Web
and Book design,
Copyright, Kellscraft Studio 1999-2018 (Return to Web Text-ures) |
Click
Here to return to
Little Journeys To the Homes of Great Scientists Content Page Return to the Previous Chapter |
(HOME)
|
THOMAS H. HUXLEY That man, I
think, has a liberal
education whose body has been so trained in youth that it is the ready
servant
of his will, and does with ease and pleasure all that, as a mechanism,
it is
capable of; whose intellect is a clear, cold, logic engine, with all
its parts
of equal strength and in smooth running order, ready, like a
steam-engine, to
be turned to any kind of work and to spin the gossamers as well as
forge the
anchors of the mind; whose mind is stored with the knowledge of the
great
fundamental truths of Nature and the laws of her operations; one who,
no
stunted ascetic, is full of life and fire, but whose passions have been
trained
to come to heel by a vigorous will, the servant of a tender conscience;
one who
has learned to love all beauty, whether of Nature or of art, to hate
all
vileness, and to esteem others as himself. Thomas Henry
Huxley
hat was a great
group of thinkers to which Huxley
belonged.
The Mutual
Admiration Society
forms the sunshine in which souls grow great men come in groups. Sir
Francis
Galton says there were fourteen men in Greece in the time of Pericles
who made
Athens possible. A man alone is only a part of a man. Praxiteles by
himself could have
done nothing. Ictinus might have drawn the plans for the Parthenon, but
without
Pericles the noble building would have remained forever the stuff which
dreams
are made of. And they do say that without Aspasia Pericles would have
been a
mere dreamer of dreams, and Walter Savage Landor overheard enough of
their
conversation to prove it. William Morris
and seven men
working with him formed the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood and gave the
workers and
doers of the world an impetus they yet feel. Cambridge and
Concord had seven
men who induced the Muses to come to America and take out papers. These men of
the Barbizon School
tinted the entire art world: Millet, Rousseau, Daubigny, Corot, Diaz.
And the
people who worked a complete revolution in the theological thought of
Christendom were these: Darwin, Spencer, Mill, Tyndall, Wallace, Huxley
and,
yes, George Eliot, who bolstered the brain of Herbert Spencer when he
was
learning to think for himself. When the
victory had become a
rout, there were many others who joined forces with the evolutionists;
but at
first the thinkers named above stood together and received the rather
unsavory
gibes and jeers of those who get their episcopopagy and science from
the same
source. Darwin was the
only man in the
group who was a university graduate, and he once said that he owed
nothing to
his Alma Mater, save the stimulus derived from her disapproval. For the work
these men had to do
there was no precedent: no one had gone before and blazed a trail. Learning, like
capital, is timid;
but ignorance coupled with a desire to know, is bold. Do I then make a
plea for
ignorance? Yes, most assuredly. It is just as well not to know so much,
as to
be a theologian and know so many things that are not true. Learning and
institutions of
learning subdue men into conformity; only the man who belongs to
nothing is
free; and ignorance, as well as a certain indifference to what the
world has said
and done, is a necessary factor in the character of him who would do a
great
work. It was the combined ignorance and boldness of Columbus that made
it
possible for him to give the world a continent. Yet the man who
has not had a
college training often feels he has somehow missed something valuable:
there is
timidity and hesitation when he is in the presence of those who have
had
"advantages." And Huxley felt this loss, more or less, up to his
thirty-fifth year, when Fate had him cross swords with college men, and
then
the truth became his that if he had had the regular university
training, it was
quite probable that he would have accepted the doctrines the
universities
taught, and would then have been in the camp of the "enemy," instead
of with what he called the "blessed minority." Isolation is a
great aid to the
thinker. Some of the best books the world has ever known were written
behind
prison-bars; exile has done much for literature, and a protracted
sea-voyage
has allowed many a good man to roam the universe in imagination. Some
of
Macaulay's best essays were written on board slow-going sailing-ships
that were
blown by vagrant winds from England to India. Darwin, Hooker and
Huxley, all
got their scientific baptism on board of surveying-ships, where time
was
plentiful and anything but fleeting, and most everything else was
scarce. Huxley was only
assistant surgeon
on the "Rattlesnake," and above him was a naturalist who much of his
time lay in his bunk and read treatises on this and also on that. Huxley was the
seventh child of a
plodding schoolteacher, born on the seventh day of the week on a
seventh-floor
back, he used to say. His genius for work came from his mother, a
tireless,
ambitious woman, who got things done while others were discussing them.
