for it was thought that they had a 
 better chance of bringing men together from 
 various quarters during this short holiday than 
 in the long vacation, which each man is disposed 
 to utilise after a fashion of his own. 
 
 Add to this, that if the weather should 
 prove favourable, a good deal of the discussion 
 might be conducted in the open air, and by 
 moving about from place to place they might 
 even convert themselves into a school of peri- 
 patetic philosophers. 
 
 The most important member of the home 
 circle was Frederick Fairbank, the host's eldest 
 son, a young and rising barrister who had dis- 
 
8 THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 
 
 tinguished himself at Cambridge even more than 
 his father had done thirty years before. He 
 was a striking instance of that strange law by 
 which family peculiarities, in descending, fre- 
 quently leap over one generation with the view 
 apparently of acquiring sufficient impetus to 
 fasten them with redoubled pertinacity upon 
 the next. A general objector to every conclu- 
 sion that was not absolutely sure from its very 
 foundation, he was not, however, by any means a 
 Mephistopheles, nor did he range himself, either 
 from choice or profession, invariably against the 
 side of goodness and virtue. To him the side 
 which he took was apparently a matter of in- 
 difference, if only he might get the chance of 
 dealing an unexpected blow. 
 
 He was like a military engineer who first 
 sets himself to construct an armour-plate 
 sufficiently strong to resist all known projectiles, 
 and, after succeeding, constructs a gun suffi- 
 ciently powerful to pierce the plate. 
 
 Always keeping his own counsel, no one 
 knew where to have him in any dispute ; while 
 
THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 9 
 
 he, on the contrary, had a perfect knowledge of 
 the weak points of both parties. 
 
 We must next make our readers acquainted 
 with the Rev. Ralph Bemerton, B.D., vicar of 
 the parish in which Stephen Fairbank lived. 
 Permitting neither his piety to interfere with 
 his general cultivation, nor his general cultiva- 
 tion with his piety, he nevertheless considered 
 the duties of his parish to form his chief work. 
 He was a lover of antiquity, and held fast by 
 Catholic tradition, separating however between 
 that which was manifestly a product of time 
 and that which he considered to be essential. 
 He was likewise a diligent, and in some re- 
 spects a successful, student of physical and 
 natural science, the true characteristics of which 
 he would not for a moment admit to be 
 incompatible with those of religion. 
 
 It was even rumoured that he had dabbled 
 somewhat in the Divine art, and that should the 
 recesses of his desk ever be examined they 
 would be found to contain a poem celebrating 
 the past glories of the old family, now extinct, 
 
io THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 
 
 to whom the surrounding district had, genera- 
 tions ago, belonged. 
 
 When pressed upon this subject he was 
 understood to admit the soft impeachment, 
 alleging at the same time the engrossing claims 
 of his parish duties as an excuse for the non- 
 completion of his literary work. 
 
 Our catalogue would be incomplete if we 
 forgot the distinguished East Indian, Sir Ken- 
 neth M 'Kelpie, K.S.I., who was one of the 
 guests on the present occasion. A Scot of 
 Scots, he had very much of the shrewdness of 
 his countrymen, with perhaps a tinge of some 
 of their peculiarities. 
 
 As an instance of the former we may re- 
 mark that in early life he had been content to 
 forsake the barren glories of his hereditary 
 moor for more profitable if less exalted pastures 
 in the East. 
 
 As an instance of the latter, Sir Kenneth, 
 if he did not believe in second-sight, and its 
 long train of affiliated mysteries, was yet dis- 
 posed to represent the subject as one which, in 
 
THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. n 
 
 his own opinion, and in that of all unprejudiced 
 persons, must be regarded as open for discussion. 
 Owing to his high culture and formidable 
 originality, he had a way of putting things which 
 had already secured him many adherents. We 
 remember his quaint account of the first stance 
 at which he had been present. * I asked the 
 medium,' he said, ' when and where my father 
 had died ? and it was not till a year afterwards 
 that I discovered he had made a mistake.' 
 Knowing the gentle yet insidious mysticism 
 of his guest, the wily host had endeavoured 
 to balance it on this occasion by the vigorous 
 oratory of Elijah Holdfast, Member of Par- 
 liament for one of the Northern Counties, 
 well known and not unfrequently listened to in 
 the House of Commons. This rising statesman 
 was not to be taken in, and it was a matter of 
 great interest and much speculation amongst the 
 guests whether the quaint and exquisitely subtle 
 suggestions of Sir Kenneth would finally pre- 
 vail, or would be forced to yield to the sledge- 
 hammer oratory of this modern Boanerges. 
 
12 THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 
 
 But the most distinct personality among the 
 guests invited by Stephen Fairbank on this 
 occasion was undoubtedly Dr. Hermann Stoff- 
 kraft, the well-known German Philosopher. 
 
 Picture to yourself a little man, enthusiastic, 
 single-hearted, sincere, and withal perfectly 
 amiable, with a sanguine complexion, and with 
 prominent eyes generally seen behind spec- 
 tacles, active in his habits, and always rushing 
 about, and you have a very fair notion of the 
 outward man. 
 
 With regard to his mental characteristics, 
 they were not like those of ordinary mortals. 
 In this country we should probably (in the 
 rough way we have of lumping men together) 
 call him a materialist, but Dr. Hermann Stoff- 
 kraft might no doubt be inclined to contest the 
 propriety of the name. He called himself a 
 votary of the goddess Nature, apparently using 
 that word to denote not merely the orderly 
 succession of external phenomena with which 
 we are brought into contact, but likewise the 
 Power which underlies these manifestations. 
 
THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 13 
 
 But he was by no means a blind worshipper, 
 in fact he was compelled reluctantly to admit 
 that in one little matter his goddess had made 
 a mistake. 
 
 This mistake consisted, according to him, in 
 the development of a race of intelligent beings 
 like ourselves. 
 
 This was the only blot on her escutcheon 
 the rift within the lute the one incongruous 
 feature that marred her otherwise perfect 
 beauty. 
 
 He had often and anxiously pondered over 
 this little point, at first in the hope that it might 
 be found to denote a strictly local outbreak, 
 just as every good man is bound to hope that 
 an epidemic may be confined to one locality, 
 but a more profound study had brought home 
 to his reluctant mind the conviction that the 
 disease was probably as extensive as the uni- 
 verse itself. 
 
 As he had no enemies, the task of criticising 
 these utterances of the little Doctor of course 
 fell to his friends, from whom we have derived 
 
14 THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 
 
 this description, and who used now and then 
 to hint that the Doctor would have preferred a 
 universe presided over by his favourite god- 
 dess, with only Hermann Stoffkraft to sing 
 her praises. 
 
 As, however, he had not been consulted on 
 this point, and as numerous candidates for the 
 office of chief singer had already appeared, 
 especially in his native country, these would-be 
 critics were understood to imply that the Doctor 
 had been rather piqued, and had in consequence 
 retaliated by proposing to regard the whole 
 system as a mistake. 
 
 Be this as it may, he had evidently per- 
 suaded himself that he was right, and his trans- 
 parent sincerity and consistency of conduct 
 could not be disputed, although perhaps the 
 more sagacious of his friends understood the 
 Doctor well enough to doubt that he would 
 always remain faithful to his present creed. 
 
 These were the more prominent members of 
 the company assembled at Elmsly House on 
 the Saturday evening preceding Whitsunday. 
 
THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 15 
 
 Our readers may perhaps be interested in 
 the following conversation which then took 
 place : 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. I propose, gentlemen, 
 that to-morrow morning such of you as please 
 should go with me to hear our friend Bemerton 
 preach, for I rather think he will give us a 
 very good discourse. I am not sure, however, 
 whether Dr. Stoffkraft will care to go, as he 
 probably entertains peculiar opinions upon the 
 subject of church-going. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. My dear Sir, I 
 shall be glad to go. I am a student of human 
 nature, and hope to derive much instruction 
 from being present, even if I do not echo the 
 sentiments of the preacher. But (here the 
 little Doctor put on an arch expression] I hope 
 you will not press me to sign anything. 
 
 All. Sign anything! why, Doctor, what 
 makes you think of such a thing ? 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Because I have 
 just parted from my distinguished American 
 friend Lucretius O. Blazeforth, who tells me 
 
16 THE PARADOXICAL SOCIETY. 
 
 that the last time he went to church he had 
 to sign something. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton (laughing). 
 When a similar occasion arises in the history 
 of Dr. Stoffkraft I need not say that my church 
 will be very much at his service. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank (laughing also). And I, 
 for my part, will place my house, with equal 
 good-will, at the Doctor's service, and perhaps if 
 he stays here long enough I may be able to 
 afford him an opportunity of finding the prime 
 requisite. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Many thanks, 
 my dear friends, but that will never be ; you 
 know my opinions. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. Perhaps these may 
 change, Doctor. Sensible people are not 
 wedded for ever to the same opinions. 
 
 After this conversation the Doctor was in 
 more than usual good humour for the rest of 
 the evening. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 ' Much upon this riddle runs 
 The wisdom of the world." 
 
 SHAKSPERE, Measure for Measure. 
 
 ON Sunday after service (which the Doctor 
 attended in full evening dress), the weather 
 being fine, a walk was proposed in the direction 
 of the ruins, and the party started off, fully pre- 
 pared to utilise the occasion for at least a pre- 
 liminary discussion. Sir Kenneth was the first 
 to speak. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M { Kelpie. Something in the 
 service to-day brought to my mind the two 
 ways of viewing the universe the idealistic 
 and the materialistic. 
 
 The idealist generally asserts that the laws 
 of the universe mean only the mode in which 
 
 B 
 
i8 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 the Supreme Being trammels finite intelligences 
 with regard to time, space, and sensation. He 
 thus starts with himself a conditioned being, 
 and with a Supreme Power underlying all 
 phenomena and influencing all finite intelli- 
 gences after an orderly manner. On the other 
 hand, the materialist, failing to grasp the under- 
 lying Power, attaches a reality to external 
 phenomena which the idealist will not admit. 
 
 Now, I am not at present going to argue 
 the point at issue between the two schools, nor 
 will I dilate upon the distinction which meta- 
 physicians make between noumena and pheno- 
 mena, but I should wish nevertheless to point 
 out that in my opinion the theological doctrine 
 that would confine the term substance or essence 
 to that Power which underlies phenomena is by 
 no means inconsistent with our appretiation of 
 the practical reality of external things. 
 
 It has been recently said * that our l prac- 
 tical working certainty of the reality of matter 
 depends upon the facts, firstly, that it offers 
 
 1 Unseen Universe, page 103. 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 19 
 
 resistance to our imagination and our will, and, 
 secondly, that in particular it offers absolute re- 
 sistance to all attempts to change its quantity/ 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. While agreeing gener- 
 ally with what has just been said, I yet object 
 to the manner in which Sir Kenneth has 
 brought together the three words time, space, 
 and sensation, as if each were independent of 
 the others. I think I can conceive of a being 
 / with no impression of space, while I feel sure 
 I cannot conceive of a being without some im- 
 pression of time. I can, for instance, conceive a 
 man in good health to be so comfortably placed 
 let us say in bed, in the dark, that virtually he 
 is not brought into contact with any external 
 reality. He is not even conscious of having 
 a body, because he experiences no such in- 
 equality of sensation as might recall this cir- 
 cumstance to his mind. On the other hand, 
 not being engrossed with any fatiguing train of 
 thought, he is equally unconscious of having 
 a head and brain. And yet the very circum- 
 stance of his conscious existence and enjoyment 
 
20 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 gives him the impression of time, while from 
 the placid nature of his external surroundings 
 he fails to attain the impression of space. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M l Kelpie. There is I fancy a 
 good deal of truth in this distinction, and we 
 must allow that it is impossible for a conscious 
 being wholly to get rid of the idea of time. 
 Indeed, I suppose that when your friend has 
 attained perfect equality of sensation he will at 
 once fall asleep the very act of sensation im- 
 plying inequality. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. I am unwilling to in- 
 terrupt this pleasant discussion, but I cannot 
 help being amused at the haste with which you 
 have both branched off into a side issue, while 
 here is our friend Stoffkraft ready, and even 
 anxious, to give us his views on the main 
 subject. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I for my part am 
 willing to allow that something analogous to 
 the idealistic mode of viewing the universe best 
 represents the truth. To my mind the Cos- 
 mos without an underlying power is a structure 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 21 
 
 without a backbone it is a thing which cannot 
 withstand the vigorous blows of a thoroughly 
 sound and common sense philosophy, but must 
 ultimately collapse. I say ultimately, because 
 like a gigantic octopus such a theory may throw 
 out numerous arms in various directions, and 
 grapple with its adversaries in a very un- 
 pleasant manner, but it cannot ultimately pre- 
 vail. Such a creature, if only big enough, could 
 seize its prey long after its body had been 
 smashed to pieces. Indeed, thinkers who differ 
 in everything else appear to agree on this point. 
 Hume, for instance, acknowledges it. ' The 
 whole frame of nature/ he tells us in his Natural 
 History of Religion, 'bespeaks an intelligent 
 author; and no rational inquirer can, after 
 serious reflection, suspend his belief a moment 
 with regard to the primary principles of genuine 
 Theism and religion.' 
 
 I presume that we all agree about this 
 necessity, although we very probably differ as to 
 how far we are entitled to attribute a certain 
 character to the Author of the universe. 
 
22 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 This, it seems to me, is the real point in 
 dispute, and it is well known that Hume ' pro- 
 fessed himself unable to reconcile the facts of 
 the world with Infinite Power and Goodness, 
 and therefore disposed on his own part to 
 allow a more moderate conception of a God/ 1 
 
 I confess that in this respect I agree with 
 Hume, but I must not wander from the present 
 subject. I will therefore return to the evidence 
 we have for an intelligent designer of the 
 universe. 
 
 Now, in the first place, I cannot see that 
 this evidence can possibly be upset by any 
 theory with regard to the method in which 
 these designs have been carried out that it 
 can, for instance, be upset by the theory of 
 Evolution I utterly deny. 
 
 Before the advent of this theory it was 
 usual for those who followed a certain class of 
 theologians to imagine that our first parents 
 sprang in a moment, ready-made, into the 
 
 1 See the article in the Quarterly Review for 1 869, entitled 
 ' The Argument of Design/ 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 23 
 
 possession of a mature physical and moral 
 nature. Now why this view should be held to 
 be more in accordance with religion, nay, why 
 it should be held to be more in accordance with 
 the Bible, than the hypothesis of evolution I 
 cannot comprehend. 1 We all of us acknowledge 
 that in the case of the individual our whole 
 nature, physical, intellectual, and moral, has 
 been developed from what we may term an 
 insignificant beginning why should we there- 
 fore set ourselves against the hypothesis which 
 presumes that a similar course of procedure 
 may have been adopted in the history of our 
 race ? 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. It is not, I ima- 
 gine, the theory of Evolution to which theo- 
 logians object. Indeed, if we view the word as 
 expressive of orderly development, evolution 
 becomes at once a theological doctrine. It is 
 rather the abuse of this theory by mechanical 
 bigots that is repulsive to the theologian. Certain 
 of the philosophers, not of the genuine men of 
 
 1 ' Adam, which was the son of God.' Luke iii. 38. 
 
24 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 science, seem to be forming themselves into a 
 caste, with a dogma of their own, and to be 
 developing into as fine specimens of the genus 
 bigot as the Inquisition ever encouraged. For 
 instance, we know that one class of writers 
 challenges the verdict of design on account of 
 certain enigmatical parts of Nature. These cite 
 with this view the existence of rudimentary 
 organs in man, and ask what useful purpose such 
 organs can be meant to serve. To my mind 
 traces like these are no less valuable than the 
 occurrence of fossils in geological strata, for 
 they indicate to us the way in which the great 
 Designer has been pleased to work. Indeed, 
 these rudimentary organs and other relics of the 
 past appear, when viewed in this light, to fur- 
 nish the crowning proof of design, because they 
 would seem to imply a provision for the in- 
 tellectual adolescence of our race, just as a wise 
 parent opens his mind and method of working 
 to the son who is arriving at a mature age. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M' Kelpie. There is, however, 
 another objection to the argument for design to 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 25 
 
 which no allusion has yet been made. I mean 
 that derived from the infinite nature of God. 
 
 What right have we, it may be said, to 
 / attribute design to an eternal and all-powerful 
 Being ? Is design not rather a word expressive 
 of the mode by which our own finite intelli- 
 gences work, than one which denotes the mode 
 of operation of the Divine Mind ? To all this 
 I would reply, in the first place, by asking 
 whether it be not a mere quibble on the 
 difference (such as it is) between design and 
 piirpose? and next, by the remark that, if we 
 contemplate the Deity at all (and I hold that 
 we are bound to do so as far as we can), we 
 must develop from the platform on which we 
 have been placed, and it is surely unnecessary 
 to say that we must develop upwards instead 
 of downwards. Perhaps, after all, my friend 
 Frederick was right when he told us that the 
 notion of time forces itself on us in a way that 
 that of space does not, and that we can more 
 easily conceive of a Being existing without refer- 
 ence to space than of one existing without refer- 
 
26 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 ence to time. Let us therefore take this last 
 and most essential condition, and see what we 
 reach by developing upwards. In the first place, 
 I can conceive of a Being whose rapidity and 
 capacity of thought in the present are immea- 
 surably greater than those of man. In the next 
 place, I can conceive of a Being whose memory 
 of past events is immeasurably more vivid than 
 that of man, so that the past is virtually always 
 present before Him. Thirdly, I can conceive 
 of a Being whose prevision of the future is im- 
 measurably greater than that of man, so that the 
 future is likewise virtually present before Him. 
 Fourthly, I can conceive of a Being whose ex 
 istence goes immeasurably far back, and will 
 go immeasurably far forward. Fifthly and 
 lastly, I can imagine such a Being embracing 
 all space, so that nothing is external to Him. 
 In fine, it appears to me that I can only ap- 
 proach the mysterious Imposer of conditions 
 by bringing before me an infinite conditioned 
 Being. No doubt this method is imperfect, 
 but I can do no more. I must accept the con- 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 27 
 
 ditions imposed upon me, and think by means 
 of time and space, although I well know that 
 these are not trammels to the Divine Being in 
 the same sense as they are to me. For, with 
 regard to the Deity, they form conditions 
 which He imposes on His creation, while, with 
 regard to myself, they represent the conditions 
 which the Creator imposes upon me. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I may say that 
 I quite agree with nearly every word which Sir 
 Kenneth has spoken. 
 
 We must regard the relation of the Deity to 
 space and time very much as Sir Kenneth says. 
 I think, too, that we must regard Him as very 
 wise and very powerful. I will not say infinitely 
 wise or infinitely powerful, because it is im- 
 possible that we should attain to ,any kind of 
 proof of infinite wisdom or infinite power 
 eternal power I grant, but not infinite power. 
 
 So much I make out from a contempla- 
 tion of the Universe, but I do not from the 
 same source perceive that He is absolutely 
 good. Perhaps I am not justified in saying that 
 
28 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 He is not so, but I think I am justified in asserting 
 that if His goodness be perfect, then His power 
 and wisdom are not infinite ; or, on the other 
 hand, that if His power and wisdom be infinite, 
 then His goodness is not perfect. In saying so, 
 I am, of course, aware that I am using the terms 
 power, wisdom, and goodness in a human sense, 
 and I freely concede to my opponents what- 
 ever advantage they may think they derive 
 from the concession. 
 
 These are the conclusions to which I have 
 been brought by considering the universe in 
 which I dwell. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M l Kelpie. I am not now 
 going to contest these conclusions, but I should 
 like to bring before the learned Doctor a some- 
 what curious point. I daresay he will think 
 me a mystic, but I maintain that mysticism is 
 an inherent element in the discussion of such 
 problems as those now before us. 
 
 What I wish to point out is that, in certain 
 geometrical and physical problems, infinity 
 comes to us in two ways. Let us, first of all, 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 29 
 
 take the case (quoted by Professor Jevons) of a 
 horizontal fixed straight line which we may 
 imagine to be indefinitely extended in both 
 directions; next let there be another straight 
 line, also indefinitely extended, moveable round 
 some point above the fixed line, and cutting 
 that line towards the right. If, now, this 
 line be made to revolve with a rotation, the 
 opposite to that of the hands of a watch, the 
 point at which it cuts the fixed line will move 
 to the right, and when both lines have become 
 parallel, this point will have moved to an 
 infinite distance in that direction. But mark 
 what will happen if the rotation be continued 
 beyond this limit: the point of intersection 
 having already marched off to an infinite dis- 
 tance on the right, will now appear at and 
 return from an infinite distance on the left. 
 Thus a progress towards infinity in the one 
 direction is supplemented by a progress from 
 infinity in the other. 
 
 Something of a very similar kind occurs in 
 optics : 
 
30 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 Suppose, for instance, that we have a con- 
 cave mirror, and let us begin by placing a lumi- 
 nous object at its centre, then its image will be 
 at the centre likewise. Now let the luminous 
 object move gradually from the centre to the 
 principal focus ; while this goes on its image 
 will move rapidly outwards from the centre to 
 infinity, say, on the left. Continue the progress 
 of the luminous object from the principal focus 
 towards the mirror, and mark what will then take 
 place. The image which had proceeded to in- 
 finity on the left will at once make its appearance 
 at an infinite distance on the right, and rapidly 
 approach the mirror, so that, when the object 
 shall have reached the mirror, its image will 
 be there likewise. Here, too, a progress 
 towards infinity in the one direction is sup- 
 plemented by a progress from infinity in the 
 other. In fine, it appears to me that wherever 
 any sort of progress towards infinity is con- 
 ceivable, such, to be complete as a hypothesis, 
 requires to be supplemented by a correspond- 
 ing progress from infinity in the opposite 
 direction. If, therefore, the development of 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 31 
 
 the individual onwards and upwards into the 
 eternity of the future be a conceivable hypo- 
 thesis, it requires, I feel sure, to be supple- 
 mented by a corresponding development down- 
 wards from the eternity of the past ; and more 
 especially if immortality be a truth, and if we 
 are to have relations onwards and upwards with 
 a spiritual unseen throughout a future eternity, 
 I should expect that these would necessarily 
 presuppose relations with a spiritual unseen 
 bearing down upon us from a past eternity. 
 
 I think that if we ponder on these views 
 they will be found to contain; a plea for the 
 necessity of revelation, and will be found like- 
 wise to combat the objection to the possibility 
 of immortality derived from the fact that we 
 have a beginning, and must therefore expect to 
 have an end. I speak, however, as a mystic. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. While a study 
 of the works of Nature must, I think, lead every 
 one up to some conception of God, yet this con- 
 ception must, it is clear, be necessarily imper- 
 fect. For what do we do P 1 ' We start with a 
 
 1 See Unseen Universe, page 18. 
 
32 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 single intellectual being who is applying himself 
 to a scientific study of the works of Nature. 
 The idea of our neighbour does not enter into 
 it, and we agree to regard ourselves as intel- 
 lectual rather than as moral or social beings. 
 The result is that, having voluntarily confined 
 our argument to one channel, we obtain a 
 knowledge of God's character, which is neces- 
 sarily incomplete/ I quite agree with what 
 Sir Kenneth has said about there being two 
 ways through which we are brought into con- 
 tact with the infinite, although the infinity of 
 which he gave us examples is, properly speak- 
 ing, the reciprocal of a conceivable quantity 
 varying continuously through zero. I am not 
 quite sure, however, that I hold the distinction 
 between natural and revealed religion to be so 
 marked as he seems inclined to make it. I 
 feel rather disposed to look upon man as being 
 in a state of childhood, or let us say early youth, 
 and upon God as acting towards him like a 
 wise father, leaving him to develop his own 
 faculties by his own use of them, but at the 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 33 
 
 same time continually watching over him and 
 wisely interfering when necessary, always, how- 
 ever, in such a manner as not to put his intel- 
 lect to permanent confusion. 
 
 It seems to me that, in order to render com- 
 plete the argument derived from Nature, it must 
 be made to embrace with the external universe 
 a study of man himself, that we must there- 
 fore take account of history, and specially that 
 great and complicated historical problem the 
 rise and progress of Christianity. Here, then, 
 we are at once brought into contact with revela- 
 tion. I confess I think that the only result of 
 drawing a hard and fast line between the 
 natural and the revealed has been to divide 
 us into two separate and seemingly hostile 
 camps, the one under the banner of science 
 and the other under that of religion. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. To return for a 
 moment to what Sir Kenneth has said, I would 
 ask if his doctrine does not in some sense in- 
 volve that of a past eternity of the universe, 
 or, in other words, of a past eternity of matter ? 
 
 c 
 
34 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 I have always understood that this is a doctrine 
 eminently repugnant to theologians as such. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. The doctrine of 
 the past eternity of the universe implies, no 
 doubt, the past eternity of the conditioned, but 
 does it therefore imply that the matter or stuff 
 which we now behold has existed from all 
 eternity ? I certainly fail to perceive that the 
 one doctrine necessarily implies the other. 
 
 By this time the party had reached the 
 ruins, through which the Rev. Ralph Bemerton 
 undertook to be their guide, while he gave 
 them an account of the family now extinct, who 
 had long ago been lords of the district. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. The St. Claudes 
 were an old Norman family, who, having 
 settled in this country, seem speedily to have 
 secured the attachment of their dependents ; 
 they became, in fact, a recognised race of here- 
 ditary chieftains. 
 
 Ruling well and lovingly, one would have 
 expected that their days would be long in the 
 land. But where are they now ? Their name 
 and race have utterly disappeared. There is 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 35 
 
 no evidence to show that they were violent 
 partizans of either of the two great rival Planta- 
 genet houses which contested the throne, but 
 they fell before an enemy not less dreadful than 
 the demon of civil war. 
 
 As he spoke the party entered the ruined 
 chapel, which contained the graves of the 
 family, and their attention was attracted to 
 one corner in which there were a number of 
 monuments apart by themselves 
 
 ' Each bearing the form of a maiden fair 
 With her hands clasped meekly, as if in prayer, 
 And a saint-like calm on her pallid face : 
 The calm of the just who has run his race. . . . n 
 
 One of these monuments bore the following 
 
 inscription : 
 
 ELIZABETH ST. CLAUDE, 
 
 OB. JUN. 15, 1475, AET. XVII. 
 
 OMNIS CARO FENUM, ET OMNIS GRATIA EIUS QUASI FLOS AGRI. 
 EXSICCATUM EST FENUM ET CECIDIT FLOS QUIA SPIRITUS 
 DOMINI SUFFLAVIT IN EO ; VERE FENUM EST POPULUS : 
 EXSICCATUM EST FENUM ET CECIDIT FLOS ; VERBUM AUTEM 
 DOMINI MANET IN ETERNUM. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft was the first to 
 break the silence imposed by the solemnity of 
 the surroundings. ' Well/ he said, * I suppose 
 
 1 From the unpublished MS. of the Rev. Ralph Bemerton, 
 B.D. 
 
36 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 that with families as with individuals very 
 often the best die soon. It requires a tough 
 nature to stand long. Life brings little but 
 suffering, and death can thus be no real loss/ 
 
 The party soon began to turn homewards, 
 and Stephen Fairbank ventured to remind them 
 that one-half only of the original subject of con- 
 versation had yet been discussed. The ideal- 
 istic theory of the universe, he told them, 
 assumed the existence of the individual, and 
 he should like much to know what they thought 
 about this assumption. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. The existence 
 of the individual follows logically from the con- 
 clusions upon which we are all agreed. 
 
