---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,the ,,logic ,,of ,,vegetarianism ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,uniform ,,with ,,the ,,present ,,volume4 ,,in ,,tune ,,with ,,the ,,infinite1 or ,fulness of ,peace1 ,power1 and ,plenty4 ,by ,,ralph ,,waldo ,,trine4 #ajeth ,thousand4 #cs4 #f;d4 net4 ,,what ,,all ,,the ,,world',s ,a-,,seeking4 ,by ,,ralph ,,waldo ,,trine4 #ceth ,thousand in ,england and ,america4 #cs4 #f;d4 net4 ,,the ,,universal ,,kinship4 ,by ,j4 ,,howard ,,moore4 ,interpreting the kinship between man and the subhuman races1 and showing there is a relationship--physical1 psychical1 and ethical--between all species of animals1 whether they swim1 fly1 crawl1 or walk4 #ds4 #f;d4 net4 ,,mind ,,power4 ,by ,,albert ,b4 ,,olston4 ,third ,english ,edition4 #ds4 #f;d4 net4 ,one of the most striking books of the age4 ,,the ,,conquest ,,of ,,death4 ,by ,,helen ,,wilmans4 #cs4 #f;d4 net4 ,,limitless ,,man4 ,by ,,helen ,,wilmans4 #bfb pp41 #cs4 #f;d4 net4 ,,the ,,will ,,to ,,be ,,well4 ,by ,,charles ,,brodie ,,patterson4 #cs4 #f;d4 net4 ,,dominion ,,and ,,power4 ,studies in ,spiritual ,science4 ,by ,,charles ,,brodie ,,patterson4 #cs4 #f;d4 net4 ,,the ,,food ,,of ,,the ,,future4 ,a ,summary of ,arguments in ,favour of a ,non-,flesh ,diet4 ,by ,c4 ,w4 ,,forward4 ,with ,preface by ,,ernest ,,bell4 #as4 #f;d4 net4 ,,the ,,logic ,,of ,,vegetarianism4 ,by ,,henry ,s4 ,,salt4 #as4 #f;d4 net4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,london3 ,,george ,,bell ,,sons ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,the ,,logic ,,of ,,vegetarianism ,,essays ,,and ,,dialogues ,,by ,,henry ,s4 ,,salt ,,author ,,of ,,animals' ,,rights1 ,,considered ,,in ,,relation ,,to ,,social ,,progress ,,second ,,edition1 ,,revised ,,london ,,george ,,bell ,,and ,,sons ,,york ,,house1 ,,portugal ,,street #aijf ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,the ,,moralist ,,at ,,the ,,shambles4 ,where slaughter'd beasts lie quivering1 pile on pile1 ,and bare-armed fleshers1 bathed in bloody dew1 ,ply hard their ghastly trade1 and hack and hew1 ,and mock sweet ,mercy's name1 yet loathe the while ,the lot that chains them to this service vile1 ,their hands in hideous carnage to imbrue3 ,lo1 there6--the preacher of the ,good and ,true1 ,the ,moral ,man1 with sanctimonious smile6 ,thrice happy beasts1 he murmurs1 'tis our love1 ,our thoughtful love that sends ye to the knife 7,nay1 doubt not1 as ye welter in your gore672 ,for thus alone ye earned the boon of life1 ,and thus alone the ,moralist may prove ,his sympathetic soul--by eating more4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,preface ,in preparing this ,logic of ,vegetarianism for a new edition1 ,i have carefully re-read a sheaf of press opinions which greeted the first appearance of the book some seven years ago1 with the hope of profiting by any adverse criticism which might point out arguments that ,i had overlooked4 ,in this1 however1 ,i have been disappointed1 for1 apart from a few such objections as that raised in all seriousness by the ,spectator--that ,i had not done justice to the great problem of what would become of the ,esquimaux--the only definite complaint which ,i can find is that the representatives of flesh-eating whom ,i have introduced in the dialogues are deliberately made to talk nonsense4 ,it is easy1 said one critic1 to confute an opponent if you have the selection of the arguments and the framing of the replies4 ,i ought not1 perhaps1 to have expected that the assurance given in my introductory chapter 7p4 #b7 as to the authenticity of the anti-vegetarian pleadings would shield me from this charge2 indeed1 the ,vegetarian ,messenger1 in a friendly review of the book1 expressed doubt as to the policy of using dialogue at all1 because1 as it remarked1 the arguments against vegetarianism are often so silly that it looks as if the author had set up a man of straw in order to demolish him4 ,yet1 as the ,messenger itself added1 there is not an argument against vegetarianism quoted in this volume which we have not1 time after time1 seen seriously brought forward by our opponents4 ,surely it would be a strange thing if food reformers had to avoid any terse presentment of their adversaries' reasoning for the very fact of its imbecility6 ,and there is this further question4 ,if ,i have failed to include in my selection the effective arguments against vegetarianism1 where and what are they8 ,looking through those cited in the press notices1 ,i can discover none that seem to be formidable2 but rather than again be suspected of unfair suppression1 let me frankly quote the following specimens of the beef-eater's philosophy3 ,the proof that man should eat meat is that he always has done so1 does now1 and always will4 ,and again3 ,nobody will want to make out that he 7the advocate of vegetarianism7 is wrong1 but folk will just go on suiting themselves as before4 ,shelley and ,thoreau1 ,wagner and ,edward ,fitz,gerald1 were vegetarians1 but1 then1 ,wellington and ,gladstone partook of the roast beef of ,old ,england1 and were none the worse4 ,there is a sublime simplicity about these statements which is most impressive1 but ,i cannot think that any wrong is done to the case against vegetarianism by not including them in a discussion which purports to be a logical one4 ,h4 ,s4 ,s4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,contents ,,page ,,preface v ,,introductory #a ,,why ,,vegetarian8 #d ,,the ,,raison ,d',,tre ,,of ,,vegetarianism #i ,,the ,,past ,,and ,,present ,,of ,,vegetarianism #ac ,,structural ,,evidence #ah ,,the ,,appeal ,,to ,,nature #bd ,,the ,,humanitarian ,,argument #bi ,,palliations ,,and ,,sophistries #ce ,,the ,,consistency ,,trick #da ,,the ,,degradation ,,of ,,the ,,butcher #dg ,,the ,,sthetic ,,argument #ea ,,the ,,hygienic ,,argument #eg ,,digestion #fb ,,conditions ,,of ,,climate #fg ,,flesh ,,meat ,,and ,,morals #ga ,,the ,,economic ,,argument #gg ,,doubts ,,and ,,difficulties #hc ,,bible ,,and ,,beef #hi ,,the ,,flesh-,,eater',s ,,kith ,,and ,,kin #ie ,,vegetarianism ,,as ,,related ,,to ,,other #aja ,,reforms ,,conclusion #aji ,,index #aae ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,the ,,logic ,,of ,,vegetarianism ,,introductory ,it is the special purpose of this book to set forth in a clear and rational manner the logic of vegetarianism4 ,to the ethical1 the scientific1 and the economic aspects of the system much attention has already been given by well-accredited writers1 but there has not as yet been any organised effort to present the logical view--that is1 the dialectical scope of the arguments1 offensive and defensive1 on which the case for vegetarianism is founded4 ,i am aware that mere logic is not in itself a matter of first-rate importance1 and that a great humane principal1 based on true natural instinct1 will in the long-run have fulfilment1 whatever wordy battles may rage around it for a time2 nevertheless1 there is no better method of hastening that result than to set the issues before the public in a plain and unmistakable light4 ,i wish1 therefore1 in this work1 to show what vegetarianism is1 and 7a scarcely less essential point7 what vegetarianism is not4 ,for though1 owing to the propaganda carried on for the last fifty years1 there has been an increasing talk of vegetarianism1 and a considerable discussion of its doctrines1 there are still very numerous misunderstandings of its real aims and meaning4 ,in this1 as in other phases of the great progressive movement of which vegetarianism is a part1 to give expression to a new idea is to excite a host of blind and angry prejudices4 ,the champions of the old are too disdainful to take counsel with the champions of the new2 hence they commonly attribute to them designs quite different from those which they really entertain1 and unconsciously set up a straw man for the pleasure of pummelling him with criticism4 ,devoid always of a sense of sympathy1 and mostly of a sense of humour1 they absurdly exaggerate the least vital points in their adversaries' reasoning1 while they often fail to note what is the very core of the controversy4 ,it is therefore of great concern to vegetarianism that its case should be so stated as to preclude all possibility of doubt as to the real issues involved4 ,if agreement is beyond our reach1 let us at least ascertain the precise point of our disagreement4 ,with a view to this result1 it will be convenient to have recourse now and then to the form of dialogue1 so as to bring into sharper contrast the pros and cons of the argument4 ,nor will these conversations be altogether imaginary1 for1 to avoid any suspicion of burlesquing the counter-case of our opponents by a fanciful presentment1 ,i shall introduce only such objections to vegetarianism as have actually been insisted on--the stock-objections1 in fact1 which crop up again and again in all colloquies on food reform--with sometimes the very words of the flesh-eating disputant4 ,it is not my fault if some of these objections appear to be foolish4 ,i have often marvelled at the reckless way in which those who would combat new and unfamiliar notions step forth to the encounter1 unprovided with intellectual safeguards1 and trusting wholly to certain ancient generic fallacies1 which1 if we may judge from their appearance in all ages and climates1 are indigenous in the human mind4 ,many of the difficulties which the flesh-eater to-day propounds to the vegetarian are the same1 mutatis mutandis1 as those which have at various times been cast in the teeth of the reformer by the apologists of every cruel and iniquitous custom1 from slave-holding to the suttee4 ,to show the unreality of these sophisms1 by clearing away the misconceptions upon which they rest1 and to state the creed of vegetarianism as preached and practised by its friends rather than as misapprehended by its foes--such is the object of this work4 ,to make conversions1 in the ordinary sense1 is not my concern4 ,what we have to do is to discover who are flesh-eaters by ingrained conviction1 and who by thoughtlessness and ignorance1 and to bring over to our side from the latter class those who are naturally allied to us1 though by accident ranged in opposition4 ,and this1 once more1 can only be done by making the issues unmistakable4 ,incidentally1 ,i hope these pages may suggest to our antagonists that vegetarians1 perhaps1 are not the weak brainless sentimentalists that they are so often depicted4 ,it is1 to say the least of it1 entertaining when a critic who has just been inquiring 7for example7 what would become of the animals if mankind were to desist from eating them1 goes on to remark of vegetarians that their hearts are better than their heads4 ,alas1 we cannot truthfully return the compliment by saying of such a philosopher that his head is better than his heart6 ,it cannot be too strongly stated that the appeal of vegetarianism1 as of all humane systems1 is not to heart alone1 nor to brain alone1 but to brain and heart combined1 and that if its claims fail to win this double judgment they are necessarily void and invalid4 ,the test of logic1 no less than the test of feeling1 is deliberately challenged by us2 for it is only by those who can think as well as feel1 and feel as well as think1 that the diet question1 or indeed any great social question1 can ever be brought to its solution4 ,,why ,,vegetarian8 ,the term vegetarian1 as applied to those who abstain from all flesh food1 but not necessarily from such animal products as eggs1 milk1 and cheese1 appears to have come into existence over fifty years ago1 at the time of the founding of the ,vegetarian ,society in #ahdg4 ,until that date no special name had been appropriated for the reformed diet system1 which was usually known as the ,pythagorean or vegetable diet1 as may be seen by a reference to the writings of that period4 ,presumably1 it was felt that when the movement grew in volume1 and was about to enter on a new phase1 with an organised propaganda1 it was advisable to coin for it an original and distinctive title4 ,whether1 from this point of view1 the name vegetarian was wisely or unwisely chosen is a question on which there has been some difference of opinion among food reformers themselves1 and it is possible that adverse criticism would have been still more strongly expressed but for the fact that no better title has been forthcoming4 ,on the whole1 the name vegetarian seems to be fairly serviceable1 its disadvantage being that it gives occasion for sophistry on the part of captious opponents4 ,in all controversies such as that of which vegetarianism is the subject there are verbalists who cannot see beyond the outer shell of a word to the thing which the word signifies1 and who delight to chop logic and raise small obstacles1 as thus3 ,,verbalist3 ,why vegetarian8 ,,vegetarian3 ,why not vegetarian8 ,,verbalist3 ,how can it be consistent with vegetarianism to consume1 as you admit you do1 milk1 butter1 cheese1 and eggs1 all of which are choice foods from the animal kingdom8 ,,vegetarian3 ,that entirely depends on what is meant by vegetarianism4 ,,verbalist3 ,well1 surely its meaning is obvious--a diet of vegetables only1 with no particle of animal substance4 ,,vegetarian3 ,as a matter of fact1 such is not1 and has never been1 its accepted meaning4 ,the question was often debated in the early years of the ,vegetarian ,society1 and it was always held that the use of eggs and milk was not prohibited4 ,to induce habits of abstinence from the flesh of animals 7fish1 flesh1 fowl7 as food was the avowed aim of vegetarianism1 as officially stated on the title-page of its journal4 ,,verbalist3 ,but the word vegetarian--what other meaning can it have than that which ,i have attributed to it8 ,,vegetarian3 ,presumably those who invented the word were the best judges of its meaning1 and what they meant by it is proved beyond a doubt by the usage of the ,society4 ,,verbalist3 ,but had they a right thus to twist the word from its natural derivation8 ,,vegetarian3 ,if you appeal to etymology1 that raises another question altogether1 and here1 too1 you will find the authorities against you4 ,no one has a better right to speak on this matter than ,professor ,j4 ,e4 ,b4 ,mayor1 the great ,latin scholar1 and he states that1 looking at the word etymologically1 vegetarian cannot mean an eater of vegetables4 ,it is derived from vegetus1 vigorous1 and means1 strictly interpreted1 one who aims at vigour4 ,mind1 ,i am not saying that the originators of the term vegetarian had this meaning in view1 but merely that the etymological sense of the word does not favour your contention any more than the historical4 ,,verbalist3 ,well1 what does vegetarian mean1 then8 ,how do you explain it yourself8 ,,vegetarian3 ,a vegetarian is one who abstains from eating the flesh of animals1 and whose food is mainly derived from the vegetable kingdom4 ,the above dialogue will show the absurdity and injustice of charging vegetarians1 as the late ,sir ,henry ,thompson did1 with equivocal terms1 evasion--in short1 untruthfulness1 because they retain a title which was originally invented for their case4 ,the statement that vegetarians have changed the meaning of their name1 owing to inability to find adequate nourishment on purely vegetable diet1 is founded on similar ignorance of the facts4 ,here are two specimens of ,sir ,henry ,thompson's inaccuracy4 ,in #ahhe he wrote3 ,it is high time that we should be spared the obscure language1 or rather the inaccurate statement1 to which milk and egg consumers are committed1 in assuming a title which has for centuries belonged to that not inconsiderable body of persons whose habits of life confer the right to use it4#a ,footnote #a3 ,nineteenth ,century1 ,may1 #ahhe4 ,observe that ,sir ,henry ,thompson was then under the impression that the name vegetarian 7invented in #ahdg7 was centuries old6 ,nor1 names apart1 was he any more accurate as regards the practice itself1 for it can be proved on the authority of a long succession of writers1 from the time of ,ovid to the time of ,shelley1 that the use of milk and its products has been from the first regarded as compatible with the ,pythagorean or vegetable diet4 ,the fact that some individual abstainers from flesh have also abstained from all animal substances is no justification of the attempt to impose such stricter abstinence on all vegetarians on peril of being deprived of their name4 ,thirteen years later ,sir ,henry ,thompson's argument was entirely changed4 ,his assertion of the antiquity of the name vegetarian was quietly dropped2 in fact1 its novelty was now rather insisted on4 ,they 7the vegetarians7 emphatically state that they no longer rely for their diet on the produce of the vegetable kingdom1 differing from those who originally adopted the name at a date by no means remote4#b ,footnote #b3 ,ibid41 ,june1 #ahih4 ,but our critic was again absolutely mistaken4 ,there is no difference whatever between the diet of those who adopted the name at the date by no means remote and that of those who bear it now4 ,now1 as then1 there are some few vegetarians who abjure all that is of the animal1 but the rule of the ,society now1 as then1 is that the use of eggs and milk is permissible4 ,at the third annual meeting1 held in #ahej1 it was stated by one of the speakers that the limits within which the dietary of the ,vegetarian ,society was restricted excluded nothing but the flesh and blood of animals4 ,to avoid any possible misunderstanding1 let me repeat that it is no part of the case for vegetarianism to defend the name vegetarian in itself2 it may be a good name or a bad one4 ,what we defend is our right to the title1 an indefeasible historical claim which is not to be upset by any such unfounded and self-contradictory assertions as those quoted4 ,but it may be said that even if the title is historically genuine1 it would be better to change it1 as it evidently leads to misunderstanding4 ,we should be perfectly willing to do this1 but for two difficulties3 first1 that no other satisfactory title has ever been suggested1 and secondly that1 as the word vegetarian has now a recognised place in the language1 it would scarcely be possible to get rid of it2 at any rate1 the substitute1 to have the least chance of success1 would have to be very terse1 popular1 and expressive4 ,take1 for example1 the name flesh-abstainer1 or akreophagist1 proposed by ,sir ,henry ,thompson4 ,the obvious objection to such terms is that they are merely negative1 and give the notion that we are abstinents and nothing more4 ,we do not at all object to the use of the term flesh-abstainer as explanatory of vegetarian1 but we do object to it as a substitute1 for as such it would give undue prominence to our disuse of flesh food1 which1 after all1 is merely one particular result of a general habit of mind4 ,let us state it in this way3 ,our view of life is such that flesh-eating is abhorrent and impossible to us2 but the mere fact that this abstinence attracts the special attention of flesh-eaters1 and becomes the immediate subject of controversy1 does not make it the sum and substance of our creed4 ,we hold that in a rational and humanised society there could be no question at all about such a practice as flesh-eating2 the very idea of it would be insufferable4 ,therefore we object to be labelled with a negative term which only marks our divergence from other persons' diet2 we prefer something that is positive and indicative of our own4 ,and until we find some more appropriate title1 we intend to make the best of what we have got4 ,the whole ,why 'vegetarian'8 argument is1 in fact1 a disingenuous one4 ,the practical issue between vegetarians and flesh-eaters has always been perfectly clear to those who wished to understand it1 and the attempt made by the verbalists to distract attention from the thing in order to fasten it on the name is nothing but sophistical4 ,of this main practical issue1 and of the further distinction between the vegetarian or flesh-abstaining diet and the purely vegetable diet1 ,i will speak in the following chapter4 ,,the ,,raison ,d',,tre ,,of ,,vegetarianism ,behind the mere name of the reformed diet1 whatever name be employed 7and1 as we have seen1 vegetarian at present holds the field71 lies the far more important reality4 ,what is the raison d'tre1 the real purport of vegetarianism8 ,certainly not any a priori assumption that all animal substances1 as such1 are unfit for human food2 for though it is quite probable that the movement will ultimately lead us to the disuse of animal products1 vegetarianism is not primarily based on any such hard-and-fast formula1 but on the conviction1 suggested in the first place by instinctive feeling1 but confirmed by reason and experience1 that there are certain grave evils inseparable from the practice of flesh-eating4 ,the aversion to flesh food is not chemical1 but moral1 social1 hygienic4 ,believing as we do that the grosser forms of diet not only cause a vast amount of unnecessary suffering to the animals1 but also react most injuriously on the health and morals of mankind1 we advocate their gradual discontinuance2 and so long as this protest is successfully launched1 the mere name by which it is called is a matter of minor concern4 ,but here on this practical issue1 as before on the nominal issue1 we come into conflict with the superior person who1 with a smile of supercilious compassion1 cannot see why we poor ascetics should thus afflict ourselves without cause4 ,,superior ,,person3 ,but why1 my dear sir--why should you refuse a slice of roast beef8 ,what is the difference between roasting an ox and boiling an egg8 ,in the latter case you are eating an animal in embryo--that is all4 ,,vegetarian3 ,do you not draw any distinction between the lower and the higher organisation8 ,,superior ,,person3 ,none whatever4 ,they are chemically