"Had
she been a man, she would have been leader of the Opposition in the
House of
Commons," her son used to say. College
education was not for
that goodly brood a living was the first thing, so after a good
drilling in
the three R's, Thomas Huxley was apprenticed to a pharmacist who paid
him six
shillings a week, a sum that the boy conscientiously gave to his mother. Oh, if in our
school teaching we
could only teach this one thing: a great thirst for knowledge! But this
desire
we can not impart: it is trial, difficulty, obstacle, deprivation and
persecution that make souls hunger and thirst after knowledge. Young
Huxley
wanted to know. His thoroughness in the drugstore won the admiration of
the
doctors whose prescriptions he compounded, and several of them loaned
him books
and took him to clinics; and at seventeen we find him with a Free
Scholarship
in Charing Cross Hospital, serving as nurse and assistant surgeon. Then
came
the appointment as assistant surgeon in the Navy, and the appointment
to
"H.M.S. Rattlesnake," bound on a four-year trip to the Antipodes, all
quite as a matter of course. Life is a
sequence: this happened
today because you did that yesterday. Tomorrow will be the result of
today. The general
idea of evolution was
strong in the mind of young Huxley. He realized that Nature was moving,
growing, changing all things. He had studied embryology, and had seen
how the
body of a man begins as a single minute mass of protoplasm, without
organs or
dimensions. Behind the ship
was his dragnet,
and he worked almost constantly recording the different specimens of
animal and
vegetable life that he thus secured. The jellyfish attracted him most. To the ship's
naturalist,
jellyfish were jellyfish, but Huxley saw that there were many kinds,
distinct,
separate, peculiar. He began to dissect them and thus began his book on
jellyfish, just as Darwin wrote his work on barnacles. Huxley vowed to
himself that
before the "Rattlesnake" got back to England he would know more about
jellyfish than any other living man. That his ambition was realized no
one now
disputes. Among his first
discoveries, it
came to him with a thrill that a certain species of jellyfish bears a
very
close resemblance to the human embryo at a certain stage. And he
remembered the dictum of
Goethe, that the growth of the individual mirrors the growth of the
race. And
he paraphrased it thus: "The growth of the individual mirrors the
growth
of the species." So filled was he with the thought that he could not
sleep, so he got up and paced the deck and tried to explain his great
thought
to the second mate. He was getting ready for "The Origin of Species,"
which he once said to Darwin he would himself have written, if Darwin
had been
a little more of a gentleman and had held off for a few years. It was on board
the
"Rattlesnake" that Huxley wrote this great truth: "Nature has no
designs or intentions. All that live exist only because they have
adapted
themselves to the hard lines that Nature has laid down. We progress as
we
comply." n Australia,
while waiting for his ship to locate
and map a dangerous reef, Huxley went ashore, and as he playfully
expressed it,
"ran upon another."
The name of the
most excellent
young woman who was to become his wife was Henrietta Heathorn; and
Julian
Hawthorne has discovered that she belongs to the same good stock from
whence
came our Nathaniel of Salem. It did not take
the young
naturalist and this stranded waif, seven thousand miles from home, long
to see
that they had much in common. Both were eager for truth, both had the
ability
to cut the introduction and reach live issues directly. "I saw you were
a
woman with whom only honesty would answer," he wrote her thirty years
after. He was still in love with her. Yet she was a
proud soul, and no
assistant surgeon on an insignificant sloop would answer her when he
got his
surgeon's commission she would marry him. And it was seven years before
she
journeyed to England alone with that delightful object in view. He had
to serve
for her as Jacob did for Rachel, with this difference: Jacob loved
several, but
Thomas Huxley loved but one. Huxley's wife
was his companion,
confidante, comrade, friend. I can not recall another so blest, in all
the
annals of thinking men, save John Stuart Mill. "I tell her everything I
know, or guess, or imagine, so as to get it straight in my own mind,"
he
said to John Fiske. In that most
interesting work,
"Life and Lessons of Huxley," compiled by his son Leonard, are
constant references and allusions to this most ideal mating. In reply
to the
question, Is marriage a failure? I would say, "No, provided the man
marries a woman like Huxley's wife, and the woman marries a man like
Huxley." here is a
classic aphorism which runs about this way, "Knock and
the world knocks with you; boost and you boost alone." Like most
popular
sayings this is truth turned wrong side out.