 We are ull of us advocates of a hypothesis 
 more or less idealistic : now such a hypothesis 
 appears to me to imply the specific distinction 
 of the individual. 
 
 A practical conviction of the reality of the 
 Ego is something which cannot possibly be 
 dismissed. To argue one's self out of existence 
 would be a mental feat reminding us of the 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 37 
 
 Kilkenny cats, or rather of the wonderful 
 + American animal which jumps down its own 
 throat and so disappears. 
 
 But the acknowledgment of the true exist- 
 ence of the individual is a very different thing 
 from the assumption of his eternal persistence. 
 The former is a point on which I imagine we 
 are all practically agreed, while the latter is a 
 doctrine regarding which we shall probably be 
 found to differ very considerably in opinion. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. I will only interrupt so 
 far as to ask Dr. Stoffkraft whether he regards 
 the desire of immortality as a grossly selfish 
 wish. My excuse for the interruption is that if 
 this can be proved it will greatly simplify our 
 future discussions, if indeed it do not render 
 them altogether superfluous. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I do not see that 
 the wish for a personal immortality can be re- 
 garded as something intensely selfish. I am 
 conscious of possessing that wish myself, and 
 yet it is not associated in my mind with any 
 \ desire to promote my own happiness to the 
 
38 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 detriment of my fellows, which is the true 
 definition of selfishness. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. Dr. Stoffkraft has told 
 us that he can perceive no selfishness in the 
 desire for immortality. I should now like to 
 have his opinion regarding the alternative doc- 
 trine which the Comtist school would put in its 
 place. I mean that of a posthumous unconscious 
 life in the Cosmos living as it were through 
 the influence which we have exerted during our 
 lives, and which will propagate and extend 
 itself after we ourselves have ceased to exist 
 and have been forgotten. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. All right-minded 
 persons are conscious of possessing two wishes of 
 this kind which may be separately discussed. 
 The one is a longing for the continuation of in- 
 dividual existence and happiness. The other is 
 a feeling that the truest form of happiness con- 
 sists in doing good to others. Now the longing 
 for an individual immortality may, it appears to 
 me, be regarded as an extension of the first of 
 these desires ; while the Comtist doctrine of a 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 39 
 
 posthumous life through the Cosmos may be 
 equally regarded as an extension of the second. 
 But surely these two desires ought to be re- 
 cognised as allies, or brethren, rather than as 
 rivals and enemies. And, as a matter of fact, 
 individual existence lies at the root of every- 
 thing. Surely the true conception of immor- 
 tality is that of a life of increased usefulness and 
 activity indefinitely prolonged beyond the grave. 
 And the Christian system, generously viewed, 
 appears to lead not only to an indefinite expan- 
 sion of each of these desires, but also to an in- 
 creased deepening of the vital and necessary 
 connection between the two. Surely the good 
 man desires immortality in order that he may 
 greatly increase his love to others, and his 
 power of doing them good a result which 
 means at the same time an increased nearness 
 to God. 
 
 No doubt we see through a glass darkly, 
 and there have been numerous partial ways of 
 looking at heaven. I presume that the idea of 
 eternal praise has been borrowed very much 
 
40 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 from the apocalyptic vision, and it again from 
 the accessories of the Jewish temple. The idea 
 of a place of rest, on the other hand, springs 
 naturally from the feeling of weariness which 
 invariably accompanies a prolonged life in this 
 world. But I particularly wish to point out 
 the great contrast between the breadth of the 
 Christian system, and the narrowness of 
 the Comtist doctrine. The Christian im- 
 mortality is the inheritance of the humblest 
 individual who does his duty ; of the man 
 who has only one talent as well as of him 
 who has ten ; of the philosopher who spends 
 his life in discovering principles, as well as 
 of the humble village dame. On the other 
 hand, the Comtist heaven is limited to a favoured 
 few, including of course the great philosopher, 
 who is pleased to think what future generations 
 will say to his labours, but excluding the village 
 dame, who knows perfectly well that she will 
 have no future immortality in the Cosmos. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. Dr. Stoffkraft 
 has pointed out with much clearness that the 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 41 
 
 Comtist scheme excludes all of our race except 
 a favoured few from the benefits of its grotesque 
 immortality. I may be allowed to add that it 
 gives the men of our race an undue advantage 
 over the women. In all civilised communities 
 there must be a very great difference between 
 the duties performed by these two great sides 
 of the human family. 
 
 The function of the man is rather to educate 
 and subdue the world, while that of the woman 
 is more directly concerned with the education 
 of the individual. I do not, of course, mean to 
 say that the man is not to consider the indi- 
 vidual, or that the woman is not to regard the 
 world, but I yet hold within certain limits to 
 the distinction which I have drawn. And while 
 I am quite of opinion that a freer and fuller 
 opportunity of usefulness should be opened up 
 to those women who can avail themselves of it, 
 I yet clearly perceive that in any community 
 the civilising offices of the one sex must be 
 very different from those of the other. There- 
 fore, any theory which cuts at the root of in- 
 
42 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 dividual existence beyond the grave will, I feel 
 sure, provoke a stronger resentment from the 
 woman than from the man. In my youth I 
 translated some German hexameters, which 
 seem to me to illustrate this point fairly enough, 
 though, if you will, in a rather Klopstockian 
 vein of sentiment or sentimentality. It is 
 strange from any point of view strangest of 
 all from that of Comte that such things should 
 haunt one for a lifetime. Here they are : 
 
 A PHILOSOPHER'S HEXAMETERS TO HIS MISTRESS. 
 
 Mine, in clustering coils of circumstantial existence 
 
 Tracing the thread of purpose to seek for the presence of order, 
 
 Then with unfaltering hand to knit the unknitted together. 
 
 Thine a far gentler task with imperceptible deftness 
 
 Binding invisible bonds, a hundredfold intertwining 
 
 Children and parents, and husband and wife, and household 
 
 and country. 
 
 Whose in the social whole the nobler share and the higher 
 Power ? the stronger effect and the fuller meed of achievement ? 
 Dearest, the woof was spread ere yet thy assiduous fingers 
 Busily plied their task, nor shall it break and the worker 
 Sink unheeded away, with work half done in the twilight ; 
 But its fulness shall come to whoso shared in the labour, 
 Where no labour is vain and angels are weaving with angels. 
 
 Now, one great beauty of the Christian scheme 
 is, that while recognising and even insisting 
 upon this essential difference, it yet puts both 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 43 
 
 sides of the human family upon an equal footing 
 before God and as regards their hopes of a 
 future beyond the grave. On the other hand, 
 the curse of such religions as those of Brigham 
 Young and Comte is, that they unduly exalt 
 and glorify those qualities which the man pos- 
 sesses in contradistinction to the woman. The 
 one is an apotheosis of the physical superiority 
 of the man over the woman, while the other 
 is an apotheosis of his intellectual superiority, 
 which (so far as the present argument is con- 
 cerned) must be regarded as constituting nothing 
 more than a refined and subtle form of physical 
 predominance. Imagine for a moment what 
 must have happened centuries ago in that ruin 
 we have just left. Picture to yourself the life 
 of its inmates the mother bending over her 
 drooping child, impressed with the mournful 
 conviction that the earthly life of the beloved 
 one was fast drawing to a close, but yet full of 
 a noble and generous faith in God and of the 
 sure and certain hope of a joyful resurrection. 
 Think of all this, and then tell me whether this 
 
44 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 glorified maternal affection be not one of the 
 noblest and most sacred treasures of our nature, 
 and whether, if the hope of immortality were 
 destroyed, it could possibly exist in the cold 
 and withering shade of the Comtist philosophy. 
 I utterly fail to see that it could even be 
 imagined. 
 
 Hitherto I have been dealing with the best 
 feelings of our nature let me now deal with the 
 worst, and contemplate the operation of a tri- 
 umphant positivism upon the malefactor. Let 
 us endeavour to realise the hell of the Comtists. 
 It consists, I presume, in the dread that our 
 evil deeds will perpetuate for us a species of 
 degraded immortality in the Cosmos. But I 
 need hardly tell you that the most depraved of 
 our race are utterly indifferent to the terrors of 
 any kind of posthumous disgrace, while many, 
 at least, of them nevertheless stand in awe of 
 the righteous indignation of God. Take, for 
 instance, the successful and secret murderer. 
 In not a few cases he has voluntarily come 
 forward to be his own accuser driven to con- 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 45 
 
 fess by an inner voice which speaks to him of 
 the judgment to come. Now, what motive 
 would there be for such a confession under the 
 Comtist philosophy ? He has made a mistake ; 
 he is sorry for it, and will not repeat it ; but 
 why should he make a confession which must 
 at once cut short his liberty, if not his existence ? 
 *If he be a philosopher he may perhaps conclude 
 that such a confession might ultimately tend 
 by an indirect process somewhat to increase 
 the happiness of the race, but being a murderer 
 he is not likely to act upon this conviction. In 
 fine, the Comtist system, while, on the one hand, 
 it withdraws support from the best feelings of 
 our nature, withdraws, on the other, all adequate 
 and practical restraint from the indulgence of 
 such, at least, of our vicious propensities as are 
 not well provided against by law and police. 
 
 To conclude : I am even inclined to think 
 that this system will act prejudicially upon its 
 particular pet, the great philosopher, who, 
 while babbling about a posthumous life in the 
 Cosmos, may not unfrequently be inclined to 
 
46 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 sacrifice its empty praise for the solid pudding 
 of a present reputation. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M' Kelpie. There is yet 
 another aspect of the question which must not 
 be overlooked. No one admires more than 
 myself the wonderful advances recently made 
 towards exhibiting the physical unity of the 
 Cosmos. Not only are the great masses of the 
 universe bound together possibly by the same 
 law of force, but they appear to be made of the 
 same materials, and to be surrounded by the 
 same medium. There is a strong mechanical 
 and physical binding together of the whole by 
 a bond whose existence we can scientifically 
 perceive. 
 
 When, however, we leave the objective for 
 the subjective side of the Cosmos matter for 
 life we fail, unless we embrace the doctrine of 
 immortality, to reach any adequate conception 
 of unity. As far as mechanics and physics are 
 concerned, the Comtist has no doubt risen to 
 the conception of an underlying unity in the 
 visible Cosmos, but he fails utterly to recognise 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 47 
 
 any sort of intelligent intercourse between the 
 various inhabitants ; there are to him, in a sense, 
 as many universes as there are individual 
 existences. 
 
 I presume none of us expect science ever 
 to realise in this world the ingenious dreams of 
 the modern novelist, or to provide us with the 
 means of visiting about from star to star. Thus 
 an intelligent intercourse between the inhabi- 
 tants of the various worlds depends entirely 
 upon the possibilities of a future state. Then, 
 again, think of those exquisite scenes of natural 
 beauty that have all along been hidden in 
 corners 
 
 ... * Where no one comes 
 
 Or hath come, since the making of the world,' 
 
 and tell me if it be not more philosophical as 
 well as pleasant to imagine that these have 
 nevertheless been a source of joy, if not to 
 man, yet to spiritual presences such as the 
 angels, who may, perhaps, visit this world not 
 entirely on errands of mercy. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I am perfectly 
 
48 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 willing to allow the force of all these observa- 
 tions. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. In consequence of this 
 admission, I will now propose a question to 
 Dr. Stoffkraft. 
 
 He has allowed that in respect of its 
 practical working the doctrine of immortality 
 has great advantages over any other alternative 
 hypothesis. Now unless there be some definite 
 proof that this doctrine is untrue, there will no 
 doubt be always a large number of followers 
 who will adopt it, accompanied with a religious 
 belief which will probably be some form of 
 Christianity. But, in virtue of the great prac- 
 tical excellence of this form of belief, these ad- 
 herents will be placed in a position of advantage. 
 
 They will, by a species of natural selection, 
 and on account of the suitability of their prin- 
 ciples to the requirements of society, achieve a 
 predominance over their opponents, and we 
 may therefore look forward to a time when the 
 doctrine of immortality will be universally held. 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I readily reply to 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 49 
 
 the challenge of our host. I feel sure that the 
 doctrine is untrue, and that the clear light of 
 science is even now penetrating into the dark 
 corner where immortality was believed to be 
 concealed. 
 
 It will, I feel sure, withdraw the veil from 
 the Christian holy of holies, which will be found 
 as great a blank as its Jewish prototype was 
 when similarly invaded. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. If this be so, have we 
 not here a very strange anomaly ? By follow- 
 ing the truth that is to say (according to Dr. 
 Stoffkraft), by giving up our belief in immor- 
 tality the result will be less conducive to social 
 development than if we were to persevere in 
 believing a lie. Nay, it is even possible that 
 society, when sufficiently enlightened to disbe- 
 lieve in a future state, will in consequence become 
 disintegrated, and begin falling to pieces. 
 
 How does it happen that here alone misery 
 instead of happiness, weakness instead of 
 strength, is the result of conforming ourselves 
 to the conditions of our environment ? 
 
 D 
 
50 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I cannot reply 
 to this question except by saying that I must 
 regard consciousness as a mistake, at least a 
 consciousness sufficiently developed to feel at 
 the same time a longing for immortality and 
 an assurance of its impossibility. Probably the 
 Governor of the universe has done his best ; 
 there may very possibly be an inherent contra- 
 diction in immortality ; it may be as impossible 
 to make a being immortal as to make two and 
 three equal to six. This we do not know, but 
 what we may easily divine, if we choose to 
 examine for ourselves, is, that the universe 
 around us is not so constituted as to admit of 
 immortality. Inasmuch, however, as I ardently 
 long for that which I feel to be impossible, I 
 am personally put to confusion, and am reluct- 
 antly compelled to admit that the Deity has 
 made a mistake. 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. ' Feeling sure that a 
 doctrine is untrue' is, you will permit me to 
 say, Doctor, what you Germans call reasoning 
 * nach Art der Frauen/ and, I presume, must 
 
CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 51 
 
 be considered as at least virtually an acknow- 
 ledgment of defeat. Had you said no more, I 
 should not have thought it necessary to reply. 
 But your answer to our friend Fairbank shifts 
 the point of the discussion to a region in which 
 I did not expect you to travel. I have heard 
 such things many times, especially of late ; but 
 never till now from the lips of a true man of 
 science. I fear I cannot answer you with the 
 judicial calmness we ought all to display. Your 
 last sally was so abrupt, and (again pardon me) 
 so suggestive of the 'child crying for the 
 moon,' that I am somewhat at a loss how to 
 take it. What should you say if a thief, who 
 had an intense longing for your massive gold 
 watch, and at the same time an assurance that 
 it was impossible to get it, should say that 
 Providence had no doubt done its best, but 
 had made a mistake in grafting this feeling of 
 covetousness in him ? 
 
 Or to take what many would think higher 
 ground, what should you say to a man of 
 pseudo-science, with an ardent desire to be 
 
52 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 distinguished as a discoverer or inventor, but 
 who was conscious of his own incapacity to 
 achieve for himself such a species of immor- 
 tality, should he happen unguardedly to admit 
 that Providence had no doubt done all it could 
 for him, but had made a mistake in making him 
 if it could not also give him genius ? 
 
 Should you not punish the thief if he 
 attempted to rob you ? And as to the pseudo- 
 scientific man, would you not say something so 
 calm and yet so conclusive in its calmness as to 
 wither his little soul within him ? 
 
 I must really once more apologise for my 
 frankness, but I almost fancy that your ob- 
 servation was a jocular attempt to find what 
 were the limits of our endurance, and I have 
 tried to answer you in a similar spirit. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. But, my dear sir, 
 there is surely a great difference between the 
 depraved appetites of certain individuals and 
 the nearly universal craving of civilised man for 
 a personal immortality beyond the grave. Here 
 we have a deeply seated feeling which has con- 
 
CHOOSING TPIE SUBJECT. 53 
 
 science for its friend, while the assurance of its 
 gratification would be attended with the most 
 excellent results. Nevertheless it must remain 
 ungratified if there be any truth in scientific 
 principles. 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. I did not quite make out 
 from the Doctor's words that he was prepared 
 to bring forward a scientific proof of the impos- 
 sibility of immortality. I rather imagined that 
 while he had on the one hand an ' unscientific 
 feeling' of the advantage of immortality, he had 
 on the other a ' scientific feeling' (whatever that 
 may mean) of its impossibility. But if the 
 Doctor has got a proof, that is a very different 
 thing, and the subject is one which may be 
 profitably discussed. Perhaps I, in my turn, 
 may be allowed to ' feel an assurance' that when 
 this discussion is complete, the mistake will be 
 found to be transferred to somewhat different 
 shoulders from those on which the Doctor 
 supposes it now to rest. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Well, well, gentlemen, 
 we are now nearing home, and I have two 
 
54 CHOOSING THE SUBJECT. 
 
 remarks to make. The first is, that I am sure 
 we shall all be delighted if Dr. Stoffkraft will 
 give us his argument against Immortality. The 
 second is, that in the Paradoxical Society no 
 one is supposed to know beforehand the subject 
 of the debate. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Pray, my dear sir, 
 what conclusion do you draw from these two 
 disjointed remarks ? 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Only this, Doctor, that 
 we shall all look to you to open the debate in 
 the Paradoxical. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT OPENS THE DEBATE. 
 
 ' GENTLEMEN,' said a conjuror, one fine starry evening, ' these heavens 
 are a deceptio vistis ; what you call stars are nothing but fiery motes in the 
 air. ' . . . Whereupon the artist produced a long syringe of great force ; 
 and . . . filled it with mud and dirty water, which he then squirted with 
 might and main against the zenith. The wiser of the company unfurled 
 their umbrellas ; but most part, looking up in triumph, cried, ' Down with 
 delusion ! It is an age of science ! ' . . . Here the mud and dirty water 
 fell, and bespattered and beplastered these simple persons, and even put 
 out the eyes of several, so that they never saw the stars any more. 
 
 THOMAS CARLYLE. 
 
 AT the breakfast table next morning Sir 
 Kenneth presented himself, punctual to the 
 minute, and without a trace of that ndgligt 
 which is too often tolerated even among those 
 who have not allowed themselves to sink into 
 effeminacy or luxury. 
 
 Holdfast and the host were already there, 
 eagerly scanning the morning papers, so utterly 
 absorbed in their political excitement as to 
 
56 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 pay no attention to one another, nor to Miss 
 Fairbank, who sat watching them with some 
 amusement. Sir Kenneth, smiling at their 
 abstraction, engaged in a lively discussion with 
 the young lady, and no one seemed to think of 
 breakfast. At last Holdfast threw down the 
 Times, and hastily apologising to Miss Fair- 
 bank, thus addressed Sir Kenneth : 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. Well, Sir Kenneth, we 
 have carried our man after all at St. Oran. 
 I must say I am surprised, for I could hardly 
 conceive a worse specimen to bring forward. 
 I told them that it was an utter mistake that 
 we should have to run our very best available 
 man in order to have any chance against the 
 Master of Glenstriven, with his many advan- 
 tages of character, influence, and even clanship. 
 They merely said, ' We know our men,' and 
 the event has justified them. But I never 
 could understand Scotland. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M* Kelpie. I am grieved, but 
 not surprised. Were I less of a Scotsman than 
 I am I should have given up Scotland long ago. 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 57 
 
 But painful, and even ridiculous, as I feel this 
 last business to be, I receive it as an additional 
 proof that things will soon mend. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. You were always a 
 paradoxer, Sir Kenneth, but this is quite unin- 
 telligible to me unless from the common point 
 of view that when things are at the worst they 
 begin to mend. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M'Kelpie. Even that saying is 
 mathematically correct. What is the definition 
 of a minimum ? But, unfortunately, it never 
 can be applied in proper time, for things require 
 to begin to mend before we can be sure that they 
 have yet reached the worst. My hope is based 
 upon better grounds, which I think I can give 
 you in a few words. 
 
 It is all a question of education. Now there 
 can be no doubt that the education of the 
 average voter is in Scotland (to a small extent 
 at least) higher than it is in England. But 
 it is as yet far from having risen to culture ; 
 and, in consequence, while he has lost the 
 semi-slavish admiration for rank, wealth, or 
 
58 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 merit which Hodge still feels, he has, in the 
 reaction from this (and possibly by the recol- 
 lection of cherished traditional wrongs) come 
 to envy and even to hate his superiors in posi- 
 tion or intellect. Remember the fate of Aris- 
 tides. The average Scottish voter has just the 
 requisite amount of education to fit him ' meanly 
 to admire mean things.' This, if I recollect 
 rightly, is Thackeray's definition of a snob. 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. Thanks, Sir Kenneth. 
 Habemusl We have got it this time, Fair- 
 bank, and no mistake. At any other time I 
 could have disputed the point with you, Sir 
 Kenneth ; but this St. Oran business is really 
 too bad. When is your national education 
 likely to rise to culture, as you call it ? 
 
 Sir Kenneth M* Kelpie. When your ' Liberal' 
 devices for keeping us from progressing shall 
 have been thoroughly countermined ; when every 
 candidate for a seat on a School Board shall be 
 required to prove that he has himself received 
 a good education, and to show that he has not 
 forgotten it ; when our Protestant sects cease 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 59 
 
 to split hairs, and once for all join cordially in 
 those vastly more important matters in which 
 they perfectly agree. 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. In other words, when 
 Scotland ceases to be Scottish. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M ( 'Kelpie. Remember Home's 
 lines : 
 
 " Let him drink port ! the English statesman cried ; 
 He drank the poison, and his spirit died." 
 
 Quaint as they are, and dealing with a trivial 
 matter, they have an allegorical meaning which 
 is as true as it is important. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. I cannot but agree with 
 you, Sir Kenneth, though to say so is contrary 
 to my allegiance. But here comes the Doctor ! 
 Good morning, Doctor! I hope you are in 
 great force to-day. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Thank you. Good 
 morning, Miss Fairbank. I must apologise for 
 my late appearance. But you are aware of the 
 ordeal I have to endure to-day ? 
 
 Miss Fairbank. I was glad to hear from 
 my brother that you are to lead the debate. 
 
60 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 My cousin Fanny and I intend to be present ; 
 but we come to listen only, not to speak. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. It is only in 
 churches, I think, that women are ordered to 
 be silent; and, in our preliminary discussion 
 yesterday, the clergyman and your father both 
 took their stand mainly upon woman's side 
 of the question, while Mr. Holdfast told me 
 I was reasoning c after the manner of women.' 
 I think, then, that it is not improbable that 
 you might contribute usefully to our debates. 
 
 Miss Fairbank. Not to-day, at least, Doc- 
 tor. We have yet to learn what this Para- 
 doxical Society really is, and how its affairs are 
 managed. Then we shall be able to judge 
 whether we can reasonably take part in your 
 discussions. 
 
 At this moment Frederick Fairbank and the 
 other absentees appeared on the lawn, each 
 with a fair basket of trout ; and the company 
 was soon seriously engaged at breakfast. The 
 conversation, of course, became prosaic as well as 
 discursive and fragmentary, Sir Kenneth stand- 
 
OPENS THE DEB A TE. 6 1 
 
 ing up for the supreme merits of kippered 
 salmon, while some of the others rallied him 
 good-humouredly on the Scottish (?) partiality 
 for sweets, particularly jam and marmalade. 
 
 After breakfast came the Doctor's turn. It 
 was supposed to be as impossible for a German 
 to dispense with his pipe as for a Scotsman 
 to breakfast without marmalade, and so said 
 the men of the party as they smoked in the 
 garden. But he bore it all with great glee, 
 and retorted, to the surprise of the company, by 
 giving a singular list of non-smoking Germans, 
 in which were to be found the names of some 
 of the very greatest of modern scientific men. 
 
 Frederick Fairbank.- And do you consider, 
 Doctor, that their non-smoking has anything to 
 do with their scientific eminence ? 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Nothing what- 
 ever ; at least, that I have been able to trace. 
 Smokers have indeed told me that their practice 
 was eminently conducive to concentration of 
 thought, inasmuch as it rendered them insensible 
 to petty disturbances ; but I have met with 
 
62 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 no facts of importance on either side of this 
 question. 
 
 Frederick Fair bank. Precisely my case. 
 On every disputed question you meet with 
 bigots and zealots without end ; but their zeal 
 is, in almost every instance, directly proportional 
 to their ignorance. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton (stepping up to 
 the group}. Exactly so; it is the very opposite 
 of the ' zeal which is according to knowledge/ 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Good morning, Parson. 
 I presume we are now ready for the proper 
 business of the day. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. Which must be 
 held in the house to-day at least : under the 
 trees here you are in blissful ignorance of the 
 storm which is coming up from the sea. I have 
 been watching it as I came across the hill just 
 now. 
 
 Punctually at n A.M. the whole company 
 met in the great hall. A huge fire blazed in 
 the grand old chimney, for already the air had 
 become chilly. 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 63 
 
 After a few trivial remarks, each member 
 assumed an attitude of anxious and critical 
 attention to the Doctor. 
 
 It was a curious and interesting study to 
 note the various modes in which men so differ- 
 ent in character and person, though all of high 
 and trained intellectual powers, prepared them- 
 selves for a continued mental effort. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank leant back motionless in 
 his easy-chair, with eyes half closed, but keenly 
 directed to the speaker. Elijah Holdfast seemed 
 to gaze at the fretted ceiling, but in reality he 
 was exercising his sense of hearing alone. Sir 
 Kenneth, on the other hand, though his eyes 
 were always wide open and directed full on the 
 Doctor, was scarcely for a moment quiet, chang- 
 ing from one attitude to another with wonderful 
 rapidity. The ladies perused the carpet, now 
 and then only throwing a momentary glance on 
 the speaker. 
 
 Premising that for the sake of accuracy he 
 had committed to writing a great part of what 
 he had to say (whether this had been done on 
 
64 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 the previous evening or not, the editors are not 
 prepared to state with certainty), Dr. Stoffkraft 
 opened as follows the discussion on the 
 'Possibility of a Fut^tre State.' 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. It seems to me 
 that, though there are at least three main points 
 of view which may be adopted in regarding the 
 question before us, all of them ultimately lead 
 us to inquire into the nature of Life itself as 
 the one chief difficulty in the discussion. 
 