identical in substance4 ,,vegetarian3 ,possibly2 but we were talking1 not of chemistry1 but of morals1 and an egg is certainly not morally identical with an ox4 ,,superior ,,person3 ,how or where does the moral phase of food-taking enter the science of dietetics8 ,,vegetarian3 ,at a good many points1 ,i think4 ,one of them is the question of cannibalism4 ,allow me to read you a passage from the ,encyclopdia ,britannica3 ,man being by nature 8 carnivorous as well as frugivorous1 and human flesh being not unfit for human food1 the question arises why mankind generally have not only avoided it1 but have looked with horror on exceptional individuals and races addicted to cannibalism4 ,it is evident on consideration that both emotional and religious motives must have contributed to bring about this prevailing state of mind4 ,,superior ,,person3 ,of course4 ,why read me all that8 ,,vegetarian3 ,to show you that what you call the moral phase of food-taking has undoubtedly affected our diet4 ,the very thought of eating human flesh is revolting to you4 ,yet human flesh is chemically identical with animal flesh1 and if it be true that to boil an egg is the same thing as to roast an ox1 it follows that to butcher an ox is the same thing as to murder a man4 ,such is the logical position in which you have placed yourself by ignoring the fact that all life is not equally valuable1 but that the higher the life the greater the responsibility incurred by those who destroy it4 ,or it may be that the superior person1 instead of denying that morals affect dietetics1 himself poses as so austere a moralist as to scorn the wretched half-measure of merely abstaining from flesh food while still using animal products4 ,the result is in either case the same4 ,the all-or-nothing argument is sometimes put forward in this fashion3 ,,superior ,,person3 ,well1 as far as the right or wrong of the question is concerned1 ,i would not care to be a vegetarian at all1 unless ,i were a thorough one4 ,what can be the good of forswearing animal food in one form if you take it in another8 ,,vegetarian3 ,but surely it is rational to deal with the worst abuses first4 ,to insist on an all-or-nothing policy would be fatal to any reform whatsoever4 ,improvements never come in the mass1 but always by instalment2 and it is only reactionists who deny that half a loaf is better than no bread4 ,,superior ,,person3 ,but in this case ,i understand that it is quite possible to be consistent4 ,there are individuals1 are there not1 who live upon a purely vegetable diet1 without using milk or eggs8 ,now1 those are the people whose action one can at least appreciate and respect4 ,,vegetarian3 ,quite so4 ,we fully admit that they are in advance of their fellows4 ,we regard them as pioneers1 who are now anticipating a future phase of our movement4 ,,superior ,,person3 ,you admit1 then1 that this extreme vegetarianism is the more ideal diet8 ,,vegetarian3 ,yes4 ,to do more than you have undertaken to do is a mark of signal merit2 but no discredit attaches on that account to those who have done what they undertook4 ,we hold that the first step1 as ,tolstoy has expressed it1 is to clear one's self of all complicity in the horrible business of the slaughter-house4 ,,superior ,,person3 ,well1 ,i must repeat that1 were ,i to practise any form of asceticism1 ,i should incline to that which does not do things by halves4 ,,vegetarian3 ,of course4 ,that is invariably the sentiment of those who do not do things at all4 ,asceticism6 such is the strange idea with which1 in many minds1 our principles are associated4 ,it would be impossible to take a more erroneous view of modern vegetarianism2 and it is only through constitutional or deliberate blindness to the meaning of the movement that such a misconception can arise4 ,how can we convey to our flesh-eating friends1 in polite yet sufficiently forcible language1 that their diet is an abomination to us1 and that our abstinence1 far from being ascetic1 is much more nearly allied to the joy that never palls8 ,is the farmer an ascetic because1 looking over into his evil-smelling pigsty1 he has no inclination to swill himself from the same trough as the swine8 ,and why1 then1 should it be counted asceticism on our part to refuse1 on precisely the same grounds1 to eat the swine themselves8 ,no2 our opponents must clearly recognise1 if they wish to form any correct notion of vegetarianism1 that it is based1 not on asceticism1 but stheticism2 not on the mortification1 but the gratification of the higher pleasures4 ,we conclude1 then1 that the cause which vegetarians have at heart is the outcome1 not of some barren academic formula1 but of a practical reasoned conviction that flesh food1 especially butchers' meat1 is a harmful and barbarous diet4 ,into the details of this belief we need not at present enter2 it has been sufficient here to show that such belief exists1 and that the good people who can see in vegetarianism nothing but a whimsical fad have altogether failed to grasp its true purport and significance4 ,the raison d'tre of vegetarianism is the growing sense that flesh-eating is a cruel1 disgusting1 unwholesome1 and wasteful practice1 and that it behoves humane and rational persons1 disregarding the common cant about consistency and all-or-nothing1 to reform their diet to what extent and with what speed they can4 ,,the ,,past ,,and ,,present ,,of ,,vegetarianism ,but1 it may be said1 before entering on a consideration of this reformed diet1 for which such great merits are claimed by its exponents1 the practical man is justified in asking for certain solid assurances1 since busy people cannot be expected to give their time to speculations which1 however beautiful in themselves1 may prove at the end to be in conflict with the hard facts of life4 ,and the first of these questions is1 ,what is the historic basis of vegetarianism8 ,in what sense is it an old movement1 and in what sense a new one8 ,has it a past which may serve in some measure to explain its present and guarantee its future8 ,such questions have been dealt with fully from time to time in vegetarian literature4#c ,i can here do no more than epitomise the answers4 ,vegetarianism1 regarded simply as a practice and without relation to any principle1 is of immemorial date2 it was1 in fact1 as physiology shows us1 the original diet of mankind1 while1 as history shows us1 it has always been the diet of the many1 as flesh food has been the diet of the few1 and even to this day it is the main support of the greater part of the world's inhabitants4 ,numberless instances might be quoted in proof of these assertions2 it is sufficient to refer to the people of ,india1 ,china1 and ,japan1 the ,egyptian fellah1 the ,bedouin ,arab1 the peasantry of ,russia and ,turkey1 the labourers and miners of ,chili and other ,south ,american ,states2 and1 to come nearer home1 the great bulk of the country folk in ,western ,europe and ,great ,britain4 ,the peasant1 here and all the world over1 has been1 and still is1 in the main a vegetarian1 and must for the most part continue so2 and the fact that this diet has been the result1 not of choice1 but of necessity1 does not lessen the significance of its perfect sufficiency to maintain those who do the hard work of the world4 ,side by side with the tendency of the wealthier classes to indulge more and more in flesh food has been the undisputed admission that for the workers such luxuries were unneeded4 ,footnote #c3 ,as in ,the ,perfect ,way in ,diet1 by ,dr4 ,anna ,kingsford2 and ,strength and ,diet1 by the ,hon4 ,r4 ,russell4 ,during the last half-century1 however1 as we all know1 the unhealthy and crowded civilisation of great industrial centres has produced among the urban populations of ,europe a craving for flesh food1 which has resulted in their being fed largely on cheap butchers' meat and offal2 while there has grown up a corresponding belief that we must look almost entirely to a flesh diet for bodily and mental vigour4 ,it is in protest against this comparatively new demand for flesh as a necessity of life that vegetarianism1 as a modern organised movement1 has arisen4 ,secondly1 if we look back for examples of deliberate abstinence from flesh--that is1 of vegetarianism practised as a principle before it was denoted by a name--we find no lack of them in the history of religious and moral systems and individual lives4 ,such abstinence was an essential feature in the teaching of ,buddha and ,pythagoras and is still practised in the ,east on religious and ceremonial grounds by ,brahmins and ,buddhists4 ,it was inculcated in the humanitarian writings of great pagan philosophers1 such as ,plutarch and ,porphyry1 whose ethical precepts1 as far as the treatment of the lower animals is concerned1 are still far in advance of modern ,christian sentiment4 ,again1 in the prescribed regimen of certain religious ,orders1 such as ,benedictines1 ,trappists1 and ,carthusians1 we have further unquestionable evidence of the disuse of flesh food1 though in such cases the reason for the abstinence is ascetic rather than humane4 ,when we turn to the biographies of individuals1 we learn that there have been numerous examples of what is now called vegetarianism--not always consistent1 indeed1 or continuous in practice1 yet sufficiently so to prove the entire possibility of the diet1 and to remove it from the category of generous aspiration into that of accomplished fact4#d ,footnote #d3 ,see the list of names cited in ,mr4 ,howard ,williams's ,ethics of ,diet1 a biographical history of the literature of humane dietetics from the earliest period to the present day4 ,but granting that there is historic basis for the vegetarian system1 the question is asked whether1 on ethnological evidence1 it does not appear that the dominant races have been for the most part carnivorous1 and the subject races vegetarian--a line of argument which always appeals strongly to the patriotic ,briton4 ,,patriot3 ,come1 now2 it is all very well to talk of philosophers and poets1 and ,i have no doubt you can point to such names among the founders of your creed1 but what ,i ask is1 ,were the founders of the ,british ,empire vegetarians8 ,were any great empires ever founded by vegetarians8 ,was ,julius ,csar a vegetarian8 ,was ,wellington a vegetarian8 ,can you give me any instance of vegetarianism as a fighting force8 ,,vegetarian3 ,as regards the rank and file of conquering armies1 there are many such instances1 both in ancient and modern history4 ,the diet of the ,roman soldier was not that of a flesh-eater1 and the ,roman ,empire was assuredly not won by virtue of flesh-eating1 but by the hardihood which could subsist on simple rations of wheat1 oil1 and wine4 ,so1 too1 the armies which built up the earlier empires of ,egypt and ,assyria were1 for the most part1 vegetarian4 ,that is to say1 while the rulers and wealthy classes of fighting nations have been carnivorous1 the bulk of the soldiery1 drawn from the frugal peasant class1 has been unaccustomed to such luxuries4 ,the idea that the flesh-eating races have everywhere subjugated the vegetarians is quite illusory4 ,,patriot3 ,but surely in ,india the flesh-eating ,mohammedan has always conquered the vegetarian ,hindu8 ,,vegetarian3 ,not by any means always4 ,it took him centuries of fierce fighting to do so1 with all the advantages of religious fanaticism on his side1 as against an enemy weakened by internal dissension and an enervating climate4 ,but that ,mohammedanism does not depend on flesh food for its fighting qualities may be seen from the case of that special ally and favourite of yours1 the ,turk4 ,let me read you what the ,standard said of him some twenty years back3 ,from the day of his irruption into ,europe1 the ,turk has always proved himself to be endowed with singularly strong vitality and energy4 ,as a member of a warlike race1 he is without equal in ,europe in health and hardiness4 ,he can live and fight when soldiers of any other nationality would starve4 ,his excellent physique1 his simple habits1 his abstinence from intoxicating liquors1 and his normal vegetarian diet1 enable him to support the greatest hardships1 and to subsist on the scantiest and simplest food4 ,have ,i said enough to show you that vegetarianism may be a fighting force8 ,it will be objected1 perhaps1 that when food reformers claim these fighting qualities for their diet they are proving just a little too much for their principles1 as1 for example1 in the reference to the sanguinary ,turk as a practical vegetarian4 ,if the outcome of vegetarian diet is to be war and massacre1 how is the system any better than that which it fain would supersede8 ,this brings us back to the starting-point of the present chapter1 the distinction between what may be called the old and the new vegetarianism4 ,we have seen that1 so far as the common practice is concerned1 abstinence from flesh food is as old as history itself1 and that rarer instances may be cited of practice and principle combined2 but when we regard vegetarianism as a propagandist movement1 a conscious endeavour to benefit not merely the individual man1 but human society itself1 we have to recognise that it is a new movement4 ,from a mere habit of the many1 or piety of the few1 it has become a reasoned principle1 an organised system1 with a name and nomenclature of its own3 in vulgar language1 it is an -ism1 and1 like other kindred -isms1 a part of the great humanitarian impulse of the past hundred years4 ,the significance of this distinction is considerable4 ,modern vegetarianism is the same1 yet not the same1 as the flesh abstinence that dates from earlier times--the same in so far as the actual dietary is concerned1 and in some fewer cases the same in principle1 but different altogether in the spirit by which that principle is informed2 and for this reason it would be ridiculous to judge vegetarianism as a whole by the character of those races who happen to have been abstainers from flesh1 and who are merely quoted as proving the physical sufficiency of the diet4 ,in a word1 ethnical vegetarianism and ethical vegetarianism are two very different things4 ,it has also to be remembered that the modern vegetarian appeals not to humane instinct only1 but to physiological facts1 and that the movement has now become to a very large extent a scientific and hygienic one1 thus again differing widely from the merely empirical and unconscious vegetarianism of earlier times4 ,these several aspects of the system will be reviewed in succeeding chapters2 it is enough here to repeat that vegetarianism as a practice is immemorial1 as a precept is of great antiquity1 but as an organised cult is one of the new revolutionary forces of modern times4 ,,structural ,,evidence ,we have seen1 then1 that vegetarianism1 though new as a propagandist doctrine1 has its historical record2 but if we wish thoroughly to understand its origin1 we must go back beyond history to the more ancient and more durable evidence of the organic structure of ,man4 ,here we come in conflict with what is1 perhaps1 the strangest of the many strange prejudices that oppose the humane diet--the superstition1 so common among the uneducated1 and connived at1 if not shared1 by some of the scientific themselves1 that the verdict of comparative anatomy is fatal to the vegetarian claims4 ,so far is this from being the case that the great naturalists1 from ,linnus onward1 give implicit judgment to the contrary1 by classing mankind with the frugivorous family of the anthropoid apes4 ,thus ,sir ,richard ,owen says3 ,the apes and monkeys1 which man most nearly resembles in his dentition1 derive their staple food from fruits1 grain1 the kernels of nuts1 and other forms in which the most sapid and nutritious tissues of the vegetable kingdom are elaborated2 and the close resemblance between the quadrumanous and the human dentition shows that man was1 from the beginning more especially adapted 'to eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden4'#e ,footnote #e3 ,odontography1 chap4 x41 p4 #dga1 #ahdj-ahde4 ,this sentence is quoted only for what it is worth--viz41 as proving that1 in ,owen's opinion1 man was originally frugivorous4 ,if the whole passage in ,odontography be studied1 it will be seen that ,owen cannot fairly be cited as a vegetarian authority1 because1 after alluding to the fact that the apes occasionally eat insects1 eggs1 and young birds1 he sums up in favour of what he calls the frugivorous and mixed regimen of the quadrumana and man4 ,this point ,i have dealt with later in the chapter4 ,and here is the more recent verdict of ,sir ,benjamin ,richardson3 ,on the whole1 ,i am bound to give judgment on the evidence of the teeth rather in favour of the vegetarian argument4 ,it seems fairest of fair to read from nature that the teeth of man were destined--or fitted1 if the word destined is objected to--for a plant or vegetable diet1 and that the modification due to animal food1 by which some change has been made1 is practically an accident or necessity1 which would soon be rectified if the conditions were rendered favourable to a return to the primitive state4444 ,by weighing the facts that now lie before us1 the inference is justified that1 in spite of the very long time during which man has been subjected to an animal diet1 he retains in preponderance his original and natural taste for an innocent diet derived from the first-fruits of the earth4#f ,footnote #f3 ,foods for ,man1 ,longman's ,magazine1 #ahhh4 ,yet1 in spite of such testimony1 and more of an equally authoritative kind1 it is quite a common thing for some flesh-eating scientist to allege against vegetarianism the conformation of the human teeth or stomach4 ,,scientist3 ,but our teeth1 my good friend1 our teeth6 ,what can be the use of your talking about vegetarianism1 when we both of us carry in our mouths a proof of the necessity of flesh-eating4 ,,vegetarian3 ,but surely you do not hold the popular fallacy that man's canine teeth class him among the carnivora8 ,,scientist3 ,they prove at least that he is an eater of flesh as well as of vegetables4 ,why else has he got such teeth8 ,,vegetarian3 ,why has a gorilla got such teeth8 ,for the purpose of combat and defence1 ,owen tells us1 not of food4 ,and if a gorilla1 with canines much more developed than man's1 is a frugivorous animal1 why must man with less developed canines be carnivorous8 ,,scientist3 ,well1 well2 let us turn to the digestive organs1 then4 ,look at the immense difference between the human stomach and that of the true herbivora4 ,how can mankind get the required nutriment from herbs1 when we have not the necessary apparatus for doing so8 ,,vegetarian3 ,but it has never been argued by us1 nor is it in any way essential to our argument1 that mankind is herbivorous4 ,what have the herbivora to do with the question8 ,,scientist3 ,i have seen them quoted in your books as instances of strength and endurance---- ,,vegetarian3 ,to dispel the illusion that there is no chemical nutriment in anything but flesh food2 but that is quite a different thing from asserting that man is himself herbivorous4 ,the point at issue is simple4 ,you charge vegetarians with flying in the face of ,nature4 ,we show you1 from your own authorities1 that the structural evidence1 whatever that may be worth 7it was you who first appealed to it71 pronounces man to have been originally neither carnivorous1 nor herbivorous1 but frugivorous4 ,if you think otherwise1 what do you make of the apes8 ,the close similarity that exists between the structure of man and that of the anthropoid apes is the hard fact that cannot be evaded by the apologists of flesh-eating4 ,in the conformation alike of brain1 of hands1 of teeth1 of salivary glands1 of stomach1 we have indisputable proof of the frugivorous origin of man--indeed1 it is not seriously questioned by any recognised authority1 that man was a fruit-eater in the early stages of his development4 ,as far as comparative anatomy throws light on the diet question1 mankind and the apes are1 so to speak1 in the same box1 and he who would disprove the frugivorous nature of man1 must also disprove the frugivorous nature of the anthropoid apes1 a predicament of which the more intelligent of our opponents are keenly aware4 ,and this brings us to the second branch of the subject of this chapter4 ,whatever his original structure1 it is argued1 man has extended his resources in the matter of food1 and has long been omnivorous1 while his middle position between the carnivora and herbivora indicates that he is naturally suited for a mixed diet4 ,omnivorous1 it will be noted1 is the blessed word that is to bring comfort to flesh-eaters1 and the inconvenient apes1 whom the naturalists class as frugivorous1 have somehow to be dragged in under the category of omnivorous4 ,but1 first1 a word about the meaning of this saving term4 ,now1 ,i wish to make it plain that vegetarians are not wedded to any a priori theory that the lines of dietetic development are stringently limited by the original structure of man4 ,if the flesh-eater appeals1 as he so often does1 to physical structure1 with the intent of attributing carnivorous instincts to mankind1 we confront him with an array of scientific opinion which quickly makes him wish he had let the subject alone2 and if he insists on the evolutional rather than the natural aspect of the problem1 we are equally ready to meet him on this newer ground4 ,but we decline to fall victims to the rather disingenuous quibble that lurks in the specious application to mankind of the term omnivorous4 ,for what1 in the present connection1 does the word omnivorous mean8 ,it cannot1 obviously1 mean that man should1 like the hog1 eat everything1 for1 if so1 it would sanction not only flesh-eating1 but cannibalism1 and we should have to class mankind 7so ,professor ,mayor has wittily remarked7 as hominivorous6 ,it must mean1 presumably1 that man is fitted to eat not everything1 but anything--vegetable food or animal food--implying that he is eclectic in his diet1 free to choose what is good and reject what is bad1 without being bound by any original law of nature4#g ,to the name omnivorous1 used not in the hoggish sense1 but in this rational sense1 and not excluding1 as the scientists would absurdly make it exclude1 the force of moral and other considerations1 the vegetarian need raise no objection4 ,man is omnivorous1 is he8 ,he may select his own diet from the vegetable and animal kingdoms8 ,well and good3 that is just what we have always advised him to do1 and we are prepared to give reasons1 moral and hygienic1 why1 in making the selection1 he should omit the use1 not of all animal products1 but of flesh4 ,the scientists cannot have it both ways4 ,they cannot dogmatise on diet as a thing settled by comparative anatomy1 and also assert that man is omnivorous--i4e41 free to choose what is best4 ,footnote #g3 ,it has been well shown by ,dr4 ,j4 ,oldfield1 in the ,new ,century ,review1 ,october #ahih1 that omnivorism in the hoggish sense1 is not characteristic of progressive mankind4 ,the higher we go in the scale of life1 the more we find selection taking the place of omnivorism4 ,the more complex the organism1 the greater its selective capacity4 ',selection1' then1 rather than 'omnivorism1' should be the watch-cry of the human race evolving upward4 ,but let us return to our monkeys4 ,,scientist3 ,you just now quoted the gorilla as a frugivorous animal1 but1 on further consideration1 ,i cannot admit him to be so4 ,he is omnivorous--like man4 ,i have ,sir ,richard ,owen's authority for it4 ,,vegetarian3 ,what6 ,does the ape rush upon the antelopes1 and rend them with those canine teeth of his8 ,how horrible6 ,,scientist3 ,not exactly that2 but it was stated by ,sir ,henry ,thompson that ,sally1 the large chimpanzee once so popular in the ,zoological ,gardens1 was not infrequently supplied with animal food4 ,,vegetarian3 ,well1 and how does that prove that the chimpanzee is not naturally frugivorous8 ,i should imagine that any one of us1 if placed in a cage1 and stared at all the year round by a throng of gaping visitors1 might be liable to aberrations4 ,even a vegetarian might do the same4 ,,scientist3 ,but in their wild state also the baboons are known to prey on lizards1 young birds1 eggs1 etc41 when they can get them4 ,perhaps you were not aware of this when you called the apes frugivorous8 ,,vegetarian3 ,i was quite aware of it1 and in view of the exceedingly small importance of these casual pilferings as compared with their staple diet1 ,i maintain that they are1 for all practical purposes1 frugivorous4 ,indeed1 so far from this mischievous penchant of the apes being an argument against vegetarianism1 it is most suggestive as explaining how the early savages may have passed1 almost by accident at first1 from a frugivorous to a mixed diet4 ,,scientist3 ,well1 at any rate1 it indicates that apes have a tendency to become omnivorous4 ,,vegetarian3 ,yes1 if you like to express it so2 and it is still more evident that men have that tendency4 ,but the question is whether the tendency is rightly interpreted as giving a sanction to flesh-eating4 ,for flesh-eating1 as we use the term1 means the breeding1 destroying1 and devouring of highly-organised mammals1 and is a very different thing from the egg and lizard hunting in which the monkeys sometimes indulge4 ,if you would confine your flesh-eating to a few insects and nestlings1 you would have a better right to quote the example of the apes4 ,has flesh-eating been a necessary step in man's progress8 ,without access to the flesh-pots1 it has been asked1 would not the race have remained in the groves with the orangs and the gorillas8 ,i do not see that vegetarians need concern themselves to answer such speculations1 which1 interesting though they are1 do not bear closely on the present issue4 ,for though1 as we have seen1 the testimony of the past is in favour of a frugivorous origin1 the problem of the present is one which we are free to solve without prejudice1 and whether the past use of flesh food1 by a portion of the world's inhabitants1 has helped or hindered the true development of man is a matter for individual judgment4 ,we may have our own opinion about it4 ,but what we are concerned to prove is that flesh-eating can offer no advantages to us now4 ,,the ,,appeal ,,to ,,nature ,of the many dense prejudices through which1 as through a snowdrift1 vegetarianism has to plough its way before it can emerge into the field of free discussion1 there is none perhaps more inveterate than the common appeal to ,nature4 ,a typical instance of the remarkable misuse of logic which characterises such argument may be seen in the anecdote related by ,benjamin ,franklin1 in his ,autobiography1 of the incident which induced him to return1 after years of abstinence1 to a flesh diet4 ,he was watching some companions sea-fishing1 and observing that some of the fish caught by them had swallowed other fish1 he concluded that1 ,if you eat one another1 ,i don't see why we may not eat you--a confusion of ichthyology and morals which is ludicrous enough as narrated by ,franklin1 but not essentially more foolish than the attempt so frequently made by flesh-eaters to shuffle their personal responsibility on to some supposed natural law4 ,but let the carnivorous anthropologist speak for himself3 ,,anthropologist3 ,now1 understand me6 ,i think this vegetarianism is well enough as a sentiment2 ,i fully appreciate your aspiration4 ,but you have overlooked the fact that it is contrary to the laws of ,nature4 ,it is beautiful in theory1 but impossible in practice4 ,,vegetarian3 ,indeed6 ,that puts me in an awkward position1 as ,i have been practising it for twenty years4 ,,anthropologist3 ,it is not the individual that ,i am speaking of1 but the race4 ,a man may practise it perhaps2 but mankind cannot do so with impunity4 ,,vegetarian3 ,and why8 ,,anthropologist3 ,because1 as the poet says1 ,nature is one with rapine4 ,it is natural to kill4 ,do you dare to impugn ,nature8 ,,vegetarian3 ,not at all4 ,what ,i dare to impugn is your incorrect description of ,nature4 ,there is a great deal more in ,nature than rapine and slaughter4 ,,anthropologist3 ,what8 ,do not the beasts and birds prey on one another8 ,do not the big fish eat the little fish8 ,is it not all one universal struggle for existence1 one internecine strife8 ,,vegetarian3 ,no2 that is just what it is not4 ,there are two principles at work in ,nature--the law of competition and the law of mutual aid4 ,there are carnivorous animals and non-carnivorous1 predatory races and sociable races2 and the vital question is--to which does man belong8 ,you obscure the issue by these vague and meaningless appeals to the laws of ,nature1 when1 in the first place1 you are quoting only part of ,nature's ordinance1 and1 secondly1 have not yourself the least intention of conforming even to that part4 ,,anthropologist3 ,i beg your pardon4 ,in what do ,i not conform to ,nature8 ,,vegetarian3 ,well1 are you in favour of cannibalism1 let us say1 or the promiscuous intercourse of the sexes8 ,,anthropologist3 ,good gracious1 my dear sir6 ,i must entreat you---- ,,vegetarian3 ,exactly6 ,you are horrified at the mere mention of such things4 ,yet these habits are as easily justified as flesh-eating1 if you take ,nature as your model1 without specifying whose nature8 ,the nature of the conger and the dog-fish1 or the nature of civilised man8 ,pray tell me that1 ,mr4 ,anthropologist1 and then our conversation may not be wholly irrelevant4 ,the idea that the ,darwinian doctrine of the struggle of life justifies any barbarous treatment of inferior races is ridiculed by so distinguished an authority as ,prince ,kropotkin1 who points out that ,darwin does not teach this4 ,he proves that there is a struggle for existence in order to put a check on the inordinate increase of species4 ,but this struggle is not to be understood in a crude and exclusive sense2 there is a law of competition1 but there is also--what is still more important--a law of mutual aid1 and as soon as the scientist leaves his laboratory1 and comes out into the open woods and meadows1 he sees the importance of this law4 ,only those animals who are mutually helpful are really fitted to survive2 it is not the strong1 but the co-operative species that endure4#h ,so1 too1 with reference to the strange notion that a guide for human conduct may be deduced from some particular animal instinct1 taken at haphazard from its surroundings1 a timely warning is addressed to such crude reasoners by ,professor ,j4 ,arthur ,thomson3 ,what we must protest against is that one-sided interpretation1 according to which individualistic competition is ,nature's sole method of progress4444 ,the precise nature of the means employed and ends attained must be carefully considered1 when we seek from the records of animal evolution support or justification for human conduct4#i ,footnote #h3 ,humane ,science ,lectures3 ,summary of address given by ,prince ,kropotkin at ,essex ,hall1 ,november #ag1 #ahif4 ,footnote #i3 ,study of ,animal ,life4 ,it may be said1 however1 that though man is fitted to co-operate peacefully with his fellows1 he is not bound by any such ties of brotherhood to the lower animals1 and that it is natural that he should prey on the non-human races1 even if it be not natural that he should seek pleasure at the cost of his fellow-man4 ,but1 in reality1 ,nature knows no such bridgeless gulf between the human and the non-human intelligence2 and it is impossible1 in the light of modern science1 to draw any such absolute line of demarcation between man and the animals as in the now discredited theory of ,descartes4 ,we are learning to get rid of these anthropocentric delusions1 which1 as has been pointed out by ,mr4 ,e4 ,p4 ,evans1 treat man as a being essentially different and inseparably set apart from all other sentient creatures1 to which he is bound by no ties of mental affinity or moral obligation2 whereas1 in fact1 man is as truly a part and product of ,nature as any other animal1 and this attempt to set him up as an isolated point outside of it is philosophically false and morally pernicious4#aj ,footnote #aj3 ,evolutional ,ethics and ,animal ,psychology4 ,the talk1 then1 about ,nature being one with rapine is a mere form of special pleading1 which will not stand examination in the full light of fact4 ,if man is determined to play the part of tiger among his less powerful fellow-beings1 he will have to go elsewhere than to ,nature to obtain a warrant for his deeds1 for as far as the indications of ,nature carry weight1 they suggest that man1 by his physical structure and his compassionate instincts1 belongs unmistakably to the sociable1 and not the predatory tribes2 and that by constituting himself a beast of prey on a vast artificial scale1 he is doing the greatest possible wrong to nature 7i4e41 to his own nature7 instead of conforming to it4 ,our innate horror of bloodshed--a horror which only long custom can deaden1 and which1 in spite of past centuries of violence1 is so powerful at the present time--is proof that we are not naturally adapted for a sanguinary diet2 and1 as has often been pointed out1 it is only by delegating to others the detested work of slaughter1 and by employing cookery to conceal the uncongenial truth1 that thoughtful persons can tolerate the practice of flesh-eating4 ,if ,nature pointed us to such a diet1 we should feel the same instinctive appetite for raw flesh as we now feel for ripe fruit1 and a slaughter-house would be more delightful to us than an orchard4 ,it is not ,nature1 but custom1 that is the guardian deity of the flesh-eater4 ,but we have not quite exhausted the appeal to ,nature2 we have still to speak of the common objection to vegetarianism that it is necessary to take life4 ,,anthropologist3 ,i have a most important argument to put before you4 ,must you not face the fact that1 in this imperfect world1 it is necessary to take life8 ,how can it be immoral to do what necessity imposes8 ,,vegetarian3 ,we do not say that it is immoral to take life1 but that it is immoral to take life unnecessarily4 ,it is not immoral1 for instance1 to destroy rats and mice1 because it is necessary to do so4 ,it is immoral to kill animals for the table1 because it is not necessary to do so4 ,did you ever tread on a beetle8 ,,anthropologist3 ,yes1 by accident4 ,i could not help it4 ,i am a most humane man4 ,,vegetarian3 ,of course4 ,but supposing that you wished to murder someone1 would you think yourself justified in doing so because you had trodden on beetles--because1 in fact1 sometimes it is necessary to take life8 ,,anthropologist3 ,certainly not4 ,how can you suspect me of being so immoral8 ,there is a great difference between taking the life of a beetle by accident and of a man by design4 ,there are degrees of responsibility1 you know4 ,,vegetarian3 ,ah6 you have got your answer1 then4 ,how is it1 we wonder1 that rational beings can commit themselves to such irrational arguments as this appeal to what is called ,nature but is in reality only an isolated section of ,nature1 viewed apart from the rest8 ,let ,benjamin ,franklin himself supply the answer4 ,for in narrating that incident of the cod-fish to which ,i have alluded1 he humorously hints that his philosophical conclusion1 ,if you eat one another1 ,i don't see why we may not eat you1 was not uninfluenced by the fact that he had been a great lover of fish in early life1 and that the fish smelt admirably well as it came out of the frying-pan2 and he sagely adds that one of the advantages to man of being a reasonable creature is that he can find or make a reason for anything he has a mind to do4 ,such is the logic of the flesh-eater1 in which the wish is father to the thought1 and mixed thinking leads by a convenient process to a mixed diet4 ,,the ,,humanitarian ,,argument ,it will have been noted that the anti-vegetarian arguments which have so far come under review have been mainly such as are based on purely materialistic grounds1 as if the question were wholly one for doctors and scientists to decide2 and it has been shown that1 even thus1 there is no sort of warrant for the supercilious dismissal of vegetarianism as a theory condemned in advance by some superior tribunal4 ,but the question is not one for the ipse dixit of the specialist4 ,it is also a moral question of very great moment1 and this fact gives a new significance to such unwilling admissions as that made by the ,british ,medical ,journal1 that man can obtain from vegetables the nutriment necessary for his maintenance in health--i4e41 from vegetables only1 much more1 therefore1 from a vegetable diet with the addition of eggs and milk4 ,the practicability of vegetarianism being thus fully granted1 it is impossible to pretend that moral considerations are not relevant to the controversy1 and that in forming an opinion on the vexed problem of diet we should not give due weight to the promptings of humaneness4 ,people often talk as if the humanitarian plea were some fanciful external sentiment that has been illogically thrust into the discussion2 whereas in truth it is one of the innermost facts of the situation which no sophistry can escape4 ,our humane instincts are unalterably implanted in us1 and we cannot deny them if we would2 to be human is to be humane4 ,there is something in human nature1 says an old writer1#aa resulting from our very make and constitution1 which renders us obnoxious to the pains of others1 causes us to sympathise with them1 and almost comprehends us in their case4 ,it is grievous to see or hear 7and almost to hear of7 any man1 or even any animal whatever1 in torture4 ,and now that modern science has demonstrated the close kinship that exists between human and non-human1 the greater is the repulsion that we feel at any wanton ill-usage of animals4 ,footnote #aa3 ,wollaston1 ,religion of ,nature1 #agei4 ,this is now so generally admitted that the point in dispute is not so much the duty of humaneness1 as some particular application of that duty1 as in the present case to the slaughter of animals for food4 ,what have humane people to say to the tremendous mass of animal suffering inflicted1 in the interests of the table1 on highly-organised and sensitive animals closely allied to mankind8 ,by the unthinking1 of course1 these sufferings1 being invisible1 are almost wholly overlooked1 while the deadening power of habit prevents many kindly persons from exercising1 where their daily beef and mutton are concerned1 the very sympathies which they so keenly manifest elsewhere2 yet it can hardly be doubted that1 if the veil of custom could be lifted1 and if a clear knowledge of what is involved in butchery could be brought home1 with a sense of personal responsibility1 to everyone who eats flesh1 the attitude of society towards the vegetarian movement would be very different from what it is now4 ,if it be true that hunger is the best sauce1 it may also be said that the bon vivant's most indispensable sauce is ignorance--ignorance of the horrible and revolting circumstances under which his juicy steak or dainty cutlet has been prepared4 ,,bon ,,vivant3 ,what is this8 ,vegetarian you call yourself8 ,,vegetarian3 ,and you8 ,you are a bon vivant4 ,you live well1 ,i understand4 ,,bon ,,vivant3 ,not ashamed of enjoying a good dinner1 but not greedy1 ,i hope4 ,,vegetarian3 ,nor cruel1 ,i suppose8 ,,bon ,,vivant3 ,cruel6 ,i subscribe regularly to the ,society for the ,prevention of ,cruelty to ,animals4 ,,vegetarian3 ,and eat them4 ,,bon ,,vivant3 ,why not8 ,a speedy painless death is no cruelty1 is it8 ,,vegetarian3 ,while you are finishing that choice beef steak1 ,i will tell you something of the speedy painless death of steak-producing animals4 ,it may serve as an aid to digestion1 like a musical accompaniment4 ,,bon ,,vivant3 ,oh1 you won't spoil my digestion4 ,fire away6 ,,vegetarian3 ,let us suppose1 then1 that our friend 7on your plate there7 hails from ,ireland1 and at one of the fair grounds1 of which there are several thousand in that island paradise1 he meets the first agent in his euthanasia--the drover4 ,on such occasions1 says the ,report of the late ,departmental ,committee on the ,inland ,transit of ,cattle1 animals already1 perhaps1 exhausted and foot-sore from a walk of many miles1 stand for hours on the hard road1 bewildered by the beating they receive and their unaccustomed surroundings4444 ,it was repeatedly asserted by responsible witnesses that many of the drovers are brutally harsh4 ,so ferocious is the treatment that in many cases1 when the animals are slaughtered1 the hide1 as butchers testify1 simply falls off the back1 and is worthless even for use as leather4 ,i hope your steak is nice and tender8 ,,bon ,,vivant3 ,but why are not the brutal drovers punished for it8 ,,vegetarian3 ,perhaps because it is not for themselves that they are driving4 ,then there is the journey in the railway-trucks1 and we learn on good authority 7,report of the ,liverpool ,s4,p4,c4,a47 that the animals have frequently gone twenty to twenty-four hours without food at the time they are driven on the boats4 ,as for the delights of the sea-transit1 you have read1 ,i suppose1 of what happens in cattle-ships8 ,,bon ,,vivant3 ,well1 of course1 in stormy weather there may be accidents---- ,,vegetarian3 ,no1 ,i am speaking of the ordinary scenes of the cattle traffic1 and say nothing of the occasions 7not so rare1 either7 when the boats come into port with blood pouring from their scuppers---- ,,bon ,,vivant3 ,thank you1 thank you6 that is enough6 ,,vegetarian3 ,we find it stated1 in the ,report of the ,committee of ,inquiry into the ,irish ,cattle ,transit1 that the damage sustained by cattle is very serious1 and that the principal portion of that damage is due to their treatment during shipment1 while on shipboard1 and on debarkation4 ,on landing there is more thrashing and tail-twisting1 another railway journey1 and then--the slaughterman4 ,you have visited a slaughter-house1 of course8 ,,bon ,,vivant3 ,no1 really1 ,i must protest---- ,,vegetarian3 ,ah1 then it should interest you6 ,the drover's task accomplished1 the butcher's begins4 ,yard by yard and foot by foot1 with chains fastened to his horns and sharp goads applied to his flanks1 the struggling animal is dragged into the dark1 blood-stained shed1 where he is lucky indeed if he be killed by the first blow of the pole-axe---- ,,bon ,,vivant3 ,shameful6 ,i do not believe you4 ,it cannot be4 ,,vegetarian3 ,then many well-known eye-witnesses must have strangely perjured themselves4 ,dr4 ,dembo1 for example1 says3 ,cases in which several blows are required are very frequent4 ,on my first visit to the ,deptford slaughtering yards ,i found that the number of blows struck was five and more1 and he goes on to describe a case which he saw in ,london1 when twelve minutes elapsed before the animal---- ,,bon ,,vivant3 ,stop6 ,i will hear no more4 ,,vegetarian3 ,you will hear no more--but will you eat more8 ,it is on you1 not on the brutal drover or slaughterman1 that the responsibility falls4 ,for this is the speedy and painless way in which animals must be slaughtered that you may live well4 ,i will hear no more4 ,that1 said or implied1 is the most common and the most insuperable argument by which the vegetarian is confronted4 ,it is the one great stronghold of flesh-eating which remains from age to age impregnable4 ,for how can even truth convince the deaf and the blind8 ,the horrors of the journey by sea and journey by rail1 of the savage drover's goad and the clumsy butcher's pole-axe--if the ordinary man and woman1 unimaginative and unfeeling though they are1 could see or even hear of these things1 the end of the controversy