f I No. I. OCTOBER, 1902, Vot. VIII. SOUTH PLACE ··MAGAZINE EDITED BY W. J. REYNOLDS. , Contents PAGE. ETHICS, SCIENCE AND VIVISECTION .. .... ... ..... 1 By MONA CAIRO. H AROLD SEYLER - IN MEMORIAM . ... ..... .... 5 WILLIAM JOHNSON FOX . .. ....... ................. 9 By J. H . , BRITISH EMPIRE SERIES. ....... ............ ..... 10 By H. C. CORRESPOND ENCE .. .. ............. .. ... .. ...... 11 NOTES AND COMMENTS . .. 11 NOTICES . ............... .. ....... ..... ............. 14 Monthly , 2d., o It 25. 6d. PE tt ANN U M I I) 0 S T F R E E ~OI\~OI\ SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY, FINSBURY, KC. A. & H . B . BONNER. 1&2 TOOK'S COURT, FURNIVAL STREET, E.C 'llufq ilart @fqiraI ~llritty. -------------................ South Place Chapel & Institute, Finsbury, E .C ~ Object of the Society. " The object of the Society is the cu.itivation of a rational religious sentiment , the study of ethical principles, and the promotion of human welfare, in harmony with advancing knowledge. " OCTOBER, 1..902. Tlte jollowi7lg DISCOURSES will be delivered 011 S!llIday 1II01'ltWgS, Service beginnillg at 11.15. October 5th.-HERBERT BURRO WS .•, Christ In London." A th I 1. "If with all your heans " (Elljah) ... .. ... ... At .III/clssoI",. n ems 2. iI As tben tbe tulip" and 11 Alas! that Spring J' (Persian Garden) Llhman". H 1No. 16. "Once in the busy streets" (0. B. I17) ymns No. la. "A IIltle child, in bulrush ark" (0. B. 61) October 12th.-M rs. ANNIE BESA NT.-" India and England." Antbems I J. :: O. pr~y [or the ~,eace" ... ... ... ... .. Tllolllt. 2. PIlgnm s Song ....... ... .. TschaikQwsky. H mns I No. 96. "Honour to bim who freely gives" (0. B. 514) y No. 77. "Man whose boast it is that ye" (0. B. 386) Oct ober Igth.-Dr. CHARLES LENTZNER (of tbe Oriental Seminary, Berlin).­ " Modern Classics and Eth ical Culture." Anthems \ 1. "Now ariscth the sun of liberty" ... Mo.art. 2. "My beart is weary" (Nadeshda) .. .. .. Goring Thomas. H mn I No. 112. 11 A dreamer dropped a random thought" Y S No. 33. 11 There is a song now singing" (0 B.170) October 26th.-HERBERT BURROWS.-" Rationalism and Life." Anthems I I. "Salve Rcgina" ... .. Ha"ptma",•. •. "I will extol Thee" (Ell) ... ... ... ... .. Cosla H I No. 29· "Truth is great and must prevail" (0. B. 160) ymns No. 30. "Hast thou, 'midst life's empty noises? " (0. B. 161) S U NDAY S CHOOL. The Children meet in the CHAPEL every Sunday morning, at 11.15, and tbeir lesson is given in the CIa ..-room during the discourse. Members and friends wishing tbeir children to attend the school are requested to communicate with the Superintendent. October 5th. D. J. RtOER ... " Tatlcrley." 12th. W. VARIAN ... lI Sermons in Stones." 19th. Miss F . A. LAW ••. " Symbols." 26th. H . F . GOULO ... " Cbarles Darwin." Visitors mlly take tllly Se,,(s VIICallt ajlel' Ihe ft1'S! AlIthem, and they IIle i,""led to obtaill ill/oll/wtfo" regllrdfllg the Society ill Ihe Libral), 011 SUllday morlli1lgs. CyclIsts deslri"g to atl£lld Ihe Sel vices a,·e i"jol1ned Ihat the C01llmittee have made (lI1"111I{!e111ellls fOl' hot/slJlg theil lIIachl1lcs in the basement. A Col/cetio)1 is mllde III the close oj ellch Service to ellable Visitors to cOllt"joule to the expwses of the Society. T h e Ch apel _ s licen sed for Marria ges. Arran R;c m en ts con be mode for the con du ct of F une ra l Services 0 11 applica­ tion to the Secretary. MEMEERSHIP . .. Persons paying for sittings in tlu: Socit ty's plact: of l\feeling for the time being arc ti1Ul hy constituted members of the Soci~ty. l\1(;mbeJ!:. who arc twt:nty~onc years of age and upwards whose names have been twelve months upon the registu'l and whose subscriptions for the previous quarter have been paid, shall be qunlifild to vote and to ho1d office."-Exll'act /,om tht R,,/rs. Sittings may be obtained upon application in the Library, or t o Mrs. H. SEYLER, loal Featherstone Buildings, Holborn, W.C., HOIl. Registrar of Members and Asscdates l prices varying from IS. to ]05. per quarter. Persons unde r 2] are charged half the usual rates. ASSOCI ATES. Persons residing at a distance, and who are unable to attend the services tegularly. Ill'), become Associates of the Society UpOll \,aymcnt of an annual Subscription of 55. with the privilege of receiving all the current pub ications of tbe Society. Subscriptions may be paid­ III the Library or to tbe Hon. Registrar of Members and ASSOCIates at above address. SOUTH PLACE MAGAZINE . No. I. Vo!. VIII. 1902. • d. Monthly. O CTOBER, 2&. Od. por annum, poet trl'e. The writels of Articles appearing it! tltis Magazillc al'e alotle I'CSPollsible jor the opinions thereit! expressed.) ETHICS, SCIENCE AND VIVISECTION. IN