 We may argue (as I propose to do) from 
 the scientific principle of continuity, or from the 
 moral and social point of view, or from that of 
 religious belief in any of its thousand forms. I 
 shall not, for the moment, give any reasons for 
 attaching comparatively little importance to 
 the two latter methods beyond the obvious fact 
 of their utter indeflniteness. However you 
 may regard them, I think you will at least agree 
 with me in this, that that subject is not science 
 (at least not as yet science) in which no two 
 students can be found to exactly agree with one 
 another even about its elementary principles. 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 65 
 
 Nothing is more painfully ludicrous to me than 
 the way in which men, even of considerable 
 ability, are certain to fall into what average 
 common sense perceives to be the most pal- 
 pable absurdities, as soon as they begin to 
 lay down principles in political economy, 
 ethics, or metaphysics. Hence probably the 
 reason why (for nearly a century) these sub- 
 jects have failed to enlist the highest class of 
 thinkers. And, even in those religious systems 
 whose articles, creeds, or standards are drawn 
 up with all the minuteness and precision of 
 which logical acumen is capable, we see by the 
 trials for heresy (of which we have constant 
 examples in Protestant countries) that scarcely 
 any two followers of the same system attach 
 exactly the same meaning to any one term of 
 their common belief. I may have more to 
 say on this subject, and I am quite certain, 
 beforehand, that you will not agree with me ; 
 but I have alluded to it sufficiently to justify 
 for the present, to my own mind at least, the 
 course of argument which I have found it neces- 
 
 E 
 
66 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 sary to adopt. For I do not consider that any 
 
 useful purpose can be served by a discussion, 
 
 whatever be its subject, unless the terms which 
 
 have to be employed are sufficiently definite in 
 
 their generally accepted meaning to secure us 
 
 against ambiguity. Many things, of which we 
 
 \ can form only very vague conceptions, are still 
 
 sufficiently indicated by a properly chosen word; 
 
 while in other cases a term of excessive vague- 
 
 V ness seems to have been introduced to help 
 
 ^ men to talk, with the appearance of knowledge, 
 
 about things of which they are profoundly 
 
 ignorant. 
 
 Thus the word Infinite, as applied to dis- 
 tance, duration, or measurable magnitude of 
 any kind, suggests a perfectly definite meaning 
 exactly the same to all intelligent minds 
 though altogether beyond the grasp of any one 
 mind, however acute. 
 
 On the other hand, the term Cause is one 
 which at the first glance every one thinks he 
 understands, and, which, therefore, he freely 
 uses; yet where will you find two men (who 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 67 
 
 think for themselves) to agree exactly in the 
 meaning they attach to it ? 
 
 Feeling so strongly as I do, upon this point, 
 I shall endeavour to make perfectly clear the 
 precise meaning which I attach to any some- 
 what doubtful word which I may be obliged to 
 employ. And one of the most important of 
 these presents itself at the very outset. 
 
 I attach to the term Continuity, when em- 
 ployed to denote a general scientific principle, 
 a meaning quite distinct from those which 
 (more or less akin to one another) it usually 
 bears in mathematical and physical science. 
 For in these the term simply implies the 
 absence of gaps or sudden changes, which may 
 be of many kinds. Thus, a ' continuous ' line 
 may be straight, or curved, or even zig-zag, but 
 there must be no interruptions in it. A curve 
 has usually ' continuous ' change of direction, 
 or, as Newton called it, continued curvature ; 
 and the want of this is the essence of zig-zag. 
 When matter is said c continuously ' to fill any 
 space, it is meant that there is no portion (how- 
 
68 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 ever small) of that space which is not fully 
 occupied by matter. 
 
 But the ' principle of continuity ' implies, 
 as I understand it, a thinkable relation, or 
 relations, between successive or simultaneous 
 events in the physical universe, whether in 
 connection with what we call life or not. 
 
 In other words, it is merely a mode of 
 stating what experience has shown to be true ; 
 that nothing physical occurs without a phy- 
 sical antecedent, and that whenever all the 
 determining circumstances are the same, the 
 result is always the same. Why this happens 
 to be the case is a point on which I have 
 thought much, but hitherto without reaching 
 any very definite conclusion. It, happily, how- 
 ever, need not occupy us just now, as all I 
 require for the sake of my argument is the 
 concession, which you are doubtless all ready 
 to make, that continuity, as I have just ex- 
 plained it, is found by all recorded scientific 
 experience to be a universal fact. 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. Hold there, Doctor! I 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 69 
 
 was most unwilling to interrupt you, so I let; 
 pass several points which appeared to me to be 
 objectionable ; but I cannot allow so very grave 
 a statement to pass except under strong protest ; 
 especially as you have assumed that we are 
 all ready to agree to it. It seems to me that 
 your last position explicitly denies the occur- 
 rence of any supernatural event whatever. If 
 so, it must be considered as a begging of the 
 whole question ; for were it granted, I cannot 
 see the interest there would be in a future state, 
 even if we could then allow its possibility. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. My dear sir, are 
 you not a little hasty ? I am commencing a 
 scientific argument, and I intend to discuss it 
 scientifically. In accordance with this purpose 
 I can take scientific evidence alone. This I 
 think I have closely adhered to, and therefore 
 I once more read my statement : * You are 
 doubtless all ready to make the concession that 
 continuity, as I have just explained it, is found 
 by all recorded scientific experience to be a 
 universal fact/ Is it not so ? 
 
70 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. Pray go on, Doctor. I 
 did not notice the word ' scientific/ and I shall 
 take care not to interrupt you again. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. You are all, no 
 doubt, well acquainted with an old, but still fairly 
 respectable book, Paley' s ' Natural Theology/ 
 Perhaps the most hackneyed passage in it is 
 that about the savage finding a watch. It seems 
 to me, however, that this contains a very great 
 deal of useful information which has not been 
 extracted from it. So far as Paley, and I be- 
 lieve any of his commentators, have gone, the 
 existence of the watch serves merely as a proof 
 of design on the part of the (unknown) maker, 
 or of some one under whose directions that 
 maker wrought. And a precisely similar argu- 
 ment (perhaps not so convincing) is perpetually 
 in the mouths of many who sneer at Paley and 
 the system he was defending, when we find 
 them tracing primaeval man by chips of flint or 
 by bones broken so as to allow extraction of 
 the marrow. [I mention this in passing, not 
 because it has anything to do with my argu- 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 
 
 ment, but because it is in itself particularly 
 instructive as a characteristic of the pseudo- 
 scientific man.] But extend Paley's illustration. 
 Suppose we saw a watch suddenly start into 
 existence. Here we should at once recognise 
 a manifest breach of continuity. There would 
 still remain, as complete as before, the evidence 
 of design ; but it would be design acting in a 
 manner wholly inscrutable to human beings. 
 It would put them to a species of intellectual 
 confusion. 
 
 Thus we come to see that a watch or any 
 other machine supplies us with something more 
 than the mere argument for design. We per- 
 ceive in it the evidence of design working after 
 a thinkable method. We may perhaps under- 
 stand very little about the machine or its 
 method of working, but we know that it did 
 not spring into existence ready made out of 
 nothing. We know perfectly well that the 
 materials of which it is made must have ex- 
 isted in the universe before they were brought 
 together by the maker. Think of the spring 
 
72 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 alone. We can trace the steel back in thought 
 to the time when it was extracted as ore of 
 iron from the mine, or possibly when it was 
 cut from a lump of meteoric iron, and by 
 a number of artificial processes reduced to 
 its present form and properties. We go 
 still farther back and picture to ourselves 
 the materials of which the earth is com- 
 posed, gradually condensing together from 
 what it is common to call a * nebulous ' state, 
 cooling through long ages, and finally arriving 
 at the disposition in which we find them now ; 
 and we can see in thought an outlying straggler 
 of the same or of another nebulous mass, under 
 the action of ordinary gravitation, assuming an 
 orbit which, after millions of years, leads to its 
 encountering the earth and forming a compara- 
 tively recent addition to its mass. All this, 
 however, is familiar to every one of us from 
 quite recent discussions, so that I need not 
 enlarge on it. This is, in fact, the origin and 
 growth of worlds, with their satellites and their 
 primary, so far as we yet know them. But 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 73 
 
 what I desire to consider specially, for its bear- 
 ing on my argument, is their decay and end. 
 I fully agree with the modern theory of the 
 dissipation of energy, so far at least as it is 
 predicated of any finite portion of the material 
 universe. It follows that a time must come 
 when life, under any conditions conceivable to 
 us, will be physically impossible. What then ? 
 I leave this question for the present with the 
 brief remark that, somehow or other, it would 
 appear to suggest that such life as we are 
 acquainted with is limited in duration, not only 
 as regards the individual but as regards the 
 race and this whether we consider the vege- 
 table or the animal creation. And with the 
 human race must perish, of course, all that has 
 most proudly distinguished them from the 
 lower animals. It is not merely * the dust 
 of Alexander stopping a bunghole ; ' all the 
 conceits of Shakspere and the stupendous dis- 
 coveries of Newton must alike perish, along with 
 the subject-matter of both. Said I not rightly 
 but yesterday, that consciousness is a mistake ? 
 
74 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 But then it is argued that two effete suns, 
 after practically endless ages, may impinge on 
 one another with a terrific crash, reproducing 
 (on a larger scale than before) the nebulous 
 state from which worlds originally condensed, 
 and that, as there is an infinite amount of 
 matter in the universe, this reformation of 
 worlds may go on without end, always on a 
 grander scale than before. Be it so : what 
 then ? A mere repetition of the same brief 
 and melancholy history of a world of petty 
 inhabitants, with occasional outbursts of vast 
 intellect, whose productions are soon to be as 
 if they had never been, and high aspirations 
 checked and quenched almost as soon as 
 formed. Will you now tell me that conscious- 
 ness is not a mistake ? 
 
 But it has been said that, in all this alter- 
 nate decay and rejuvenescence of habitable 
 worlds, there is one kind of matter at least 
 which is for ever unchangeable in its associa- 
 tions which is not sporadically distributed in 
 infinite space, but fills it throughout to the 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 75 
 
 flammantia mania mundi. That life, when it 
 seems to us to leave our material bodies, re- 
 mains as truly as ever associated with the 
 ether which everywhere freely pervades them, 
 is a doctrine which I have often heard ad- 
 vanced. It is obvious that, were this doctrine 
 capable of justification, a species of future 
 existence would be possible. To this specula- 
 tion I have given my best attention ; and I 
 think with the result of satisfactorily refuting 
 it. It would, I fancy, lead me into too many 
 purely scientific considerations were I now to 
 give you my argument on this head, but it is 
 ready at any time for such of you as care to 
 hear it. I pass this speculation, therefore, with 
 the one remark, that it cuts both ways, and 
 gives quite as strong an argument for a pre- 
 vious as for a future disembodied existence. 
 And this, I think, will of itself, to most men, 
 form an insuperable objection. For it is ob- 
 vious to the majority of us that we have no 
 consciousness of a previous state of existence ; 
 and therefore the being, who might be sup- 
 
76 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 posed to be formed by my life associated with 
 the ether, would have no consciousness of me 
 could not therefore be myself. 
 
 Having thus cleared the way, I proceed to 
 show briefly the conclusions to which I have 
 been led in studying the nature of consciousness. 
 The first step to a clear understanding of 
 this phenomenon is furnished by the effects of 
 so-called Ancesthetics. These in all cases tem- 
 * porarily modify, sometimes wholly destroy for 
 a time, what we call consciousness. Now I 
 think this one fact, which seems to be strangely 
 overlooked by most reasoners on the subject, is 
 of immense importance. No one in his senses 
 can assert that an anaesthetic is anything more 
 than ordinary matter at least I am not aware 
 of any which are applied in association with 
 what we ordinarily call life. Can conscious- 
 ness then be conceived to be anything but a 
 result of some collocation or association of 
 matter, when it is known to be modified, and in 
 many cases wholly suspended, by the mere 
 introduction of other matter ? 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 77 
 
 This leads us to the temporary, entire or 
 partial, loss of consciousness which we ex- 
 perience in Sleep. The normal cause of sleep 
 is simply fatigue, the exhaustion of muscular 
 and nervous energy in the body, again due to 
 a mere change of collocation or association of 
 matter. When the energy supplied by the 
 food has had time to make good the waste, the 
 brain matter has recovered its normal group- 
 ing, and consciousness reappears. 
 
 Now the extraordinary connection which is 
 shown by various physiological experiments to 
 exist between thought and brain-changes, and 
 which is still more forcibly impressed on us 
 by almost all the physical phenomena accom- 
 panying Mental disease, seems to me to prove, 
 beyond reasonable doubt, that consciousness, 
 and a fortiori life, depend upon the grouping of 
 matter in the brain and nerve. It is com- 
 monly said that certain kinds of matter, such 
 as phosphorus, are exclusively so associated. 
 This I cannot help regarding as a breach 
 of continuity. Hence, consistently with that 
 
7 8 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 great principle, I feel myself compelled to 
 believe that all kinds of matter have their 
 motions associated with certain simple sensa- 
 tions : in other words, all matter is, in some 
 occult sense, alive. And just as the simpler 
 physical properties of the atom, which we 
 cannot even see, are lost in the complex 
 physical properties of an aggregate such as a 
 crystal, which we can handle and submit to 
 experiment, so the simple life of the indi- 
 vidual atom escapes our observation, while in 
 the aggregate of brain atoms we recognise it 
 as conscious existence. 
 
 I pass briefly to the remaining part of my 
 reasoning. When this world condensed from 
 its nebulous state the chance of the occurrence 
 of any one special grouping of atoms must have 
 been large, unless it was a particularly complex 
 one. Hence we may easily see the great 
 probability that many groups would be formed 
 in such a way as to develop in a high degree 
 life and consciousness such as we recognise. 
 And just as we know that the tiniest crystal, 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 79 
 
 introduced into a supersaturated solution of the 
 > same salt, suffices to multiply copies of itself 
 without number so we may imagine these 
 conscious groups to be in certain circumstances 
 capable of inducing the requisite condition for 
 the aggregation of others similar to themselves. 
 Such arrangements would thus have an advan- 
 tage over others in the struggle for existence, 
 and would grow not merely in numbers but in 
 individual complexity. We have thus the first 
 beginnings of the struggle for life. The rest 
 you know from Wallace and Darwin. 
 
 To conclude : It is allowed on all hands 
 that life is always found associated with energy. 
 In fact even the most tranquil consciousness is 
 dependent for its maintenance upon perpetual 
 transformations of energy. Now the first law 
 of energy tells us that none of it can either 
 come into or leave the universe. It may pass, 
 no doubt, from ordinary matter to ether, or 
 from ether to ordinary matter, these two being 
 the constituents of the universe the bricks and 
 mortar by the union of which the vast pile is 
 
8o DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 built together. But there is nothing else to 
 which it can go, if the theory of energy be true. 
 
 But if life must always be associated with 
 energy, and is inconceivable in the ether, the only 
 possible conclusion is that there can be no forms 
 of living creature existence except those with 
 which we are acquainted, and others essentially 
 similar to them. I feel therefore bound by the 
 principle of continuity to regard the universe 
 before me as eternal, both as to its past and its 
 future duration, and, believing it to be eternal, 
 I must also regard it as infinite, if the dissipa- 
 tion of energy is allowed to be true. What we 
 are thus presented with is an endless recurring 
 series of the formation, the destruction, and the 
 reconstitution of worlds, each world during its 
 short history developing a race of conscious 
 beings like ourselves, who, far from being im- 
 mortal as individuals, are even more perishable 
 than the system of which they form an exceed- 
 ingly small part. 
 
 My statement is confessedly incomplete. 
 In the rapid treatment of so vast a subject it is 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 81 
 
 not possible to do more than mention the 
 various branches of the argument. Which of 
 them you may be inclined to agree with, which 
 dispute, I am by no means certain. I have 
 therefore contented myself with little beyond a 
 bare enumeration, reserving more detailed ex- 
 planation for those points only on which we 
 may not be found in accord. 
 
 During the latter part of the Doctor's ad- 
 dress the noise of the approaching storm had 
 made it necessary for him to raise his voice, 
 and the darkness had become so great that he 
 could scarcely see his manuscript. These cir- 
 cumstances at last excited the Doctor and 
 induced him to ' improve the occasion,' a 
 method of procedure which, in the opinion of 
 all sensible people, should be confined to par- 
 sons and lawyers, and even by them em- 
 ployed with the greatest caution. When he 
 had finished the reading of his manuscript he 
 remarked that had he lived in a rude age or 
 amongst uninformed people the thunderstorm 
 might have been regarded as an intimation 
 
 F 
 
82 DOCTOR STOFFKRAFT 
 
 that the powers of Nature were displeased 
 with his doctrine. This of course would be 
 rank Fetishism ; and he would not now argue 
 the point whether or not some such feeling lay 
 at the root of all religions. He would rather 
 take it for granted that none of his present 
 audience could for a moment imagine that the 
 connection between his speech and the thunder- 
 storm was one of cause and effect, or that the 
 coincidence in point of time could be anything 
 else than accidental. Not yet thoroughly 
 understood, the storm was merely one of the 
 most striking of the many peculiar freaks 
 played by water- substance in passing from 
 one to another of its Protean forms. ' I fail 
 altogether,' he said, ' to see in what respect 
 lightning is more remarkable than cloud, or 
 rain, or hail, all being mere direct physical 
 results of evaporation and condensation of that 
 very prosaic stuff water. Dangerous it is, no 
 doubt, but not more so than such vile matter 
 as a chimney-can or a flower-pot which have a 
 few yards to fall on your head. And if one 
 
OPENS THE DEBATE. 83 
 
 wishes to be altogether free from danger in a 
 thunderstorm, he has only to dress himself in 
 an old suit of armour, discarded long ago as 
 useless against that villainous gunpowder, but 
 a perfect protection from the bolts of Dies- 
 piter. The one, perhaps you may say, was 
 the invention of a monk, the other of a pagan. 
 But this would be the very climax of unfair 
 argument/ 
 
 A dazzling blaze of lightning seemed to 
 linger for a moment in the hall, followed 
 immediately by a sharp crack of thunder, 
 apparently close overhead, and then silence. 
 Some of the company felt almost stunned, and 
 all agreed that they had had an exceedingly 
 narrow escape. Fairbank and his son at once 
 ran out to inspect the premises, and to provide 
 promptly against any possible danger from fire. 
 But nothing seemed to be injured, at least so 
 much as to require immediate attention, so 
 they returned to the hall. It had been the last 
 effort of the storm. In a very few minutes the 
 summer sun was shining brightly overhead, and 
 
84 DR. STOFFKRAFT OPENS THE DEBATE. 
 
 the birds were singing merrily on the dripping 
 branches. 
 
 The Doctor, in congratulating the party on 
 their lucky escape, took occasion to ask the 
 host whether he imagined that he (the Doctor) 
 had already been answered. The smiling host 
 informed the good-natured Doctor that on the 
 contrary he had given them some very hard 
 nuts to crack, which however they must try to 
 attack after lunch. 
 
 Here Sir Kenneth could not resist whisper- 
 ing audibly to the Doctor, ' I was never so 
 convinced of the existence of elemental spirits 
 as I have been to-day. But they did not treat 
 you well, Doctor. Now don't tell me that it 
 was not done on purpose don't pretend that 
 it was only a coincidence.' 
 
 The Doctor had no time to reply, for at this 
 very moment he was requested to lead Miss 
 Fairbank in to lunch. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE REPLY. 
 
 1 So they had them to the top of a high hill called Clear, and gave them 
 the glass to look. ' The Pilgrim's Progress. 
 
 AFTER lunch the ladies informed the company 
 that owing to their home engagements they 
 could not attend the Paradoxical any more that 
 day, whereupon the host suggested a walk, as 
 the afternoon was likely to prove fine. 
 
 If they were not afraid of eight miles he 
 would show them something very curious, and 
 they might continue their discussion by the 
 way. (Agreed to.} He would begin by thank- 
 ing the Doctor for his discourse, and more 
 
 especially for Paley's watch, and the mode in 
 
 / * 
 
 which he had introduced it. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I am glad you 
 agree with me that the hypothesis of the 
 
86 THE REPLY. 
 
 sudden coming into being of a watch would 
 put all finite intellects to permanent confusion. 
 
 Stephen Fair dank. I quite agree with you, 
 Doctor, and feel disposed to push the argu- 
 ment even further. Suppose, for instance, 
 some one were to suggest as an alternative 
 hypothesis the infinite past duration of the 
 watch, what now should you say to such a 
 view ? 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. It would be no 
 improvement. You would not by this means 
 get rid of intellectual confusion. In the case 
 before us you are compelled by your intellect 
 to try to imagine how the parts of the watch 
 were brought together ; but the hypothesis of 
 eternity pulls you up with a vengeance. I 
 must have a previous state, and this must be 
 a conceivable one somehow or other in the 
 universe, and not out of it. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Well, Doctor, you have 
 completely disposed of the eternity hypo- 
 thesis. But imagine that some very per- 
 tinacious objector (like Frederick there) were 
 
THE REPLY. 87 
 
 next to suggest that the watch might have 
 been formed by the operation of blind natural 
 forces, such as those which round the pebbles 
 on a beach, what should you say in reply to 
 this? 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I should say, 
 ' How absurd ! ' Blind natural forces do not 
 act in this uniform manner ; they can turn out 
 rounded stones no doubt, but these are irregular 
 and of different sizes. They don't turn out 
 watches, or engravings, or complex products 
 accurately moulded. These are only produced 
 by intelligent agents operating in the universe 
 and designing uniformity. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. Many thanks, my dear 
 Doctor, I see we are all perfectly agreed about 
 the watch. Now, let me take another instance, 
 and ask if you would object to regard the Sun 
 as eternal ? 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Undoubtedly I 
 should. My objection to the sun's eternity is 
 twofold, one derived from scientific principle 
 and one from the scientific facts called the laws 
 
THE RE PL Y. 
 
 of energy. Let us take the last first. I can 
 no more imagine a finite body like the sun to 
 have been giving out light and heat at a finite 
 rate from all eternity than I can imagine a 
 candle to have been burning from all eternity. 
 Again, my objection from scientific principle is 
 that the sun, equally with the watch, is a collo- 
 cation of matter in space, and I am therefore 
 bound to imagine an antecedent state out of 
 which it was educed. 
 
 Stephen Fair dank. I suppose, however, you 
 will allow that the sun has been brought into 
 its present state through the operation of 
 natural forces, while the watch is produced by 
 an intelligent agent designing uniformity. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Precisely so. But 
 of course, I do not mean to say that the mould- 
 ing of the sun does not imply design. I only 
 assert that it has been brought about by that 
 which we call ' Nature/ while the watch has 
 been brought about by that which we call 
 ' Art.' 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. In the language 
 
THE REPL Y. 89 
 
 of Sir Kenneth's compatriots, I * take instru- 
 ments and crave extracts/ But for use at a 
 future stage only, as I do not wish to interrupt 
 the present run of the discussion. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Just one word more, 
 then, on this branch of our subject. Suppose 
 the savage of Paley had found a hundred or a 
 thousand watches, or even many thousands, all 
 of the same pattern, would this weaken your 
 argument ? 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. On the contrary, 
 it would strengthen it. For, to take a simpler 
 case, when I see a schoolboy's marble, for 
 instance, I cannot tell whether this may not 
 have been formed by Nature, but when I see 
 a thousand all of nearly the same pattern, I 
 am quite sure that they have been made 
 by man. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Now, a few questions 
 on another point : I suppose we are all agreed 
 that molecules and atoms form the material 
 basis of the present universe, or, to adopt a 
 well-known analogy, they are the bricks out of 
 
90 THE REPL Y. 
 
 which the structure is built, while the ether 
 may be compared to the cement by means of 
 which these various bricks are built together. 
 Do you imagine, Doctor, that these bricks 
 were originally of different sizes and shapes ? 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Without pretend- 
 ing to dogmatise, I am rather inclined to adopt 
 the hypothesis of Prout and Lockyer, and to 
 imagine that the primordial atoms were all of 
 the same pattern, in which case the great 
 variety of chemical substances we possess would 
 be due to varied groupings of these atoms more 
 or less intimate, the strongest or most self-con- 
 tained groupings forming what we now call 
 elements, simply because we are unable to tear 
 their components asunder. I look upon these 
 primordial atoms as very small bodies capable 
 of intensely rapid vibrations, and always in 
 motion. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. I suppose you would 
 object to the hypothesis which regards them as 
 having been created in time out of nothing ? 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Most decidedly, 
 
THE RE PL Y. 
 
 for would not this (even without the 
 
 tion that they were created from nothing) put 
 
 the intellect to permanent confusion ? 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. I quite agree with you. 
 Now, what do you say to their eternity ? For 
 my own part I cannot regard them as eternal, 
 my objections being twofold, and very similar 
 to those you have advanced against the eternity 
 of the sun. One is from the theory of energy, 
 for since the dissipation of cosmical energy is 
 accompanied pari passu with the aggregation 
 of mass, I should expect to meet with very 
 large if not infinite masses in a physical uni- 
 verse that was at once eternal and infinite. 
 The other is derived from scientific principle, 
 for I must conceive the atom as truly as the 
 sun to represent a collocation of something 
 in space. Indeed it is certain that the struc- 
 ture of the atom, not to speak of that of the 
 molecule, is vastly more complex than that of 
 any watch qua watch. The same reasoning 
 should therefore apply to both, and I am thus 
 led to some anterior conceivable state in virtue 
 
92 THE REPLY. 
 
 of which the existence of the atom was 'brought 
 about. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. My dear sir, what 
 can I do ? It is a choice between two evils 
 (forced upon me by that lamentable mistake, 
 Consciousness), and of the two I would rather 
 regard the atom as eternal than as created in 
 time. No, no, development is a good horse 
 a very good horse but it must not be ridden 
 too hard. 
 
 During this utterance, which seemed to be 
 extracted from him rather than spontaneously 
 spoken, the Doctor was visibly excited, and 
 relieved himself by whirling his umbrella 
 rapidly round and round his head. 
 
 In the midst of one of these revolutions a 
 sudden thought struck the worthy Doctor, and 
 that particular gyration was not properly com- 
 pleted. 
 
 The result was serious, for the umbrella, 
 narrowly missing the head of Sir Kenneth, 
 came sharply in contact with the rim of his hat. 
 This unexpected assault sent the knight's head- 
 
THE REPLY. 93 
 
 piece high in air, and might have given rise to 
 a chase more than usually long and laborious, 
 inasmuch as the party were ascending a rather 
 steep slope. But Frederick Fairbank was 
 a cricketer, and ' fielded' it with singular 
 promptitude, restoring the hat to its owner 
 almost as soon as he became aware of his 
 loss. 
 
 Meanwhile the worthy Doctor, utterly un- 
 conscious of the mischance, was seen eagerly 
 working up and down one of those india-rubber 
 rings which formed, two years since, an in- 
 variable appendage to all umbrellas. 
 
 As the knight was about to ask the meaning 
 of this strange performance, the host, by way 
 of diversion, thought it absolutely necessary to 
 say something. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. What is it all about, 
 Doctor ? What is the matter with your um- 
 brella ? 
 
 Sir Kenneth M'Kelpie. There is a great 
 deal the matter. It has demolished my hat, 
 narrowly missing my head, and now, if I mis- 
 
94 THE REPLY. 
 
 take not, it is just about to demolish the 
 doctrine of the soul's immortality ! 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I most particu- 
 larly beg your pardon, Sir Kenneth. Gentle- 
 men all, pray receive my apology I was 
 indeed carried away for the moment, but I 
 think I have made a hit. 
 