would be nearer4 ,by the few flesh-eaters who have made inquiry1 accidental or conscientious1 into the facts of the cattle traffic and butchering trade1 it is not denied that fearful cruelties are committed4 ,thus the ,meat ,trades ,journal1 which is not a sentimental paper1 remarks of the sea and land transit1 that our cattle1 sheep1 and pigs are carried by sea and rail with the minimum care and maximum cost2 they are bundled and shunted about as if they were iron4#ab ,again1 ,dr4 ,t4 ,p4 ,smith1 writing in opposition to vegetarianism1 allows that the indictment of the slaughter-house hits a grievous blot on our much-vaunted civilization4#ac ,there is a mass of printed testimony to the same effect1 which can be confirmed1 as often as confirmation is needed1 by a visit to the shambles4 ,but that is a visit which the ordinary man will neither undertake himself nor hear of from the mouths of others4 ,footnote #ab3 ,december #bi1 #ahih4 ,footnote #ac3 ,fortnightly ,review1 ,november1 #ahie4 ,much also might be said of certain special cruelties1 such as those involved in the supply of white veal or pt de foie gras1 and other so-called delicacies2 but it is unnecessary to dwell on such refinements of torture1 because it is the ordinary every-day aspects of flesh-eating that are here under debate4 ,it is a terrible fact that the very prevalence of the habit serves1 more than anything else1 to conceal its full import2 and thus a large number of people1 who1 in any other department of life1 would indignantly refuse to profit by the cruel usage of animals1 are 7without knowing1 or at least without recognising it7 dependent for their daily food on the continued and systematic infliction of sufferings which1 in their magnitude and frequency1 surpass all other cruelties whatsoever of which animals are the victims4 ,these horrors1 as ,i have said1 are not realised by those who are personally responsible for them4 ,or1 rather1 they are not directly realised2 for indirectly it is evident enough that the more sensitive conscience of mankind is far from easy about the morality of butchering1 and would show still greater uneasiness but for the quieting assurance that flesh food is a strict necessity of existence4 ,this sense of compunction has found at least partial expression in many non-vegetarian works1 as1 for example1 in ,michelet's ,bible of ,humanity4 ,life--death6 ,the daily murder which feeding upon animals implies--those hard and bitter problems sternly placed themselves before my mind4 ,miserable contradiction6 ,let us hope that there may be another globe in which the base1 the cruel fatalities of this one may be spared to us6 ,now1 in view of these facts and these feelings1 we have a right to press the advocates of flesh-eating for some more explicit and coherent statement than they have hitherto accorded us of their attitude towards the ethics of the diet question4 ,if1 as the scientists themselves admit1 there is no such cruel fatality as that which ,michelet pictured1 and if flesh-eating is not to be regarded as necessary1 but only as expedient1 then it is in the highest degree unreasonable to rule out humane considerations from their due share in the settlement of this many-sided problem4 ,the ,british ,medical ,journal has said that there is not a shadow of doubt that the use of animals for food involves a vast amount of pain4 ,the same paper has said that man can obtain from vegetables the nutriment necessary for his maintenance in health4 ,can it be doubted1 that if the average ,englishman were made aware of these two facts1 he would at least think vegetarianism worthy of a serious trial8 ,to ask1 as a superior person of science has asked 7not merely in these dialogues1 but in actual debate71 ,how or where does the moral phase of food-taking enter the science of dietetics8 or to take refuge in the common saying that one man's food is another man's poison1 is simply irrelevant4 ,for diet1 like other social questions1 has its moral aspect1 which claims no less and no more than its due importance2 and it is because the scientific antagonists of vegetarianism have overlooked this fact that their judgments have hitherto been so warped1 illogical1 and unscientific4 ,,palliations ,,and ,,sophistries ,it is instructive to note the desperate shifts and subterfuges to which our antagonists have recourse when they find themselves face to face with the humanitarian impeachment of the slaughter-house4 ,if one-half of the popular prejudices were true1 it might be supposed that1 in the discussion of so fanciful and ,utopian a theory as vegetarianism it would be its supporters who would take refuge in metaphysical quibblings and sophistries1 while its opponents would hold sternly to the hard facts of life4 ,but no6 for when butchery is the theme we find the exact opposite to be the case1 and it is the flesh-eaters1 those level-headed deriders of the sentimental1 who suddenly became enamoured of the imaginary what-might-be and the hypothetical what-would-otherwise-have-been1 and are disposed to turn their attention to anything rather than to the unpalatable what-is4 ,now1 when the apologists of any form of cruelty are reduced to the plea that it is no worse than some other barbarous habit1 the presumption is that they are in a very bad plight indeed4 ,yet we frequently hear it said that the fate of animals slaughtered for the table is no worse than that of other animals--those perhaps that are used for purposes of draught or burden--a quite pointless comparison1 because1 even if the statement be true1 the one act of injustice can obviously be no excuse for the other4 ,or it may be that the mortality of man himself1 and his liability to disease and accident1 are alleged in mysterious justification of his carnivorous habits1 the suffering of the animals being represented as brief and momentary in contrast with the pathetic human death-bed--an argument which reached its culminating point in ,mr4 ,w4 ,t4 ,stead's delightful assertion that of all kinds of death he would himself prefer the mode in which pigs are killed at ,chicago1 which mode1 as he incautiously let out1 he did not go to see when he visited that city4 ,i do not think we need further discuss such remarkable preference2 it will be time enough to do so when we hear of ,mr4 ,stead's lamented self-immolation in the ,chicago pig-shambles4 ,but it is said that domesticated animals owe a deep debt of gratitude to mankind 7only to be repaid in the form of beef and mutton71 because1 by being brought within the peaceful fold of civilisation1 they have been spared all the harrowing fears and anxieties of their wild natural life4 ,this1 however1 is a fallacy to which the great naturalists give no sort of sanction2 for it is obvious that1 though the life of a wild animal is liable to more sudden perils than that of our tame livestock1 it is not on that account a less happy one1 but1 on the contrary1 is spent throughout in a manner more conducive to the highest health and happiness4 ,thus1 ,dr4 ,alfred ,russel ,wallace says3 ,the poet's picture of nature red in tooth and claw1 is a picture the evil of which is read into it by our imagination1 the reality being made up of full and happy lives1 usually terminated by the quickest and least painful of deaths4 ,and ,mr4 ,w4 ,h4 ,hudson3 ,i take it that in the lower animals misery can result from two causes only--restraint and disease--consequently1 that animals in a state of nature are not miserable4 ,they are not hindered or held back4444 ,as to disease1 it is so rare in wild animals1 or in a large majority of cases so quickly proves fatal1 that1 compared with what we call disease in our own species1 it is practically non-existent4 ,the 'struggle for existence1' in so far as animals in a state of nature are concerned1 is a metaphorical struggle2 and the strife1 short and sharp1 which is so common in nature1 is not misery1 although it results in pain1 since it is pain that kills or is soon out-lived4 ,let us proceed1 then1 to the great sophistical paradox that it is better for the animals themselves to be bred and slaughtered than not to be bred at all--that most comfortable doctrine which of late years has been a veritable city of refuge1 or grand old umbrella1 to the conscientious flesh-eater under stress of the vegetarian bombardment4 ,hither flock the members of the learned professions1 academies1 and ethical societies1 and fortify their souls anew with this subtle metaphysic of the larder4 ,,sophist3 ,of all the arguments for vegetarianism1 none1 in my opinion1 is so weak as the argument from humanity4 ,the pig has a stronger interest than anyone in the demand for bacon4 ,,vegetarian3 ,indeed8 ,and is that the view the pig himself takes of it8 ,,sophist3 ,it is the view ,i take of it1 speaking in the interests of the pig4 ,for where would the pig be if we did not eat pork8 ,he would be non-existent2 he would be no pig at all4 ,,vegetarian3 ,and would he be any the worse for that8 ,,sophist3 ,yes1 for he would lose the joy of life4 ,and not the pig alone1 but all animals that are bred for human food4 ,their death is the little price they necessarily pay for the inestimable boon of existence4 ,,vegetarian3 ,now1 let me first point out to you that it is not only flesh-eating that would be justified by this argument4 ,vivisection1 pigeon-shooting1 slavery1 cannibalism1 any treatment whatsoever of animals or of mankind where they are specially bred for the purpose1 might be similarly shown to be a kindness4 ,do you really mean that8 ,,sophist3 ,i assume1 of course1 that the life is a happy one1 and the death as painless as possible4 ,,vegetarian3 ,neither of which conditions is in reality fulfilled6 ,for the wretched creatures that are bred and fed for the shambles have none of the true joys of life1 but from the first are mere animated beef1 pork1 and mutton1 while their death is nothing better than a prolonged and clumsy massacre4 ,,sophist3 ,but it need not be so4 ,it is a mere question of police and proper supervision4 ,it should be imperative on all those who confer life on animals to ensure absolute painlessness for the last moment4 ,,vegetarian3 ,it should be6 ,so it seems that this remarkable kindness of yours is1 by your own showing1 not an actual but a hypothetical benefit4 ,the animals fulfil their part of the compact by being killed and eaten1 and you might fulfil your part by killing them painlessly--only you don't6 ,are you serious in talking this stuff8 ,,sophist3 ,this stuff8 ,let me remind you1 sir1 that ,i have the authority of such eminent philosophers as ,sir ,henry ,thompson1 ,mr4 ,leslie ,stephen1 ,professor ,d4 ,g4 ,ritchie1 and ,dr4 ,stanton ,coit4 ,do you call their academical reasoning stuff8 ,,vegetarian3 ,what else can it be called8 ,for1 as a matter of fact1 quite apart from the conditions1 good or bad1 under which the animals live and die1 it is a pure fallacy to say that it is a kindness to bring them into existence4 ,,sophist3 ,how so1 if life is pleasant8 ,,vegetarian3 ,because it is impossible to compare existence with non-existence4 ,existence may1 or may not1 be pleasant2 but non-existence is neither pleasant nor unpleasant--it is nothing at all4 ,it cannot1 therefore1 be an advantage to be born1 though1 when once you are born1 the good and the evil are comparable4 ,the whole question is a post-natal1 not a prenatal one2 it begins at birth4 ,,sophist3 ,well1 but supposing you were an animal1 would you not prefer---- ,,vegetarian3 ,oh1 that is a very old question4 ,you will find it all in ,hansard4 ,it was asked by ,sir ,herbert ,maxwell when he defended the sport of pigeon-shooting in the ,debates of #ahhc4 ,he wanted to ask the hon4 member whether1 if he were a blue-rock1 he would rather accept life under the condition of his life being a short and happy one1 and violently terminated1 or whether he would reject life at all upon such terms4 ,,sophist3 ,hear1 hear6 ,that is just what ,i say4 ,,vegetarian3 ,then you had better think over ,mr4 ,w4 ,e4 ,forster's reply1 which puts the case in a nut-shell4 ,he said that ,sir ,herbert ,maxwell made one very amusing appeal1 by asking him the member who introduced the ,bill to put himself in the position of a blue-rock4 ,but this would be difficult1 for the position was not a blue-rock in existence1 but a blue-rock before it was born4 ,whereat the ,house laughed1 and sophistry was for the moment disconcerted4 ,but for the moment only2 for there have since sprung up many other professors of this metaphysic of the larder1 though none of them1 with the exception of ,dr4 ,stanton ,coit1 have had the hardihood to expound their theory in detail--a wise reticence1 perhaps1 when it is seen how ,dr4 ,coit fared in his conscientious but humourless essay on ,the ,bringing of ,sentient ,beings into ,existence4 ,if the motive1 he opined1 that might produce the greatest number of the happiest cattle would be the eating of beef1 then beef-eating1 so far1 must be commended4 ,and while1 heretofore1 the motive has not been for the sake of cattle1 it is conceivable that1 if vegetarian convictions should spread much further1 love for cattle would 7if it be not psychologically incompatible7 blend with the love of beef in the minds of the opponents of vegetarianism4 ,with deeper insight1 new and higher motives may replace or supplement old ones1 and perpetuate but ennoble ancient practices4#ad ,footnote #ad3 ,the ,ethical ,world1 ,may #g1 #ahih4 ,the ,ox in a ,tea-cup1 be it observed1 may henceforth become the emblem of the concentrated humanity of the ethical societies6 ,but we frankly admit1 continues ,dr4 ,coit1 that it is a question whether the love of cattle1 intensified to the imaginative point of individual affection for each separate beast1 would not destroy the pleasure of eating beef1 and render this time-honoured custom psychologically impossible4 ,we surmise that bereaved affection at the death of a dear creature would destroy the flavour4#ae ,footnote #ae3 ,ibid4 ,what a picture is conjured up by the sentence ,i have italicised--the bereaved moralist1 knife and fork in hand1 swayed in different directions by the call of duty and the scruples of affection6 ,and then ,dr4 ,coit goes on to express a fear that mankind1 if they adopted vegetarianism1 might become less powerful in thought6 ,i respectfully submit that1 in view of the arguments quoted1 there is not the smallest possibility of that4 ,the plea that animals might be killed painlessly is a very common one with flesh-eaters1 but it must be pointed out that what-might-be can afford no exemption from moral responsibility for what-is4 ,by all means let us reform the system of butchery as far as it can be reformed--that is1 by the total abolition of those foul dens of torture known as private slaughter-houses1 and by the substitution of municipal abattoirs1 equipped with the best modern appliances1 and under efficient supervision2 for there is no doubt that the sum of animal suffering may thus be greatly lessened4 ,there will be no opposition from the vegetarian side to such reform as this2 indeed1 it is in a large measure through the personal efforts of vegetarians that the subject has attracted attention1 whereas the very people who make this prospective improvement an excuse for their present flesh diet are seldom observed to be doing anything practical to carry it into effect4 ,but when all is said and done1 it remains true that the reform of the slaughter-house is at best a palliative1 a temporary measure which will mitigate1 but cannot possibly amend1 the horrors of butchery2 for it is but too evident that1 under our complex civilisation1 when the town is so far aloof from the country1 and pastoralism can only be carried on in districts remote from the busy crowded centres1 it is impossible to transport and slaughter vast numbers of large and highly-sensitive animals in a really humane manner4 ,more barbarous1 or less barbarous1 such slaughtering may undoubtedly be1 according to the methods employed1 but the humane slaughtering1 so much bepraised of the sophist1 is an impossibility in fact and a contradiction in terms4 ,,the ,,consistency ,,trick ,it is certain1 then1 that the practice of flesh-eating involves a vast amount of cruelty--a fact which cannot be lessened or evaded by any quibbling subterfuges4 ,but1 before we pass on to another phase of the food question1 we must deal more fully with that very common method of argument 7alluded to in an earlier chapter7 which may be called the ,consistency ,trick--akin to that known in common parlance as the tu quoque1 or you're another--the device of setting up an arbitrary standard of consistency1 and then demonstrating that the vegetarian himself1 judged by that standard1 is as inconsistent as other persons4 ,whether we plead guilty or not guilty to this ingenious indictment depends altogether on the meaning assigned to the term consistency4 ,for1 as anyone who tries to do practical work in the world will rapidly discover1 there is a true and there is a false ideal of consistency4 ,to pretend that in our complex modern society1 where responsibilities are so closely interwoven1 it is possible for any individual to cultivate a perfect character1 and stand like a ,sir ,galahad above his fellows--this is the false ideal of consistency which it is the first business of a genuine reformer to put aside2 for no human being can do any solid work without frequently convicting himself of inconsistencies when consistency is stereotyped into a formula4 ,on the other hand1 there is a true duty of consistency1 which regards the spirit rather than the letter1 and prompts us not to grasp foolishly at the ideal1 like a child crying for the moon1 but to push steadily towards the ideal by a faithful adherence to the right line of reform1 and by ever keeping in view the just proportion and relative value of all moral actions4 ,let it be remembered that it is this latter consistency alone that has any interest for the vegetarian4 ,his purpose is not to exhibit himself as a spotless ,sir ,galahad of food reformers1 but to take certain practical steps towards the humanising of our barbarous diet system4 ,herein will be found the answer to a class of questions frequently put to vegetarians1 as to how they find it consistent with their principles to use this or that form of food or animal substance4 ,it depends entirely on what their principles are4 ,if their aspirations were of the ,sir ,galahad order1 some of the posers would indeed be formidable2 but as they do not aim at moral perfection1 but merely at rational progress1 the charge of inconsistency hurtles somewhat harmlessly over their heads4 ,but here let the consistency man have his say3 ,,consistency ,,man3 ,but what ,i want to know is this--how you can think it consistent to use milk and eggs8 ,,vegetarian3 ,consistent with what8 ,,consistency ,,man3 ,why1 with your own principles1 of course4 ,,vegetarian3 ,or do you mean with your idea of my principles8 ,the two things are not always identical1 you know4 ,,consistency ,,man3 ,you condemn flesh-eating because of the suffering it causes1 but it seems to have escaped your notice that the use of milk and eggs is also responsible for much4 ,it is strange that it has never occurred to you---- ,,vegetarian3 ,my good sir1 it has occurred to us years and years ago4 ,the question is as old as the movement itself4 ,the cock-and-bull argument1 ,i presume8 ,,consistency ,,man3 ,i ask1 what would become of the cockerels and bull-calves under a vegetarian rgime8 ,at present your supply of milk and eggs is easy enough1 because the young males are killed and eaten by us carnivorous sinners4 ,but are you not1 to a certain extent1 participators in the deed8 ,,vegetarian3 ,yes1 frankly1 to a certain extent 7a very limited extent7 ,i think we are4 ,we are content to get rid of the worst evils first4 ,,consistency ,,man3 ,but is one sort of killing worse than another8 ,,vegetarian3 ,immeasurably worse4 ,even if it were necessary under the vegetarian system1 to destroy some of the calves at birth1 as the superfluous young of domestic animals are now destroyed1 it would be ridiculous to compare such restricted killing of new-born creatures with the present wholesale butchery of full-grown and highly-sentient animals in the slaughter-house4 ,,consistency ,,man3 ,you say if it were necessary1 but is there any doubt of it8 ,,vegetarian3 ,it is not by any means so certain as you suppose that the slaughter of calves would be unavoidable4 ,vegetarians use milk sparingly--far more so than flesh-eaters--and a limited amount of milk is obtainable without killing the calf4 ,nor is there any reason1 as ,professor ,newman has pointed out1 why a number of oxen should not be employed as formerly in working the land4 ,but ,i do not wish to take refuge in future possibilities4 ,i prefer to take the bull-calf argument by the horns1 and admit that1 under present conditions1 we are indirectly responsible4 ,call it inconsistency1 if you like4 ,if it be inconsistency not to postpone the abolition of the greater cruelties until we also abolish the minor ones1 we are willing to be called inconsistent4 ,it may be noted1 in passing1 that the zeal with which flesh-eaters urge this counter-charge of inconsistency is designed1 unconsciously perhaps1 to hide an important admission--viz41 that where eggs and milk are used there is no necessity for butchers' meat1 or1 in other words1 that vegetarianism is a perfectly feasible diet4 ,eggs and milk1 says ,dr4 ,t4 ,p4 ,smith1 when objecting to their use by vegetarians1 contain a much larger quantity of nutritive material than an equal amount of meat1 for which1 therefore1 they may easily serve as substitutes4#af ,if this be granted1 the rest is a mere battle of words4 ,footnote #af3 ,fortnightly ,review1 ,november1 #ahie4 ,but the cock-and-bull argument1 with which may be linked the objection to the