John Fiske once
called Thomas
Huxley an "appreciative iconoclast." That is to say, Huxley was a
persistent protester (which is different from a protestant), and at the
same
time, he was a friend who never faltered and grew faint in time of
trouble.
Huxley always sniffed the battle from afar and said, Ha! Ha! There be those
who do declare
that the success of Huxley was owing to his taking the tide at the
flood, and
riding into high favor on the Darwinian wave. To say that there would
have been
no Huxley had there been no Darwin would be one of those unkind cuts
the
cruelty of which lies in its truth. It is equally
true that if there
had been no Lincoln there would have been no Grant; but Grant was a
very great
man just the same so why raise the issue! Darwin summed
up and made nebulζ
of the truths which Huxley had, up to that time, held only in gaseous
form. Darwin was born
in the immortal
year Eighteen Hundred Nine. Huxley was born in Eighteen Hundred
Twenty-five.
When "The Origin of Species" was published in Eighteen Hundred
Fifty-nine, Thomas Huxley was thirty-four years old. He had made his
four
years' trip around the world on the surveying-ship "Rattlesnake,"
just as Darwin had made his eventful voyage on the "Beagle." These men in
many ways had
paralleled each other; but Darwin had sixteen years the start, and
during these
years he had steadily and silently worked to prove the great truth that
he had
sensed intuitively years before in the South Seas. "The Origin of
Species"
sheds light in ten thousand ways on the fact that all life has evolved
from
very lowly forms and is still ascending: that species were not created
by fiat,
but that every species was the sure and necessary result of certain
conditions. Until "The
Origin of
Species" was published, and for some years afterward, the Immutability
of
Species was taught in all colleges, and everywhere accepted by the
so-called
learned men. Goethe had
somewhat dimly
prophesied the discovery of the Law of Evolution, but his ideas on
natural
science were regarded by the schools as quite on a par with those of
Dante:
neither was taken seriously. Darwin proved
his hypothesis.
Doubtless, very many schoolmen would have accepted the theory, but to
admit that
man was not created outright, complete, and in his present form, or
superior to
it, seemed to evolve a contradiction of the Mosaic account of Creation,
and the
breaking up of Christianity. And these things done, many thought, would
entail
moral chaos, destruction of private interests and moral confusion being
one and
the same thing to those whose interests are involved. And so for
conscience'
sake, Darwin was bitterly assailed and opposed. Opportunity,
which knocks many
times at each man's door, rapped hard at Huxley's door in Eighteen
Hundred
Sixty. It was at Oxford, at a meeting of the British Association for
the
Advancement of Science: "A big society with a slightly ironical
name," once said Huxley. The audience was large and fashionable,
delegates
being present from all parts of the British Empire. "The Origin of
Species"
had been published the year before, and tongues were wagging. Darwin
was not
present; but Huxley, who was known to be a personal friend of Darwin,
was in
his seat. The intent of the chairman was to keep Darwin and his
pestiferous
book out of all the discussions: Darwin was a good man to smother with
silence. But Samuel
Wilberforce, Bishop of
Oxford, in the course of a speech on another subject began to run short
of
material, and so switched off upon a theme which he had already
exploited from
the pulpit with marked effect. All public speakers carry this
boiler-plate
matter for use in time of stress. The Bishop
began to denounce
"those enemies of the Church and Society who make covert attacks upon
the
Bible in the name of Science." He warmed to his theme, and by a
specious
series of misstatements and various appeals to the prejudices of his
audience
worked the assemblage up to a high pitch of hilarity and enthusiasm.