 Frederick Fair bank (aside). So you did, 
 but you were had at slip ! 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Now (turning to 
 Stephen Fairbank), what do you think of the 
 notion, due to one of your own physicists, that 
 the material universe has been developed by 
 vortex motion out of the ether, or of some 
 other fluid filling the whole of space ? I con- 
 fess I was reminded of this by noticing the 
 india-rubber ring of my umbrella, which you 
 all know represents a vortex ring very well. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Developed out of the 
 ether or some other fluid ! How or by whom ? 
 Surely not by intelligent beings residing in the 
 ether or other fluid, for you told us in your 
 discourse there could be no life there. 
 
THE REPL Y. 95 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I meant, rather, 
 developed by the Deity. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. But would not this be an 
 action in time from without the universe, thus 
 putting the intellect to confusion ? It would 
 imply an abrupt and inexplicable starting up 
 in the Universe, not exactly of matter, but of 
 energy ; for I presume one can hardly imagine 
 the ether or other fluid having a natural pro- 
 pensity suddenly to develop vortex rings of its 
 own accord. 
 
 Dr. Hermann S toff kr aft (reflecting). You 
 are right it would. So there must have been 
 a prior universe different from the ether, out of 
 which the present system has been evolved 
 (after a pause] suppose we call it the Unseen 
 Universe. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank (smiling). The name will 
 do very well. Now as we are agreed that the 
 visible universe must have been developed from 
 the Unseen, I will ask you to go a step further. 
 For the Unseen universe, no less than the 
 seen, is an object of intellectual vision repre- 
 
96 THE REPLY. 
 
 sents in fact a collocation of some sort, and 
 hence it too must have been developed out of a 
 previous state. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I see now what 
 you are aiming at. You are driving me back 
 to Universe after Universe, to process after 
 process, forming together an illimitable avenue, 
 and you are quite determined we shall never 
 get to the end. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. You could not have 
 expressed my meaning more clearly. What 
 have you or I, my dear Doctor, to do with the 
 end or the bottom of things ? 
 
 If the principle of continuity demands that 
 no limits shall be set to time and space, does it 
 not equally demand that there shall be no 
 bounds to structural complexity ? Whenever 
 you become intellectually aware of anything 
 existing in the Universe, you at once ask your- 
 self three questions : When did it arise ? 
 where did it arise ? and out of what did it 
 arise ? And an anonymous modern writer 
 compares time, space, and structural complexity 
 
THE REPLY. 97 
 
 to three independent co-ordinates, in terms of 
 which the process of development goes on 
 simultaneously as our sphere of knowledge is 
 enlarged. 1 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Good ! I like the 
 idea, but of course we cannot now regard the 
 atom as an extremely simple thing. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Certainly not ; on the 
 contrary, we must regard it as only less com- 
 plex than the whole universe. 
 
 The party were now almost scrambling 
 upwards, and it was at length evident whither 
 their host was leading them. Elmsly House 
 was seen far below on the slope of the valley, 
 shut in by a range of somewhat lofty hills. 
 These were very even in elevation and outline, 
 with the exception of a little gap towards which 
 they were rapidly approaching. In a short time 
 they had almost reached the entrance of the 
 gap, and here the host asked them to rest for 
 a moment, to look back upon the valley from 
 which they had ascended. 
 
 1 Unseen Universe, p. 237. 
 G 
 
98 THE REPL Y. 
 
 The view was of a somewhat mixed and 
 sombre character ; palpable traces of the 
 morning's storm still lingered about it, and the 
 sky, though not altogether obscured, was yet 
 heavily veiled by ill-defined clouds. 
 
 When he thought they had sufficiently 
 studied the scene, Stephen Fairbank took the 
 Doctor's arm and said, ' Now for the other 
 side of the shield!' 
 
 In a few moments the Doctor suddenly 
 stopped and uttered an exclamation of the 
 most joyful surprise. No wonder he was 
 delighted with the view which had in a 
 moment burst upon him ! There can be few 
 sights equalling, or even rivalling it, either in 
 this country or anywhere else. 
 
 Suddenly, at a turning-point, the party saw 
 before them a new and glorious valley beyond 
 the gap, with a cloudless sky above, and bathed 
 in all the brightness and freshness of a summer 
 afternoon, when there is ' clear shining after rain/ 
 The Doctor had to look back repeatedly before 
 he could assure himself that the valley he had 
 
THE REPLY. 99 
 
 just left was not a dream, and then again he would 
 look forward as if afraid this new and glorious 
 valley should after all prove to be a delusion. 
 
 When the party had sufficiently regaled 
 themselves with the enjoyment of this delight- 
 ful spectacle, the host led the way homewards, 
 and lost no time in resuming the discussion. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. I would next ask you, 
 Doctor, whether we are not carried back to an 
 Unseen Universe by the study of the forces of 
 the present system just as truly as when we 
 study its origin. Let us take, for instance, the 
 force of gravity, and try to imagine from what 
 source it springs. That it acts at a distance 
 without the intervention of something between 
 the attracting masses was inconceivable to 
 Newton, and I am sure we shall not be 
 inclined to dispute his verdict. To regard 
 this force as the immediate operation of the 
 Great First Cause would surely break the 
 principle of continuity. But if gravity acts 
 through some sort of machinery, this must 
 certainly be sought for in the Unseen World. 
 
TOO THE REPLY. 
 
 We need not now discuss the hypothesis of 
 Le Sage and Thomson : sufficient for our 
 purpose that this or any other hypothesis must 
 drive us a once to the Unseen, which must 
 therefore be looked upon as the antecedent 
 not only of the materials of the present system, 
 but also of the various transmutations of energy 
 which are continually taking place around us. 
 And to complete our hypothesis, we must 
 imagine the vital phenomena of the present 
 universe to be derived from the Unseen just as 
 truly as its objective realities. Swedenborg 
 held, it is well known, views of this nature, 
 and it now appears that such views are fully 
 borne out by those scientific principles which 
 lead us to regard the whole visible system of 
 things (including its life phenomena) as only a 
 fringe, and but a small fringe of that great 
 garment of God which we may call THE 
 UNIVERSE. 
 
 Dr. Hermann S toff kr aft. All this may be 
 very true, but I fail to see what proof it gives 
 us of the soul's immortality. 
 
THE REPLY. 101 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. We will come to that 
 presently ; but I think you must own, Doctor, 
 that your proof of the impossibility of this 
 doctrine no longer holds good. For this was 
 founded on the belief that there is nothing but 
 matter and ether, and that life is impossible in 
 ether. Now, you have already acknowledged 
 that the Unseen is very different from the 
 ether as we know it. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Until you have 
 proved to me, or at least given me good 
 grounds for believing, that intelligence is 
 capable of residing in the Unseen, I am 
 surely entitled to imagine that it does not 
 there exist. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. I presume we are all 
 driven by the principle of continuity to con- 
 clude that life of some sort resides in the 
 Unseen. And at the present stage of our 
 argument it is at least as much an assumption 
 to assert that such life must be very much 
 lower than ours as it would be to assert that it 
 must be very much higher. At present we 
 
102 THE REPLY. 
 
 must imagine ourselves to be in complete 
 ignorance of the rank of this life. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Well, we are 
 agreed there must be life in the Unseen, of 
 the nature of which, let us say, we are ignorant. 
 Let us therefore confine ourselves to those 
 points where possibly the Unseen has come in 
 contact with ourselves, and try to discover 
 whether they afford us any means of judging 
 of the nature of that life which resides in the 
 Unseen. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. By all means let us 
 do so. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stojffkraft. Now, as the 
 visible universe was developed from the Un- 
 seen, and as development implies a progress 
 from less to more complex, I conclude that life 
 exists in the Unseen in an extremely simple 
 state, even simpler than that which continuity 
 leads me to associate with the atom and a 
 fortiori much simpler than life as we recog- 
 nise it in the human being. 
 
 Stephen Fair dank. Your statement, Doctor, 
 
THE REPLY. 103 
 
 is somewhat obscure. To make things clear 
 let us separate between the objective or ma- 
 terial and the subjective or life side of the 
 visible universe. 
 
 Now, have you tried to realise how the 
 matter of the visible universe was developed 
 from the Unseen ? 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Well, there was 
 something or other which by virtue of the 
 forces with which it was endowed suddenly 
 developed into the visible universe, and this 
 something had I suppose in like manner been 
 previously developed out of something else, 
 and so on. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. A very satisfactory series 
 of processes, and very much like what matter 
 is in the habit of doing ! 
 
 Dr. Hermann S toff kr aft. You are laughing 
 at me I know, but is it possible to conceive of 
 any other development ? 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. You have told us of a 
 dead development, but is it not possible to 
 conceive of a living one ? May we not imagine 
 
io 4 THE REPLY. 
 
 that the visible universe was formed by an 
 Intelligence residing in the Unseen, and acting 
 through conceivable processes while developing 
 that which we see around us ? 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. What a singular 
 Being what an unlikely existence ! I enter- 
 tain an invincible repugnance to believe in such 
 a development, and should very much prefer 
 what you are pleased to call a dead develop- 
 ment. 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. This won't do, Doctor. 
 An 'invincible repugnance' to a doctrine is 
 very closely allied to an 'assurance that it is 
 untrue/ Both are, to my mind at least, essen- 
 tially unscientific. For a man of science ought, 
 I think, to be perfectly willing and ready to 
 receive whatever is sufficiently demonstrated, 
 and to take to avizandum all that is plausible : 
 his own feelings and prepossessions notwith- 
 standing. How is knowledge to advance if 
 your school have an invincible repugnance to 
 a living development, while our host and the 
 parson and their school have an equally uncon- 
 
THE REPLY. 105 
 
 querable repugnance to a dead one ? But I 
 wrong them, for though they may feel it they 
 will not express it, still less will they permit it 
 to influence their judgment. But I need lay 
 no stress on this just now : you have already 
 accepted the argument from analogy, and it is 
 too late to retreat upon repugnances. The ques- 
 tion, as it seems to me, is now simply this : 
 Do atoms, so far as we know their properties, 
 suggest a dead or a living development ? 
 
 The Rev. Ralph B enter ton. Yes; I think 
 that, for the moment, we are confronted with 
 this question ; and I should be glad to hear it 
 discussed. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. By all means : 
 but let my antagonist lead off. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. If this question be re- 
 ferred to scientific analogy, it is soon settled. 
 The atom is unquestionably a compound 
 structure, as far as the human intellect can 
 grasp it ; the primordial atoms were probably 
 all of the same type (at least the Doctor is 
 rather inclined to imagine they were), and they 
 
io6 THE REPLY. 
 
 were certainly produced in enormously great 
 numbers. 
 
 The case is precisely that of the savage who 
 finds many thousand watches, and the Doctor 
 has justly told us how very absurd it would be 
 to suppose these to have arisen through mere 
 natural operations without the aid of an in- 
 telligent being designing uniformity. 
 
 I should now like to ask the Doctor if he has 
 at all conceived of the way in which the life of 
 the universe was developed from the Unseen. 
 For it appears to me that here especially we 
 come very near to the question upon which our 
 discussion has been founded : and that, in fact, 
 the possibility of a future life will impress itself 
 upon different minds in a manner, and to an 
 extent of conviction, closely corresponding to 
 the view taken of the origin of life itself. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. The Unseen must 
 have possessed life in some primitive and 
 simple form no doubt : continuity requires so 
 much ; but the form of its life must have been 
 even more simple than that of the atom which 
 
THE REPLY. 107 
 
 is a development from the Unseen. I have 
 already, in my opening remarks, stated my 
 belief that when the universe of atoms had 
 sufficiently condensed together from its nebulous 
 state, there would be a great probability that 
 many groups would be formed in such a way as 
 to develop in a high degree that life and con- 
 sciousness which we recognise, and that such 
 arrangements would thus have an advantage 
 over others in the struggle for existence, and 
 would grow not merely in numbers, but in 
 individual complexity. The * rest you know 
 from Wallace and Darwin. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. But we know also from 
 these authorities and from the universal con- 
 sensus of all biologists, that no organised being 
 which we can recognise can be produced except 
 from an organised antecedent. Now any theory 
 of the origin of recognised life from within 
 this universe must take account of this law. 
 For just as there are strong scientific grounds 
 for believing in the existence of the atom, and 
 in the law of the conservation of energy, so there 
 
io8 THE REPLY. 
 
 are grounds almost equally strong for believing 
 in the law that life, as we perceive it, can only 
 be produced from a living antecedent. But 
 your school, Doctor, while they hold rigidly to 
 the atom and to energy, break the law of 
 Biogenesis without the smallest scruple. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. In this case there 
 can be no hypothesis at all as to the origin of 
 recognised life from within our universe, if we 
 assume that what we may call its natural 
 operations do not produce life except out of a 
 living antecedent. 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. Ne sutor ultra crepidam 
 must be our motto here, as elsewhere, and if we 
 are to agree at all, we must take the universe 
 as we know it. We will only own our missing 
 Princess by her ability to put on the glass 
 slipper she has left behind. You have brought 
 us her step-sister, Doctor, and as you cannot 
 enlarge the slipper, you are trying to break it in 
 order to give a chance to your goddess with the 
 splay feet. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. But, my dear Sir, 
 
THE REPLY. 109 
 
 you will surely allow that the sudden produc- 
 tion of a peculiar kind of life in the universe 
 would break the principle of continuity. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Not if it were an intro- 
 duction from an Unseen of whose existence 
 and power we were previously aware. 
 
 I feel myself compelled to look to this Unseen 
 for the origin not only of the matter of the 
 Visible Universe, but also of its life, for there is 
 no other hypothesis that does not break some 
 intellectual principle or some scientific law. 
 Indeed, we appear to have two developments 
 from the Unseen^ the one taking place after the 
 other, and the latter or life development, even 
 more than the former or matter development, 
 leading us to recognise an intelligent and 
 spiritual Unseen. 1 And not only does your 
 hypothesis break the law of Biogenesis, but it 
 
 1 This appears to have been suggested by Jean Paul Richter, 
 who says (Levana), 'At least two miracles or revelations 
 remain for you uncontested in this age, which deadens sound 
 with unreverberating material. They resemble an Old and a 
 New Testament, and are these : the birth of Finite Being and 
 the birth of Life within the hard wood of matter.' 
 
no THE REPLY. 
 
 leads you to recognise in the various orders of 
 the eternal Unseen Universe nothing but a 
 rudimentary form of life which we can never 
 grasp, except in a dim intellectual way, with our 
 present powers, and which, therefore, according 
 to your theory, we shall never be fit to grasp at 
 all. You thus present us with two universes, 
 a visible one, in which we may verify pheno- 
 mena, and a tremendous Unseen, which our in- 
 tellect drives us to acknowledge, but with the 
 substance or life of which we shall never be 
 brought into more intimate contact. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. If I mistake not, 
 the Doctor in our first discussion made what I 
 thought a very apt comparison between the life 
 progress of the individual and that of the world, 
 and biologists, we know, insist strongly on the 
 very intimate likeness between the two. 
 
 Now it appears to me that this comparison 
 has taken into account one side only of the life 
 development. In all living things, whether 
 animal or vegetable, we have two sides ; there 
 is first the descent from a parent or parents, 
 
THE REPLY. in 
 
 and there is secondly and subsequently the 
 ascent of the individual. To complete the 
 analogy, we must therefore imagine that the life 
 of our globe has somehow descended to it just 
 as the life of the individual has in some way 
 descended to him. A continuous life ascent 
 from all eternity taken alone, as the Doctor will 
 have it, is, I maintain, a fatally one-sided and 
 incomplete hypothesis. 1 
 
 1 A writer on Evolution in the Church Quarterly Review 
 (July 1878) has made an exceedingly valuable suggestion in 
 comparing together the life history of the individual and that of 
 the Earth. He conceives that just as in the generation of the 
 higher organisms we have two distinct stages, one from the 
 germ to the birth, the other from the birth to the maturity of 
 the animal; so likewise may there be two corresponding stages 
 in the Evolution of the life of the Earth. Again, he observes 
 that after birth the animal develops according to quite a 
 different set of influences from those which surround it before 
 birth, and that a study of the one of these two developments 
 would throw little light upon the other. So it may be, he goes 
 on to say, that a study of the laws which now regulate the 
 development of the life of the Earth may throw little light upon 
 the nature of its earlier life history. It will be seen that this sug- 
 gestion, taken in connection with that of Mr. Bemerton, completes 
 the analogy between embryology and life Evolution. (ED.) 
 
ii2 THE REPLY. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M' Kelpie. I see you are draw- 
 ing very rapidly towards my view, that we must 
 have always two ways of regarding an eternal 
 development. 
 
 Now if the visible universe has emerged 
 from a spiritual Unseen extending throughout 
 a past eternity, is it not more natural to couple 
 this with the development of the individual 
 extending onwards and upwards throughout the 
 future ? 
 
 A similar thought seems to have occurred to 
 Renan, who thus expresses himself in his 
 dialogues and philosophical fragments : 
 
 ' It is not impossible,' he tells us, 'that in the 
 infinitude of time the universe may minister to 
 the perceptions and enjoyments of one single 
 being : thus personal monotheism would be a 
 truth. On this condition it is even possible to 
 conceive the resurrection of individuals. The 
 universe, reduced to one single absolute being, 
 will be the complete life of all the renewal of 
 beings who have disappeared/ 
 
 He has thus, I think, brought before us, 
 
THE REPLY. 113 
 
 albeit in a somewhat obscure and mystical way, 
 the future half of the great problem, and in 
 doing so he has, without doubt, borrowed largely 
 from St. John. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. Without pre- 
 tending to discuss the merits of this somewhat 
 obscure statement, let me briefly express my 
 opinion upon the drift of our present argument. 
 Whether we take the material or the life of the 
 visible universe, I do think we are led by strong 
 analogies to regard the Unseen as replete with 
 spiritual power, inasmuch as it has developed 
 and now sustains the present order. We 
 cannot tell from the results of science whether 
 a future has been prepared for man, but we are 
 surely led to ask if the Unseen has given us any 
 information on a point so important to our well- 
 being, while we should hold ourselves prepared, 
 at the same time, to receive proofs of this with 
 all humility. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I am willing to 
 acknowledge the possibility of a Spiritual 
 Unseen, but I strongly object to the generally 
 
 H 
 
ii4 THE REPLY. 
 
 received proofs of such a communication, and I 
 do so not on one only but on many grounds. 
 One of these alone need be mentioned now; 
 but it is very appropriate in the present 
 connection. In the supposed revelation to 
 which you allude, man is treated like a child, 
 not like an intellectual being, and the so-called 
 proofs are asserted occurrences which, if they 
 do not put the intellect to permanent confusion, 
 are yet totally opposed to the mode in which 
 Nature is known habitually to work. 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. You will allow me to say, 
 Doctor, that though from your point of view 
 you speak, as you always do, with courtesy 
 yet from the point of view of the rest of this 
 company, it appears altogether outrageous to 
 speak of the Christian revelation as if it were 
 of the same class as the mere human dogmas 
 of various schools of philosophy. I hope the 
 time will never come when, at least in any 
 British company, such a classification will be 
 tolerated. I repeat that from your point of 
 view no exception can be taken to your mode 
 

 && 
 
 THE REPLY. u< 
 
 v 
 
 of putting matters; but Britons, at least, are 
 not accustomed to hear their religion calmly 
 discussed as something on a par with Aristotle, 
 or even with Plato. 
 
 But, to pass from this, I would ask you 
 whether the acquisition of mere human know- 
 ledge does not depend very much upon the 
 exercise of qualities closely approximating to 
 the humility and receptiveness of a child. 
 
 For long ages the schoolmen tried to imagine 
 what Nature ought to be, and science has only 
 developed since men have been content to 
 take things as they are. Why have you, 
 yourself, Doctor, succeeded so greatly as a 
 man of science ? Is it not because you have 
 taken up the study of the Universe as a little 
 child? 
 
 Imagine a little man saying to his father : 
 Father, I have a profound conviction that you 
 mean well, and I hear that you have provided a 
 ship that is to carry me to an unknown land. 
 I much desire, however, that you would give 
 me a proof of the sterling qualities of this ship 
 
n6 THE REPLY. 
 
 such as I and men of my standing (here the 
 little atom tries to look big) may intellectually 
 comprehend. Are the timbers thick enough, 
 the bolts well riveted, and are there no sunken 
 rocks in the way ? Have you a sufficient 
 supply of coals, and, above all, is the engine 
 well greased and free from priming ? Now 
 what should you say to all this, Doctor ? I 
 know what I should do I should promptly pull 
 the ears of the wretched little prig. You may 
 perhaps think me irreverent, but I cannot 
 refrain. The matter is one on which I feel 
 very strongly. 
 
 The Rev. RalpJt Bemerton. I quite agree 
 with the views expressed so forcibly by my 
 friend Mr. Holdfast, because, as you all know, 
 I deprecate the artificial separation between 
 the Natural and the Revealed. All is nature 
 and all is revelation. For convenience' sake, 
 no doubt, we set apart a particular body of 
 knowledge which refers to the ordinary pro- 
 cesses going on around us, whether of matter 
 or life, and call it science, so that the laws of 
 
THE RE PL Y. 117 
 
 science are, by definition, those laws which 
 regulate ordinary phenomena. It is thus abun- 
 dantly evident that the laws of science will give 
 us nothing more than a knowledge of the ordi- 
 nary working of the Universe around us, and 
 that if there have been communications from 
 an intelligent Unseen giving us information 
 which it is desirable we should possess, these 
 will not be proved by scientific laws, inasmuch 
 as these latter mean an artificially selected 
 body of knowledge having exclusive reference 
 to the ordinary working of the visible universe. 
 We must in fact take care that we do not treat 
 revelation like the prophet's book : ' And the 
 vision of all is become unto you as the words of 
 a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one 
 that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee : 
 and he saith, I cannot ; for it is sealed : and 
 the book is delivered to him that is not learned, 
 saying, Read this, I pray thee : and he saith, 
 I am not learned.' l 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. We are now nearing 
 
 1 Isaiah xxix. 11-12. 
 
n8 THE REPLY. 
 
 home, and I think I hear the dinner-bell, so, 
 as chairman, I will give you leave to get ready 
 to join the ladies within half-an-hour. 
 
 At dinner the Doctor was observed to be 
 very absent. His usual ceremonious courtesy 
 was scarcely able to carry him through it 
 with decency. * Hard hit, poor beggar,' said 
 Frederick Fairbank to himself, ' I must back him 
 up a little.' As he thought this the Doctor's 
 eye met his, and read there the sympathy for 
 which he longed. Further discussion was out 
 of the question for that evening indeed it was 
 forbidden. Stephen Fairbank had said the day 
 was sufficient for the work of men's intellects, 
 the evening barely so for the higher duties of 
 their hearts. But Frederick took the first 
 opportunity of asking the Doctor to meet him 
 early next morning for a little private talk. ' I 
 was not quite satisfied,' he said, ' that to-day's 
 discussion was altogether fair, and I have 
 somewhat to tell you about it.' Dr. Stoffkraft 
 eagerly grasped his hand, and retired on the 
 plea of slight fatigue. 
 
THE REPLY. 119 
 
 Miss Fair bank. Now for the mystery ; I 
 wish no arguments or discussions, but it is plain 
 to me that Dr. Stoffkraft does not think he has 
 been quite fairly used to-day. What have you 
 been saying or doing to him ? 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. We took no unfair ad- 
 vantage though with a man of StoffkrafVs 
 erudition one is tempted to use every means 
 in his power. The Doctor has not yet heard 
 of the Unseen Universe, and we plied him with 
 a few arguments drawn from it. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. And with equal 
 effect and justice. He was evidently quite 
 unprepared for an attack from the purely scien- 
 tific side. 
 
 Miss Fairbank. Of course, you let him 
 fancy that these were your own arguments ? 
 I call that scarcely fair. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Oh, we can easily put that 
 right. It was a sort of practical joke to pay 
 him off for his extempore burst of the morning. 
 The discussion is by no means closed, and I 
 fear we have fired off most of our best charges 
 
120 THE REPLY. 
 
 already. The authors of that book remind me 
 of the makers of dynamite and other terrible 
 explosives. They treat with unconcern matters 
 which in other hands would most probably 
 prove deadly. And I don't feel quite at ease 
 about some of the arguments I took from 
 them this morning. They may be polished up 
 in the Doctor's fertile brain and retorted on 
 us to-morrow in a form not very easy to meet. 
 
 Frederick Fair bank. Which will serve you 
 both right. You named Hume and Paley when 
 you quoted them : but you left Stoffkraft to 
 infer that the Unseen Universe arguments were 
 your own. He has evidently been led to 
 over-estimate your powers both of attack and 
 of defence. You are just like a new bowler ; 
 while your style is a secret, you are deadly : 
 presently they will hit you all about : and 
 then, where are you ? 
 
 Miss Fair bank. Right, Fred ! I am happy 
 to agree with you. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. Wait till to- 
 morrow before coming to such positive con- 
 
THE REPLY. 121 
 
 elusions. Perhaps you may find yourself glad 
 to use any argument against the Doctor ! 
 I should say, of course, against the Doctor's 
 creed, for the man himself is unexceptionable. 
 You have not yet heard what he thinks of the 
 matters in dispute from the moral and social 
 point of view. 
 
 Miss Fairbank. There I am not afraid of 
 him. These are questions of conscience, and 
 no one with an unperverted conscience could 
 go wrong in such things. Far feebler bonds 
 are effective. Could a well-bred person be 
 guilty of a breach of etiquette ? 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. Well said, indeed ; but 
 the Doctor is a tough opponent, and I fancy 
 we shall have to do all we know to-morrow. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M' Kelpie. He has two grand 
 defects ; each separately fatal to his authority. 
 He all but denies the existence of the Super- 
 natural, and he looks upon conscience as a 
 weakness ; an amiable one, no doubt, but still 
 unworthy of his ideal. 
 
 Miss Fairbank. I do not think so hardly 
 
122 THE REPLY. 
 
 of him, Sir Kenneth, he seems to me to be 
 remarkably genial and considerate. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M' Kelpie. Mere habit or dis- 
 position : ineradicable, but sneered at by its 
 possessor, who would have preferred that 
 chance had either made him master of his con- 
 science, or given him none. I tried him with 
 the story of ' Neil the Ranter/ and his com- 
 ments (for he is a simple, truthful, soul) enabled 
 me to read him thoroughly. 
 
 Miss Fair bank. Is that your usual test, Sir 
 Kenneth ? I hope my remarks, when you told 
 it me the other morning, did not reveal any 
 dreadful state of mind ? 
 
 Sir Kenneth M'Kelpie. It is a true touch- 
 stone, and I never found it fail. But I '11 say 
 no more about it to-night. There is a time 
 for everything, and your probable future is not 
 to be discussed now. 
 
 Miss Fairbank. But you'll tell me some day ? 
 
 Sir Kenneth M'Kelpie. That I will, and 
 something more which I have quite recently 
 read : in the Stars ! 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE CONFERENCE IN THE YEW TREE AVENUE. 
 
 THE palace in a woody vale they found 
 High raised of stone ; a shaded space around : 
 Where mountain wolves, and brindled lions roam, 
 (By magic tamed) familiar to the dome. 
 
 Now on the threshold of the dome they stood, 
 And heard a voice resounding through the wood 
 Placed at her loom within, the goddess sung ; 
 The vaulted roofs and solid pavement rung. 
 
