oasts, I lower him; if he lowers himself I raise him; either way
I contradict him, till he learns he is a monstrous, incomprehensible
mystery." "Make yourself an honest man," says Carlyle sarcastically,
"and then you may be sure there is one less rascal in the world." This
remark sprang, probably, from a reading of

WHATELEY'S COMPARISON

of a rogue with a man of honor: "Other things being equal, an honest man
has this advantage over a knave, that he understands more of human
nature: for he knows that _one_ honest man exists, and concludes that
there must be more; and he also knows, if he is not a mere simpleton,
that there are some who are knavish. But the knave can seldom be brought
to believe in the existence of an honest man. The honest man _may_ be
deceived in particular persons, but the knave is _sure_ to be deceived
whenever he comes across an honest man who is not a mere fool." "Man is

TOO NEAR ALL KINDS OF BEASTS--

a fawning dog, a roaring lion, a thieving fox, a robbing wolf, a
dissembling crocodile, a treacherous decoy, and a rapacious vulture."
This was the poet Cowley's opinion. "Of all the animals" scolds Boileau,
"which fly in the air, walk on the ground, or swim in the sea, from
Paris to Peru, from Japan to Rome, the most foolish animal, in my
opinion, is man." People must be very bad, indeed, who get opinions as
low as the two last quoted. That rapacious vulture George Peabody! that
dissembling crocodile William Cowper! that robbing wolf Girard! that
thieving fox Charles Sumner! that fawning dog Napoleon Bonaparte! and
those most foolish animals Louis Agassiz and Isaac Newton! It does not
well become the weakest links in a chain to boast that they gauge that
chain's strength, for the chain can be greatly strengthened, upon this
easy discovery of those weak links, by simply dropping them out of
connection.

And now comes the query: "What is man?" He has always been more or less
at a loss for some striking and succinct statement of his peculiar
characteristics--of the mark that separates him from other animals.
Diogenes Laertius says that Plato having defined man to be a two-legged
animal without feathers, he (Diogenes) plucked a cock, and, bringing him
into the school, said "Here is Plato's man." From this joke there was
added to the definition "With broad flat nails." Even this definition is
just as faulty, as it does not exclude many species of the monkey. Again
it was thought that man was t