Toward the
close of his speech he happened to spy Huxley seated near, and pointing
a pudgy
finger at him, "begged to be informed if the learned gentleman was
really
willing to be regarded as a descendant of a monkey?" As the Bishop
sat down, there was
a wild burst of applause and much laughter, but amid the din were
calls,
"Huxley! Huxley!" These shouts increased as it came over the people
that while the Bishop had made a great speech, he had gone a trifle too
far in
ridiculing a member who up to this time had been silent. The good
English
spirit of fair play was at work. Still Huxley sat silent. Then the
enemy,
thinking he was completely vanquished, took up the cry with intent to
add to
his discomfiture: "Huxley! Huxley!" Slowly Huxley
arose. He stood
still until the last buzzing whisper had died away. When he spoke it
was in so
low a tone that people leaned forward to catch his words. Huxley knew his
business: his
slowness to speak created an atmosphere. There was no jest in his voice
or
manner. The air grew tense. His quiet
reserve played itself
off against the florid exuberance of the Bishop. The Bishop was not a
man given
to exact statements: his knowledge of science was general, not specific. Huxley
demolished his card house
point by point, correcting the gross misstatements, and ending by
saying that
since a question of personal preferences had been brought into the
discussion
of a great scientific theme, he would confess that if the alternatives
were a
descent on the one hand from a respectable monkey, or on the other from
a
Bishop of the Church of England who could stoop to misrepresentation
and
sophistry and who had attempted in that presence to throw discredit
upon a man
who had given his life to the cause of science, then if forced to
decide he
would declare in favor of the monkey. When Huxley
took his seat, there
was a silence that could be felt. Several ladies fainted. There were
fears that
the Bishop would reply, and to keep down such a possible unpleasant
move the
audience now applauded Huxley roundly, and amid the din the chairman
declared
the meeting adjourned. From that time forward Huxley was famous throughout England as a man to let alone in public debate. t is a fine
thing to be a great scientist, but it
is a yet finer thing to be a great man. The one element in Huxley's
life that
makes his character stand out clear, sharp and well defined was his
steadfast
devotion to truth. The only thing he feared was self-deception. When he
uttered
his classic cry in defense of Darwin, there was no ulterior motive in
it; no
thought that he was attaching himself to a popular success; no idea
that he was
linking his name with greatness.
What he felt
was true, he
uttered; and the strongest desire of his soul was that he might never
compromise with the error for the sake of mental ease, or accept a
belief
simply because it was pleasant. Huxley once
wrote this terse
sentence of Gladstone: "It is to me a serious thing that the destinies
of
this great country should at present be to a great extent in the hands
of a man
who, whatever he may be in the affairs of which I am no judge, is
nothing but a
copious shuffler in those that I do understand." Gladstone crossed
swords
with Huxley, Spencer and Robert Ingersoll, and in each case his
blundering
intellect looked like a raft of logs compared with a steamboat that
responds to
the helm. Gladstone was a man of action, and silence to such is most
becoming. He had a
belief, that was enough;
he should have hugged it close, and never stood up to explain it. Let
us vary a
simile just used: Lincoln once referred to an opponent as being "like a
certain steamboat that ran on the Sangamon. This boat had so big a
whistle that
when she blew it, there wasn't steam enough to make her run, and when
she ran
she couldn't whistle." Huxley, Spencer
and Robert
Ingersoll, all made Gladstone cut for the woods and cover his retreat
in a
cloud of words. Ingersoll once said that in replying to Gladstone he
felt like
a man who had been guilty of cruelty to children. If one wants to
see how pitifully
weak Gladstone could be in an argument, let him refer to the "North
American Review" for Eighteen Hundred Eighty-two. Yet Ingersoll
was surely lacking
in the passion for truth that characterized Huxley. Ingersoll was
always a
prosecutor or a defender: the lawyer habit was strong upon him. Just a
little
more bias in his clay and he would have made a model bishop. His stock of
science was almost
as meager as was that of Samuel Wilberforce, and he seldom hesitated to
turn
the laugh on an adversary, even at the expense of truth. When brought
to book
for his indictment of Moses without giving that great man any credit
for the
sublime things he did do, or making allowances for the barbaric horde
with
which he had to deal, Bob evaded the proposition by saying, "I am not
the
attorney of Moses: he has more than three million men looking after his
case." Again, in that
most charming
lecture on Shakespeare, Ingersoll proves that Bacon did not write the
plays, by
picking out various detached passages of Bacon, which no one for a
moment ever
claimed revealed the genius of the man. With equal
plausibility we could
prove that the author of Hamlet was a weakling, by selecting all the
obscure
and stupid passages, and parading these with the unexplained fact that
the play
opens with the spirit of a dead man coming back to earth, and a little
later in
the same play Shakespeare has the man who interviewed the ghost tell of
"that bourne from whence no traveler returns." Even Shakespeare was
not a genius all the time. And Ingersoll, the searcher for truth,
borrowed from
his friends, the priests, the cheerful habit of secreting the
particular thing
that would not help the cause in hand. But one of the best things in
Ingersoll's character was that he realized his lapses and in private
acknowledged them. On reading the
smooth, florid and
plausible sophistry of Wilberforce, Ingersoll once said: "Be easy on
Soapy
Sam! A few years ago, a little shifting of base on the part of my
ancestors,
and I would probably have had Soapy Sam's job." This resemblance of opposites makes a person think of that remark applied to Voltaire. "He was the father of all those who wear shovel-hats." hen Thomas
Huxley and his wife arrived in New York
in Eighteen Hundred Seventy-six, on a visit to the Centennial
Exhibition, this
interesting item was flashed over the country, "Huxley and his titled
bride have arrived in New York on their wedding-journey."