use of leather1 is only one of many departments of the consistency trick4 ,another favourite method of convicting vegetarians of inconsistency is to start from the false assumption that vegetarianism is the same thing as ,brahminism1 and that any destruction of even the lowliest forms of life is therefore reprehensible4 ,as for the argument based on the cruelty of slaughter-houses1 says ,mr4 ,w4 ,t4 ,stead1 ,i don't see that it bears upon the question1 unless you take the extreme ,hindoo doctrine as to the wickedness of taking sentient life1 even in the shape of lice and adders4 ,that is to say1 the terrible and quite unnecessary cruelties inflicted on the most highly-organised and harmless animals in the cattle-ship and slaughter-house do not even bear upon the morality of diet1 unless we also abstain from killing the most noxious and lowly-organised forms6 ,of the same nature is the foolish when-you-drink-a-glass-of-water fallacy1 which argues that1 as we necessarily swallow minute organisms in drinking1 we need have no scruples as to the needless butchery of a cow or a sheep4 ,the savages who in the good old times used to eat their grandfathers and grandmothers might have justified their dietetic habits on precisely similar grounds4 ,nor is it only insects and vermin on whose behalf the consistency man is concerned1 for plants also have life1 and therefore if the vegetarian holds that it is immoral to take life 7which he does not71 he must be inconsistent in eating vegetables4 ,as an instance of a common but strange misunderstanding of the vegetarian principle on this subject1 ,i must here quote a passage from the ,science ,jottings of ,dr4 ,andrew ,wilson4 ,note the triumphant tone of the unscientific scientist as he rushes to his absurd conclusion3 ,i have not yet finished with the food faddist4 ,suppose ,i find a vegetarian who1 more consistent than the run of his fellows1 will not touch1 taste1 nor handle milk1 eggs1 cheese1 or any animal product whatever4 ,i think it is still possible to show him that he is infringing the code he lives by1 in so far as its pretensions with the sacredness of life are concerned4 ,plants1 no less than animals1 are living things4 ,their tissues contain living protoplasm1 which is the essential physical basis of life everywhere4444 ,i am afraid that the consistent vegetarian must no longer kill a cabbage if he is to live up to the standard of morals he sets up as a kind of fetish in his diet regulations2 and to lay low the lettuce1 or pluck the apple from its bough1 is really a direct infringement of the code which maintains that you have no right to kill any living thing for food4 ,really this is a monstrous doctrine when all is said and done4#ag ,footnote #ag3 ,illustrated ,london ,news1 ,may #ad1 #ahih4 ,it is a monstrous doctrine2 and what are we to think of a man of science who attributes such absurdities to vegetarians1 and thereupon holds them up to public contempt as inconsistent1 when by making inquiry he might at once have learnt that the blunder was on his own side8 ,once more1 then1 be it stated that it is not the mere taking of life1 but the taking of life unnecessarily that the vegetarian deprecates1 and that no criticism of vegetarianism can be of any relevance if it ignores the fact that all forms of life are not of equal value1 but that the higher the sensibility of the animal1 and the closer his affinity to ourselves1 the stronger his claim on our humaneness4 ,before leaving this question of consistency1 as affected by the gradations of our duty of humaneness to animals1 a few words may be said on the practice of fish-eating4 ,it was humorously suggested by ,sir ,henry ,thompson1 who1 as ,i have proved in the second chapter of this work1 wrote in complete ignorance of the facts and dates of the vegetarian movement1 that1 as vegetarians have added milk and eggs to their diet since their society was founded 7a statement quite devoid of truth71 they may perhaps still further enlarge their dietary so as to include fish4 ,here1 again1 ,sir ,h4 ,thompson only showed his unfamiliarity with the subject1 for his novel proposition was in fact an old one1 which has been debated and rejected by the ,vegetarian ,society in its adherence to its original rule of excluding fish1 flesh1 and fowl1 and nothing else1 from its dietary4 ,so far1 then1 as organised vegetarianism is concerned1 those who eat fish are not within the pale of membership2 but looked at from the purely humane standpoint1 it must be admitted that there is an immense difference between flesh-eating and fish-eating1 and that those unattached food reformers1 not few in number1 who for humane reasons abstain from flesh1 but feel justified in eating fish1 hold a perfectly intelligible position4 ,and ,i would further note that the very fact of there having been some disposition1 wise or unwise1 within the vegetarian ranks to recognise the comparative harmlessness of fish-eating1 corroborates what ,i have asserted throughout--that the raison d'tre of vegetarianism has not been a pedantic hard-and-fast crusade against animal substances1 but a practical desire to abolish the horrors of the slaughter-house4 ,this1 then1 is our parting word to the professors of the ,consistency ,trick4 ,if they had charged us with the real inconsistency--that is1 with sacrificing the spirit to the letter by overlooking graver cruelties while denouncing minor ones--we should have been fully prepared to meet so serious an accusation4 ,but as they have not done this1 but have merely twitted us with not attempting everything at once1 and with allowing the subordinate evil to wait until the central evil has been grappled with1 we cheerfully admit the impeachment--coming as it does 7such is the humour of the situation7 from those who are themselves desirous of perpetuating both kinds of suffering1 the greater and the smaller alike6 ,we beg to assure them that we would much rather be inconsistently humane than consistently cruel4 ,,the ,,degradation ,,of ,,the ,,butcher ,but this question of butchery is not merely one of kindness or unkindness to animals1 for by the very facts of the case it is a human question of no slight importance1 affecting as it does the social and moral welfare of those more immediately concerned in it4 ,of all recognised occupations by which in civilised countries a livelihood is sought and obtained1 the work which is looked upon with the greatest loathing 7next to the hangman's7 is that of the butcher--as witness the opprobrious sense which the word butcher has acquired4 ,owing to the instinctive horror of bloodshed1 which is characteristic of all normal civilised beings1 the trade of doing to death countless numbers of inoffensive and highly-organised creatures amid scenes of indescribable filth and ferocity is delegated--in the large towns1 at any rate--to a pariah class of slaughtermen1 who are thus themselves made the victims of a grievous social wrong4 ,i'm only doing your dirty work4 ,it's such as you makes such as us1 is said to have been the remark of a ,whitechapel butcher to a flesh-eating gentleman who remonstrated with him for his brutality2 and the remark was a perfectly just one4 ,to demand a product which can only be procured at the cost of the intense suffering of the animal and the deep degradation of the butcher1 and by a process which not one flesh-eater in a hundred would himself under any circumstances perform or even witness1 is conduct as callous1 selfish1 and unsocial as could well be imagined4 ,for butchery1 as ,sir ,benjamin ,richardson used to point out1 is essentially a dangerous trade4 ,it not only deadens and destroys the moral sympathies1 but it has the physical effect of straining the nerves and weakening the heart of the slaughterman1 and thus naturally induces a tendency to have recourse to drink4 ,how often1 too1 in reading of some murderous crime1 has one seen it stated that the criminal was a butcher2 as1 for instance1 in the ,austrian ripper case1 when1 as the papers stated1 a woman of the unfortunate class was killed by a young butcher of herculean frame1 by whom it is supposed a previous victim had also been slaughtered4 ,to have accustomed one's self to a total disregard for the pleading terror of sensitive animals and to a murderous use of the knife is a terrible power for society to put into the hands of its lowest and least responsible members4 ,the blame must ultimately fall on society itself1 and not on the individual slaughterman4 ,no one had a better knowledge of this subject than the late ,mr4 ,h4 ,f4 ,lester1 and this is his opinion3 ,we must take into consideration the fact that the ranks of slaughtermen are habitually made up from persons in whom one could hardly expect to find the sentiment of pity strongly developed2 yet1 even among these1 there is a certain air of dissatisfaction with the work they are compelled to do1 and a mixture of insolence and shamefacedness1 of swagger and evident dislike of inspection1 which makes one think they know their trade is a nasty one1 only bearable from lack of other employment and from the good wages earned4 ,but there are plenty of men engaged in this work of killing animals for food who are much too good for the business4 ,these will tell you openly that they dislike the job1 but 'people will have meat1' and if they were to give it up1 someone else would step into the work4#ah ,footnote #ah3 ,behind the ,scenes in ,slaughter-houses4 ,again1 subordinate to the actual butchery1 there are certain disgusting1 if not dangerous1 occupations1 such as that of the women who work in or near the cattle markets at the malodorous task of preparing animal entrails for commercial uses1 of which process the following account has been given3#ai ,the women's share in the ugly business begins when the greasy1 slimy intestinal skins come to them for the scraping off of all fat and substance still attaching to them4 ,they are washed1 twisted up1 dressed with salt1 and are ready for the sausage-makers1 on whose behalf they have been thus prepared4 ,the journalistic comment is1 that in an ideal world men would not permit women to do work from which every instinct of refinement and even decency shrinks1 but that all is over-ruled by the demands of present-day cheapness4 ,this1 as things go1 is undeniable2 but it would be well that conscientious flesh-eaters should at least realise what their diet imposes on other people4 ,footnote #ai3 ,daily ,telegraph1 ,july #ai1 #ahig4 ,that1 however1 is just what they are mostly determined not to realise1 doubtless from a subconscious apprehension that1 if once they begin to look into this unsavoury subject1 they may be pushed to the verge of certain awkward conclusions4 ,nothing is more significant than the extreme unwillingness of philanthropists and members of ethical societies1 who debate almost every problem under the sun1 to give serious attention to the question of butchery--a reluctance which may be taken as one of the strongest possible tributes to the pertinence of vegetarianism4 ,this is said to be especially true of the philanthropists of ,chicago--that great centre of the killing trade4 ,no one who goes to ,chicago1 says an eye-witness1 should fail to see the shambles4 ,they are the most wicked things in creation4 ,they are sickening beyond description4 ,the men in them are more brutes than the animals they slaughter4 ,missions and institutes have been built in the respectable parts of the city from the profits1 and the employees of the shambles have been left to go straight down to the devil4444 ,it is the duty of everyone interested in social questions1 of everyone whose demands necessitate this kind of labour1 to wade through this filth to see these poor wretches at work4#bj ,footnote #bj3 ,new ,age1 ,november #be1 #ahig4 ,and so they go their ways1 the philanthropist to build homes1 the ethical folk to talk learnedly1 and the social reformer to concoct schemes for the amelioration of the human race4 ,yet1 meantime1 these very persons are themselves perpetuating1 by their mode of living1 the evil conditions which they profess to be anxious to remove1 and condemning the pariah slaughterman to a life of sheer bestiality4 ,the meat-eater1 says ,mr4 ,lester1 accepts the results of this man's demoralisation of character4 ,pious and professed ,christians are content to allow the deep degradation of the nature of a whole class of men1 set apart to do the nation's dirty work of slaughtering1 without an apparent thought of the baseness of their conduct4 ,here1 as ,i said at the outset1 is a distinctively human question1 and one which cannot be evaded1 even by those slippery reasoners who would shuffle out of the duty of humaneness to animals by pretending 7in the face of evolutionary science7 that there is no bond of consanguinity between the animals and mankind4 ,by no possible sophistry can educated people be justified in placing this heavy burden of butchery on the hands of their social inferiors4 ,the vivisector and the sportsman have at least the courage to do their own devilries2 and the work even of the hardened agents of murderous millinery and the fur-trade is diversified to some extent by travel and adventure4 ,but the slaughterman's task is one of unrelieved1 unmitigated brutality1 involving the constant and systematic doing of deeds that are inhuman in themselves1 degrading to the rough men who do them1 and trebly disgraceful to the polite ladies and gentlemen at whose behest they are done4 ,,the ,,sthetic ,,argument ,closely connected with the humane argument is the sthetic argument1 the two being1 in fact1 twin branches of the same stem4 ,for humane1 as the ,latin shows1 has the double meaning of gentle and refined2 so that humanity1 in the original conception of the term1 implies not only a moral regard for the rights of our fellow-beings1 but also an sthetic appreciation of what is beautiful and pure4 ,culture and good-breeding1 together with justice and compassion1 are the characteristics of humane man2 and the fact that this twofold sense of the word has been well-nigh forgotten in the education of the modern gentleman may serve to explain why there is often such a grievious lack of gentleness in persons who claim to be refined4 ,our liter humaniores are a mere academic course of book-learning1 the humane element being altogether left out of account2 and to such bathos has this divorce of gentleness and refinement carried us that1 in some quarters1 a professor of humanity is--a teacher of ,latin grammar4 ,we are prepared1 then1 to find that the sthetic or artistic faculty of the present day is deplorably narrow in its scope1 and is so ignorant of the true relationship of humanity and art that it actually prides itself on omitting from its ken all humane considerations1 while it diligently searches for the beautiful and the picturesque1 as if beauty were a thing detached from the realities of every-day life6 ,the bare idea that there is an sthetic side to the diet question1 beyond the mere delicacies of cookery and embellishments of the dining-table1 would be scouted as ridiculous by ninety-nine out of a hundred of our artists or literary men2 for the very force of habit which has made them so quick to resent the least technical flaw in their special departments of work1 has left them blindly indifferent to the hideous and revolting aspects of flesh-eating4 ,to these sthetes1 so-called1 the sight of an ugly house1 for example1 is a sore trouble and grievance1 but the slaughter-house1 with all its gruesome doings1 is a matter of supreme unconcern--nay1 rather a thing to be indirectly patronised and defended4 ,i have known a case where an sthetic lady1 of great personal culture1 and the centre of a polished circle1 stained the floor of her charming suburban villa with bullock's blood brought from the shambles in a bucket4 ,yet the sthete does not usually vindicate his carnivorous diet and its appurtenances with the old unhesitating heartiness of the barbarian2 he is somewhat ashamed of himself--unconsciously1 perhaps--in these latter days1 even as the cannibal is ashamed when the discussion turns upon long pig4 ,like all the apologists of flesh-eating1 in their respective spheres1 he is shifty and evasive in his defences1 and is not too proud1 in his moment of extremity1 to have recourse to the consistency trick1 and to try to trip up his vegetarian persecutor with the retort of ,you're another4 ,from which signs of grace it may be surmised that the sthete1 in spite of his brave exterior1 is not quite at ease in his dietetic philosophy1 and that the products of butchery are1 in a very real sense1 the skeleton in the cupboard 7the larder cupboard7 of literature and art4 ,,sthete3 ,pray1 why do you address yourself to me in that significant manner8 ,,vegetarian3 ,because ,i understand that you cultivate the artistic sense4 ,you love to have beautiful things about you1 do you not8 ,so you must needs wish to be a vegetarian4 ,,sthete3 ,i love beautiful things1 certainly4 ,art is my vocation4 ,but what has vegetarianism to do with it8 ,,vegetarian3 ,have the arrangements of the dinner-table nothing to do with it--the cloth1 the silver1 the glasses1 the dessert1 the flowers8 ,,sthete3 ,a great deal1 obviously4 ,there is much art in dining well4 ,,vegetarian3 ,yet the meats that are served at the table have nothing to do with it6 ,is not that rather contradictory8 ,,sthete3 ,i did not say that4 ,the cookery is an essential point1 of course4 ,,vegetarian3 ,but what of the meat--the thing cooked8 ,what is it8 ,what was it8 ,and how did it come to be on your plate8 ,,sthete3 ,i never think of such questions4 ,so long as it is nice1 ,i am content4 ,it must satisfy my taste1 that is all4 ,,vegetarian3 ,but are you sure that it does satisfy your taste in the same way that other things do8 ,i think not1 for you have never put it to the trial4 ,in no other branch of art do you take things wholly on trust1 but you try them by the standard of an independent and educated intelligence4 ,in diet1 and in diet only1 you shut your eyes and open your mouth1 as the children say1 and never distinguish between a real innate liking and the liking that is merely traditional4 ,,sthete3 ,de gustibus non est disputandum4 ,,vegetarian3 ,about genuine tastes1 ,i admit1 disputation is idle4 ,but the proverb is not true of the sham tastes to which ,i refer4 ,there is a great deal to be discussed about them4 ,,sthete3 ,but ,i assure you my liking for a ham-sandwich is a genuine taste4 ,,vegetarian3 ,with full knowledge of the pig-sty and the pig-sticker4 ,do not the antecedents of your ham-sandwich cause you a feeling of disgust8 ,,sthete3 ,oh1 well1 if you persist in thinking about it1 all feeding causes disgust4 ,don't you think there is something gross in the whole process of ingestion8 ,,vegetarian3 ,then why not gorge on carrion at once8 ,the moment you adopt the in for a penny1 in for a pound attitude1 you sacrifice the whole art of living4 ,,sthete3 ,but what of the processes on which vegetarianism itself depends8 ,you talk of the filth of the slaughter-house2 but how about the filth of market gardening8 ,to watch the soil being manured1 if we let our thoughts dwell upon it1 is enough to spoil all appetite for the produce of the garden4 ,the more delicious the asparagus or the strawberries1 the more we ought to loathe them4 ,,vegetarian3 ,there ,i disagree with you entirely4 ,there is nothing in the least disgusting1 to me1 at any rate 7and ,i speak from personal experience71 in the manuring of the soil or in any agricultural process--on the contrary1 there is much that is wholesome and cheering in this chemistry of nature4 ,the healthy mind takes a delight in gardening1 just as it regards slaughtering with abhorrence4 ,if you want to see the contrast between the effects of the two professions on those who practise them1 compare the face of the typical slaughterman with that of the typical gardener4 ,it is as remarkable as the contrast between a butcher's and a fruiterer's shop4 ,,sthete3 ,well1 it is no use talking about it2 our views of life are different4 ,you are a social reformer and agitator1 and agitation is fatal to the tranquility of art4 ,i am an artist1 and do not care a straw for social reform4 ,my creed is expressed in ,keats's couplet3 ,beauty is truth1 truth beauty--that is all ,ye know on earth1 and all ye need to know4 ,,vegetarian3 ,yes1 but it is possible that ,keats's meaning is somewhat deeper than you imagine4 ,it is not your creed that ,i quarrel with1 but your own misunderstanding and misuse of it4 ,that the oneness of truth and beauty is knowledge sufficient1 ,i admit2 but my complaint is that you do not really know it1 and therefore ,i regard your stheticism--the stheticism that makes clean the outside of the cup and the platter1 and the outside only--as mere vandalism in masquerade4 ,nor is even the outside of the sthetic platter free from offence1 for there is nothing more hideous to the eye 7not to mention the mind7 than the scorched corpses1 as ,bernard ,shaw calls them1 that are displayed on polite dinner-tables when the dish-covers are removed4 ,among the customs at table that deserve to be abolished1 wrote ,leigh ,hunt1 is that of serving up dishes that retain a look of life in death--codfish with their staring eyes1 hares with their hollow countenances1 etc4 ,it is in bad taste1 an incongruity1 an anomaly2 to say nothing of its effect on morbid imaginations4 ,perhaps1 however1 the most morbid imagination1 or lack of imagination1 is that of the persons who are not disgusted by these ugly sights4 ,art and humanity1 then1 are but two branches of the same stock3 the true humanist and the true artist are own brethren4 ,to the artistic temperament1 in particular1 vegetarianism has the surest right of appeal2 for the stheticism which can prate of truth and beauty1 while it battens like a ghoul on bloodshed