the Religious Nature of Man, and in the Spiritual Realities of the Universe.

"If this can be done in time, the advance against the strongholds of Sin can go on: if not, there is sure to be disaster. It is to arrest this disaster that you are to put forth all your efforts.

"In the presence of the dangers that confront you, I must remind you of the difference which exists between war and all imitations of it. I have dwelt much on strategy and tactics, a knowledge of which I look upon as indispensable, but let me remind you that battles are not won in the armchair. The great thing is to have collected sufficient force and to put it forth to the utter

most.

"In order to arouse the true professional spirit which is necessary for victory, I would recommend a recent book by a British naval officer, entitled 'Heresies of Sea Power.' You will observe that the same principles apply to the other branch of the service that we recognize in conflicts on land.

"The gallant writer analyzes the great sea fights of history; in the attempt to find some law governing success he finds there is no trick by

which a half-hearted power can overcome one that is alert and persevering and daring.

"The only formula that he arrives at—that he sets forth as a conclusion of the whole matteris fitness to win.

"Who are those who are fit to win? not those merely who have the command of good material, but those who, having it, are impelled by an overwhelming desire to use it to the uttermost in carrying on the project in which they are engaged. 'The full possession of that desire,' he says, 'has implied caution where caution was required, rashness where rashness was the better way—but always because of the fullness of the desire.'

"The great cause of failure, he insists, has been feebleness of purpose. Whatever its inferiority in heavy guns cost the Spanish Armada, its inability to use effectively such guns as it had, and to secure sufficient ammunition for them, cost it a great deal more.'

"You, young gentlemen, in preparing for active service, should seek the best equipment possible, but remember that 'fitness to win' is indicated not by mere superiority in heavy guns, but by the ability to use effectively such guns as you have."

THE ROMANCE OF ETHICS

in its early career

POLITICAL economy in its

gained the reputation of being "the dismal science." But what used to be called Moral Science was a good second. To take up a text-book on the subject, published a generation ago, is painful in the extreme. The treatise seems to be but a series of lame apologies for its own exist

ence.

Can there be such a thing as Moral Science? The author candidly admits that until his appearance on the scene there had been none. Before you can have a science you must know what it is about. You must define your subject-matter. Whereupon he begins to pick flaws in all the definitions that have hitherto been made. It appears that most of those who have attempted to deal with the subject did n't know Morality when they saw it. They have been acutely analyzing something else.

Having given his own definition, he then pro

ceeds to defend it against all comers. He loves it for the enemies it has made. He successfully refutes all criticisms made by other Professors of Moral Science, who, it appears, are not so wise as they might be.

It is a good definition, and the only thing that remains is to find out whether it fits the facts in the case. It appears that this is rather difficult, for facts come in odd sizes. Good men whom we happen to know, or whose biographies we have read, ought to act in strict accord with the ascertained laws of Moral Science. But many good men are not Strict Constructionists. Even the gentlemen who endowed the Chair of Moral Science may not have proceeded strictly according to rule. It is necessary, then, to make some adjustments between the Moral Law and the conduct of the respectable classes of the community.

One watches the process of adjustment as the frugal householder, when he undertakes to do the family marketing, watches the butcher who is selling him four pounds of lamb chops. First the meat, for which the market price is exacted, is carefully weighed. There is something generous in this transaction, and trifles are not taken

into account. But in the delivery of his goods the butcher uses the intensive method. He proceeds conscientiously to trim each chop to the delicate proportions demanded by the epicure who will eat only the best. The trimmings he throws into a receptacle provided for them. The householder meekly accepts the precious remnants which are finally awarded him, and wends his way homeward. As he walks, he wonders why he did not get all that he paid for.

So the Professor of Moral Science, after he has shown us the Moral Law in its entirety, proceeds to pare it down. It seems that there are parts of it that mar the symmetry of the science, when viewed as a practical one. He cheerfully throws away the non-essentials. We look wistfully at these non-essentials. The few essentials that are left may be nourishing, but they are not filling.

The suspicion grows that the ethical element in the life of man is likely to escape scientific analysis. Science deals with existing things. It can trace their origin, it can follow their development, it can classify them. But the subjectmatter of ethics is not an existing thing at all. It is not something that has been done, but the idea