 The goddess rising, asks her guests to stay, 
 Who blindly follow where she leads the way. 
 
 On thrones around with downy coverings graced, 
 With semblance fair, th' unhappy men she placed. 
 Milk newly press'd, the sacred flour of wheat, 
 And honey fresh and Pramnian wines the treat : 
 But venom'd was the bread, and mix'd the bowl, 
 With drugs of force to darken all the soul. 
 
 THE ODYSSEY, translated by Pope. 
 
 THE verses we have quoted are admirably 
 descriptive of that Kirkean monster, a false 
 Philosophy. 
 
 Many are the guests whom this infamous en- 
 
i2 4 THE CONFERENCE IN 
 
 chantress has consigned to the same unutterable 
 doom which overtook the followers of Ulysses, 
 and from which their leader was rescued only 
 by the virtues of the god-given moly. 
 
 A change, however, has recently taken place 
 in the policy of the goddess. Some time since 
 her more astute advisers (remembering the 
 wisdom of the serpent ' Eritis sicut Deus, 
 scientes bonum et malum ') ventured to remind 
 her that the unvarying sequel to her banquets 
 had already brought her into disrepute, and they 
 suggested as a remedy that she also should 
 have her store of moly grow it in her kitchen 
 garden, and serve it up at her feasts in such a 
 way that her guests might eat of it or not at 
 their pleasure. 
 
 Should any fail to partake of it (they went 
 on to observe) their unutterable doom would 
 be attributed no longer to the goddess but to 
 their own perversity, and thus her feasts might 
 even in time become renowned as nice and 
 delicate tests of character, serving to discri- 
 minate between the evil and the good. 
 
THE YE W TREE A VENUE. 1 2 5 
 
 The goddess gladly took the insidious coun- 
 sel, and the moly is now a well-known gar- 
 nishment at all her banquets. 
 
 Thus some of her guests manage to escape 
 the unutterable transformation. Most of them, 
 however, rise from table with a stunned 
 and perplexed look, indicative of the struggle 
 within them between the virtues of one thing 
 and the poison of another. Dr. Stoffkraft, 
 having eaten plentifully of the antidote, was 
 not likely to become wholly the prey of 
 the monster; but, poor moth, he had several 
 times smartly singed himself in her deceitful 
 flame. 
 
 And with him the awakening from the delu- 
 sion was ever as rude as it was certain. 
 
 A few words from Stephen Fairbank on the 
 previous day had opened his eyes to the ab- 
 surdity of one at least of the opinions which he 
 had been confidently because rashly parading ; 
 and he felt a sickening misgiving that the 
 whole system might similarly crumble. 
 
 Thus he was at the moment prepared to 
 
i 2 6 THE CONFERENCE IN 
 
 clutch at any support, rather than be deprived 
 at once of all his laboriously-erected castles. 
 
 After a sleepless night, he sought the garden 
 about six o'clock. Frederick Fairbank was 
 there before him, and he had a little book in 
 his hand. 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. Well, Doctor, I feel 
 even more strongly this morning than I did 
 yesterday that they did not give you fair play. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. How do you 
 mean ? Their arguments were quite fair ; but 
 I must confess they were more to the purpose 
 than I expected from my adversaries. 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. But the arguments 
 they used were not theirs ! 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. You surprise me 
 very much. I thought I had read almost every 
 work on the subject, or at least that I knew 
 the tenour of every argument that had been 
 brought forward. 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. But of course you 
 never thought of a modern English book on 
 the subject ? 
 
THE YEW TREE AVENUE. 127 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. No, certainly not. 
 Has any Englishman written anything on these 
 matters from the genuine scientific side I 
 mean ? 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. An anonymous lot 
 evidently scientific men have lately brought 
 out a work with the very title, Unseen Universe, 
 to which my father led you up yesterday. He 
 and Bemerton have been reading and com- 
 menting on the book for some time, and for 
 this reason, no doubt, they adroitly brought 
 you to initiate a discussion of this very 
 subject. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. And have you 
 seen the book ? 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. Here it is ! I have 
 looked it through as critics do, sufficiently to 
 be able to talk of it, not more. But^<?& must 
 read it carefully. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Of course I must 
 read it. But this news is so unexpected that I 
 hardly yet fully realise it. Englishmen at- 
 tempting scientific speculation ! What next ? 
 
128 THE CONFERENCE IN 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. Germans ceasing to 
 do so. 
 
 Dr. Hermann S toff kr aft. No, no ; I don't 
 seek wit. I am no match for you or any one in 
 that. How can I turn the tables on these 
 conspirators ? I have not time to read this 
 work, much less to think it over, before we 
 resume our discussions. I thought I had so 
 fully considered almost every possible aspect 
 of this question that my antagonists could 
 hardly raise any valid argument quite new to 
 me. But yesterday's experience was not 
 merely perplexing in itself, it has left me with 
 the feeling that some other new and unex- 
 pected mines may be sprung on me. Can you 
 not give me a rapid sketch of the argument of 
 this book ? 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. I don't think I can. 
 But this at least I can do : if you will indicate 
 one by one the arguments you are about to 
 use, I will tell you how they will probably be 
 met, that is, provided the Unseen Universe 
 gives the means of meeting them. 
 
THE YEW TREE AVENUE. 129 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I thank you ; 
 that is lawyer-like, at least in all respects but 
 one, for it is friendly. 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. But don't fancy, Doc- 
 tor, that if I take your side it is necessarily 
 from conviction. I am naturally combative, 
 and I like above all things a fight, but it must 
 be a fair one. And I am a lawyer, and as 
 such quite as ready to fight on one side as 
 on the other, whatever my private opinions. 
 Hal-d-the-Wynd) in fact, as Sir Kenneth is 
 fond of saying. But proceed to your enumera- 
 tion. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Well, it strikes 
 me that I should begin to-day by pointing out 
 that all the arguments they used yesterday in 
 favour of a possible future state hold good for 
 brutes as well as for men, being based upon the 
 common properties of material organisms. 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. There you wouldn't 
 have a chance. The parson would probably re- 
 mind you, as he has already done, that when you 
 have once realised the probability of a spiritual 
 
130 THE CONFERENCE IN 
 
 Unseen, it is your interest to inquire whether 
 this order of things has vouchsafed you any 
 information, and your bounden duty to receive 
 such with all humility. 
 
 He might go on by supposing one of the 
 apostles to have put this question to their 
 Master, in which case the nature of the reply 
 could hardly be doubtful. ' What is that to 
 thee ? follow thou Me,' would effectually stop 
 a repetition of the question. 
 
 My father, again, will point to the fact that 
 the main dissimilarity between men and brutes 
 is not in bodily structure or materials (which 
 must necessarily be the same in both, inasmuch 
 as they both live in the same physical universe), 
 but in style of thought. And then he will 
 turn your argument against you by saying that 
 the unseen concomitants of thought, if they 
 could be scientifically perceived, would almost 
 certainly be very different in the two cases. 
 And remember that it is on these unseen 
 concomitants that part of the scientific argu- 
 ment for a future life is based. 
 
THE YEW TREE AVENUE. 131 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. 1 see that i5 
 new, and doubtless taken from this book. I 
 must have time to think over the point : so I 
 shall not attempt this part of my proposed line of 
 argument to-day. My next objection is founded 
 upon the mysterious in their religious system 
 the doctrine of the Trinity, for instance. 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. You cannot attack 
 them there. They would simply reply that 
 any theory of the nature of God, be it even a 
 materialistic one, is necessarily mysterious : so 
 that mystery cannot be brought forward as a 
 reproach. And they would add, as the authors 
 of the Unseen Universe have done, that though 
 their speculations cannot, from the very nature 
 of the problem, give any information on such a 
 subject, they yet lead to results connected with 
 the position of Life and Energy in the Cosmos 
 which are at least perfectly consistent with 
 Christian doctrine. They would then point out 
 the impossibility of conceiving of the Universe 
 without this or some similar doctrine implying 
 development through a spiritual Unseen; and 
 
132 THE CONFERENCE IN 
 
 I think it must be allowed, Doctor, that you 
 were not very successful yesterday when you 
 tried to account for the Universe by means of 
 a dead development. 1 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I proposed next 
 to attack the notion of a future state from the 
 point of view of the common doctrine of the Eter- 
 nity of physical Punishment. Have your Unseen 
 Universe authors provided a reply to this ? 
 
 Frederick .Fair bank. Not that I can see. 
 I noticed that they appeared to avoid the ques- 
 tion, though they are several times brought to 
 the verge of it, and this leads me to suspect 
 that possibly they are not quite at one upon it, 
 for they have certainly shown sufficient fear- 
 lessness of opinion in other matters. Your 
 antagonists will be driven to their own resources 
 for an answer to this objection, and here I will 
 gladly take your part, for I think I am likely to 
 be heartily on your side. In fact, from my 
 
 1 Similar ideas were held by a philosopher of the ninth 
 century, the well-known Johannes Scotus See article ' Erigena' 
 by Professor Adamson, Encyclopedia Britannica, ninth edi- 
 tion. ED. 
 
THE YEW TREE AVENUE. 133 
 
 point of view (not, of course, from yours), I 
 believe that the monstrous misrepresentations 
 of the New Testament Gehenna have had more 
 to do with modern Atheism than all other 
 causes put together. But more of this when 
 
 the time comes. 
 
 / 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I am : very glad. 
 That is the first crumb of comfort you have 
 given me. Well, I have one powerful argu- 
 ment at least, and no concealed armour in the 
 way of it to prevent my thrusting it home ! 
 
 Frederick Fairbanks Don't be too sure of 
 that. I cannot fancy that Bemerton's ideas 
 will be found very different from ours on this 
 subject ; and therefore he must have some easy 
 way out of the difficulty. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. You alarm me; 
 but I have other points of attack ; for instance, 
 the inspiration of Scripture. 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. A good subject, but 
 dangerous. Take care it does not cut both 
 ways. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. And the extreme 
 
i 3 4 THE CONFERENCE IN 
 
 limitation, both in space and in time, of the 
 miraculous element in Scripture records. How 
 will that do ? 
 
 Frederick Fair bank. I think the Unseen 
 Universe deals with this question ; but whether 
 it does or no Sir Kenneth will be sure to be 
 drawn by the subject. He has been very quiet 
 as yet ; but the supernatural in all its forms is 
 perpetually in his mind. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I shall be glad to 
 hear his arguments ; for he is evidently an able 
 and original man, though perhaps a mystic. 
 Well, I have enough for to-day at least, unless 
 they raise some quite unexpected issue. And 
 now pray excuse me, I must think over what 
 you have said, and there is but half-an-hour 
 to breakfast. 
 
 Frederick Fair bank. Come with me, and 
 take a header in the pool under the linn, 
 Doctor. That will clear your head and 
 arrange your ideas better than all your secret 
 ponderings. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Um Himmels- 
 
THE YEW TREE AVENUE. 135 
 
 willen nein. My dear sir, I am not yet accus- 
 tomed to your violent insular doings ; what is 
 pleasure or perhaps necessity to you might be 
 death to me. A cold bath, and before breakfast 
 too. I should be mad never ! (Exit hurriedly.} 
 
 Frederick Fair bank. Not a bad little man, 
 and knows a great deal, no doubt. But 
 what is the good of it ? Reminds one of his 
 own gigantic octopus, whose stomach may be 
 smashed to pieces before its tentacles cease 
 catching food for it. There isn't a single 
 inch of back-bone in his whole system. He 
 fights by rule and method, and mildly re- 
 monstrates with you for lungeing in carte while 
 he is parrying in tierce! A year or two at 
 football and cricket would have made some- 
 thing of him. His knowledge would not have 
 been sensibly the less, but he would have been 
 able to use it. And knowledge is not power 
 except to him who can use it. 
 
 I wouldn't exchange physique and habits 
 with the Doctor if I got all the learning of 
 Germany into the bargain. 
 
136 THE CONFERENCE IN 
 
 Whereupon Frederick Fairbank, so musing, 
 reached the clear deep pool, took his solitary 
 * header,' and forthwith made the best of his 
 way home to breakfast. 
 
 The Doctor had fully recovered his spirits, 
 and was gaily chatting with all and sundry. 
 Miss Fairbank affected to attribute his last 
 evening's preoccupation partly to the excite- 
 ment of his lecture, but chiefly to his unwonted 
 walking performance. 
 
 Miss Fairbank. But if, as we all hope you 
 will, you make some stay with us, Doctor, you 
 will find it indispensable to be a good walker. 
 Scarcely a day passes on which even my cousin 
 and I do not walk at least twice as far as you 
 did yesterday. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I shall gladly 
 learn under your auspices. I confess that your 
 brother has a little frightened me this morning, 
 so that I feel somewhat disposed to avoid his 
 tuition. He would have me engage at once in 
 all his rough pastimes, including (what I still 
 shudder to think of) his early morning plunge 
 
THE YEW TREE AVENUE. 137 
 
 into ice-cold water ! I cannot reconcile the 
 athlete and the philosopher. If he had his will 
 of me, I might perhaps complete the tale of my 
 bad habits by becoming a smoker. What with 
 baths and cricket, fishing, shooting, meals, and 
 the newspapers, and (above all) perpetual 
 smoking, one's whole working day would be 
 mortgaged before one entered on its posses- 
 sion, and its owner would pass through it 
 without having any tangible proof that he had 
 lived otherwise than as a highly- trained wild 
 beast. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M* Kelpie. There I cannot agree 
 with you, Doctor. True, it ill befits me now to 
 speak of such things- years have put several 
 of them quite beyond my power but while I 
 was under sixty I don't think there were many 
 sports in which I should have shunned a trial 
 even against youngsters like Frederick. And 
 I look back to these days with the full con- 
 sciousness that my intellectual part had always 
 its fair share of employment : that is of enjoy- 
 ment. No one, till he tries, has the least idea 
 
138 THE CONFERENCE IN 
 
 how immensely more easily, as well as rapidly, 
 his mind works when his body is kept sedu- 
 lously in what you have called the ' wild-beast 1 
 state, than when by ill-regulated diet and 
 neglect of physical exercise the more tangible 
 part of the complex human machine is allowed 
 to become lethargic or dyspeptic. I shall never 
 forget a remark made by a great medical man, 
 whom I accompanied on his tour of inspection 
 through one of our central prisons, ' See, every 
 one here has a tongue like a dog!' Enforced 
 simplicity of diet and enforced exercise had put 
 these men's bodies into the proper * wild-beast' 
 state. And is it not obvious that their mental 
 condition must have at least equally benefited ? 
 It is with individuals as with nations, the effete 
 voluptuaries of Rome, though once the rulers 
 of the world, went down like nine-pins before 
 the vigorous, because unpampered, Goth. A 
 man who forces his intellect while neglecting 
 his body is in my eyes nothing better than a 
 self-made Strassburg goose, whose whole system 
 is drained in order to exaggerate still farther 
 
THE YEW TREE AVENUE. 139 
 
 one monstrously hypertrophied organ. No 
 doubt the spiritual part of a man is infinitely 
 superior to the material part as the seed-corn 
 to the mere clods in which it has to be buried 
 but if those clods be not sedulously attended 
 to with plough and harrow, nitrates and phos- 
 phates, what becomes of your harvest ? 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. This then is, I 
 suppose, your modern British upper-class creed, 
 what I am told is called 'Muscular Christianity' ? 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. A mere nickname smart 
 enough, and likely to stick, because there is 
 some little aptness in it but, like all nick- 
 names, essentially incomplete and one-sided. 
 Sir Kenneth's ideal, to which I entirely sub- 
 scribe, is a far loftier thing than what is com- 
 monly known as Muscular Christianity which, 
 to my mind at least, seems to be a sort of 
 reproduction of mediaeval knight-errantry and 
 chivalry in a modern dress : with broad-cloth 
 for mail, and the ' noble science' instead of the 
 'joyous passage of arms/ All may strive after 
 Sir Kenneth's ideal, for, like the Christian life 
 
THE CONFERENCE IN 
 
 of which it forms a part, it is open to all : the 
 Spanish steel-coat and the broad-cloth are 
 sacred to the chivalrous order of the Knight 
 and the Squire. The Yeoman may occasion- 
 ally be admitted to its ranks, but the Villein 
 never. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. My dear sir, I 
 feel that I have indeed much to learn. Within 
 the last twenty-four hours I have been intro- 
 duced to a region of which I had hitherto only 
 slight and transient glimpses so transient that 
 I set them down to fancy. I must observe 
 more before I venture to discuss these matters. 
 
 Frederick Fair bank (Aside to his father). 
 I must take him in hand : so he must be kept 
 here at all hazards. He's a splendid little 
 fellow ! We '11 teach him what he never would 
 have learnt had he attended for a lifetime all 
 the Realschulen, Polytechnica, and Universities 
 in his own Fatherland. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. I fear you will not suc- 
 ceed. The Doctor's early training, or rather 
 want of it, has made it almost impossible to 
 
THE YEW TREE AVENUE. 141 
 
 reclaim him by your methods. No ! If he is 
 to be reclaimed the work will be done entirely 
 by a woman. Schiller knew his type well 
 when he said ' 
 
 * Ewig aus der Wahrheit Schranken 
 Schweift des Mannes wilde Kraft ; 
 
 Gierig greift er in die Feme, . . . ' 
 
 And mark how he immediately indicates the 
 remedy : 
 
 * Aber mit zauberisch fesselndem Blicke 
 Winken die Frauen den Fliichtling zuriicke, . . . ' 
 
 Depend upon it, this will be the issue. 
 
 Frederick Fair bank. I prefer the other ver- 
 sion : 
 
 ' Des Gedankens Sieg entehret 
 Der Gefiihle Widerstreit.' 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 Atqui sciebat quae sibi barbarus 
 
 Tortor pararet ; non aliter tamen 
 
 Dimovit obstantes propinquos 
 
 Et populum reditus morantem, 
 Quam si clientum longa negotia 
 Dijudicata lite relinqueret. . 
 
 HORACE. 
 
 ON that day the company were assembled 
 punctually at eleven, for it was known to all 
 that Miss Fairbank had requested permission 
 to take part in the debate. Frederick, in fact, 
 privately told Dr. Stoffkraft that 'he would 
 catch it this time, and no mistake.' ' It 's all 
 very well,' he said, ' arguing with us. We have 
 conventional rules of debate, and so on. But it 
 is a very different thing when the women come 
 in, as you will speedily find to your cost.' But 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 143 
 
 the Doctor was calm and confident, and his 
 whole expression seemed to indicate absolute 
 faith in the security of his position. 
 
 Miss Fairbank. Although I was not present 
 at the discussion of yesterday afternoon, yet I 
 know all about it from Mr. Bemerton. (Here 
 an almost imperceptible glance was exchanged 
 between Sir Kenneth and the host.) I am not 
 sure that I can follow the reasoning, but I could 
 not help wondering very much that the fate of 
 an infinitely important and practical system like 
 Christianity should be placed at the disposal of 
 the victor in a species of intellectual tourna- 
 ment. I have heard of savages staking their 
 clothes, their wives and families, and sometimes 
 even their ornaments ; but it has been quite a 
 new experience to me to hear of grave Christian 
 men staking their religion. 
 
 For my own part, I quite agree with those 
 who hold that the life of Christ and the lives 
 of all the holy men who have followed in His 
 footsteps, are the best proofs of the truth of 
 Christianity; these are the things that require 
 
144 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 to be accounted for. But when I learned from 
 Mr. Bemerton the curious, the strange, I was 
 going to say the grotesque, intellectual points 
 upon which the possibility of a future state 
 was made to depend, I must confess I felt 
 inclined to hold up my hands in absolute 
 amazement. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M l Kelpie. I hope you will not 
 consider it as an interruption, Miss Fairbank, if 
 I tell you that all of us (and I don't think I 
 need except Dr. Stoffkraft) will readily admit 
 the superiority of the internal evidence of the 
 truth of Christianity. 
 
 But you must remember that very many other 
 things besides Christianity wear two greatly 
 different aspects, according as we view them 
 morally or physically. Let us, for instance, 
 imagine that a great and good monarch lies 
 almost at the point of death. Vast moral 
 and social issues are trembling in the bal- 
 ance, and his death will be felt as a blow to 
 freedom over Europe, and perhaps over the 
 world. This is the moral side of the picture. 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 145 
 
 Now for the physical side. The patient lies, let 
 us imagine, in a deep sleep, and if this continues 
 he will do well. The physical requisites for the 
 salvation of Europe are that Carlo should not 
 bark, nor the nurse cough, nor the timbers 
 creak too loudly, for if they do so the King will 
 surely die. Indeed the moral and the physical 
 are very intimately interwoven in this world of 
 ours, and we must just take things as we find 
 them. There are large classes of intelligent 
 men upon whom no impression can be produced 
 by moral reasoning. They pride themselves 
 on being above such a vulgar thing as emotion, 
 and sneer at all religion as being essentially 
 emotional. To them no argument but the 
 physical one is of any consequence. 
 
 Miss Fairbank. It may be so ; indeed I 
 do not think that women can compete with men 
 in strictly intellectual matters, but in morals it 
 is different, and I maintain that the moral 
 instinct of woman is finer as well as more 
 certain than that of man. Now, Dr. Stoffkraft, 
 I have a word to say to you. 
 
 K 
 
r 4 6 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. A thousand if you 
 please, for I am sure that every one of them 
 will be kind and good. 
 
 Miss Fairbank. On referring to my notes, I 
 find that the Doctor used the following words 
 in his opening address : 
 
 * Nothing is more painfully ludicrous to me 
 than the way in which men, even of considerable 
 ability, are certain to fall into what average com- 
 mon sense perceives to be the most palpable 
 absurdities, as soon as they begin to lay down 
 principles in political economy, ethics, or meta- 
 physics. Hence probably the reason why (for 
 nearly a century) these subjects have failed to 
 enlist the highest class of thinkers/ 
 
 Now I think it likely that Dr. Stoffkraft will 
 assent in a great measure, if not entirely, to that 
 collection of moral principles called the Deca- 
 logue. He will likewise own that it is very 
 old^ three thousand years old or more, and 
 from his point of view he is compelled to 
 believe that it is a veritable product of the 
 moral faculties of man. Thus great advances 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEB A. 
 
 were made in ethics at a time when physical 
 
 ' ^*^\ 
 
 science was in the most rudimentary state, if 
 
 ^O^^' X 
 
 indeed it could be said to exist at all. 
 
 No doubt, too, the Doctor will view our 
 Saviour as a mere man ; but if so, he must be 
 regarded as doing for ethics incomparably more 
 than even Newton did for physics. So com- 
 pletely did Christ grasp the fundamental prin- 
 ciples of ethics, that ever since His day the 
 science has been mainly deductive and very 
 much confined to a practical application of the 
 great maxims which were given to the world 
 more than eighteen centuries ago. 
 
 On the other hand, physical science has been 
 until very recently in an extremely backward 
 state, and is not this the reason why the strong- 
 est intellects have been required to push it 
 rapidly forward ? The Doctor would lead us 
 to believe that ethical science is incapable of 
 marching, and that physical science must march 
 on without her ; while the truth is, that ethical 
 science is already for ever completed, so far as 
 her general outline and main principles are 
 
i 4 8 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 'concerned, and has been as it were waiting for 
 physical science to come up with her. This, 
 from the very nature of things, will never 
 happen. 
 
 Dr. Hermann S toff kr aft. You have quite 
 correctly quoted my words, which, however (so 
 far, at least, as you have called them in question), 
 were intended by me to refer not so much to 
 moral maxims, with the truth of which I quite 
 agree, as to the foundation of our moral con- 
 victions, about which (you will bear me out) 
 there has recently been very much controversy. 
 
 Miss Fair bank. No doubt; but if I am 
 not mistaken, there has been an equally ani- 
 mated discussion about the nature of our intel- 
 lectual acquirements, and whether we have 
 after all any real knowledge of outward things. 
 
 And you will own that you are not now com- 
 paring together our positive acquirements in 
 ethics and physics, but are rather engaged in 
 a semi-metaphysical discussion regarding the 
 foundations of our faculties. 
 
 It seems that you have only quite recently 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE, DEBATE. 149 
 
 got hold of the conviction, that the intellect 
 must not be put to permanent confusion in 
 such a way at least as to be able to apply the 
 principle as a weapon. But for a. long time a 
 similar principle has beea held in ethics and 
 religion, and has also been very extensively 
 applied in practice it is certainly as old as the 
 Psalmist. Indeed, it is by applying this very 
 principle that I am furnished with what I con- 
 sider the most powerful argument for a future 
 state, for to deny the existence of such a state 
 would lead, I maintain, to irretrievable moral 
 and spiritual confusion. And now, to conclude, 
 I would ask you all if there be not at the pre- 
 sent day too formal a separation between in- 
 tellectual and religious pursuits, so that while 
 the man and not the woman is chiefly devoted 
 to intellectual matters, the woman and not the 
 man is left to fulfil the duties of religion. Thus 
 the great intellectual arenas are chiefly occupied 
 by the one sex, and the churches very much by 
 the other. 
 
 Now, I do not profess to be a strong-minded 
 
150 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 woman, or to come prepared with a remedy for 
 all this, but I am not the less certain that it is 
 wrong to separate the two things in this way. 
 It brings about the grotesque result that the 
 man conceives he has an intellectual argument 
 against immortality, into which the woman does 
 not enter, while, on the other hand, the woman 
 conceives she has a moral argument in favour 
 of immortality, into which the man does not 
 enter. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. What you have 
 just said can be very easily answered at least I 
 think so. What do you fancy is the reason for 
 the extraordinary excess of feminine over male 
 believers in Christianity ? It is not (at least I 
 can honestly say not to my knowledge) any in- 
 feriority in point of logical acuteness of intellect. 
 I rather attribute it to what may be called 
 a want of strength of mind a disposition 
 common to the whole female sex to receive, 
 without questioning, whatever is strongly urged 
 upon their belief. It was Eve, according to the 
 old but well-constructed tale, who was deluded 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 151 
 
 by the serpent not Adam. And it is the 
 1 silly women ' who are led captive according 
 to Paul. So when some fire-breathing ranter 
 abuses his position by gloating over the 
 imagined future agonies of all who differ from 
 him in opinion, however slightly, women listen 
 with wonder and awe, nothing questioning ; but 
 the stronger common sense of man requires 
 proof instead of assertion. And here in fact is 
 the strongest of all arguments against the truth 
 of Christianity, and the immortality which it 
 proclaims. In the older creeds the notion of a 
 future state was shadowy and intangible, but 
 doleful alike for good and bad. Mohammed 
 also was consistent for his Paradise and his 
 Hell were alike sensuous. But if the opinion 
 of the great majority of Christians is to be 
 trusted, their Hell alone is real, sensuous, 
 material ; their Heaven altogether vague, 
 mysterious, and intangible. They know every 
 detail about the future condition of the wicked 
 a condition which is to continue for ever, 
 gradually becoming worse. But the immor- 
 
1 5 2 CONCL US JON OF THE DEB A TE. 
 
 tality of the righteous is something per se t incap- 
 able of being conceived, and therefore not to be 
 described by analogy. This won't do. Science 
 and common sense alike proclaim the inhereat 
 falsehood of a creed like this. There can be 
 no generic difference of the kind. The best of 
 men cannot possibly be as superior to the least 
 bad, as the least bad is to the worst. In fact, 
 the idea of eternal physical punishment is a 
 purely human one, originally devised to give 
 the more astute of men a fearful hold on the 
 imaginations of their weaker brethren, and still 
 worked with great success in this very way. 
 And a religion which represents its God the 
 supposed Author of all our ideas of moral right, 
 as condemning to infinitely protracted torture 
 mere finite and exceedingly imperfect beings, 
 is an inhuman, a blasphemous, and therefore a 
 false religion. 
 