This item
caused Mr. and Mrs.
Huxley both of them royal democrats more joy than did the most
complimentary interview. At home they had left a charming little brood
of seven
children, three of them nearly grown-ups. Huxley sent
Tyndall, who a few
months before had married a daughter of Lord Hamilton, the clipping and
this
note: "You see how that once I am in a democratic country I am pulling
all
the honors I can in my own direction." The next letter the Huxleys
received from Tyndall was addressed, "Sir Thomas and Lady Huxley."
Huxley never stood in much awe of the nobility; he evidently felt that
there
was another kind of which he himself in degree was heir. Huxley never
had a
better friend than Sir Joseph Hooker, and we see in his letters such
postscripts as this: "Dear Sir
Joseph: Do come
and dine with us; it is a month since we have seen your homely old
phiz."
And Sir Joseph replies that he will be on hand the next Sunday evening
and
offers this mild suggestion, "Scientific gents as has countenances as
curdles milk should not cast aspersions on men made in image of Maker." he wordy duel
between Huxley and Gladstone prompted Toole, the great
comedian, to send a box of grease-paints to Huxley with a note saying,
"These are for you and Gladstone to use when you make up." It was a
joke so subtle and choice that the Huxleys, always dear friends of
Toole,
laughed for a week.
Poor Gladstone
required a diagram
when he heard of the procedure; and then, not being trepanned for the
pleasantry, remarked that if Toole and Huxley collaborated on the
stage, it
would be eminently the proper thing, and in his mind there was little
choice
between them, both being fine actors. Later, we hear
of Huxley saying
he thought of sending the box of grease-paints to Gladstone, so the
Premier
could use them in making up with God; as for himself, he was like
Thoreau and
had never quarreled with Him. Huxley had many
friendships with
people seemingly outside of his own particular line of work. Henry
Irving, the
Reverend Doctor Parker, John Fiske and Hall Caine once met at one of
Huxley's
"Tall Teas," and Doctor Parker explained that he personally had no
objection to visiting with sinners. For Parker,
Huxley had a great
admiration and often attended the Thursday noon meeting at the Temple,
"to
see and hear the greatest actor in England," a compliment which Parker
much appreciated, otherwise he would not have repeated it. "If I ever
take
to the stage, I will play the part of Jacques or Touchstone," said
Huxley. John Fiske in
his delightful
essay on Huxley said that in the Huxley home there was more jest, joke
and
banter than in any other place in London. The air was surcharged with
mirth,
and puns, often very bad ones, were tossed back and forth with great
recklessness. At one time
John Fiske was at the
Huxleys and the dual or multiple nature of man came up for discussion.
Huxley
spoke of how very often men who were gentle and charming in their homes
were
capable of great crimes, and of how, on the other hand, a man might
pass in the
world as a philanthropist, and yet in his household be a veritable
autocrat and
tyrant. Fiske then
incidentally mentioned
the case of Doctors Parker and Webster of Harvard men of intellect
and worth.
