vealed by their microscopes or decomposed in their
crucibles. Mental science, and above all moral or ethical science,
have a claim to be heard as well as physics. Philosophy, strictly
speaking, working by the light, not of the senses, as does physical
science, but by the higher light of the intelligence alone, must be
reckoned with by the thoughtful man. Yet this is precisely what so
many of the lesser luminaries of science, the popularisers of the great
discoveries made by other and greater men, appear to be wholly unable
to see. They have borrowed their foot-rule for the mensuration of the
universe, and they apply it indiscriminately. Everything, from the
dead earth to the glowing inspiration of the prophet's soul, must be
labelled in terms of that infallible instrument. If it cannot be
reduced to their exiguous standard, so much the worse for it. Science,
or rather "the heated pulpiteer" of science (for these inflammatory
gentlemen are found both in the pulpit and at the rostrum), can take no
account of it, and that settles the matter once for all.

We may proceed to offer a few illustrations of the attempt of the
scientist to capture the domain of ethics. The late Professor Huxley,
of whom we would speak with all the respect due to his high position as
a scientific expositor, roundly asserts that "the safety of morality is
in the keeping of science," meaning, of course, physical science. The
same authority considers science a far "better guardian of morality
than the pair of old shrews, philosophy and theology," in whose keeping
he evidently thinks everybody, not a scientist, believes morality to
rest. The teaching of such men as Mr. Spencer, Mr. Bain, and Mr.
Leslie Stephen, though they lack the vigour and picturesqueness of Mr.
Huxley's unique style, comes to much the same thing. Under the
extraordinary delusion that all the world, excepting a few enlightened
scientific men, believes morality to be under the tutelage of a "pair
of shrews," to wit, philosophy and theology, they at once proceed to
fly to the opposite extreme error, and to proclaim that it is under the
guardianship of physical science. We have already satisfied ourselves
that morality is not based on religion, but contrariwise that religion
is built on the sanctified emotions of the human heart, that is on the
moral ideal--"a new church founded on moral science"--and as to
theology, I should not waste my time in attempting to show that
mo