 Frederick Fair bank. I am glad to have the 
 opportunity of protesting against what I con- 
 ceive to be a gross and abominable perversion 
 of truth. I grant at once that if the views 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 153 
 
 stated by Dr. Stoffkraft, and undoubtedly held 
 by many Christians, were at all correct, his 
 conclusion would be inevitable. This is not 
 the time to enter into an argument on the sub- 
 ject, still less to justify my opinion, as I could 
 easily do by references to all parts of Scripture. 
 I will merely say that I cannot imagine how 
 any one can doubt that immortality is there 
 stated to be a boon specially conferred, and on 
 those alone who are accounted worthy. 1 I 
 don't know what Mr. Bemerton may think, but 
 in my opinion this, is indubitably the formal 
 doctrine of the Church of England. In the 
 very first Collect of the Christian year we have 
 the petition that in the last day . . . we may 
 rise to the life immortal. In the second we 
 pray that we may embrace and ever holdfast the 
 blessed hope of everlasting life given to us in 
 Christ. And in another which soon follows, we 
 pray that the Church, enlightened, by doctrine, 
 may so walk that it may at length attain to the 
 light of everlasting life. In another, that the 
 
 1 See Life in Christ, by Edward White. 
 
154 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 people of God may be governed and preserved 
 evermore, both in body and soul. But I need 
 not quote farther examples. 
 
 Eschatology must, from the very nature of 
 the case, be one of the most difficult of subjects 
 to the human intellect. But there is a broad 
 general principle which I have always main- 
 tained, though I do not recollect having seen it 
 in print, viz., that just as * a revelation of any- 
 thing we could find out for ourselves would be 
 an absurdity/ so any ideas we may form (in- 
 dependent of revelation) on a subject where 
 revelation has been vouchsafed to us, are neces- 
 sarily absurd. And thus Mohammed's material 
 Hell completely disposes of the wonderfully 
 similar notions originating in a corrupt state 
 of the Church, and still entertained by many 
 sects of Christians. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. I am afraid I do 
 not quite see the drift of this last point in 
 Frederick's argument. Inspiration, as I take 
 it, is intended to procure us .knowledge essen- 
 tial to our well-being, which could not be other- 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 155 
 
 wise obtained. But knowledge is one thing 
 and conjecture another ; and conjectures regard- 
 ing a future state may very well have arisen in 
 the human mind quite independently of revela- 
 tion, which would then come in either to verify 
 or disprove such conjectures. Thus I imagine 
 inspiration may verify as well as originate. 
 
 No doubt the antients had some vague 
 belief in a future state, but they did not regard 
 it as one in which the deeds done in the body 
 were to receive their just retribution. This is 
 clearly shown by the authors of The Unseen 
 Universe, who remark that 'while we of the 
 present day regard the future life as in some 
 sense the reward of piety and goodness, the 
 antients looked upon Hades rather as a penalty 
 which inexorable fate had reserved for all men, 
 and from which even piety and goodness were 
 powerless to exempt their possessors.' 
 
 One great object of Christ in His utterances 
 was to bring out this aspect of the question, 
 which had somehow fallen into the shade, and 
 He does so by giving a most vivid description 
 
156 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 of the joys of the righteous and the punishment 
 of the wicked. 
 
 He was not addressing a coterie of meta- 
 physical philosophers, and therefore I take it 
 we cannot frame from His words any scientific 
 theory either of the nature of future punish- 
 ment or of its duration. All that we can 
 gather is (to adopt the words of Dr. Irons), 
 that retribution will be morally complete. We 
 ought to remember that rude Galilean peasants 
 had no true conception of what we mean by 
 eternity, and were likewise quite incapable of 
 grasping the scientific definition of annihila- 
 tion. Had Christ chosen to inform them that 
 they had lived through a previous existence 
 which they did not now remember; or that in a 
 future state they would forget this present life 
 altogether, they woul'd unquestionably have 
 received His doctrine without hesitation or 
 comment. Indeed, I have myself heard men 
 pretending to believe in a future state deny to 
 the departed any remembrance of their earthly 
 life men who considered themselves strictly 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 157 
 
 orthodox, but who had evidently a better 
 acquaintance with Christianity than with logic. 
 Therefore I maintain that we are not to look to 
 Christ's sayings for a revelation of the scientific 
 conditions of a future state. Indeed, such a re- 
 velation would Jiave been uncalled for. But, on 
 the other hand, Christ gathered together from 
 all quarters every illustration that could lend 
 power to his language, when He described the 
 future state as one of rewards and punish- 
 ments. The righteous were to enjoy a blissful 
 and honourable existence indefinitely prolonged, 
 while the wicked were to receive punishment 
 and disgrace -of indefinite duration likewise. 
 Amongst the various figures of speech which 
 He selected for this purpose, there were two that 
 would tell very powerfully upon the Jewish 
 mind. To the devout Jew the services of the 
 Temple were the very incarnation of holy and 
 honourable enjoyment, and were accordingly 
 borrowed by our Saviour and His apostles in 
 their description of heaven. The Gehenna 
 outside Jerusalem was, on the other hand, the 
 
rjS CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 very incarnation of all that was vile and worth- 
 less. It was a place where garbage was con- 
 sumed, where the worm died not, and where 
 the fire was not quenched, and was therefore 
 chosen as a type of the place of the lost. In 
 course of time, however, Jerusalem was de- 
 stroyed ; a race of Christians grew up who 
 knew neither the Temple nor the Gehenna, 
 and these, while they retained, of course, the 
 Saviour's words describing the joys of heaven, 
 were evidently at a loss to discern their true 
 meaning. A vague conception of an ethereal 
 state of endless praise was the result the 
 eternity of the tabor, as it has been termed by 
 a modern writer. Now such a heaven would 
 certainly not attract the great multitude of 
 mankind, and hence (unconsciously perhaps) 
 theologians and religious teachers felt it in- 
 cumbent on them, if they could not persuade 
 men out of wickedness by the joys of heaven, 
 to terrify them out of it by the fears of hell, 
 and thus Gehenna came in course of time to 
 give place to a walled-in region of endless 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 159 
 
 physical torment. The impenitent man in the 
 picture of Christ was like a traveller determined 
 to go on a fearful journey amid the blackness 
 of darkness, saluted ever and anon by the mut- 
 tering of distant thunder and the momentary 
 flash that only served to make darkness visible. 
 To my mind this awful darkness is more im- 
 pressive not only than the red-light and paste- 
 board demons of a past age, but even than the 
 sheer fall into nothingness that has recently 
 replaced these antiquated horrors. 
 
 Frederick Fair bank. But do not these awful 
 words, ' Son, remember!* induce us to believe 
 that the remembrance of a neglected and mis- 
 used past will be one great element in future 
 punishment ? There will be a preternaturally 
 vivid remembrance of all that we have done 
 amiss, and in time this will consume our very 
 being, this intensity of remorse gnawing into 
 the very vitals of memory, just as intense pain 
 comes to an end by consuming the organ that 
 gives rise to it. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. I will accept this 
 
160 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 as a speculation if you please, but not as a 
 revelation. Perhaps the time may come for 
 such speculations. My conviction is, that just 
 as physical and natural science are gradually 
 improving our knowledge of the origin and 
 progress of cosmical and terrestrial phenomena, 
 the genesis of worlds, and the development of 
 animals, the materials ^having been all ready 
 before man was created, but being only now 
 made use of so the true nature of the Christian 
 revelation, for the discovery of which the 
 materials have been in our hands, in a more or 
 less complete form, for eighteen centuries, is 
 becoming more and more clear to those who 
 by freedom from preconceived opinions and by 
 philological knowledge are best fitted for the 
 task. Can we expect that human beings, 
 differing as they do, in the widest manner, 
 on the so-called Questions of the day,' the 
 materials for judgment on which are in the 
 hands of all, should, all at once, or even in 
 thousands of years, exactly comprehend all 
 that was involved in the Advent, the Life, 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 161 
 
 and the Death of the Author of Christianity ? 
 Does religion belong to so different an order 
 of our faculties that we have any right to 
 expect that we should now, even after eighteen 
 centuries of patient examination, know all or 
 even much about it? Is it so much more evi- 
 dent than the cause of gravitation, or that of 
 the periodicity of sun-spots and of Eastern 
 famines ? Yet these are matters on which we 
 have the means of 'fully judging give us time 
 enough. Human intellects are very limited, 
 and we must be content to take a great deal on 
 the evidence of our faith, as well as on that of 
 our senses, before reason can be expected to 
 come in to the rescue. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft (just a little out of 
 temper). I shall now, if you please, bring for- 
 ward the whole question of inspiration. 
 
 My first position is that the inspiration of 
 the Scriptures is not plenary they cannot be 
 verbally inspired. 
 
 I will not now refer to certain statements 
 which, taken literally, are simply incredible, 
 
 L 
 
1 62 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 even allowing the possibility of the miraculous ; 
 but I will confine myself to remarking that 
 different versions of the Old Testament differ 
 in their wording, and that the Septuagint trans- 
 lation, which is largely quoted from in the New 
 Testament, differs in many respects from the 
 English Authorised Version. 
 
 Some, I am aware, maintain that while the 
 original manuscript was verbally inspired, differ- 
 ences have in course of time crept in through 
 the mistakes of copyists. 
 
 But I am forced to regard an inspiration of 
 this nature, unsupplemented by the continued 
 superintendence of copyists and translators, as 
 a perfectly futile proceeding, leading to no 
 practical result. My next position is, that 
 Christ and his Apostles, as well as the whole 
 Jewish Church at the time of Christ, including 
 the whole of the New Testament writers, 
 believed in the verbal inspiration of the Scrip- 
 tures. It must be so if we are to judge from 
 their quotations and the way in which they 
 discussed the words of Scripture. There can 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 163 
 
 be no doubt that those upon whom we depend 
 for the Christian religion, including, I venture 
 to say, the Master himself, held an untenable 
 theory in religious matters, and I fail to see 
 how we can reconcile this with the Divine per- 
 fection of Christ. 
 
 The Rev. Ralph B enter ton. I believe I am 
 at one with the Doctor regarding the first 
 position which he has assumed. Like him, I 
 do not believe in the plenary verbal inspi- 
 ration of the Bible, and the Church to 
 which I belong goes no further than to assert 
 that the Scriptures contain the word of 
 God. 
 
 I quite think, too, that the plenary and verbal 
 inspiration of the original document, without 
 the continued Divine superintendence of copy- 
 ists and translators, would be a perfectly futile 
 proceeding. We may therefore dismiss such 
 a hypothesis from our consideration. On the 
 other hand, a verbal inspiration, with the super- 
 intendence of copyists and translators, would 
 be a method of procedure very much unlike 
 
1 64 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 any of the other works of God ; and we may 
 be very glad that it does not exist. 
 
 Had there been sufficient evidence for such 
 a system, it would very speedily have produced 
 an arrogant and pedantic caste of copyists, 
 translators, and expounders a thousand times 
 worse than the Scribes and Pharisees of 
 old. 
 
 Besides which, all independent thought and 
 spiritual freedom would soon have received 
 their death-blow, and the very life and manhood 
 would have been eaten out of the Church. 
 There would seem to be a very profound 
 tendency in the human mind to attribute a 
 quasi-mechanical, or at least easily perceivable, 
 perfection to all the works of God. I need not 
 recall the great mistake of the schoolmen who 
 would insist on the spotless perfection of the 
 sun and the perfect circularity of the planetary 
 orbits. Whereas the non-circularity of these 
 orbits, when once fully recognised, led Newton 
 onwards and upwards to the great law of 
 universal gravitation ; and the study of sun- 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 165 
 
 spots seems destined to lead to equally im- 
 portant results. 
 
 Now, applying the same mode of reasoning 
 to the subject before us, may we not hope to 
 glean something from this very want of 
 mechanical perfection in the phraseology of 
 the Bible, and be ultimately led to a higher 
 view of what the Bible really is, and of the way 
 in which we are to learn from it ? 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. But, meanwhile, 
 what are we to do ? How can we receive the 
 Bible as our rule of faith and practice ? Paul 
 himself says : ' If the trumpet give an un- 
 certain sound, who shall prepare himself to the 
 battle?' 
 
 The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. Your objection 
 would be valid if the Bible were to be regarded 
 in the same light as the codified laws of a 
 country, the minutest departure from which will 
 render the transgressor liable to a certain speci- 
 fied penalty ; but this is not the case. 
 
 The Bible is in great part a venerable and 
 complex historical document, describing the 
 
1 66 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 dealings of God with man. It is composed of 
 nearly seventy books, written during the lapse 
 of sixteen hundred years. Now, a mere code of 
 laws may be so explicit as to direct the man 
 who has no moral sense whatever. He may 
 not perceive the beauty of the code ; he may 
 even loathe and abhor it ; but he can appre- 
 tiate the sting of the lash, or the hard work 
 and sharp discipline of a jail. But God has in- 
 tended the Bible to be of use to those who do 
 not smother their heaven-implanted spiritual 
 instinct, even although this may be in a very 
 rudimentary state. To one who has smothered 
 it the letter killeth ; but to one who has nursed 
 and tended it, the Spirit giveth life. ' Thy 
 word,' says the Psalmist, ' is a light unto my 
 feet and a lamp unto my path,' but it will not 
 be so to him who has made himself spiritually 
 blind. 
 
 Again, revelation is like a tree bearing pre- 
 cious fruit that is good for food. But if a man 
 be so completely disorganised as to be unable 
 to appretiate the fruit, or if he be in doubt 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 167 
 
 whether he should partake of the fruit rather 
 than of the leaves and bark (his senses failing 
 to distinguish between these three things), then 
 it is not probable that he will derive benefit 
 from the tree. 
 
 There is an instinct which underlies all our 
 practical operations, and which is independent 
 of our scientific attainments, which it invariably 
 precedes. 
 
 A man who has eyes will not decline to 
 make use of light until he is conversant with 
 the undulatory theory, nor will a man who is 
 hungry object to an apple or a piece of bread 
 until he is absolutely master of its chemical 
 constitution. 
 
 In like manner we may derive unspeakable 
 practical benefits from the Bible long before we 
 are prepared with a complete theory of in- 
 spiration. 
 
 It is so in all the arts of life; we have first 
 of all a rough method of using the materials 
 provided for us, and we ultimately arrive at 
 a knowledge of the scientific principles under- 
 
1 68 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 lying our method, and are thus able to improve 
 it. The art calls up the science, and the 
 science improves the art. 
 
 So with the subject we are discussing. It is 
 intensely interesting as well as instructive to 
 study the Bible scientifically, and try to under- 
 stand the exact nature of its inspiration ; but we 
 may derive the benefits which the book is so 
 well fitted to impart long before our theory is 
 complete. 
 
 The upholder of verbal inspiration may per- 
 haps liken the Bible to a tree bearing precious 
 fruit, but he insists that every leaf, nay, every 
 particle, of this tree shall be alive. Well, the 
 critic takes him at his word, and approaching 
 the tree, discovers a dead leaf : on the strength 
 of this, he at once condemns the whole tree. 
 Thus the one extreme calls forth and justifies 
 the other; and, meanwhile, the contending 
 parties are too busy quarrelling with each other 
 to partake of the fruit, which is hanging in rich 
 clusters above their heads. For Death may be 
 found even beneath the shadow of the tree of life. 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 169 
 
 No doubt the theory of verbal inspiration is 
 a natural consequence of the too general sys- 
 tem of breaking up the Scripture record into a 
 vast number of small fragments, each of which 
 is made to furnish an appropriate motto or text 
 for a discourse. A modern writer on this sub- 
 ject speaks as follows : * 
 
 'If the Bible be, as we suppose, a record of 
 progressive and continuous revelation, it will 
 carry with it traces of the action of the same 
 intelligence which reveals itself in Nature. 
 What do we find there ? Nature is a living 
 and complex whole, absolutely unintelligible in 
 fragments, and requiring alike for its scientific 
 explanation and highest practical use connected 
 study of its unity. No man in his senses would 
 now think of treating any science after the 
 fashion in which many of us treat the Divine 
 Revelation, by means exclusively of orations on 
 isolated facts and phenomena.' 
 
 And the same writer tells us that * the Bible as 
 
 1 On Connected Explanation of Holy Scripture, by the Rev. 
 Edward White. 
 
i;o CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 a whole is an overpowering reply to all impor- 
 tant objections to the Bible in detail.' It seems 
 to me quite certain that Christ and his apostles 
 viewed the Bible in this light ; they regarded 
 it as a record of progressive and continuous 
 revelation which was to culminate with Chris- 
 tianity, thus forming a species of spiritual evolu- 
 tion. And indeed Christ himself acknowledged 
 certain imperfections in the earlier revelation 
 which were rendered unavoidable by the rude 
 state at that time of the chosen people. While, 
 again, St. Paul gives us, in words that are 
 strangely overlooked, his idea of inspiration, 
 when he tells us ' all scripture is given by in- 
 spiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, 
 for reproof, for correction, for instruction in 
 righteousness.' 
 
 God reveals Divine truth in the Bible just 
 as He does corn in the ear. He does not 
 reveal to us, however, the scientific constitution 
 either of the ear of corn, or of the Bible 
 these we must find out for ourselves. To 
 imagine that Christ, who spoke the words of 
 
CONCL USION OF THE DEB A TE. 171 
 
 Him that sent Him, was commissioned to 
 impart such knowledge, is surely a mistake. 
 Had the gospels contained a long and learned 
 discourse of Christ upon the Elohistic and the 
 Jehovistic records, or upon the authorship of 
 the various books of the Bible, all critics, and 
 you, my dear Doctor, amongst them, would 
 have justly looked upon these documents with 
 profound suspicion. 
 
 Dr. Hermann S toff kr aft, If it would not 
 unduly lengthen out our discussion I should be 
 glad to introduce now the subject of the 
 miraculous. My first remark will be upon cer- 
 tain Old Testament miracles, which are very 
 unlike those said to have been wrought by 
 Christ. In some of these there is conspi- 
 cuously present the element of violence, with 
 an utter disregard of human life ; while in 
 others there is an obvious puerility which (to 
 my mind) at once disposes of their super- 
 natural origin. My next remark is that miracles, 
 if there ever were any, have now ceased for 
 eighteen hundred years. And all the alleged 
 
1 7 2 CONCL USION OF THE DEB A TE. 
 
 miracles on record are said to have happened 
 in an age which was pre-scientific, and which 
 could not therefore thoroughly examine their 
 claims to be supernatural, inasmuch as man's 
 knowledge of the ordinary course of nature was 
 then very small so small indeed that many of 
 our modern physical experiments, which even 
 the vulgar see without astonishment, would 
 certainly have appeared miraculous to the most 
 learned of those days. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M'Kelpie. For all that, the 
 events described, if truly described, are as mira- 
 culous to our modern knowledge as they could 
 have been to antient ignorance. This is a very 
 strong point as characterising the Scripture 
 miracles. Pardon the digression. I merely 
 wish to ask Dr. Stoffkraft if nature does not 
 sometimes act in a way that seems to be utterly 
 regardless of life. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. 'Undoubtedly ; 
 and we know how strongly John Stuart Mill 
 felt this difficulty when he said, ' Optimists, 
 in their attempt to prove that " whatever is, is 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 173 
 
 right," are obliged to maintain, not that nature 
 never turns one step from her path to avoid 
 trampling us into destruction, but that it would 
 be very unreasonable in us to expect that she 
 should. 
 
 ' Pope's " shall gravitation cease when you 
 go by ?" may be a just rebuke to any one who 
 should be so silly as to expect common human 
 morality from nature. But if the question were 
 between two men, instead of between a man 
 and a natural phenomenon, that triumphant 
 apostrophe would be thought a rare piece of 
 impudence/ 
 
 Now does not all this go to support the posi- 
 tion which I assumed at the outset when I 
 supposed myself unable to reconcile the facts 
 of the world with the Infinite power and good- 
 ness of God ? 
 
 Sir Kenneth M' Kelpie. I maintain that this 
 question depends altogether on the platform on 
 which we stand ; as a little reflection cannot 
 fail to convince us. If there were no hereafter, 
 or even if we were sure that the present life 
 
174 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 is the end of our spiritual education, and that 
 we crystallise at death, then I grant you we 
 could with difficulty understand the providen- 
 tial dealings of God in permitting the individual 
 to perish through the operation of blind physical 
 laws, and to lose either his being or his chance 
 of salvation. I say, ' with difficulty/ because I 
 do not think I am entitled to use a stronger 
 word. But if we believe in a future state, and 
 imagine that our spiritual education is not 
 ended here, then death is stripped of many of 
 its terrors. 
 
 To us, doubtless, who are in the world death 
 will always be a perplexing occurrence, putting 
 human relations out of joint. But to the 
 Governor whose sway embraces both worlds it 
 may wear a very different aspect, and disease 
 and accident may be looked on as His messen- 
 gers whom he employs to summon his subjects 
 into His presence. 
 
 When I see a rock fall and crush to death 
 a fellow-man I associate the occurrence with 
 gloom and wretchedness, simply because I 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 175 
 
 cannot see within the veil. Nevertheless it 
 may wear a very different aspect to the eye of 
 Omniscience. Just as, to our eyes, a caterpillar, 
 a chrysalis, and a butterfly are successive forms 
 of the same individual insect (though, of course, 
 we do not ourselves understand the processes 
 of transformation), while it is pretty certain that 
 a caterpillar would not recognise a butterfly, 
 still less a chrysalis, as something at all of 
 the same kind as itself. It seems to me that 
 the antients read this extremely instructive 
 analogy in a much clearer manner than any one 
 has done in modern times. 
 
 Now if the natural occurrences of life are 
 thus* ministers which God employs for calling 
 His creatures before him, is there any reason 
 why He should not employ miracles for the 
 same purpose ? But if I remember rightly 
 Butler has already handled this subject. 
 
 To my mind the true solution is found by 
 supposing that in reality, and to the eye of God, 
 death may be regarded as a comparatively small 
 event in the history of the individual, or at 
 
1 7 6 CONCL USION OF THE DEB A TE. 
 
 least as not possessing that infinite importance 
 which many assign to it. And any school which 
 maintains an opposite hypothesis must surely 
 manufacture for itself altogether unnecessary 
 difficulties in the way of its grasping the char- 
 acter of God. Nevertheless there is a class of 
 men who do not scruple to hold simultaneously 
 beliefs somewhat like the following. 
 
 In the first place, they regard the transition 
 from spiritual death to life, from danger to 
 safety, as a very abrupt one, feebly shadowed 
 forth even by the escape of Noah from the 
 Deluge. 
 
 Secondly, they maintain that this transition 
 must take place before physical death, if it is to 
 take place at all. 
 
 Thirdly, they frankly acknowledge the abso- 
 lute recklessness of natural forces that destroy 
 without distinction the evil and the good, the 
 converted and the unconverted. 
 
 Fourthly, they maintain that it is presump- 
 tion to question the justice of God, who is 
 supreme Governor. 
 
CONCL USION OF THE DEB A TE. 177 
 
 Fifthly, they imagine that our own con- 
 sciences will in a great measure frame our 
 accusation at the great assize. 
 
 And lastly, they believe that certain Chris- 
 tians, perhaps they themselves, will take a 
 share as assessors on that occasion. 
 
 Now I content myself with the assertion 
 that I cannot see how all these incompatible 
 doctrines can be simultaneously held. Thus, 
 the argument must be a very powerful one 
 which would induce me to believe that the 
 spiritual condition of the individual is crystal- 
 lised at death whatever the modern hymnist 
 may say : as, for instance, 
 
 ' Life is the season God hath given 
 To fly from hell and rise to heaven.' 
 
