CHAPTER VII.

RELIEF OF THE POOR

§ 452. We enter now upon the subject with which the conception of beneficence is almost wholly identified in some minds, and chiefly identified in many minds. With the word beneficence (or rather with the word benevolence, which commonly usurps its place) there usually springs up the idea of open-handed generosity to those in want. The giving of money or money’s worth is so much the easiest and the most familiar mode of showing kindness, that by the unthinking, and especially by recipients, kindness is conceived as little else.

CHAPTER VIII.

SOCIAL BENEFICENCE

§ 459. Is each person under obligation to carry on social intercourse? May he, without any disregard of claims upon him, lead a solitary life, or a life limited to the family circle? Or does Positive Beneficence dictate the cultivating of friendships and acquaintanceships to the extent of giving and receiving hospitalities? And if there is such a requirement, what constitutes proper discharge of it?

CHAPTER IX.

POLITICAL BENEFICENCE

§ 466. The injunction ascribed to Charles I—“Touch no State matters,” was one appropriately enough promulgated by a king; for a king naturally likes to have his own way. Ready conformity to the injunction, however, on the part of subjects, does not appear so natural; and yet throughout the past it has been general, and is not uncommon even now. There are many who, though they probably never heard of this rule of King Charles, unconsciously subordinate themselves to it, and seem to take a pride in their subordination.

CHAPTER X.

BENEFICENCE AT LARGE

§ 471. Most readers have been surprised by much which has, in the foregoing chapters, and especially the later ones, been included under the head of beneficence. Only special parts of social and political conduct are usually thought of as having ethical aspects; whereas here most parts of them have been dealt with as having such aspects.

APPENDIX A.

THE KANTIAN IDEA OF RIGHTS

Among the tracks of thought pursued by multitudinous minds in the course of ages, nearly all must have been entered upon if not explored. Hence the probability is greatly against the assumption of entire novelty in any doctrine. The remark is suggested by an instance of such an assumption erroneously made.

APPENDIX B.

THE LAND-QUESTION

The course of Nature, “red in tooth and claw,” has been, on a higher plane, the course of civilization. Through “blood and iron” small clusters of men have been consolidated into larger ones, and these again into still larger ones, until nations have been formed. This process, carried on everywhere and always by brute force, has resulted in a history of wrongs upon wrongs: savage tribes have been slowly welded together by savage means.

APPENDIX C.

THE MORAL MOTIVE

Some months after the first five chapters of this volume appeared in The Nineteenth Century, the Rev. J. Llewelyn Davies published in The Guardian for July 16, 1890, some criticisms upon them. Such of these criticisms as concern other questions I pass over, and here limit myself to one which concerns the sentiment of duty, and the authority of that sentiment. Mr. Davies says:—

APPENDIX D.

CONSCIENCE IN ANIMALS

Shortly after the publication in The Guardian of the correspondence reproduced in the preceding Appendix, I received from a gentleman residing in Devonshire the letter which I here quote:—

Dear Sir—The following careful observations on animals other than man may be of interest to you as supporting your idea that the idea of ‘duty’ or ‘ought’ (owe it) may be of non-‘supernatural’ origin. [‘Supernatural’ is used in usual sense without committing the writer to any opinion.]

APPENDIX E.

REPLIES TO CRITICISMS

[The following replies to criticisms originally appeared in Mind for January, 1881. I have thought it well to give them here a permanent place, because, in making them, I have had occasion further to elucidate certain of the doctrines set forth in the preceding pages.]