and suffering1 has abnegated its own principles1 and has ceased to be artistic4 ,how would it be possible for the scenes that are hourly enacted in slaughter-houses to be tolerated for a moment in a community which had any real artistic consciousness8 ,yet what sthetic protest1 except from vegetarians1 is ever raised against them8 ,take1 for example1 the following extract from some notes descriptive of the ,chicago meat factories3 ,slithered over bloody floor4 ,nearly broke neck in gore of old porker4 ,saw few hundred men slicing pigs1 making hams1 sausages1 and pork chops4 ,whole sight not edifying2 indeed1 rather beastly4 ,next went to cattle-killing house4 ,cattle driven along gangway and banged over head with iron hammer4 ,fell stunned2 then swung up by legs1 and man cuts throats4 ,small army of men with buckets catching blood2 it gushed over them in torrents--a bit sickening4 ,next to sheep slaughter-house4 ,more throat-cutting--ten thousand sheep killed a day--more blood4 ,place reeks with blood2 walls and floor splashed with it2 air thick1 warm1 offensive4 ',yes1' said guide1 ',armour's biggest slaughter-house in the world4 ,there's no waste2 we utilise everything--everything except the squeak of the pigs4 ,we can't can that4' ,went and drank brandy4#ba ,footnote #ba3 ,from a series of letters contributed to the ,nottingham ,guardian by ,mr4 ,j4 ,f4 ,fraser1 author of ,america at ,work4 ,it is much to be regretted that it is not found possible1 in this enterprising establishment1 to can the squeak1 as well as the flesh1 of the pig2 for such a phonographic effect might suggest certain novel thoughts to the refined ladies and gentlemen who contentedly regale themselves on ham-sandwiches at polite supper-tables4 ,for imagine what the result would be1 in studio and boudoir1 dining-room and drawing-room1 if the death-cries of the slaughter-house could be but once uncanned and brought to hearing4 ,the groans and screams of this poor persecuted race1 as ,de ,quincey said of cats1 if gathered into some great echoing hall of horrors1 would melt the heart of the stoniest4 ,but far vaster and more impressive would be the world-wide hall of horrors which should contain the bitter cry of the victims of the butcher4 ,would that it were possible thus to compel the sthetic flesh-eater to face the music of his misdeeds6 ,and1 remember1 it is not only at the big slaughtering centres that these ugly trades are carried on1 nor are they there1 perhaps1 at their ugliest2 but every town and every village has its private torture-dens where the same carnage is performed the year round on a smaller scale and in a clumsier manner1 and everywhere the butcher's shop presents the same ghastly spectacle of quartered carcases hanging a-row1 and gloated over by shopping women4 ,one would think it incredible that any lover of the beautiful could doubt that the national sense of beauty must be seriously impaired by these disgusting and degrading sights4 ,but enough of the subject6 ,were we to dwell too long on it1 we should be tempted to exclaim1 as was said of another kind of iniquity1 ,while these things are being done1 beauty stands veiled1 and music is a screeching lie4 ,,the ,,hygienic ,,argument ,the humane and the sthetic aspects of vegetarianism are constantly described by the advocates of flesh-eating as sentimental1 and if it be sentimental to have regard for the sufferings of animals and the beauty of our own surroundings1 the charge will be gladly admitted2 but there is also1 independent of all considerations of humanity1 a distinctly hygienic movement towards the disuse of flesh food1 on the ground that such diet is not only barbarous but unwholesome4 ,it is held that flesh food is in itself a stimulant1 and that incidentally it is very liable to transmit disease1 while vegetarianism1 on the contrary1 is a simple1 natural1 less inflammatory diet1 which from the earliest times has been known and practised by a few wise persons as containing the secret of health4 ,in ,germany1 especially1 the system of natural living has attracted much attention1 and the propaganda of food reform is there mainly on those lines2 in ,england less so1 but here1 too1 there are a number of vegetarians who are hygienists first and humanitarians afterwards1 and all humanitarians are to some extent hygienists1 so that it is ridiculous1 in any serious criticism of vegetarianism1 to leave out of sight1 as some of our opponents do1 this essential part of the system4 ,there is1 in fact1 a considerable scientific literature on the subject1 a train of thought and experience handed down from ,cornaro and ,gassendi1 through their successors ,cheyne1 ,hartley1 ,lambe1 ,abernethy1 and others1 to such modern authorities as ,sir ,benjamin ,richardson and ,dr4 ,alexander ,haig2 yet so little known is this testimony that it might be imagined1 from the nervous apprehension with which the abandonment of flesh flood is regarded1 that vegetarianism were some new and hazardous experiment1 whereon he who enters carries his life in his hands4 ,this ignorance of the long-standing claims of vegetarianism to a scientific basis is the result of the indifference and prejudice that have always made dietetics the most unpopular of studies1 those who are in health not caring to give more than a passing thought to the hygienic quality of their food1 while those who are sick are naturally suspicious of change or over-ruled by medical advisers4 ,yet the moment impartial inquiry is made into the comparative benefits and perils of the two modes of living1 certain undeniable facts begin to appear1 of which the first and most obvious1 though not the most important1 perhaps1 are the incidental dangers of flesh-eating4 ,many1 indeed1 and unsuspected by the ordinary man who takes a good meat dinner1 are the ills that flesh is heir to1 especially in the diet of the poor2 for1 as ,professor ,f4 ,w4 ,newman pointed out1 where the population is dense1 the poorer classes1 if they eat flesh-meat at all1 are sure to get a sensible portion of their supply in an unwholesome state4 ,this assertion is no mere piece of vegetarian polemics2 it rests on the authority of more than one ,royal ,commission1 the latest of which has insisted1 in the ,tuberculosis ,report of #ahih1 that so long as private slaughter-houses are permitted to exist1 so long must inspection be carried out under conditions incompatible with efficiency4 ,there is1 in fact1 no genuine inspection of the meat killed in private slaughter-houses1 nor is the case 7at present7 much better in public ones1 and it is notorious that a large amount of tuberculous flesh1 examined and rejected under their more careful scrutiny by the ,jews1 is thought good enough to be sold for the use of the ,gentiles4 ,it would be easy to quote official figures to show the prevalence of the mischief1 but it is not necessary here to do so1 because the facts are not denied4#bb ,the cause of the disease thus prevalent among cattle must be sought partly in the excessive demand for flesh food1 and the consequent high price of meat1 which is a great temptation to graziers to breed from immature stock2 partly1 too1 in the unhealthy system of stall-feeding and cramming1 and last1 but not least1 in the rough treatment to which animals are exposed during their transit by sea and rail--an evil which is recognised by butchers no less than by humanitarians4 ,footnote #bb3 ,see the official facts and figures cited in ,tuberculosis1 by ,dr4 ,j4 ,oldfield1 #ahib4 ,moreover1 in addition to the dangers which flesh-eaters incur of diseases contagious and parasitic1 there is the risk of eating decomposed meat under the title of table delicacies4 ,here1 as one instance out of many1 is an extract from a ,london daily paper4 ,some exemplary fines were inflicted when summonses connected with the seizure of #ac tons of rotten pigs' livers came on for hearing4 ,a company promoter1 trading as manufacturer of table delicacies1 was fined #ajj1 including costs1 for the possession of forty-four barrels of the livers1 which were deposited for the purpose of being converted into human food in the shape of meat-extracts1 soups1 and other table delicacies4 ,the magistrate characterised the condemned goods as absolute filth4 ,the bearing of such facts on the public health is obvious4 ,the shocking revelations1 it has been said1 as to the potted meat trade of ,london1 clearly give us the key-note to the terrible weekly statistics of fevers and other diseases in the poorer districts of ,london and big towns generally4 ,putrid sheep's hearts--putrid meat of unknown origin--anything from horse to pug dog--slimy livers1 reeking lights that would poison even a ,fleet ,street cat1 and moribund hams from diseased pigs are the foundation of our table delicacies4 ,ugh6 it is enough to make a man forswear anything 'potted' for ever4#bc ,footnote #bc3 ,reynolds's ,newspaper1 ,march #ai1 #ahii4 ,but1 though these and similar facts are indisputable1 and though so great an authority as ,sir ,b4 ,w4 ,richardson has stated that1 in respect to the propagation of disease1 it seems just to declare that the danger is much less and much more easily preventable on the vegetarian than on the animal diet1 the flesh-eaters1 strong or weak as they may happen to be1 even to the sickliest valetudinarian that ever sipped his ,liebig1 are much more afraid of being infected with vegetarian principles than with the poisons of the murdered ox1 and would venture on every drug in the ,pharmacopia rather than on a pure and simple diet4 ,yet more than a hundred and fifty years ago so eminent a physician as ,dr4 ,george ,cheyne1 then in a hale old age1 had written as follows3 ,my regimen at present is milk1 with tea1 coffee1 bread-and-butter1 mild cheese1 salads1 fruits and seeds of all kinds1 with tender roots 7as potatoes1 turnips1 carrots71 and1 in short1 everything that has not life1 dressed or not1 as ,i like1 in which there is as much or a greater variety than in animal foods1 so that the stomach need never be cloyed4 ,i drink no wine nor any fermented liquors1 and am rarely dry1 most of my food being liquid1 moist1 or juicy4 ,only after dinner ,i drink either coffee or green tea1 but seldom both in the same day1 and sometimes a glass of soft small cider4 ,the thinner my diet1 the easier1 more cheerful and lightsome ,i find myself2 my sleep is also the sounder1 though perhaps somewhat shorter than formerly under my full animal diet2 but1 then1 ,i am more alive than ever ,i was4#bd ,footnote #bd3 ,the ,author's ,case4 ,the close connection of vegetarianism with temperance1 simplicity1 and general hardihood has been discovered by many thousands of persons since ,dr4 ,cheyne recorded it1 and has had its latest illustration in the doings of vegetarian athletes1 whose remarkable achievements in cycling matches and long-distance walks have shown once more that flesh-eating is not by any means a necessary condition of physical prowess4 ,it cannot be mere accident that vegetarians are almost invariably abstainers from alcohol and tobacco1 that1 man for man1 they eat more sparingly1 dress more lightly1 live more naturally1 and work harder than flesh-eaters1 and are far less subject to illnesses and ailments4 ,it is notorious that in quite a number of diseases1 especially those of the gouty class1 a vegetarian diet is prescribed by medical men1 who use for cure what they scorn to use for prevention4 ,in the works of ,dr4 ,alexander ,haig1#be the most distinguished recent exponent of reformed diet1 a close study has been made of the comparative wholesomeness and unwholesomeness of vegetable and animal foods1 and to these writings1 together with those of the other authorities above-mentioned1 ,i would refer any of my readers who may be under the idea that vegetarianism has no medical support4 ,the doctors1 of course1 or those of them who study the history of their own profession1 are well aware of the hollowness of this common superstition1 but they still continue to let an ignorant public fondly hug the belief that vegetarianism is a mere fad1 a mushroom growth born of the follies and sentimentalities of a decadent and hypercivilised age4 ,footnote #be3 ,uric ,acid as a ,factor in the ,causation of ,disease4 ,diet and ,foods ,considered in ,relation to ,strength and ,power of ,endurance4 ,it is impossible in the limit of these pages1 which are concerned with the logical1 not the medical view of vegetarianism1 to discuss with any fulness the argument based on hygiene2 but it may be stated as a matter1 not of opinion1 but of knowledge1 that quite apart from all humane bias1 there is a strong case for the reformed regimen on the ground of its healthfulness alone1 and that a scientific statement of this case may be found1 by those who care to become acquainted with the facts1 in the published writings of a small1 but not inconsiderable succession of medical authorities4 ,humanity and hygiene are the twin deities of food reform1 and their paths1 though separate for the time1 converge eventually to the same vegetarian goal4 ,,digestion ,we have seen that the scientific apologists of flesh-eating do not seriously rely on the old bogey of structural evidence1 though they have certainly not been over-anxious to dissociate their cause from whatever support has accrued to it through this too common misunderstanding4 ,the same is true of that other widespread superstition1 that meat alone gives strength--i4e41 that vegetarian diet1 as compared with a flesh diet1 is deficient in flesh-forming constituents--an error which the medical faculty1 as a whole1 has secretly fostered and encouraged1 though in face of the existence of the elephant and rhinoceros and other mighty herbivora1 its responsible spokesmen have1 of course1 not committed themselves to any such absurdity4 ,except for the fact that thousands of ignorant persons are still under the delusion that no adequate nourishment is to be found in the vegetable kingdom1 it would not be necessary to point out that1 by the admission of all authorities1 the albuminoids1 carbohydrates1 oils1 salts1 and other chemical food-properties1 exist in vegetable no less than in animal substances1 and therefore that a vegetarian diet1 even without the use of eggs and milk1 has access to all the needed elements4 ,the professional1 as distinct from the popular1 objections to vegetarianism1 are based nowadays on quite other arguments1 as may be seen from the suggestive admissions and assertions made in the following passage from the ,british ,medical ,journal3 ,man is undoubtedly in his anatomy most nearly allied to the higher apes1 and these animals1 though they show obvious tendencies to be omnivorous1 are yet1 in the main1 eaters of nuts and fruits4 ,but man is not a higher ape1 and in the process of development to his present high status he has become omnivorous4 ,it is true that he can obtain from vegetables the nutriment necessary for his maintenance in health1 but he has learnt that he can obtain what he wants at less cost of energy from a mixed diet1 and he is not likely to unlearn this lesson4#bf ,footnote #bf3 ,british ,medical ,journal1 ,june #d1 #ahih4 ,in the words that ,i have italicised we have the latest shibboleth of carnivorous science in its changing treatment of the food question4 ,vegetarianism is not impossible 7as we used to be told it was76 ,oh1 no6 life1 and even healthy life1 can really be maintained on a diet of vegetables 7how many thousands of doctors have asserted the contrary674 ,but the inferior digestibility of vegetable food--that is the trouble6 ,the poor vegetarians must put their digestive organs to so great a strain1 and must eat so large a bulk of food in order to get the requisite nourishment4 ,why1 then1 says the chemist1 should they thus over-tax their systems1 when they could digest a few slices from a dead body at so much less cost of energy8 ,now1 if the chemist were a man of action1 and not merely a man of study1 the practical aspects of this question might at the outset give him pause4 ,had he known vegetarians1 lived among vegetarians1 and talked with vegetarians1 instead of regarding them theoretically1 he would be aware that the average vegetarian eats decidedly less in bulk than the average flesh-eater1 and is seldom or never troubled with the indigestion that the flesh-eater dreads4 ,so far from being compelled to consume a greater bulk of food1 it is the general experience of those who have adopted vegetarianism that they eat much less under the new system than they did under the old1 and it is a frequent marvel to them1 when they dine with their former messmates1 to see the huge amounts that they devour4 ,there is the further consideration1 entirely overlooked in the argument of the ,british ,medical ,journal1 that vegetarianism1 in the current sense of the word1 is not a diet of vegetables only1 but includes the use of eggs1 butter1 cheese1 and milk4 ,for all which reasons the talk about less cost of energy seems to have little practical bearing on the subject under discussion1 and it may be suspected that the chemical chimera is quite as fabulous as the phantom difficulties that have preceded it4 ,,chemist3 ,now listen6 ,i am a chemist1 and ,i have no time to think or talk of anything sentimental4 ,to all your views about vegetarian diet ,i have but one answer--,hofmann's experiments4 ,,vegetarian3 ,so ,hofmann's figures have settled this diet problem for all time8 ,,chemist3 ,undoubtedly4 ,for they prove that the human stomach can assimilate a greater percentage of animal than of vegetable substances2 in other words1 that it requires a greater exercise of digestive power to get an equal amount of nourishment from vegetables4 ,what have you to say to that8 ,,vegetarian3 ,obviously this--that it is quite devoid of value unless we know who were the persons experimented on4 ,no statistics of the comparative digestibility of foods can be of practical use unless the habits and conditions of those who digest the foods are also noted4 ,custom and the personal element are all-important factors in the result4 ,many vegetable foods1 nuts for example1 are readily digested by vegetarians accustomed to their use1 though almost universally found indigestible by flesh-eaters4 ,,chemist3 ,i cannot follow you into that4 ,let us keep clear of all such sentiment1 if you please1 and bear in mind the great precept which ,dr4 ,andrew ,wilson1 in his application of ,hofmann's figures1 has laid down for our guidance1 that animal matter1 being likest to our own composition1 is most easily and readily converted into ourselves4 ,,vegetarian3 ,with all due deference to the ,andrew ,wilson formula1 may ,i ask what matter is likest to our own8 ,,chemist3 ,why1 animal matter1 of course4 ,,vegetarian3 ,yes1 but what animal matter8 ,,chemist3 ,oh1 we don't go into that4 ,,vegetarian3 ,but ,i do2 and ,i beg you to observe that the matter likest to our own composition is human flesh1 so that according to the ,andrew ,wilson formula1 we all ought to be cannibals1 because for human beings human flesh must be the most digestible of foods4 ,,chemist3 ,very likely it is so1 though ,i do not approve of cannibalism4 ,,vegetarian3 ,then allow me to read you a sentence from ,c4 ,f4 ,gordon ,cumming's book1 ,at ,home in ,fiji4 ,at every cannibal feast there was served a certain vegetable1 also commonly used by the cannibal ,maoris of ,new ,zealand1 which was considered as essential an adjunct as mint-sauce is to lamb or sage to goose4 ,its use1 however1 was prudential1 as human flesh was found to be highly indigestible1 and this herb acted as a corrective4 ,now ,i ask you if that does not logically dispose of the ,andrew ,wilson formula8 ,,chemist3 ,nonsense1 sir6 ,i will not discuss cannibalism4 ,you fail to see that some things1 though logical enough1 may not be expedient4 ,,vegetarian3 ,i am delighted to hear you say that4 ,i beg you to remember it when you next talk of ,hofmann's experiments4 ,it is possible that flesh-eating1 like cannibalism1 is not expedient1 when it is regarded from a wider standpoint than that of the chemical doctrinaire4 ,nothing1 indeed1 could be more unscientific than the attitude taken on this question by scientists of the ,andrew ,wilson type4 ,for1 in the first place1 as pointed out above1 it is impossible to arrive at any scientific conclusion as to the comparative digestibility of vegetable and animal foods unless the conditions are equal--that is1 unless the persons experimented on are equally accustomed to the food-stuffs they are invited to digest2 and1 secondly1 there is the question of the quality of the foods supplied1 for as ,dr4 ,oldfield has remarked1 it is quite as unfair to judge of the digestibility of the proteid of the vegetable kingdom from one example of the legumens as it would be to class all forms of flesh as indigestible because veal or lobster happens to be so4 ,against the academic testimony of the ,hofmann school of specialists we may confidently set that of so distinguished a practical chemist as ,sir ,b4 ,w4 ,richardson1 who1 by his personal knowledge of vegetarians and vegetarianism1 was peculiarly qualified to judge4 ,from experimental observations which ,i have made1 ,i am of opinion that the vegetable flesh-forming substances may be as easily digested1 when they are presented to the stomach in proper form1 as are the animal substances of like feeding quality4#bg ,footnote #bg3 ,foods of ,man4 ,the true function of the chemist in his general relation to the diet question is to help the coming dietary by transferring to the vegetarian system some of the scientific attention that has hitherto been solely devoted to flesh meats4 ,men of practical science1 says ,sir ,b4 ,w4 ,richardson1 ought to be at work assisting with their skill in bringing about that mighty reformation4 ,we now know to a nicety the relation of the various parts of food needed for the