 But, on the contrary, have we not good reason 
 to think that the primitive church did not 
 hold as a doctrine this hard and fast crystal- 
 lisation ? We all know what St. Peter says 
 about Christ preaching to ' the spirits in prison/ 
 The Church of Rome too believes in a state 
 where souls are purified, and it was only after 
 
 M 
 
178 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 the Reformation (and because Purgatory had 
 been utilized) that the stern (I had almost said 
 savage) theodicy of modern times took its rise. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. You have said 
 nothing about the puerility of some of the 
 miracles of the Old Testament. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M' Kelpie. Any reasonable 
 communication from the unseen must, in the 
 very nature of things, adapt itself to the state 
 of the human society to which it is made. 
 Possibly some of the miracles of the Old 
 Testament may not commend themselves to 
 Dr. Stoffkraft, a philosopher of the nineteenth 
 century, but they were in perfect accordance 
 with the feelings of the antient Jews. Dr. 
 Stoffkraft believes that this supposed puerility 
 is an infallible proof that these miracles were 
 not of Divine origin, but to my mind the 
 argument goes rather the other way. What 
 are we the ablest of us in the sight of 
 Omniscience ? In comparison with Omni- 
 science, all human intellects, from that of 
 Newton to the lowest savage or the youngest 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 179 
 
 child, are alike infinitesimal. Besides, even 
 were it not so, a wise father who is anxious to 
 instruct his young child will speak to him in a 
 very different manner from that in which he 
 will address a youth or a grown-up man. 
 , The Rev. Ralph Bemerton. And when the 
 child has grown up to intellectual adolescence, 
 his father will cease to watch over him with 
 the minute and constant attention he bestowed 
 when he was a child. When the time comes 
 for his being released from leading-strings, he 
 will leave him in a great measure to his own 
 powers, having first done his utmost for his 
 welfare. Now is not this the way in which 
 God has dealt with man ? In the fulness of 
 time God sent His own Son into the world, and 
 the character which He manifested, the position 
 which He asserted, and the deeds which He 
 did, combine to furnish a permanent miracle. 
 No doubt it is discriminating in its appeals, but 
 any one who has the slightest inkling of the 
 spiritual sense will not fail to perceive that the 
 Christian idea of Christ is not something that 
 
i8o CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 took its rise in the imagination of man. You will 
 perhaps tell me this is no proof of the divinity 
 of Christ ; and I will own that we possess no 
 rigorously logical proof. Nevertheless, you 
 have to account for the undoubted fact that a 
 perfect man once lived. Such a fact is simply 
 an astounding moral miracle. 1 
 
 And here, as when dealing with inspiration, 
 let me repeat that our grasp and appretiation of 
 Christianity depend upon the spiritual instinct, 
 and do not pre-suppose a perfect theory either 
 of the inspiration of the Old Testament or of 
 the miraculous element which it contains. The 
 Bible tells us all this very frequently, and in 
 words which I need not now repeat. Rather 
 let me quote from a modern writer, Coleridge, 
 who speaks as follows : ' Whatever may be 
 thought of the genuineness or authority of any 
 part of the book of Daniel, it makes no differ- 
 ence in my belief in Christianity; for Chris- 
 
 1 See ' The rationale of Miracles,' Church Quarterly Review, 
 April 1876. Also article in the Saturday Review upon the 
 same subject. 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 181 
 
 tianity is within a man, even as he is a being 
 gifted with reason/ And again he says, ' For 
 Christianity proves itself, as the sun is seen by 
 its own light. Its evidence is involved in its 
 existence/ 
 
 Sir Kenneth M l Kelpie. And that existence 
 is itself a miracle and a continued one. Men 
 speak of the religious systems of Buddha 
 and of Mohammed as persistent, and therefore 
 possibly genuine. But their persistence is that 
 of everything Eastern a state of indolent re- 
 pose, and of status quo. How different from 
 an essentially aggressive creed like that of the 
 Christian ! What has been considered as Chris- 
 tianity has never for more than a few centuries 
 been exactly the same creed all sorts of so- 
 called Reformations have modified it, and split 
 its adherents into sects innumerable, many of 
 them being in fact almost infinitesimal. But it 
 lives on for all that, and will probably have to 
 suffer many more gigantic Reformations before 
 it becomes anything like the ideal of Christ and 
 His immediate followers. I hope I may call 
 
182 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 myself a Christian, yet there is no one of the 
 infinitely varied creeds of modern Europe to 
 whose dogmas I can wholly subscribe. What 
 we require is no new Revelation, but simply an 
 adequate conception of the true essence of 
 Christianity. And I believe that, as time goes 
 on, the work of the Holy Spirit will be con- 
 tinuously shown in the gradual insight which 
 the human race will attain into the true essence 
 of the Christian religion. I am thus of opi- 
 nion that a standing miracle exists, and that 
 it has ever existed : a direct and continued 
 influence exerted by the supernatural on the 
 natural. I am of course aware of the Scripture 
 which says, ' My spirit shall not always strive 
 with man,' but I interpret it in the sense that 
 ultimately there will be such agreement as to 
 render 'strife' unnecessary, and in fact impos- 
 sible. But that we are at every instant guided 
 and assisted morally, perhaps even physically, 
 in our otherwise hopeless struggles, is, I think, 
 all but axiomatic. I would go even further, 
 and say that if it were not so if the universe 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 183 
 
 and its inhabitants had been, as it were, merely 
 started on a set of rails, already definitely laid 
 down, and had been furnished with the requisite 
 driving power (every precaution being taken to 
 prevent accidents), conscience would have been 
 an absurd and therefore an impossible adjunct, 
 and free will, of which we are all conscious, 
 a violation of natural law. To my mind the 
 whole universe, material or not, is peopled with 
 spirits good or bad. And men's souls live 
 amongst these, just as their bodies do among 
 the conflicting agencies of ozone and disease- 
 germs. While I am on this subject, I should 
 like to tell you of a strange dream I had about 
 a year ago. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Let us hear it by all 
 means, Sir Kenneth. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M'Kelpie. I dreamt that a 
 friend and myself were walking one morning 
 under the shadow of the * Tree of Social Vir- 
 tues/ and were partaking of its delicious fruit 
 with the most exquisite relish. Now this tree, 
 while its roots are fixed in the Unseen, has 
 
184 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 thrown out many large branches over the 
 naturalistic paddock, and what was our surprise 
 to find all these swarming with a motley group 
 of men. There were Secularists, Comtists, 
 Atheists, Nihilists, and many more, whose con- 
 fessions of faith are denoted by words ending 
 in ist they were all there, and each man was 
 provided with a saw. On being hailed, one 
 of their number leered at us over his saw in a 
 most impudent manner, and informed us that 
 he was entitled by law to all the branches that 
 were over his paddock. Each of the ists had 
 therefore asked his own surveyor to raise a 
 vertical plane from his boundary line, and to 
 mark the points where this intersected the 
 various branches ; and they intended to appro- 
 priate these up to the limits of the marks. 
 
 But, said my companion, people at your 
 elevation must surely perceive that the roots of 
 the tree are not in your paddock at all. 
 
 Hereupon the fellow remarked, with a dis- 
 gusting gesture, that they were all somewhat 
 shortsighted, and couldn't see so far away as 
 
CONCL USION OF THE DEB A TE. 185 
 
 theosophers like us. This of course raised a 
 general laugh at our expense. But what 
 benefit, said I, can you possibly expect from 
 cutting down the branches ? 
 
 That is our look-out, said the impudent 
 fellow once more : we love this tree just as 
 much as you do, and we know that we are 
 entitled to every leaf of it that lies above our 
 paddock. We mean to have them too; and we 
 have no intention, I can assure you, of poking 
 our heads the least inch beyond the proper 
 boundary. We are great sticklers for law, 
 and will keep to our programme. Hereupon 
 another fellow with appropriate gestures jocu- 
 larly informed us that they meant to pelt us 
 with the branches of the tree if we didn't 
 leave them alone. This roused my anger 
 against the man, and I shook my cudgel at 
 him, but my friend pulled me back by my 
 skirts. Better leave them alone, said he let 
 them carry out their programme; come away 
 for half an hour, and they will set to work. 
 When we returned, each man seemed very 
 
1 86 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 busy with his saw, and my friend whispered in 
 my ear, ' You see that in order to carry out his 
 programme, each man is obliged to sit on the 
 branch that he is sawing off! ! ! ' 
 
 It is a year since I dreamt the dream, but I 
 can remember at this moment the absolutely 
 fiendish glee with which I realised the situa- 
 tion and waited for the coming catastrophe. 
 But there was no such good luck in store, for, 
 of course, I awoke before the event took place. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. A very remark- 
 able dream, and a solemn warning to all 
 naturalists. I hope I didn't fall very far. I was 
 just about to ask how Sir Kenneth reconciles 
 'these remarks of his with the well-known cessa- 
 tion of the miraculous for eighteen centuries. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M' Kelpie. I do so by denying 
 altogether the fact of this cessation. Occur- 
 rences have I believe taken place in all ages 
 which are evidently so many signals from the 
 Unseen demanding the surrender of the intel- 
 lect of man. But alas ! many of the ' leaders of 
 thought ' are one-eyed men who have lost their 
 
CONCL USION OF THE DEB A TE. 187 
 
 spiritual optic altogether. Now mark what 
 they do when this signal is held out. Like 
 Nelson they apply their blind eye to the tele- 
 scope, and then exclaim ' I can see nothing.' 
 There is a deplorable want of receptivity in 
 such men. When these so-called men of 
 science encounter a rare phenomenon they are 
 ready to receive it on the slightest foundation, 
 if only it chimes in with their preconceived 
 opinions ; but if it go against their prejudices 
 they at once dismiss it, with the remark that such 
 an unlikely occurrence demands a practically 
 infinite number of repetitions before they will 
 believe it. Thus they manipulate the evidence 
 to suit their opinions, and not their opinions to 
 agree with the evidence. Now let me give you 
 a short catalogue of various strange phenomena, 
 for each and all of which there is abundant 
 evidence to any one who will keep his eyes 
 open both eyes remember. 
 
 In the first place, there have been frequent 
 and unquestionable apparitions of the spirits of 
 the departed. I will instance only the well- 
 
T 88 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 known case in which a murder in New South 
 Wales came to light through the intervention 
 of such a messenger, whose appearance was 
 sworn to before a court of justice. 
 
 Secondly, we have mysterious warnings from 
 another world ; indeed there are numerous well- 
 authenticated cases in which life has been saved 
 by means of such interventions. 
 
 Thirdly, We have the appearance of a 
 distant friend at the moment of his death. I 
 have myself, when in India, experienced a case 
 of this kind, which I thoroughly investigated, 
 noting down the facts without delay ; and I 
 found the coincidence in point of time to be 
 exact, and in point of detail complete. 
 
 Fourthly, There can be no reasonable doubt 
 of the existence of second sight or clairvoyance. 
 Let me here quote the well-known instance of 
 Swedenborg, who saw by this means the 
 progress of a great fire in a distant city, 
 and told even the very house at which it was 
 arrested. 
 
 Fifthly, We have occasionally a supernatural 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 189 
 
 gift of deriving information, or rather perhaps 
 of divining what is in the mind of another. I 
 think I told you that once at a stance I asked 
 the medium where and when my father had 
 died, and he answered me with the exact ex- 
 pression which I should myself have used in 
 reply ; but a year afterwards I discovered that 
 he and I alike had made a mistake. 
 
 Sixthly, We have table-turning, levitation, 
 and other allied phenomena, for the truth of 
 which the evidence is very strong, although I 
 grant that such things have been much abused 
 by impostors. I may state that I myself know 
 a little girl, a friend of mine, of undoubted re- 
 spectability, who, much against her will, is the 
 medium of mysterious rappings, which I have 
 listened to again and again, and tried in vain to 
 account for. 
 
 Seventhly, There are, I conceive, well- 
 authenticated instances of what may be called 
 the materialisation of spiritual presences, and 
 indeed I am not without hope that such pre- 
 sences will ultimately, when psychology is 
 
1 90 CONCL US ION OF THE DEB A TE. 
 
 better understood, exhibit themselves on public 
 platforms in the light of day. 
 
 Elijah Holdfast (sarcastically). On the 
 floor of the House of Commons, for instance. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M'Kelpie (continuing]. Per- 
 haps even there ; although the Speaker's eye, 
 Elijah Holdfast's eloquence, and the Usher's 
 black rod would be a combination sufficient to 
 appal the stoutest spirit. And now I will only 
 detain you by adding one more item to my 
 category in the shape of certain miscellaneous 
 occurrences of a mysterious nature. For in- 
 stance, I do not think the mango-tree perform- 
 ance of Indian jugglers can be accounted for 
 in the same way as the vulgar tricks we see 
 performed by the score. And what do you 
 say to the fact, for it is a fact, that an Indian 
 Fakeer will allow himself to be buried alive for 
 a month or more ? Finally, I read of an extra- 
 ordinary performance which lately took place in 
 Paris before scientific physiologists, in which a 
 girl lay prostrate, having one side of her body 
 quite unconscious, while the other was acutely 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 191 
 
 sensitive to pain ; nevertheless, when a magnet 
 was brought near to, but not in contact with, 
 the unconscious side, it suddenly became 
 sensitive, while at the same time the other side 
 was rendered unconscious. 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. Now that Sir Kenneth 
 has exhausted his very singular and interesting 
 catalogue of grotesque mysteries, I venture 
 with all humility to challenge the accuracy of 
 his conception of the supernatural. The buried 
 Fakeer I leave to the physiologists, merely re- 
 marking that every hybernating animal does 
 the same thing quite naturally, and therefore, 
 in all likelihood, much better : and that there is 
 abundant evidence of the existence of a species 
 of catalepsy which is for a time absolutely un- 
 distinguishable from death. Possibly accident 
 has led to the discovery of a physical means of 
 producing this state, and the secret is jealously 
 guarded in one particular sect. The question 
 is a very interesting one ; but there is certainly 
 nothing of the supernatural in it. I under- 
 stand by the supernatural such occurrences as 
 
192 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 tend to exhibit the existence and character of 
 intelligent beings residing in the Unseen. It 
 seems to me quite possible that formal science 
 may ultimately greatly extend its borders ; in- 
 deed, the theories which try to account for the 
 origin of gravitation and for the production of 
 atoms are attempts in this direction. Should 
 these ultimately succeed, they may possibly 
 throw light on the scientific machinery and 
 capabilities of the Unseen, although I doubt it ; 
 but they will throw none upon the character 
 of the Beings which may there reside. The 
 question whether we have had communications 
 from such Beings must be argued by an ex- 
 tension of those habits of thought that lead 
 us to believe there are other human individuals 
 besides ourselves. Now it is well known that 
 in certain diseased states of body or mind 
 we see apparitions. I may, for instance, ima- 
 gine that a man is sitting opposite me whom 
 nobody else sees. This apparition may affect 
 me injuriously, but it will never give me new 
 information, or assist me in any way. 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 193 
 
 And this at once disposes of apparitions of 
 all kinds. Nothing can be more vivid than the 
 impression sometimes produced by a dream. 
 Yet when you wake you know that the appear- 
 ances were not objective. So it is with all 
 ghosts ; when the credulous or superstitious 
 ghost-seer comes to his senses, he knows that 
 he has been deceiving himself. And when we 
 speak of a ' materialised spirit form ' we speak 
 of something which, of its very essence, must 
 be, in part at least, natural, and therefore so far 
 capable of being investigated by physical 
 means. Let us have this physical investiga- 
 tion first ; and, when that has been satisfac- 
 torily carried out, there will certainly remain 
 nothing for farther inquiry, except perhaps by 
 a physician or by a police-magistrate. The 
 Lunatic Asylum or the Pillory (unwisely al- 
 lowed to become obsolete) would then, in 
 all probability, deserve, if it did not receive, 
 one patient more. The same remark disposes 
 of ' levitation,' ' table-turning/ * spirit-rapping/ 
 etc. For we all know respectable people (to 
 
 N 
 

 i 9 4 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 :;' qse !$tr Kenneth's own word) who lie, cheat, 
 ; ''-chink, etc., as much as the veriest Bohemian ; 
 from whom indeed they differ only for the 
 worse for your Bohemian is at least honest in 
 not concealing his vices. The one sin these 
 people avoid is swearing for it is unmistak- 
 able, and, to have any effect, it must be done in 
 public. 
 
 ' Second-sight ' presents at first a difficulty, 
 but not, I think, at all an insuperable one. 
 Considering that every really active mind is 
 always at work on speculation of some sort or 
 other, and that we probably hear only of 
 the one successful speculation, while the nine 
 hundred and ninety-nine unsuccessful are for- 
 gotten almost as soon as conceived, I think that 
 the wonder is rather that the cases of so-called 
 'second-sight' are so few than that there are any. 
 What we do hear of are the ' flukes/ and their 
 author is at once credited with consummate 
 skill or supernatural power. It reminds me of 
 Mr. Tupman, when, opening his eyes after 
 firing, he saw a plump partridge in the act of 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE 
 
 falling. ' I saw you do it I 
 pick him out I noticed you as you rais< 
 piece to take aim ; and I will say this, that the 
 best shot in existence could not have done it 
 more beautifully. You are an older hand at 
 this than I thought you, Tupman ; you have 
 been out before.' 
 
 Allow for flukes, and you will find that 
 second-sight, dream-revelations, etc., cease to 
 be even remarkable. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M'Kelpie. Mr. Holdfast, you 
 forget that this is not the House of Commons, 
 where members have the privilege of slander- 
 ing at will all who are non-members without 
 being called to order by the Speaker. You 
 transgress the bounds of courteous debate 
 when you imply that a young girl of nine 
 years, a relative of mine, in whose presence 
 raps are produced, is not merely a conscious 
 deceiver, but has the unparalleled effrontery to 
 pretend that she exceedingly dislikes the part 
 she is forced to play. You may perhaps allege 
 that anything connected with table-rapping 
 
196 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 must ip so facto be considered imposture; but I 
 must, as a gentleman, decline taking part in 
 any discussion where such offensive dogmatism 
 is allowed. 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. I much regret if I have 
 attributed imposture to a Highland cousin of 
 Sir Aenneth's. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M'Kelpie. She is my niece, 
 Sir, and an Englishwoman, but I will let it 
 pass after what you have said. And now I 
 have a word to say about the ' flukes,' as you 
 call them. You know of course that it is 
 possible to calculate probabilities ; you can 
 therefore tell me what were the chances that a 
 friend, whom I left in perfect health, should die 
 sometime in 1845, his thirty-sixth year. Be- 
 sides, the apparition of a distant friend is not a 
 common occurrence, even to a Highlander. I 
 myself never saw another, and it is therefore 
 possible to calculate, roughly at least, the chance 
 of my having seen such an apparition in that 
 particular year. Both events were, taken apart, 
 very unlikely to have happened. How ex- 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE -DEBATE. 197 
 
 tremely improbable then is it that they should 
 by chance have occurred together, as nearly as 
 possible at the very same moment of time. 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. I will, if you please, Sir 
 Kenneth, leave the calculation of such proba- 
 bilities to the Doctor, who is a better mathema- 
 tician than I. But you will allow me to remark 
 that such occurrences, even if true, and re- 
 member I don't admit their truth, are not super- 
 natural, because they do not point to the 
 existence of intelligent agencies and powers 
 residing in the Unseen. 
 
 Then with regard to the spiritualistic pheno- 
 mena, the authors of the Unseen Universe draw 
 what is, I think, a very just distinction between 
 the miracles of Christianity and the so-called 
 spiritualistic miracles. The miracles of Chris- 
 tianity had an object in view, gave new infor- 
 mation, and invaded the world. 
 
 The spiritualistic miracles have no object, 
 give no new information, and, far from invading 
 the world, are exhibited only under conditions 
 which are adverse to scientific scrutiny. 
 
198 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 I agree with Sir Kenneth about the want of 
 receptivity of the leaders of thought, but he has, 
 I think, overdrawn his simile about the signal 
 held out from the Unseen. The true signal is 
 the Life and Character of Christ, and any one 
 who has spiritual eyesight may see this signal 
 without a telescope. To slight this evidence 
 and go to spiritualism is to be like a man who 
 believes in celestial luminaries, not because the 
 sun enlightens the world, but because with a 
 telescope of sufficient power he is able to 
 detect the satellites of Mars. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M' Kelpie. Then you will pro- 
 bably not even allow that some of these pheno- 
 mena point to a constitution of the Universe 
 inconsistent with the materialistic hypothesis of 
 atoms ? 
 
 Elijah Holdfast. Not so ; though there is 
 but one of them to which I can assign any 
 weight. It is the influence of one will on 
 another and less powerful one. I think it is 
 pretty clearly proved that there is a real basis 
 for what has been called Electro-biology; indeed 
 
CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 199 
 
 I think it is the true explanation of all these 
 grotesque phenomena. Much that is absolutely 
 absurd must be cleared away, but still there will, 
 I think, remain a good deal to be accounted 
 for. But if this be granted, to ever so slight 
 an extent, it is a most telling argument against 
 materialism, for it involves necessarily (from the 
 materialist's point of view) a species of distance- 
 action between atoms the very notion which, 
 as I am told, all the higher science of the day 
 is doing its best to upset. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. Stay let me see, 
 or at least it would involve a sensorium in the 
 unseen : which I cannot allow. This is by far 
 the most telling argument I have yet heard, 
 and I confess that (for the moment at least) I 
 do not see how to meet it. If I am right, 
 there must be a weak link in the chain, and it 
 can be no other than the assumption that some 
 at least of the phenomena of Electro-biology are 
 genuine. I must again examine them. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M' Kelpie. An excellent oppor- 
 tunity presents itself, Doctor. Next week I 
 
200 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 hope to entertain two of your compatriots, who 
 are special adepts in Electro-biology, and are 
 also ' mediums' of some note. Graf Ernst von 
 Ehrenberg and his sister you must at least 
 have heard of. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft. I am happy to 
 call him an intimate friend. We were fellow- 
 students in days when both were impecunious, 
 and when a common patron provided for us at 
 the University. Strange to say, we can still, 
 without shame, acknowledge our obligations 
 to him, great as they are. We were told that 
 the ' correct thing' was to cut him as soon as 
 we could stand on our own feet. But Count 
 Ernst, like myself, is a victim to conscience ! 
 His sister, I remember, was a merry little girl 
 some dozen or so years ago. She must be a 
 woman now. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M l Kelpie. And one of the 
 most charming of her sex, as I am sure you 
 will confess when you have met her. But she 
 is altogether above the frivolities of fashion 
 she has a mission and, like all such semi- 
 
CONCL USION OF THE DEB A TE. 201 
 
 inspired people, she cares not to think or talk 
 of anything else. Come with me to-morrow 
 to Strathkelpie, Doctor, and learn the truth 
 from a woman. 
 
 Frederick Fair bank (aside to Dr. Stoffkraff). 
 Don't be a fool, It's all up with you if you 
 go north. Besides, you have already agreed to 
 stay with us. 
 
 Dr. Hermann Stoffkraft (to Stephen Fair- 
 bank). My dear Sir, I feel I must beg you to 
 release me from my engagement with you, and 
 as nothing but my intense desire for knowledge 
 could have induced me to revoke my promise, 
 so I hope you will forgive me. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Of course, Doctor. I 
 see how it must all go. Second- sight or not, I 
 divined your fate this morning, as Frederick 
 there will tell you. But I had no idea that it 
 was so imminent. 
 
 Sir Kenneth M' Kelpie What is all this ? 
 I thought second-sight was peculiar to the 
 Scottish Highlanders. Is Saul also among the 
 prophets ? But I think, Fairbank, that the 
 
202 CONCLUSION OF THE DEBATE. 
 
 Doctor should travel with me, as my quarters 
 are not very easily accessible. You can catch 
 him, and detain him as long as you please, on 
 his way home. 1 11 give you due notice. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. Be it so. I had much to 
 show him, much to say to him, and still more to 
 learn from him. But I see that his heart is fixed 
 on your spiritualistic work, for the time at least, 
 so we must prorogue the Paradoxical at once, 
 and hope for better success at our next meeting. 
 
 Frederick Fairbank (aside). That's always 
 the way. What 's the use of bothering about 
 them ? My father has some common sense, 
 and applies it to his beliefs, but Sir Kenneth 
 will believe anything, and Stoffkraft nothing. 
 Yet these two extremes go off together for some 
 outrageous folly, and leave the common-sense 
 mean behind. Well! I have done what I could, 
 short of utter rudeness so I wash my hands of 
 the whole affair. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 ' Ungliicklicher, was willst du thun ? so ruft 
 In seinem Innern eine treue Stimme, 
 Versuchen den Allheiligen willst du ? 
 Kein Sterblicher, sprach des Orakels Mund, 
 Riickt diesen Schleier, bis ich selbst ihn hebe. 
 Doch setzte nicht derselbe Mund hinzu : 
 Wer diesen Schleier hebt, soil Wahrheit schauen ? ' 
 
 SCHILLER. 
 
 A COUPLE of years have passed since the 
 Jubilee party broke up. During the recent 
 autumn the editors enjoyed for a short time 
 the hospitality of the genial Stephen Fair- 
 bank. Trout were plentiful, and gave excellent 
 sport. The morning * header ' was as grateful 
 as ever. Frederick Fairbank, home for the 
 vacation, was busily engaged in training a 
 cricket eleven to do battle with some neigh- 
 bouring power, and we gave him what help 
 
204 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 we could. But it was felt by both of us that 
 a great change had taken place in Elmsly 
 House : all the arrangements were as perfect 
 as ever, yet an indefinite charm which used to 
 pervade the house was wanting 
 
 * 'Tis Greece, but living Greece no more.' 
 
 No Miss Fairbank presided at her father's 
 table. But in the vicarage there was now 
 a Mrs. Bemerton, whose attention was all 
 but entirely concentrated on her husband and 
 her little son ; and she was very like Miss 
 Fairbank indeed. She received us with all 
 her old grace and kindness, but it was clear 
 that she had not quite passed through the 
 transition state. The unusually long honey- 
 moon was yet very near the meridian. Mr. 
 Bemerton could with difficulty be induced to 
 leave his wife, even for an hour, and when he 
 did, he could talk of little else. 
 
 'Hes a frightful spoon, and I'm sure my 
 father misses her tremendously, 1 Frederick 
 said to us in his artless manner. ' I know he 
 now wants me to marry and settle down in the 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 205 
 
 country with him. But he won't say so : his 
 principles before his comfort : he feels that I 
 ought to work, and he would die rather than 
 breathe a hint of what is uppermost in his 
 mind. But I'm going to reconcile his wishes 
 and his convictions in a way he doesn't expect. 
 I'm going to cut the bar, and take to the 
 counting-house, to which I used to have an in- 
 surmountable aversion. I have already secured 
 the promise of a future partner (I don't think 
 she is any stranger to you), who will do the 
 honours as well at least as Mrs. Bemerton.' 
 
 Having heartily congratulated him (for we 
 understood at once that he spoke of his charm- 
 ing cousin), we asked about Sir Kenneth, 
 and most particularly about our friend Dr. 
 Hermann Stoffkraft and his fortunes. 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. There's a long and 
 queer story there, and I am not sure that I 
 know all about it. Stoffkraft has given up for 
 good his materialistic notions. Bemerton and 
 my father began the work, but the Grafin 
 and Sir Kenneth, with the help of Father 
 
206 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 Prediger, effectually finished it. The Doctor 
 is a Geheimrath now, and the Grafin is his 
 wife ! What do you say to that ? She had 
 enough sense and strength of mind to have 
 thrown caste to the winds, and married the 
 plebeian Doctor, but the Privy Councillorship 
 has luckily prevented the necessity of such a 
 frightful breach of etiquette. But my father 
 will tell you about the business. He has had 
 lots of letters from all of them. Leave that to 
 the evening and come with me : my eleven 
 will be savage if we don't give them some 
 swift round-hand this afternoon. 
 
 There was nothing for it but to accompany 
 the enthusiast, who kept us at work till the 
 first dinner-bell rang. 
 
 After dinner, which for once reminded us of 
 old times, because Mr. Bemerton and his wife 
 were present, Stephen Fairbank produced a 
 mass of correspondence, from which he ex- 
 tracted a few characteristic letters sufficiently 
 connected to form a nearly continuous, though 
 of course not exhaustive, narrative. 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 207 
 
 SIR KENNETH M' KELPIE to STEPHEN FAIRBANK. 
 
 ' STRATHKELPIE CASTLE, June zist, 1876. 
 ' MY DEAR FAIRBANK, My distinguished 
 German guests have now been with me for 
 ten days, and my young niece, whose fair name 
 was the innocent cause of a passage at arms 
 between Elijah Holdfast and myself, is here 
 likewise so you see the spiritualistic element 
 is very strong. I gladly comply with your 
 request to give you a long account of our pro- 
 ceedings. As precision of thought is essential, 
 I will divide these into three categories table- 
 rapping, action at a distance, and materialisa- 
 tion ; and I will begin with table-rapping. 
 Here my niece has been a host in herself, 
 albeit an unwilling one ; and I can assure you 
 we have all (the Doctor included) tried our best 
 to find out the physical cause of these knocks, 
 but absolutely without success. That they are 
 objective realities, I have not the smallest 
 doubt ; for a complete stranger once made his 
 appearance at the open door of the room in 
 
208 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 which we were sitting, and heard them as well 
 as ourselves. Besides, it is preposterous to 
 suppose that an unwilling girl, only nine years 
 old, should be able to delude a whole company 
 of grown-up people into the conviction that 
 they hear sounds which have no real existence. 
 ' You know of course that these knocks con- 
 vey a spiritual communication ; to compare 
 great things with small, they may be likened to 
 the signals of a telegraphic instrument deliver- 
 ing a message from the Unseen. Sceptics of 
 course deny this, and assert that the message 
 takes its rise from some one of the very prosaic 
 human intelligences gathered together on a 
 fool's errand ; but I can assure you that the 
 communications received by us were utterly out 
 of keeping with the habits of thought of any of 
 my guests. On one occasion the Poltergeist 
 (for so Dr. Stoffkraft habitually names it) pre- 
 tended to represent the spirit of a beautiful 
 cousin of mine whom I knew in days long gone 
 by, and who now told us she was married to a 
 North American Indian, and that Bacchus had 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 209 
 
 been best man ! And on another occasion our 
 volatile friend rapped out Ta, ta, for the pre- 
 sent I'm off for a ride ! Now, my dear 
 Fairbank, what is to be made of all this, for we 
 cannot, as members of the Paradoxical, shut 
 our eyes to it ? 
 