These men brooded over a misunderstanding that grew into a grudge and
eventually hatched murder. One worthy professor killed the other, cut
up the
body, and tried to burn it in a chemist's retort. Only the great
difficulty of
reducing the human body to ashes caused the murder to out, and brought
about
the hanging of a scientist of note. "Yes, I have
thought of the
difficulty of disposing of a dead body," said Huxley, solemnly; "and
often when on the point of committing murder this was the only thing
that made
me hesitate!" "Oh, Pater, we
are ashamed
of you," said his three lovely daughters in concert. Huxley's ability
to
joke and his appreciation of the ludicrous marked him, in the mind of
John
Fiske, as the greatest thinker of his time. The humorist knows values,
and that
is why he laughs. Sensibility is, in fact, the basic element of wit. uxley's duties
on the "Rattlesnake" were not in the line of
science. His rank was assistant surgeon; but as sure-enough surgeons
were only
sent out on bigger craft, he was this ship's doctor.
With the
captain's help the men
were kept busy, but not too busy, and the food and regulations were
such that
about all Huxley had to do was to look upon his work and pronounce it
good. As a physician,
Huxley practised
throughout his life the science of prevention. "With a
prophetic vision,
quite unconscious, my parents named me after that particular apostle I
was to
admire most," once said Huxley. He was a doubter by instinct, and
approached the world of Nature as if nothing were known about it. His work on the
Medusa won him
the recognition of the British Society, and this secured him the
coveted
surgeon's commission. Two tragedies confront man on his journey through
life one
when he wants a thing and can not get it; the other when he gets the
thing and
finds he does not want it. Having secured
his surgeon's
commission, Huxley felt a strong repulsion toward devoting his life to
the
abnormal. "I am a
scientist by nature,
and my business is to teach," he wrote to his affianced wife. These
were
wise words which he had learned from her, but which he repeated,
seemingly
quite innocent of their source. We take our own wherever we find it. Miss Heathorn
admired a surgeon,
but loved a scientist, and Huxley being a man was making a heroic
struggle to
be what the young woman most wished. Love supplies an ideal and that
is the
very best thing love does, with possibly an exception or two. So behold
a
ship's surgeon in London, full-fledged, refusing offers of position,
and even
declining to take a choice of ships, for such is the perversity of
things
animate and inanimate that, when we do not want things, Fate brings
them to us
on silver platters and begs us to accept. We win by indifference as
much as by
desire. "I have
declined to ship on
board the 'Cormorant' as head surgeon, and have applied to the
University of
Toronto for a position as Professor of Natural History." And so America
had Huxley flung
at her head. Toronto considered, and the Canadians sat on the case, and
after
considerable correspondence, the vacant chair was given to Professor
Baldini of
the Whitby Ladies College. It was a close call for Canada! Huxley had
imagined
that the New World offered special advantages to a rising young person
of
scientific bent, but now he secured a marriage-license and settled down
as
lecturer at the School of Mines. A little later he began to teach at
the Royal
College of Surgeons, with which institution he was to be connected the
rest of
his life, and fill almost any chair that happened to be vacant. From the time
he was twenty-seven
Huxley never had to look for work. He was known as a writer of worth,
and as a
lecturer his services were in demand. He became
President of the
Geological and Ethnological Society; was appointed Royal Commissioner
for the
Advancement of Science; was a member of the London School Board;
Secretary of
the Royal Society; Lord Rector of the University of Aberdeen; President
of the
Royal Society; and refused an offer to become Custodian of the British
Museum,
a life position, and where he had once applied for a clerkship. In letters to
Darwin he
occasionally signed his name with all titles added, thus, "Thomas Henry
Huxley, M.B., M.D., Ph.D., LL.D., F.R.S. of Her Majesty's Navy." Huxley was a
forceful and
epigrammatic writer, and had a command of English second to no
scientist that
England has ever produced. He was the only one of his group who had a
distinct
literary style. As a speaker he was quiet, deliberate, decisive, sure;
and he
carried enough reserve caloric so that he made his presence felt in any
assemblage before he said a word. In oratory it is personality that
gives
ballast. Of his forty or
so published
books, "Man's Place in Nature," "Elementary Physiology" and
"Classification of Animals" have been translated into many languages,