construction of the living body1 and there should be no difficulty1 except the labour of research1 in so modifying food from its prime source as to make it applicable to every necessity without the assistance of any intermediate animal at all4 ,why should not the chemist1 instead of maintaining1 like ,mrs4 ,partington1 a pettifogging and quite futile opposition to the flowing tide1 put himself in the current of progress1 and try to turn his special knowledge to the furtherance of a noble end8 ,,conditions ,,of ,,climate ,to try to change the venue is sometimes the policy of defendants in an action at law1 and a similar device is adopted by those who would stave off the hearing of the vegetarian case4 ,the tropics are the convenient limbo to which this uncongenial subject is most frequently consigned2 and it is with a proud sense of humour and self-assurance that the ,british ,islander1 who objects to alien immigration and all foreign frivolities1 warns the vegetarian heresy to keep clear of his inhospitable clime4 ,such diet may be all very well1 he thinks1 for passive ,hindoos1 but not for the hard-working inhabitants of this temperate zone4 ,,british ,,islander3 ,vegetarianism8 ,no thank you2 not here6 ,all very nice in ,africa and ,india1 ,i dare say1 where you can sit all day under a palm-tree and eat dates4 ,,vegetarian3 ,but ,i have not observed that when you visit ,africa or ,india you practise vegetarianism4 ,on the contrary1 you take your flesh-pots with you everywhere--even to the very places where you admit you don't need them1 and where1 as in ,india1 they give the greatest offence to the inhabitants4 ,,british ,,islander3 ,oh1 well1 it's no affair of theirs1 is it1 if ,i take my roast beef8 ,,vegetarian3 ,yet you think it your affair to interfere with the cannibals when they take their roast man4 ,and have you observed that it is in the tropical zone1 not the temperate zone1 that cannibalism is most rife8 ,,british ,,islander3 ,why do you remind me of that8 ,,vegetarian3 ,to show you that all this talk about vegetarianism being a matter of climate is pure humbug4 ,the use of flesh is a vicious habit everywhere1 and nowhere a necessity1 except where other food is not procurable4 ,,british ,,islander3 ,but do we not need more oil and fat in northern climates8 ,,vegetarian3 ,undoubtedly2 but these can be readily obtained without recourse to flesh4 ,,british ,,islander3 ,then how do you account for the fact that northern races have been1 to so great an extent1 carnivorous8 ,,vegetarian3 ,perhaps because in primitive times hunting and pasturage were less toilsome than agriculture4 ,but ,i am not called on to account for such a fact4 ,their past addiction to flesh food no more proves the present utility of flesh-eating than their gross drinking habits prove the utility of alcohol4 ,,british ,,islander3 ,can you quote any scientific authority for your contention8 ,,vegetarian3 ,there is one which is all the more valuable because it is an admission made by an opponent4 ,sir ,william ,lawrence wrote3 ,that men can be perfectly nourished1 and that their physical and intellectual capabilities can be fully developed in any climate by a diet purely vegetable1 has been proved by such abundant experience that it will not be necessary to adduce any formal arguments on the subject4#bh ,in any climate1 mark6 ,and a diet purely vegetable2 whereas all you are asked to do is to forego the actual flesh foods1 and not the animal products4 ,but come now6 ,ask me the great question6 ,footnote #bh3 ,rees's ,encyclopdia1 ,article1 ,man4 ,,british ,,islander3 ,what is that8 ,there is only one other ,i had in mind4 ,what would become of the ,esquimaux8 ,,vegetarian3 ,of course6 ,i have always been profoundly touched by the disinterested concern of the ,englishman 7when vegetarianism looms ahead7 for the future of that ,arctic people4 ,well1 perhaps the question of what ice-bound savages might do1 or might not do1 need scarcely delay the decision of civilised mankind4 ,for that matter1 what would become of the polar bears8 ,if you cannot dissociate your habits from those of the ,esquimaux1 why don't you eat blubber8 ,at least they have a better reason for eating blubber than some people have for eating beef--they can get nothing else4 ,the dishonesty of the excuse that vegetarianism may be all very well in the tropics is shown by the fact that ,englishmen1 when living in the tropics1 make precisely the contrary statement4 ,you would be surprised1 writes ,mr4 ,b4 ,k4 ,adams1 from ,ceylon1 if you knew how much prejudice and opposition there is here4 ,the most amusing part is that nearly everyone says1 it is all very well being a vegetarian in ,england1 in a cool climate like that1 but out here in this hot1 depressing1 and enervating climate1 you must have meat1 and some add alcoholic stimulant4#bi ,footnote #bi3 ,vegetarian ,messenger1 ,january1 #ahii4 ,twenty years ago1 just the same climatic argument used to be put forward by the opponents of the temperance movement2 it was impossible here to abstain from alcoholic drink1 whatever it might be elsewhere4 ,we do not often meet with that argument now2 on the contrary1 it is generally admitted that a disuse of alcohol brings with it an increased power of hardihood and endurance4 ,as in drink1 so in food4 ,those who fly to stimulants obtain a temporary sense of comfort at the cost of permanent vigour4 ,but granting that it is possible to support life on vegetarian diet in northern climates1 is it also possible1 asks the conscientious doubter1 to live at one's highest energy under such conditions8 ,look at the carnivorous ,mr4 ,dash's career1 it is said1 as compared with that of the vegetarian ,mr4 ,so-and-,so6 ,was not the greater public activity of the former attributable to his mixed diet8 ,to which it may be replied that any such personal comparison is necessarily useless1 from lack of sufficient data as to the relative powers and opportunities of the persons compared4 ,it is obvious that a man whose convictions are unpopular will have far less opportunity of carrying his principles into action than one who is the mouthpiece of widely current opinions1 to the propagation of which he devotes1 perhaps1 an equal amount of ability4 ,for this reason it is absurd to suggest that vegetarians1 or any other class of unpopular reformers1 are living on a less active plane because their activities are not of the kind that commend themselves to the man in the street--or to that equally fallible person1 the man in the study4 ,the whole notion that vegetarians are less able than flesh-eaters to endure a severe climate is a delusion2 it is not only untrue1 but the contrary of the truth4 ,no one surely suggests1 says ,dr4 ,oldfield1 that the ,english climate is too cold for a vegetarian dietary1 when there is the experience of the stalwart1 hardy ,scotch peasantry1 in a climate far more rigorous1 developing brain and muscle superior to the average ,englishman1 and this upon a dietary which for generations has been so largely vegetarian that no one would dream of saying that the small amount of flesh eaten by them could have had anything to do with the matter4#cj ,footnote #cj3 ,nineteenth ,century1 ,august1 #ahih4 ,anyone who is intimately acquainted with the vegetarian movement in this country will bear me out when ,i say that the average vegetarian is much less susceptible than the average flesh-eater to extremes of cold and heat1 and can get through an ,english winter in comparative comfort1 without any of the wrapping up to which the mixed dietists are reduced4 ,it is amusing1 indeed1 after being asked that common question1 ,don't you feel the cold very much1 as you eat no meat8 to observe one's questioner attired perhaps to face a moderate ,london winter like a ,german student for a duel--a moving mass of scarves and furs and overcoats1 stoked up internally with plates of beef and cups of bovril1 and shivering withal4 ,poor fellow6 one thinks1 it looks as if you were the person whose diet might be all very well for those who live in the tropics1 but not for the hard-working inhabitants of this northern clime4 ,,flesh ,,meat ,,and ,,morals ,man is what he eats1 says the materialist in the ,german proverb4 ,the body is built up of the food-stuffs which it assimilates1 and it is reasonable to suppose that diet has thus a determining influence on character4 ,if this be true1 the reflection is not a pleasant one for the flesh-eater4 ,animal food1 it has been said1 containing as it does highly-wrought organic forces1 may liberate within our system powers which we may find it difficult or even impossible to dominate--lethargic monsters1 foul harpies1 and sad-visaged lemurs--which may insist on having their own way1 building up an animal body not truly human4#ca ,footnote #ca3 ,edward ,carpenter1 ,the ,art of ,creation1 ,health a ,conquest4 ,but here the idealist steps in with a different theory4 ,man is not what he eats1 but what he thinks and feels2 it is not what we eat1 but how we eat1 that most vitally affects us4 ,this is well expressed in one of ,thoreau's daring paradoxes3 ,there is a certain class of unbelievers who sometimes ask me such questions as if ,i think ,i can live on vegetable food alone2 and to strike at the root of the matter at once--for the root is faith--,i am accustomed to answer such1 that ,i can live on board-nails4 ,if they cannot understand that1 they cannot understand much that ,i have to say4 ,there is1 however1 no real antagonism between these two theories1 for both may be to a great extent true1 though neither wholly so4 ,if mind affects matter1 matter also affects mind2 if spirit acts on food1 food in its turn reacts on spirit4 ,the one truth that stands out clearly from a consideration of this subject1 and from the witness of common experience1 is that a gross animal diet is inimical to the finer instincts1 and that1 as ,thoreau says1 every man who has ever been earnest to preserve his higher or more poetic faculties in the best condition1 has been particularly inclined to abstain from animal food4#cb ,plain living and high thinking are indissolubly connected4 ,vegetarianism1 as ,i have already shown1 is not asceticism1 but if it offer the moral advantages of asceticism without the drawbacks1 is not that in its favour8 ,footnote #cb3 ,walden1 ,higher ,laws4 ,but there is a tendency among certain psychical authorities of the present day to eschew the vegetarian doctrine as itself materialistic1 and as attributing too much importance to the mere bodily functions of eating and digesting4 ,what does it matter about our diet1 they say1 whether it be animal or vegetable1 flesh or fruit1 so long as the spirit in which we seek it be a fit and proper one8 ,the question of food is one for doctors to decide2 'tis they who are concerned with the body1 while we are concerned with the soul4 ,i wish to show that this reasoning is nothing but a piece of charlatanry1 and rests upon a perversion of the philosophy that it claims to represent4 ,for though it is true1 in a sense1 that spirit can sanctify diet1 it is not true that a general sanction is thereby given to any diet whatsoever1 no matter what cruelties may be caused by it1 or who it be that causes them4 ,we may grant that so long as no scruple has arisen concerning the morality of flesh-eating1 or any other barbarous usage1 such practices may be carried on in innocence and good faith1 and therefore without personal demoralisation to those who indulge in them4 ,but from the moment when discussion begins1 and an unconscious act becomes a conscious or semi-conscious one1 the case is wholly different1 and it is then impossible to plead that it does not matter about one's food4 ,on the contrary1 it is a matter of vital import if injustice be deliberately practised4 ,to use flesh food unwittingly1 by savage instinct1 as the carnivora do1 or1 like barbarous mankind1 in the ignorance of age-long habit1 is one thing2 but it is quite another thing for a rational person to make a sophistical defence of such habits when their iniquity has been displayed1 and then to claim that he is absolved from guilt by the spirit in which he acted4 ,the spirit that absolves is one of unquestioning faith1 not of far-fetched sophistry4 ,the wolf devours the lamb1 and is no worse a wolf for it2 but if he seek1 as in the fable1 to give quibbling excuses for his wolfishness1 he becomes a byword for hypocrisy4 ,,psychic ,,philosopher3 ,why all this fuss about vegetarianism and what we eat8 ,with the best intention1 no doubt1 you regard the matter from too low a plane4 ,has not the greatest of teachers himself told us that ,not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man2 but that which cometh out of the mouth1 this defileth a man8 ,,vegetarian3 ,you know well the text has not the meaning you put on it4 ,it could as logically be made to excuse any swinishness whatsoever4 ,flesh-eating is not a mere ceremonial question of eating with unwashed hands1 as that referred to in the text1 but one that involves the gravest issues of right-doing and wrong-doing4 ,,psychic ,,philosopher3 ,but to the pure all things are pure4 ,,vegetarian3 ,possibly--if we know who are the pure4 ,but the mere eating of impurities is scarcely proof sufficient4 ,,psychic ,,philosopher3 ,i cannot take your view of the importance of this question4 ,to me1 as to the ,indian yogis1 the choice of food is a matter of indifference4 ,,vegetarian3 ,i doubt if your butcher's bill would bear out that assertion4 ,if food is one of the indifferent things1 why do you hold fast to your flesh meat1 like a snarling dog to his bone8 ,our psychic philosopher1 in truth1 is a wolf in sheep's clothing--a carnalist in psychical disguise4#cc ,footnote #cc3 ,it is a curious fact that the ,greek word psychic had the double sense of spiritual and carnal4 ,see ,tertullian's treatise1 ,against the ,carnal-,minded 7,psychicos74 ,it will be objected1 no doubt1 that the injurious effect of flesh food on morals has never been scientifically proved1#cd nor indeed is it possible that absolute proof should be forthcoming until vegetarianism is widely enough practised to furnish data for comparison2 there are1 however1 certain very marked indications that can hardly be overlooked4 ,in the first place1 as already stated1 there is the immemorial belief1 especially prominent in the usage of monastic orders1 but scarcely less so in all systems of hygienic or spiritual exercise--amounting1 in short1 to a practical consensus of mankind--that a stimulating or excessive diet is harmful to sobriety and self-control2 as evidenced by the far greater amount of crime rife among luxurious town-dwellers than among frugal peasants4 ,secondly1 there is the fact1 too well attested to be challenged1 that flesh-eating and alcoholism are closely allied1 and that the drink-crave dies a natural death when a stimulating diet is withdrawn2 from which it may be further realised that the excitation caused by flesh food must necessarily1 in many cases1 act injuriously on the nerve-system and contribute powerfully to the vicious habits which moralists deplore4 ,footnote #cd3 ,even cannibalism--such is the complexity of the human character--is not always directly demoralising4 ,this unnatural practice1 says ,captain ,burrows in his ,land of the ,pigmies1 #ahii1 stands by itself1 seeming not in any way to affect or retard the development of the better emotions4 ,the deepest1 truest1 and most general causes of prostitution in all great cities1 says ,dr4 ,kingsford1 must be looked for in the luxurious and intemperate habits of eating and drinking prevalent among the rich and well-to-do4 ,the chief element of this luxury is the use of flesh and alcohol1 which mistaken notions of hygiene and therapeutics tend to press more and more upon all classes of men and women4 ,abolish kreophagy and its companion vice1 alcoholism1 and more1 a thousandfold1 will be done to abolish prostitution than can be achieved by any other means soever as long as these two evil influences flourish4 ,the young man of the present day1 accustomed from childhood to frequent and copious meals of flesh1 and from early youth to the use of all manner of fermented beverages and liqueurs1 carries about with him and fosters an increasingly disordered appetite1 which not infrequently assumes the character of true disease4#ce ,footnote #ce3 ,the ,perfect ,way in ,diet4 ,the evils of stimulating diet in the case of the young have been emphasized by such well-known authorities as ,dr4 ,george ,keith and ,sir ,b4 ,w4 ,richardson4 ,here is a significant passage from the writings of the former3 ,i have done much for many years privately1 whenever ,i had the opportunity1 to impress on fathers and mothers the danger to their sons and daughters from exciting prematurely their natural desires and passions2 but custom and fashion have so powerful a hold1 especially in the higher circles of society1 that ,i have frequently had to feel that my efforts were in vain4444 ,the existence of bad habits at schools is well known to the masters1 and they take what measures they can for their prevention4 ,even when they know the truth1 the strength of custom and habit so imperatively demands a full diet for the growing youth that they are obliged to fall in with the customs of the day4 ,but few of them are aware of the main cause of the evil1 and the last thing most would dream of as a remedy is a simpler diet4#cf ,footnote #cf3 ,fads of an ,old ,physician1 chap4 xiv4 ,so1 too1 ,sir ,b4 ,w4 ,richardson3 ,in all my long medical career1 extending over forty years1 ,i have rarely known a case in which a child has not preferred fruit to animal food4 ,i say it without the least prejudice1 as a lesson learnt from simple experience1 that the most natural diet for the young1 after the natural milk diet1 is fruit and wholemeal bread1 with milk and water for drink4 ,the desire for this same mode of sustenance is often continued into after years1 as if the resort to flesh were a forced and artificial feeding1 which required long and persistent habit to establish its permanency as a part of the system of every-day life4#cg ,footnote #cg3 ,foods for ,man4 ,contrast with this wise and weighty advice the dietetic habits actually prevalent among the youth of our well-to-do classes1 where we see not only a strong tendency to over-eating1 but a rooted and active conviction that flesh is the summum bonum of food4 ,the fatted calf is rivalled by the fatted schoolboy2 the cramming of ,strasburg geese itself is not more disgusting than the cramming which makes pt de foie gras of the moral fibre of the young4 ,when we find even the ,eton ,college ,chronicle raising a protest against the diet of boyish athletes1 we may be sure the evil is a crying one3 ,he the boy in training takes a lot of exercise1 and finds he has a good appetite4 ,for breakfast he has a chop every morning2 we have known some who had two4 ,he also has heard porridge is nourishing1 and that this is why ,scotchmen are so hardy and brawny4 ,he acts upon this information4 ,for dinner he makes a point of having two good helpings of meat 'to get his weight up1' while for tea1 besides having a plate of eggs and chicken1 or something of that kind1 he winds up with a large allowance of marmalade4 ,nor is it only among schoolboys that over-eating is rampant1 for the tables of the wealthy are everywhere loaded with flesh meat1 and the example thus set is naturally followed1 first in the servants' hall1 and then1 as far as may be1 in the homes of the working classes4 ,to consume much flesh is regarded as the sign and symbol of well-being--witness the popular ,english manner of keeping the festival of ,christmas4 ,we interknit ourselves with every part of the ,english-speaking world1 said the journal of the ,cosme colony1 in ,paraguay1 describing a ,christmas celebration1 by the most sacred ceremony of over-eating4 ,a nice moral bond of union1 truly1 between colonies and motherland6 ,what is likely to be the effect on the national character of such patriotic gorging8 ,we come back1 then1 to the point that though it is not absolutely true that man is what he eats1 there is1 nevertheless1 a large element of truth in the saying1 and the vegetarian has just ground for suspecting that beefy meals are not infrequently the precursors of beefy morals4 ,carnalities of one kind are apt to lead to carnalities of another1 and fleshly modes of diet to fleshly modes of thought4 ,good living1 unfortunately1 is a somewhat equivocal term4 ,,the ,,economic ,,argument ,the oftener we go to the vegetable world for our food1 says ,sir ,b4 ,w4 ,richardson1 the oftener we go to the first1 and therefore the cheapest source of supply4 ,the case for vegetarianism would by no means be complete without a statement of the economic view1 though precedence is necessarily given to the motives of humanity and healthfulness1 the higher considerations to which the idea of economy must be subservient4 ,if it were proved that flesh food is essential to the real interests of the race1 and that there is no moral objection to the use of it1 the greater outlay would be justified by the value of the result2 but if such proof is not forthcoming 7and it has been the object of the preceding chapters to show that it is not71 it is obvious that the comparative cost of a flesh diet and a vegetarian diet becomes a question of high importance to mankind4 ,what1 then1 are the facts8 ,they are so plain as to be positively beyond dispute1 and it is a cause for marvel what ,dr4 ,j4 ,burney ,yeo can have meant in describing vegetarianism as a scheme of diet which we believe to be utterly impracticable on an extensive scale1 and irreconcilable with the existing state of civilised man1 not so much on strictly physiological grounds as on general economical considerations4#ch ,if it be in accordance with general economical considerations to pay