 1 1 have thought deeply over the subject, and 
 now present you with a preliminary hypothesis. 
 May not these poltergeists be the spirits of 
 those who were the imps and pickles of this 
 world, but who died in early youth before 
 their education was finished ? This will of 
 course go on after death, and in order to com- 
 plete their character, they may be allowed to 
 have their fun out. 
 
 Coelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt, 
 
 may be true so far as they are concerned, 
 even after crossing the Styx ; and the really 
 harmless, yet somewhat unpleasant, boy who 
 used to torment the baby and the dog as 
 a daily rule, but who only on rare occasions 
 had the supreme felicity of practising on a 
 grown-up person, may now with impunity 
 
 o 
 
2io WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 bamboozle the philosopher. Indeed, I think 
 this theory will account for the dreary and 
 confusing character of many of these manifesta- 
 tions. You know there are men of science 
 who assert that they would rather not have 
 the kind of immortality such seances pretend to 
 disclose, and which one of them has comically 
 characterised as 
 
 * Rapping idiot thoughts on tables under vulgar cheats' control.' 
 
 The poltergeist may, however, regard the 
 whole affair as a huge joke, and be all the 
 while laughing in his sleeve at the credulity of 
 us mortals. So much for table-rapping. 
 
 * I now proceed to action at a distance, includ- 
 ing its two subdivisions, electro-biology and 
 clairvoyance, in both of which I flatter myself 
 we have succeeded to perfection. And first of 
 all I can dispose of Elijah Holdfast's theory of 
 strength of will, for we found that Ernst could 
 act upon his sister and also his sister on him. 
 And it was very amusing to watch the fair 
 Julia obtain complete command of the poor 
 Doctor, who was persuaded that his walking- 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR 211 
 
 stick was an umbrella, and that a glass of water 
 was the best Glenlivet (a great mistake this !). 
 The Doctor, however, had his revenge, and 
 conquered the fair Julia in his turn, persuading 
 her that a piece of glass was a diamond of the 
 first water, and also that he (the Doctor) and 
 the fair Julia were brother and sister. Well ! 
 well! Fairbank, we live in a queer world, and 
 I begin to believe there may have been such 
 things as love philtres after all. 
 
 ' Yesterday afternoon, when the Doctor was 
 practising on Julia, he happened to ask her if 
 she could transport herself to Elmsly House. 
 She immediately described it to perfection, and 
 told us the company were assembled at dinner. 
 She was then asked if she could hear the 
 conversation, and she informed us that a young 
 man, whom she described, was telling a story 
 to a young lady next him. After a while she 
 said the tale is finished, and the young lady 
 has just exclaimed O Fred, what a funny 
 story ! ' 
 
 Here we ventured to interrupt Stephen Fair- 
 
2i2 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 bank, who was reading aloud this letter, to 
 ask if the fair Julia had been correct in her 
 divination. 
 
 Frederick Fair bank (blushing a little). Well ! 
 yes, correct on the whole, but of course the 
 Doctor knew that I always sat next my cousin, 
 and invariably told her not only one story, but 
 several. He knew, too (the sly old fox) that 
 Fanny used constantly to say O Fred, what 
 a funny story ! no, no, one swallow does not 
 make a summer, 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. Well, to proceed with 
 Sir Kenneth's letter : ' We next attempted the 
 materialisation of spirits, but here we met with 
 little success. Only on one occasion a form 
 was seen by Ernst and his sister, but it wanted 
 definition, the only parts that were clearly visible 
 being the nose and the right elbow. None of 
 the others perceived it at all. These phenomena, 
 I begin to think, are not objective, but due to a 
 diabolical influence on the mind ; and I have no 
 doubt our small success was owing to the con- 
 ditions of our circle being very unfavourable 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 213 
 
 for such manifestations (I mean, of course, 
 spiritualistically unfavourable). And here I 
 may remark that our ancestors had truer ideas 
 regarding materialisation than is generally held 
 in the advanced circles of the present day, 
 for in Marlowe's Tragical History of Doctor 
 Faustus? that worthy, on being asked by the 
 Emperor to bring up before him Alexander 
 the Great and his beauteous paramour, replies 
 as follows : " My gracious lord, I am ready to 
 accomplish your request, so far forth as by art 
 and power of my spirit I am able to perform. 
 But, if it like your Grace, it is not in my ability 
 to present before your eyes the true substantial 
 bodies of those deceased princes, which long 
 since are consumed to dust. But such spirits as 
 can lively resemble Alexander and his paramour 
 shall appear before your Grace, in that manner 
 that they both lived in, in their most flourishing 
 estate; which I doubt not shall sufficiently 
 content your Imperial Majesty." 
 
 1 See Marlowe's Tragical History of Doctor Faustus. Clar- 
 endon Press series. A. W. Ward. 
 
2i 4 WHAI BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 'Well you see I have thoroughly fulfilled my 
 promise, and now you must let me know how 
 things are going on with you since we left. 
 How about Miss Fairbank and the Parson, and 
 Fred and the charming Fanny, are they all 
 well ? Give them an old man's love, and 
 believe me, ever yours truly, 
 
 1 KENNETH M' KELPIE.' 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. I need not tell you 
 how angry we all were on receipt of this letter. 
 We believed the old reprobate had got hold of 
 the Doctor and intended to ruin him, but you 
 will see as we go on that things did not turn 
 out so badly after all. 
 
 Stephen Fa irbank. Meanwhile you might 
 like to hear the Doctor's letter, giving his views 
 of the experiments. 
 
 DR. STOFFKRAFT to STEPHEN FAIRBANK. 
 
 1 STRATHKELPIE CASTLE, July 4*%, 1876. 
 ' MY DEAR SIR, I did indeed promise to write 
 soon and often to you from this northern 
 castle, but I have found so very much to 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 215 
 
 interest me as well scientifically as socially 
 that almost unwittingly I have allowed more 
 than a whole fortnight to pass. 
 
 ' The weather has been extremely rough since 
 I came here, so much so that we have scarcely 
 seen even the immediate neighbourhood. We 
 have a magnificent view of the Atlantic, and 
 the tremendous swell rolling in after some days 
 of a north-west gale far surpasses in grandeur 
 any natural phenomenon I have yet seen. 
 
 ' But if it is uncomfortable outside the castle, 
 it is quite the reverse within. I have now been 
 in many a pleasant circle in your hospitable 
 country ; but, without any disparagement to 
 the others, this transcends anything I have yet 
 seen. You will say, perhaps, that some of the 
 other guests being from my own country has 
 something to do with it ! I cannot allow that. 
 I ask myself what is the reason ; and I find it 
 in this, that we spend our days, and evenings 
 alike, in rational discussion and experiment we 
 have no morning ' headers/ and no day-long 
 athletics. And, at least till the weather 
 
216 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 improves, we shall not try to get into the ' wild- 
 beast state/ 
 
 ' You will ask how my inquiry goes on, for 
 the sake of which I so unceremoniously left you. 
 That is not easy to answer. 
 
 * On one point alone I see quite clear. The 
 ' respectable' little lady is well, not an impostor, 
 only an imp. I caught her eye on one occasion 
 after a seance, and it betrayed such a startling 
 mixture of the cherub and the fiend, that I felt 
 quite sure she was the prime mover of the whole 
 performance. For such a role her age is no 
 objection, but rather the reverse. She was born 
 an imp, and her sense of scientific morality is 
 not yet sufficiently cultivated to overcome the 
 fiendish pleasure she experiences in deluding 
 her uncle. Of course, when she is fifteen or 
 sixteen, we shall hear no more of table-rapping. 
 I have not told Sir Kenneth remembering 
 how ill he took it when Mr. Holdfast said 
 something not very flattering. But I heard the 
 raps. I proved that they were objective, and 
 by degrees traced them to her foot under the 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 217 
 
 table. Yet her foot when carefully watched 
 did not appear to move. I saw then that the 
 origin of the sound was inside her shoes, and 
 after a little practice I found it very easy indeed 
 to produce rapping like hers. To make sure, I 
 privately took a very large and shallow tea 
 tray, and just before the performance inverted 
 it under the carpet, in such a way that when 
 the girl was seated in her usual position her 
 feet must rest on it. The first rap she gave 
 evidently startled her with its loud resonance, 
 and she could (or rather would) do no more that 
 night I need not say that (before morning) I 
 replaced the tray in its former position. Next 
 night she rapped quite freely after a little 
 nervousness in commencing. Keeping my eye 
 fixed on her, I then began to rap also. She 
 started, looked at me for a moment in a wild 
 way, and hurriedly left the room. I have not 
 heard her perform since. But I cannot bear to 
 tell Sir Kenneth, it would so much distress him, 
 yet he ought to know the truth. What should 
 I do? 
 
218 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 ' My other inquiries have been more 
 mysterious and much more pleasing. I am 
 quite satisfied that there is something real in 
 Electro-biology ; though almost any other 
 name would be better ; for it seems to me to 
 have nothing to do with biology, and still less 
 with electricity. That one human being can 
 by merely willing it, and absolutely without any 
 outward sign, affect the thoughts of another, 
 I have as yet no proof. But I now know how 
 very little of outward sign is sufficient to 
 telegraph as it were a whole world of meaning ! 
 This is in itself extraordinary, and must be 
 eliminated before any satisfactory answer can 
 be obtained to the great question I have before 
 me. I feel quite sure that most, if not all, of 
 what I have yet seen of Electro-biology : 
 extremely singular as it is is due to the very 
 slightest of signals by eye, tone, or gesture ; 
 and that the spell is voluntarily submitted to 
 is I think proved by the fact that any sudden 
 distraction (especially of a nature to provoke 
 resentment) sends it to the winds at once. 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 219 
 
 ' This was most effectual ly "shown the other 
 night when Count Ernst operated on some of 
 Sir Kenneth's keepers and ghillies. He made 
 them go through a number of antics, while they 
 seemed unable to resist, though certainly con- 
 scious that they were being laughed at. At 
 last he planted himself full in front of a gigantic 
 Highlander, and defied him to strike him let 
 him hit as hard as he could. The giant struck 
 with all his might a set of blows, each of which 
 would have felled an ox, but Count Ernst stood 
 calmly within reach, and with a slight gesture 
 of his hand waved aside (not parried] the blows 
 as they came. Then he told another of his 
 patients to take his place and stand firm. " I 
 will take care," he said, " that he does not hit 
 you," and, waving as before, placed himself 
 beside the new comer, who stood like a statue. 
 But there must have been some grudge between 
 these two men, or the spell was in some way 
 weakened, for the very first blow went home 
 with a crash, straight on the nose of the too 
 confiding victim, and sent him flying to the 
 
220 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 other end of the hall ! In an instant he was on 
 his feet, and a frightful struggle commenced. 
 But Sir Kenneth, with great promptitude, had 
 them overpowered by numbers and separated. 
 He has had to interpose his patriarchal authority, 
 which is final with these rude people, to prevent 
 serious consequences. 
 
 * The clairvoyance I have seen as yet has not 
 much impressed me from the scientific point of 
 view. Perhaps it is true, as I sometimes fancy, 
 that I am too much engaged in looking at the 
 medium herself to pay much attention to her 
 revelations. Nothing has been said that did 
 not appear to me to be quite natural under 
 the circumstances : in fact the medium's words, 
 when I interrogated her, seemed exactly to 
 follow the train of my own thoughts as regards 
 the question asked. Perhaps at another time 
 I should have wondered at this. Not so now. 
 It is strange to me how the last few days seem 
 to have deprived me of my old scientific modes 
 of procedure, how much more I think of persons 
 than of phenomena, and how little my once 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 221 
 
 habitual caution and suspicion make themselves 
 felt. Everything about Sir Kenneth is a 
 mystery, and his castle and its inhabitants are 
 no exception. 
 
 * I fear you will think this a very poor letter. 
 But I must frankly confess I am unable to write 
 a better. The weird influence of the place is 
 over me, and I feel as if knowledge were, after 
 all, a vain pursuit that human happiness in 
 short should be human and not bookish. , 
 
 4 But I tire you, for I do not understand my- 
 self. Yours truly, 
 
 HERMANN STOFFKRAFT.' 
 
 'JP.S. There is a priest here by name 
 Prediger who is the * director ' of the Count 
 and his sister. He is a somewhat austere man, 
 but very well informed, and quite as ready as 
 was Mr. Bemerton to discuss matters of science. 
 I feel as if it were not improbable that in a few 
 days we shall be discussing matter and im- 
 mortality here to the full as extensively as we 
 did at Elmsly House. I may tell you that I 
 have now fully studied the Unseen Universe, 
 
222 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 some parts of it indeed with no little pleasure. 
 I have not yet, however, quite made up my 
 mind on the whole subject so I shall defer 
 it to another occasion/ 
 
 Frederick Fairbank. There 's nothing in his 
 postscript, but I think his letter is singularly 
 expressive. You can read between the lines 
 the writer's quite naive expression of an affec- 
 tion which he is not yet even aware of feeling. 
 
 Mrs. Bemerton. Of course. The moment I 
 saw that letter I knew the little man's case 
 far better than he did himself. Well, he had 
 a terrible time of it, poor fellow but he is 
 thoroughly happy now. 
 
 Stephen Fairbank. You forget, dear, that our 
 friends are only beginning to learn his story. 
 Here is a second letter from Sir Kenneth, which 
 carries it more than a twelvemonth farther. 
 
 SIR KENNETH M'KELPIE to STEPHEN FAIRBANK. 
 
 1 STRATHKELPIE CASTLE, March 5, 1878. 
 ' MY DEAR FAIRBANK, You know, of course, 
 that our good friend the Doctor has been for 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 223 
 
 some time married to the Countess Julia. 
 Their courtship and all its accessories form a 
 very interesting as well as amusing episode in 
 my life. They looked upon me almost as a 
 father, and told me from day to day all their 
 little joys and sorrows, poor things, so I shall 
 have a great deal of news to give you when we 
 meet. More thoroughly honest, simple, and 
 worthy people I have never met. I need not 
 tell you how happy I was when I first heard of 
 their engagement. The Doctor, you know, had 
 in a very short time after leaving you become 
 an ardent spiritualist, and was under the belief 
 that mediums would form the * coming race ; ' 
 and he could not help dwelling with infinite, yet 
 artless, complacency upon the chances in the 
 struggle for place and power which might fall to 
 the lot of the children of such parents. Well! 
 well ! Fairbank, all this may sound very strange 
 to moderate men like you or me, but we must 
 not discourage youthful enthusiasm, my friend. 
 * How happy they both were, and how 
 pleasantly each day flowed on ! A large part of 
 
224 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 it was of course devoted to the courtly observ- 
 ances of the etiquette exacted by their relative 
 position. Even in the midst of these, however, 
 they found time for the pursuit of certain 
 important spiritualistic experiments. But there 
 is no Eden without its serpent, and here the 
 serpent was the Reverend Father Prediger. I 
 am aware that he is a great friend of yours and 
 Frederick's, and I cannot but respect his talents 
 and his character ; but, Fairbank, / hate that 
 man. Honestly, no doubt, and in strict dis- 
 charge of what he deemed his duty, he has 
 done irreparable injury to science. You know, 
 of course, that before the jubilee the Doctor 
 was labouring away in the hopeless slough of 
 materialistic mud well ! you and Bemerton 
 placed one stepping-stone for him, and I 
 another ; for I must tell you that when he 
 left Strathkelpie he was quite convinced, by 
 our reasonings and by personal experience, 
 of the existence of a spiritual Unseen. 
 
 'Shortly afterwards he made a determined 
 spring towards the religious platform, to which, 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 225 
 
 of course, the Reverend Father was only too glad 
 to assist him. But no sooner was he safely 
 landed there than with one vigorous effort the 
 Reverend Father kicked away the spiritualistic 
 stepping-stone. To show you how well the 
 thing was done, let me transcribe part of a 
 letter which I had from the poor Doctor : 
 " The good Father Prediger is a frequent visitor 
 both to Julia and to me. He is a most amus- 
 ing and intelligent man. One day lately he was 
 announced when I was on my usual morning visit 
 to Julia, and we were all three speedily engaged 
 in agreeable conversation. Julia happened to 
 suggest that we should tell Father Prediger 
 about our spiritualistic experiments, as perhaps 
 he would like to know something about them. 
 The Father expressed himself very greatly 
 interested, and I gave him a long account of 
 all that we had been doing. In reply he 
 divided the subject into two categories, one 
 consisting of electro-biology and clairvoyance, 
 and the other of table-rappings, materialisations, 
 and such like. 'These last/ said he, 'are, if 
 
 p 
 
226 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 genuine, probably somehow connected with 
 intelligences residing in the Unseen. It is a 
 subject of great interest and practical import- 
 ance/ ' I am glad to hear you say so, Father/ 
 I replied, ' for Julia and myself both think so, 
 and we are vastly interested in our experi- 
 ments.' ' There is one point, however/ continued 
 the Father, ' about which I should like to have 
 a little more information. Have you been 
 able to convince yourselves of the honesty of 
 the spirits, if such they be, who give you these 
 communications ?' I replied that we had not 
 thought of the subject in this light. ' Well,' said 
 he, ' had you not better do so at once ? For 
 if you believe in the existence of a spiritual 
 Unseen which has any relation to man, there 
 must be evil in it ! And that evil is perhaps, 
 nay probably, organised. I don't ask you to 
 believe in the mediaeval Devil, but common 
 sense requires you to assent to the possi- 
 bility at least of a powerful unseen federa- 
 tion for evil purposes. Now, directly or 
 indirectly, it does not matter which, and I 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 227 
 
 don't know, I believe the powers of evil are 
 connected with table-rappings and materialisa- 
 tions.' ( But,' said I, * Father, is it not a point 
 of great interest to know whether these mani- 
 festations are objective or only subjective ?' 'It 
 is no doubt a point of some interest/ he replied, 
 slightly laughing, * but yet only of secondary 
 importance. If you and I, Doctor, had missed 
 our way, and strayed into the grounds of some 
 terrific ogre, the discussion as to whether we 
 should more probably be flayed alive or 
 chopped into minced meat, when taken, might 
 perhaps prove interesting, but if the gate 
 were still open, it would be secondary in 
 importance to the act of making our escape.' 
 1 And you would advise us, Father, to give 
 up these spirit-rappings and materialisations ?' 
 * Most decidedly I should/ replied the worthy 
 Father. 'Well, what about electro-biology 
 and clairvoyance ?' said I. 'I don't imagine, 
 said he, * there is anything supernatural in 
 these, so that I cannot object to them as your 
 spiritual adviser ; but as a friend ' ' You 
 
228 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 object to them ?' I asked. 'Well/. he replied, 
 ' you and the Countess are about to take a 
 most solemn step, attended with very serious 
 responsibilities, and I much question whether 
 you or she will be able to discharge your duties 
 so well if you give yourselves up to these 
 peculiar manifestations. But I leave this 
 matter entirely to yourselves, and I shall always 
 feel greatly interested in the progress of your 
 experiments.' ' 
 
 ' Thus you see, my dear Fairbank, how the 
 poison was beginning to work ; and I will now 
 give you a short extract from a letter which 
 1 had from the fair Julia some months after 
 her marriage : " Father Prediger calls very 
 frequently, and seems much interested in the 
 progress of our experiments on electro-biology 
 and clairvoyance, but Hermann is only half- 
 hearted about them ; in fact, he seems inclined 
 to give them up, and to devote his whole time 
 to his old mathematical and physical studies." 
 
 1 And six months afterwards she writes : 
 " Hermann has just made himself a great name ; 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 229 
 
 he is universally spoken about, and Father 
 Prediger says he considers him the most dis- 
 tinguished mathematician of the age. 
 
 ' " He has recently worked up his almost for- 
 gotten mathematical MSS., and has published 
 three memoirs which are everywhere discussed 
 in scientific circles. One of these is ' A Com- 
 plete Theory of Canonizants,' another on * The 
 Physical Determination of Beknottedness/ and 
 the third ' Ueber Mannigfaltigkeiten in vier 
 Dimensionen/ whose title I cannot express in 
 English. Unfortunately I am totally unable 
 to understand any of them, but no doubt they 
 must be of great scientific importance. I shall 
 have much pleasure in forwarding copies of 
 them to you, or to any of your friends whom 
 they are likely to interest." Now, Fairbank, 
 just think of all this it is enough to make 
 angels weep. Here is a man of immense 
 ability, who till lately was engaged in the most 
 engrossing and important pursuits, and he is 
 now driven by ghostly influence to leave them 
 for subjects not only utterly pedantic but singu- 
 
2 3 o WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 larly barren of useful results. Who knows or 
 cares about Canonizants ? I must confess I 
 don't. Beknottedness seems but one step from 
 Besottedness, and must mean some species of 
 tangled intellectual trifling, if it have any 
 meaning at all. In his third paper, I am told, 
 the Doctor seriously and at great length dis- 
 cusses the possibility of performing certain 
 unthinkable operations under given inconceiv- 
 able conditions ! And for this he is famous ! 
 But I must hasten to a close. Love to the 
 Bemertons, not forgetting Fred and the charm- 
 ing Fanny, and believe me ever yours truly, 
 
 ' KENNETH M' KELPIE/ 
 
 Stephen Fair bank. One recent letter must be 
 inflicted on you. It is from the Doctor to our 
 friend Holdfast, who forwarded it to me after 
 making all sorts of pencil comments on it, 
 which in themselves almost amount to a letter. 
 He rarely writes in any other way, so you may 
 well fancy I get strange medleys from him. At 
 present he is crazed about politics. 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 231 
 
 DR. HERMANN STOFFKRAFT to 
 E. HOLDFAST, M.P. 
 
 ' SCHLOSS EHRENBERG, BADEN, Aug. 12, 1878. 
 ' MY DEAR MR. HOLDFAST, I do not know 
 whether or not the custom obtains in England, 
 but with us in Germany it is thought right for 
 a man to inform all his friends, sometimes 
 almost minutely, of the occurrence of matters 
 of any considerable importance to himself. 
 ( Thank goodness I haven't many German friends?} 
 I have two reasons, however, for being brief. 
 My friends in England are so numerous that to 
 write a long letter to each would occupy some 
 months, and I cannot send a circular. (Why 
 not make a pamphlet of it at once, and advertise 
 it f His naive confessions and confidences would 
 pay.} And I know that you are always very 
 busy. (Thanks to Imperialism, Cyprus, and 
 Afghanistan, every one of us has plenty on his 
 mind. But my constituents go in for Jingoism 
 to a man, hang them!) So I shall confine 
 myself to telling you that the results of my 
 
232 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 visit to Strathkelpie have been very numerous, 
 and, to me, of immense consequence. 
 
 * In spite of the incredulous laughter of the 
 party at Elmsly House, I believed myself 
 destined, as I told them, to become an old 
 bachelor. (No doubt he did ; he was quite 
 truthful, but quite ignorant of himself.} I am 
 now happily married, and feel myself in all 
 respects improved in consequence. (He couldn't 
 well help that, unless he had married a fool} 
 I have recently reverted to my old mathe- 
 matical and physical papers, and such of them 
 as I have yet published have been exceedingly 
 well received. (By whom? I should like to 
 know. Quips, quirks, and conundrums. Call 
 that science /) Should I desire or require it, I 
 am now certain of a Professor's chair. (Best 
 thing he could do : give him some work that 
 must be done, and keep his wits from going a 
 wool-gathering} I have even been promoted 
 to civil distinction, in a form which enables me 
 to have an influence on public affairs. (Fancy 
 mathematics making a man a Privy Councillor ! 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 233 
 
 No doubt literature has something to say for it 
 with us, and if the Tories have a Premier of that 
 kind we have had a couple at least. Biit mathe- 
 matics ! I always said these Germans were 
 owls. Mathematics and public affairs /) 
 
 ' But the most important change of all is that 
 I now see clearly the untenability of the hypo- 
 theses I maintained at the Jubilee of the 
 Paradoxical. For the first time in my life I 
 have a sense of settled conviction on such 
 matters, a welcome substitute for the restless 
 anxious feelings which I then strove to smother 
 or to laugh out of existence. (That's well.) 
 Consciousness is no mistake, and conscience is 
 one of the most precious of our many endow- 
 ments. I feel this so strongly that I am sorely 
 tempted to rush into print at once on the sub- 
 ject for the benefit of my former associates. 
 But I have learned the dangers of hasty gene- 
 ralisation, and my exposition of the Relations 
 between Religion and Science I intend to be a 
 thoroughly matured production. Pray forget, 
 or think as charitably as you can of, my old 
 
 Q 
 
234 WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 
 
 follies (No need to say that, though it is touchingly 
 said), and believe me, yours truly, 
 
 ' HERMANN STOFFKRAFT.' 
 
 [' The little man is a trump, and we must get 
 hold of him again. I am very curious to see his 
 wonderfid Countess, and to learn how such enor- 
 mous changes took place in both in so short a 
 time. Take care to have them at Elmsly House 
 when I can manage to be there. E.H. 3/9/78.'] 
 
 ' Well/ said our host (after finishing his 
 reading), * I have now told you " what became of 
 the Doctor," and I can but wish we could have 
 him here once more. You well know the start 
 which higher education has taken in this 
 country, and the Doctor would be invaluable to 
 us, either as a teacher or as an investigator/ 
 
 ' And if he were to come/ said the Rev. 
 Ralph Bemerton (evidently with an eye to pos- 
 sibilities), ' I think we could persuade him and 
 the Countess to join the Church of England/ 
 
 ' Cricket and lawn tennis for week-days/ said 
 the irrepressible Frederick. ' I'll take the 
 
WHAT BECAME OF THE DOCTOR. 235 
 
 Doctor in training, and Fanny shall have the 
 Countess.' 
 
 1 And to complete our catalogue of good in- 
 tentions/ said the smiling host, ' I think I 
 could induce the Doctor to become a regular 
 member of the Paradoxical/ 
 
 lEtun&urgJ) SEni 
 
 THOMAS AND ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE, PRINTERS TO HER MAJKSTY. 
 
RETURN CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT 
 
 202 Main Library 
 
 
 LOAN PERIOD 1 
 HOME USE 
 
 2 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 6 
 
 ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS 
 
 1 -month Joans may be renewed by catling 642-3405 
 
 sjcfesasMsa^ 
 
 DUE AS STAMPED BELOW 
 
 r 
 
 LI8HAKY USC ONLY 
 
 t *r\f\ A 
 
 St^ 2f*.aefo E 
 
 > BY 
 
 
 ClRCULATKJpWJ 
 
 >84 
 
 
 
 CI^CUUT/ON IDEPT 
 
 
 
 
 
 JW.27B9J 
 
 
 BftRlJoOZ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY 
 FORM NO. DD6, 60m, 1/83 BERKELEY, CA 94720 
 
 
J 
 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 - <