and now serve as textbooks in various schools and colleges. Huxley is the
founder of the
so-called Agnostic School, which has the peculiarity of not being a
school. The
word "agnostic" was given its vogue by Huxley. To superficial people
it was quite often used synonymously with "infidel" and
"freethinker," both words of reproach. To Huxley it meant simply one
who did not know, but wished to learn. The controlling
impulse of Huxley's
life was his absolute honesty. To pretend to believe a thing against
which
one's reason revolts, in order to better one's place in society, was to
him the
sum of all that was intellectually base. He regarded man
as an undeveloped
creature, and for this creature to lay the flattering unction to his
soul that
he was in special communication with the Infinite, and in possession of
the
secrets of the Creator, was something that in itself proved that man
was as yet
in the barbaric stage. Said Huxley: "As to the final truths of Creation and Destiny, I am an agnostic. I do not know, hence I neither affirm nor deny." umor and
commonsense usually go together. Huxley had a goodly stock of
both. When George Eliot died, there was a very earnest but ill-directed
effort
made to have her body buried in Westminster Abbey. Huxley, being close
to the
Dean, serving with him on several municipal boards, was importuned by
Spencer
to use his influence toward the desired end. Huxley saw the incongruity
of the
situation, and in a letter that reveals the logical mind and the
direct,
literary, Huxley quality, he placed his gentle veto on the proposition
and thus
saved the "enemy" the mortification of having to do so.
Darwin is
buried in Westminster
Abbey, but this was not to be the final resting-place of the dust of
Mill,
Tyndall, Spencer, George Eliot or Huxley. These had all stood in the
fore of
the fight against superstition and had both given and received blows. The Pantheon of
such
battle-scarred heroes was to be the hearts of those who prize above all
that
earth can bestow the benison of the God within. "Above all else, let me
preserve my integrity of intellect," said Huxley. Here is Huxley's
letter
to Spencer: 4
Marlborough
Place, Dec. 27,
1880 My Dear
Spencer: Your telegram
which reached me on Friday evening caused me great perplexity, inasmuch
as I
had just been talking to Morley, and agreeing with him that the
proposal for a
funeral in Westminster Abbey had a very questionable look to us, who
desired
nothing so much as that peace and honor should attend George Eliot to
her
grave. It can hardly
be doubted that the
proposal will be bitterly opposed, possibly (as happened in Mill's case
with
less provocation) with the raking up of past histories, about which the
opinion
even of those who have least the desire or the right to be pharisaical
is
strongly divided, and which had better be forgotten. With respect to
putting pressure
on the Dean of Westminster, I have to consider that he has some
confidence in
me, and before asking him to do something for which he is pretty sure
to be
violently assailed, I have to ask myself whether I really think it a
right
thing for a man in his position to do. Now I can not
say I do. However
much I may lament the circumstance, Westminster Abbey is a Christian
Church and
not a Pantheon, and the Dean thereof is officially a Christian priest,
and we
ask him to bestow exceptional Christian honors by this burial in the
Abbey.
George Eliot is known not only as a great writer, but as a person whose
life
and opinions were in notorious antagonism to Christian practise in
regard to
marriage, and Christian theory in regard to dogma. How am I to tell the
Dean
that I think he ought to read over the body of a person who did not
repent of
what the Church considers mortal sin, a service not one solitary
proposition of
which she would have accepted for truth while she was alive? How am I
to urge
him to do that which, if I were in his place, I should most
emphatically refuse
to do? You tell me that Mrs. Cross wished for the funeral in the Abbey.
While I
desire to entertain the greatest respect for her wishes, I am very
sorry to
hear it. I do not understand the feeling which could create such a
desire on
any personal grounds, save those of affection, and the natural yearning
to be
near, even in death, those whom we have loved. And on public grounds
the wish
is still less intelligible to me. One can not eat one's cake and have
it too.
Those who elect to be free in thought and deed must not hanker after
the
rewards, if they are to be so called, which the world offers to those
who put
up with its fetters. Thus, however I
look at the
proposal, it seems to me to be a profound mistake, and I can have
nothing to do
with it. I shall be deeply grieved if this resolution is ascribed to
any other
motives than those which I have set forth at greater length than I
intended. Ever
yours very
faithfully, T. H.
HUXLEY |