his interesting article on the "Province of Ethics and the Province of S ience" in the August number of this Magazine, Mr. Elwes does much to supply the key to the position of the opponents of vivisection, though he is dislosed to accuse the much refuted hand of having no position worth mentioning. In the distinction between Ethics and Science, Mr. Elwes (who speaks in the name of Science) is emphasising a point on which all careful opponents of vivisection have invariably laid insistent stress. Tt is the defenders of the practice who have obscured the distinc­ tion by declaring indignantly that they alone are the judges in this question, and that the agitation against their work is an unwar­ rantable and mi chievous interference. The reply to this is: Science and Ethics are distinct: you, as men f science are not, as such, especially competent to decide on the right and wrong of the matter. In that, the public has a claim to a voice, eeing that it involves the problem of the rights of animals which is an ethical and not merely a scientific question. Indeed your special interests and enthusiasms tend to disqualify you, to some extent at least, from judging the ethical point. ft is of course the true policy of the pro-vivisector to bring the battle to his own field, and his efforts will generally be found to be directed to concentrating the argument on the scientific value of his experiments. It not eldom happens that his opponent unwisely allows himself to be led on to this ground, and to admit, by infer­ ence, that he might consent to a practice which he began by denouncing as a crime, if once he could be convinced that its fruits are sufficiently tempting. Thus the whole question of ethics is confused with that of science, while the" Good of Humanity" is treated from the neces­ . arily limited point of view of one profession only (that of the physiologist) to the total ignoring of that more general "good of humanity" which hangs at least as much upon the principles on which man founds his Jaws and his sentiments as upon the parti- ular knowledge which he might (per assumption) acquire respecting nerves and organs, or the particular preparation of diseased animal matter which medical experts might see good to introduce into the z blood of a confiding people, with their will or against it, according as the balance of power at the moment might decide. It is not in a wilfully controversial spirit that 1 make this effort to re-examine the logical principle which underlies-or ought to underlie-opposition to this practice. Mr. Elwes cannot restrain a scientific £lout or so at anti-vivisec­ tors in the course of his article, and this perhaps is not unnatural j for to all but those who have made a special tudy of the tre­ mendous principles involved in this con trover y, the opponents of science (as they are called) must indeed seem easily assailable, especially on the ground of inconsistency. By Mr. Elwes' showing their dilemma is most serious. If, he argue, they hold it wrong to torture animals for great scientific and humanitarian ends, surely they ought to hold it more wrong to "inflict pain and death merely to provide food not absolutely necessary," and for other purposes less important. This argument, to begin with, treats death and torture as if there were no distinction between them. It is as if one were to reply to an opponent of the rack or the thumbscrew, that the objection was absurd in one who failed to protest also against war, capital punishment, and even again. t imprisonment which involves some painful experience to the victim. The criticism quoted above from Mr. Elwes' article, virtually amounts to no more than this. It seems to be at this date, the natural first-hand vie,," of the case j that is, the view induced in the public mind after about twenty years of legalised vivisection. Previous to that, the first­ hand impression produced by the practice (then outside the realm of law) was intense indignation, as will be seen by anyone who cares to study the early history of the movement. By this signi­ ficant fact we may trace the reconciling effect of familiarity with what is horrible j the inevitable trend of sentiment towards acquies­ cence and finally applause when it deals with a duly recognised and State-supported institution. The present first-hand view, whi h Mr. Elwes hares, implies that the subject has never been fully onsidered: otherwise it would be een that the accusations of inconsistency that assail the so-called enemies of science are entirely irrelevant. For the opponent of vivisection in that capacity has no locrical concern with any lesser wrong to animals than that which' hf~ opposes.