threepence for what can be procured for a penny1 then only does ,dr4 ,yeo's statement become intelligible4 ,footnote #ch3 ,food in ,health and ,disease4 ,for the very first fact that demands notice in this comparison of foods1 is that not only does butchers' meat1 pound for pound1 cost about three times the price of the cereals and pulses1 but that it is under the further disadvantage of containing a much larger percentage of water--that is to say1 in purchasing flesh1 you have to buy the water1 and buy it dirty1 while in purchasing seeds and grains you do not buy the water1 but add it clean4 ,the following passage from ,sir ,b4 ,w4 ,richardson's ,foods for ,man puts the case succinctly3 ,if we make an analysis of the primest joints of animal food1 legs of mutton1 sirloin of beef1 rump steak1 veal cutlet1 pork chop1 we find as much as #gj to #ge per cent4 of water4444 ,oatmeal contains #e or #f per cent42 good wheaten flour1 barley meal1 beans and peas1 #ad2 rice1 #ae2 and good bread1 #dj to #de of water4 ,taking1 then1 the value of foods as estimated by their solid value1 there are1 it will be observed1 a great many kinds of vegetable foods which are incomparably superior to animal4 ,we find accordingly1 when we turn from this analysis to the actual charges at restaurants1 that1 whereas a good vegetarian dinner may be got for a shilling1 it is necessary to pay fully three times that sum for an equivalent in flesh food4 ,it would be waste of time to argue further that vegetarianism1 whatever its other advantages and disadvantages to the individual1 is much more economical than flesh-eating4#ci ,footnote #ci3 ,see the chapter on ,values of ,foods1 pp4 #ic1 #id1 in ,strength and ,diet1 by the ,hon4 ,r4 ,russell4 ,but here we are met by the difficulty that the well-to-do1 on the one hand1 are not easily influenced by the motive of economy1 while the poor1 on the other hand1 are naturally suspicious of the gospel of thrift1 so often preached to them by the predatory classes who do not practise it themselves2 and it must be admitted that it is perfectly useless for philanthropical persons to preach food-thrift to the poor1 unless by their own method of living they are testifying to the truth of what they preach4 ,it is sometimes said that vegetarianism is an inconvenient diet1 which means no more than that the adoption of any new system gives trouble at first1 though it may save trouble afterwards4 ,when once adopted1 vegetarianism is1 of course1 a far more convenient1 because a simpler and cleaner diet than the ordinary one1 as is testified by those who have had personal experience of both4 ,having been my own butcher and scullion1 says ,thoreau1 as well as the gentleman from whom the dishes were served up1 ,i can speak from an unusually complete experience4 ,the practical objection to animal food in my case was its uncleanness1 and besides1 when ,i had caught and cleaned and cooked and eaten my fish1 they seemed not to have fed me essentially4 ,it was insignificant and unnecessary1 and cost more than it came to4 ,a little bread or a few potatoes would have done as well1 with less trouble and filth4#dj ,footnote #dj3 ,walden1 ,higher ,laws4 ,the assertion that the cheapening of food would cause the lowering of wages is true only as an answer to the exaggerated claims sometimes made by vegetarians1 that their system would of itself solve the whole problem of employment4 ,it would not do so2 and if there were no force but vegetarianism in the field it is doubtful whether the adoption of the cheaper diet would in the long run bring any economical advantage to the workers1 though it would still benefit them morally and physically4 ,this1 however1 does not detract from the real strength of the vegetarian argument2 for with labour now organised and resolute1 and yearly growing in power and intelligence1 there is no likelihood that the workers' thrift would become the capitalists' profit2 on the contrary1 it would clearly add to the resources of labour4 ,to assert that the working classes should maintain the cruel and wasteful practice of flesh-eating merely to keep up wages is pure nonsense1 for the same reasoning would justify the maintenance of drink1 or any other extravagant and useless habit4 ,what is true for the individual and the class is true also for the community1 and unless flesh food can be shown to be necessary for human progress1 the continuance of pastoralism1 to the detriment and neglect of agriculture1 is a criminal waste of the national resources4 ,in this ,malthusian age of over-population scares and emigration schemes it is well to recollect that a remedy lies close to hand if we would but use it4 ,not only is the earth not yet a quarter peopled1 says ,mr4 ,w4 ,r4 ,greg1 but even the inhabited portion is scarcely yet a quarter cultivated4 ,in many countries the soil is barely scratched4 ,even in ,england it is not made to yield1 on the average1 more than one-half its capacity4#da ,and in the same work he points out that the amount of human life sustainable on a given area1 and therefore throughout the chief portion of the habitable globe1 may be almost indefinitely increased by a substitution pro tanto of vegetable for animal food4444 ,a given acreage of wheat will feed at least ten times as many men as the same acreage employed in growing mutton4 ,footnote #da3 ,appendix to ,enigmas of ,life4 ,in view of the great complexity of the land question1 the variety of the causes that have led to the depression of agriculture1 and the difficulty of forecasting accurately what would be the result of the adoption of any particular reform by any one nation1 considered apart from the rest1 vegetarians will do wisely in not claiming too much for the system they advocate4 ,but at least it must be admitted that vegetarianism would tend to bring about1 in some form or other1 that much-desired return to the land1 which1 in the present congested state of our cities and busy centres1 is felt to be the best hope of stanching a dangerous wound4 ,the town is at present draining the life of the country1 and the tide of emigration is still further sapping the national strength2 but if men's thoughts could be turned back from commerce to agriculture1 if a healthy love of the soil1 of fruit-growing1 of market-gardening1 could be substituted for the insane thirst for the feverish atmosphere of the town1 it is evident that a great step would have been taken towards the cure of the disease4 ,if the towns renounced flesh-eating1 says ,professor ,newman1 we should see in a single generation1 even without improved land-tenure1 a tide of migration set the other way--from towns into the country4 ,rustic industry would be immensely developed4 ,all motive for the expatriation of our robustest youth would1 for a long time yet1 be removed1 and the country might be enormously enriched1 not in an upper stratum of great fortunes1 but down to the bottom of the community4#db ,footnote #db3 ,essays on ,diet1 p4 #ee4 ,so1 too1 ,max ,nordau1 in some notable passages of his ,conventional ,lies of our ,civilisation3 ,if the soil of ,europe were cultivated like that of ,belgium1 it could support a population of #a1iej millions much more completely and abundantly than the #cfj millions it now supports so poorly4444 ,cultivation of the soil is the despised child of our civilisation4 ,it hardly takes one forward stride where manufacture takes a hundred4444 ,experience teaches us that man's labour as a general thing can nowhere be employed in a more lucrative way than in agriculture4 ,if a man should work over his field with the shovel and spade instead of the plough1 he would find that a plot of ground of incredibly small size would be sufficient to support him4 ,there is yet another peril that would be lessened in proportion to the increase of vegetarianism--the dependence of this country on the importation of food from abroad4 ,at present1 says ,mr4 ,w4 ,e4 ,a4 ,axon1 probably one-half of the population is dependent upon a foreign supply4 ,that ,england should be1 and is1 the last country in the world to desire a ,chinese wall for the exclusion of foreign commodities1 need not blind us to the fact that there may be grave national dangers in the soil of the country providing food for about half its people4 ,a nation of vegetarians would create such a demand that rural ,england would be1 if not a cornfield1 yet a vast orchard and market-garden4#dc ,footnote #dc3 ,manchester ,vegetarian ,lectures1 ,vegetarianism and ,national ,economy4 ,for a clear statement of the present shocking neglect of agriculture in this country1 see ,fields1 ,factories1 and ,workshops1 by ,p4 ,kropotkin1 #ahii1 where it is shown that two-thirds of our food-supply is now imported from abroad4 ,enough has now been said to show that the habit of flesh-eating1 involving as it does the sacrifice of vast tracts of land to the grazing of cattle1 and the consequent starving of agriculture1 is far too costly to be justified1 in the face of an extending civilisation1 unless by a much clearer proof of its necessity than any which its advocates have essayed2 in fact1 it only remains possible1 on its present large scale1 through the temporary use of huge pasture-grounds in remote semi-civilised regions which will not always be available4 ,for pastoralism belongs rightly to another and earlier phase of the world's economics1 and as civilisation spreads it becomes more and more an anachronism1 as surely as flesh-eating1 by a corresponding change1 becomes an anachronism in morals4#dd ,it seems1 generally speaking1 that the foods which are the costliest in suffering are also the costliest in price1 whereas the wholesome and harmless diet to which ,nature points us is at once the cheapest and most humane4 ,footnote #dd3 ,against the sea fisheries1 it may be noted1 the same objection cannot be raised1 as they do not diminish1 but supplement the produce of the soil4 ,,doubts ,,and ,,difficulties ,we have next to deal with a special class of irregular foemen1 the guerillas and ,bashi-,bazouks of the flesh-eater's army1 whose game it is to waylay and harass the vegetarian movement by a small fire of doubts and difficulties as to what the future has in store4 ,the alarmists they are1 whose apprehensive minds are concerned not so much with the rightness or wrongness of the system1 as with the anxieties of what would happen if the triumph of vegetarianism should be won2 and so gloomy are their forebodings as to suggest a probable collapse of the whole fabric of society1 if once that great prop and mainstay of civilisation--the habit of eating dead animals--should be disloyally undermined4 ,now1 at the outset1 it should be said that the well-worn method of trying to discredit new principles by wanting to know beforehand exactly how everything will happen1 is in many cases a foolish and fraudulent device4 ,there are1 of course1 certain quite legitimate questions1 as to the general scope and practicability of any proposed reform1 to which reformers must be prepared to make answer before they can expect to prevail1 and to such questions vegetarians have a convincing reply2 but when the inquisition takes the form of asking for a present explanation of future developments1 and for a foreknowledge of details which1 in the very nature of things1 are unknowable1 then it is well to make it clear from the beginning that we will be no parties to any such waste of time4 ,reasonable foresight is one thing1 the gift of prophecy is another2 and it is in no wise the duty of those who are working towards a more or less distant goal1 to give a precise geometrical survey of their ,promised ,land4 ,in the case of vegetarianism the answerable doubts and difficulties fall mostly under two heads1 relating first to the alarming discomforts which the loss of flesh-food would entail upon mankind1 and secondly to the not less grievous straits to which the animals themselves would be reduced under so misguided a rgime4 ,let us take the selfish view first1 as containing1 perhaps1 a modicum of real feeling1 which can scarcely be found in that suspicious concern for the animals4 ,there are some folk1 it seems1 over whose troubled minds there really does hang1 like a nightmare1 the alarmist's vision of a world impoverished and dismantled by vegetarianism--a world sans leather1 sans bone1 sans soap1 sans candles1 sans manure1 sans everything4 ,,alarmist3 ,but this is mere trifling4 ,it is idle to talk of the humanity1 the wholesomeness1 the economy of a vegetarian diet1 while you are overlooking the disastrous consequences that stare you in the face4 ,we may perhaps be able1 as you say1 to exist without meat1 but what could we do without leather and the other animal substances on which civilisation depends8 ,,vegetarian3 ,well1 ,i suppose we should take care not to be without them1 or something just as good4 ,,alarmist3 ,how could we do that1 if there were no carcases to supply us with hides1 bone1 and tallow8 ,in your devotion to an ideal you seem to forget that if your principles prevailed1 we might wake up some fine morning to find ourselves confronted by the dislocation of the boot trade1 the bookbinding trade1 the harness trade1 and a hundred others4 ,thousands of men and women would be thrown out of work1 and we should soon have no boots1 no portmanteaus1 no soap1 no candles1 no knife-handles4 ,it would be a downright relapse into barbarism4 ,,vegetarian3 ,but1 happily1 your lurid picture is based on the false assumption that vegetarianism would come about by a sudden and instantaneous conversion4 ,that is not the way in which great changes are accomplished4 ,they are a matter of years and centuries1 not of days and weeks2 and the fine morning you spoke of will be a gradual morning of very extensive duration4 ,,alarmist3 ,well1 but that is only putting off the evil day--it would come at last4 ,,vegetarian3 ,but would not something else have also been coming meantime8 ,would not the demand1 in this as in all other usages of life1 have produced the corresponding supply8 ,there is no need1 however1 to speculate as to what would happen1 because it is happening already4 ,,alarmist3 ,what is happening8 ,,vegetarian3 ,the articles which you named are being supplied in substitutes from the vegetable kingdom4 ,slowly and tentatively at first1 as is inevitable while vegetarians are so few in numbers2 but vegetarian boots1 vegetarian soap1 and vegetarian candles are now in the market1 and as the movement spreads1 the demand will be proportionately greater4 ,so pray do not alarm yourself about the dislocation of trade1 for the whole change1 great as it is1 will come to pass imperceptibly1 and will never bring a moment's inconvenience to anyone4 ,mankind1 as it happens1 is not so helpless1 so uninventive1 so literally hidebound1 as to let its progress be dependent on skins1 bones1 and guts4 ,there is a good deal of unintended humour1 too1 in some of the difficulties that are alleged4 ,thus1 vegetarians are often asked how the land could be fertilised without the use of animal manure1 it being apparently forgotten that ex nihilo nihil fit1 and that animals can only return to the land in manure what they have previously taken from it in food2 also that by our absurdly wasteful drainage system we are all the time poisoning our seas and rivers with a mass of sewage which would be amply sufficient for the soil4 ,let the land1 says ,mr4 ,william ,hoyle1 only receive1 in the shape of manure1 the sewage and refuse from the teeming population of our towns and villages1 in addition to the other means which are applied to it1 and let it be properly drained and cultivated1 and there is hardly any limit to its power of production4#de ,footnote #de3 ,our ,national ,resources1 #ahhi4 ,but it is superfluous to spend time in answering such questions1 for their silliness is far in excess of their honesty4 ,for years the opponents of vegetarianism in the press had been asking1 ,what should we do without leather8 etc42 yet as soon as the substitutes for these articles began to be exhibited at the annual ,vegetarian ,congress1 the note was changed1 and the reporters remarked that the exhibition was not of much interest1 until we found the ,london correspondent of a big provincial paper actually complaining that the crusade against meat of every kind1 and even against leather 7at this exhibition they have boots and shoes made of imitation leather71 is carrying the reform a little too far4 ,our critics are hard to satisfy4 ,we are going a little too far if we produce a substitute for leather2 if we do not produce one1 we are not going far enough4 ,and now1 with all becoming gravity1 we turn to the second branch of our subject--the disinterested inquiry as to what would become of the animals if we ceased to kill them for food4 ,if the life of animals1 says ,dr4 ,paul ,carus1 had to be regarded as sacred as human life1 there can be no doubt about it that whole industries would be destroyed1 and human civilisation would at once drop down to a very primitive condition4 ,many millions would starve1 and large cities would disappear from the face of the earth4 ,but the brute creation would suffer too4 ,there might be a temporary increase of brute life1 but certainly not of happiness4 ,cattle would only be raised for draught-oxen and milk-kine1 and they would not die the sudden death at the hands of the butcher1 but slowly of old age or by disease4#df ,footnote #df3 ,the ,open ,court1 #ahih4 ,a pathetic picture1 indeed6 ,it does not for a moment occur to this sapient prophet of disaster that the adoption of vegetarianism will necessarily be gradual1 and further that vegetarians do not hold the life of animals to be as sacred as human life4 ,to critics who do not even ascertain what the system means before they reject it1 and who ignore all consideration of the degrees and relative sacredness of the various forms of life1 vegetarianism must naturally seem to be a confused jumble of thought--the confusion1 in reality1 being altogether on their own side4 ,,alarmist3 ,there is another aspect of this question1 and a very grave one4 ,if flesh-eating were abolished1 what would become of the animals8 ,,vegetarian3 ,yes1 let us talk about that fearful contingency4 ,you think they would be thrown out of employment1 so to speak--would find their careers cut short1 or rather left long8 ,,alarmist3 ,it is no joking matter4 ,would they not run wild in ever-increasing numbers1 and perhaps overrun the land1 or1 if food failed them1 lie dead and dying about our roadways and suburbs8 ,,vegetarian3 ,before ,i relieve your anxiety on this point1 may ,i just remark that this second difficulty seems to counterbalance the former one8 ,if every suburban householder is likely to have a dead ox against his garden-gate1 we evidently need not fear the failure of the leather and tallow trade4 ,but once again you are mistaken4 ,you have overlooked the fact that the breeding of animals is not free and unrestricted1 but is kept within certain limits1 and carefully regulated by man2 so that if the demand for butchers' meat should gradually decline1 there would be no more alarming result than a corresponding gradual decline in the supply from the breeder4 ,,alarmist3 ,well1 ,i don't know4 ,i sadly doubt whether things would balance themselves so comfortably4 ,,vegetarian3 ,ah1 you think that some neglected old porker1 like ,scott's ,last ,minstrel1 would be left out in the cold4 ,for1 well-a-day6 their date was fled1 ,his tuneful brethren all were dead2 ,and he1 neglected and oppressed1 ,longed to be with them and at rest4 ,but no2 for look at the case of the donkey4 ,we do not 7knowingly7 eat donkeys1 yet a dead donkey is proverbially a rare sight4 ,nor are we overrun with donkeys--at least1 not in the sense referred to4 ,,alarmist3 ,yet ,i understand that in ,india1 where there is a reluctance to kill animals1 they are often in wretched plight4 ,vegetarian3 ,true2 but we were talking not of killing animals but of eating them4 ,vegetarianism is not ,brahminism2 we would kill when necessary1 whether for our own sake or the animals'1 but we would not breed them in vast numbers in order to kill1 nor kill them in order to eat4 ,surely the distinction is a clear one8 ,the attitude of vegetarians towards this subject is indeed plain enough for those who wish to understand it4 ,regarding the slaughter of animals for food as cruel and unnecessary1 they advocate its discontinuance 7a process which1 if it comes about at all1 will1 as ,i have shown1 be a gradual one1 and will at no point cause any sudden disruption of existing conditions71 but this does not commit them to the absurd belief that animal life1 in all its various grades1 is absolutely sacred and inviolable4 ,must we not suspect that the apologists of flesh-eating who make these childish alarums and excursions are fain to do so from some inner conviction of the weakness of their own case8 ,,bible ,,and ,,beef ,bible and ,beer is the title that is sometimes sarcastically applied to the political alliance between churchmen and publicans2 and in like manner the dietetic alliance between the unco' guid and the butchers may be not inaptly designated as ,bible and ,beef4 ,when all else fails1 the authority of ,holy ,writ is triumphantly cited by the bibliolatrous flesh-eater as the great court of appeal to which the food question must be carried2 and here at least1 it is pleaded1 there can be no doubt as to the verdict4 ,it seems to me1 wrote ,dr4 ,william ,paley1 more than a hundred years ago1 that it would be difficult to defend this right to the flesh of animals by any arguments which the light and order of ,nature afford1 and that we are beholden for it to the permission recorded in ,scripture4#dg ,footnote #dg3 ,moral and ,political ,philosophy4 ,it is a far cry from the theologian of #aghd to the ,meat ,trades' ,journal of to-day1 but from an editorial article we learn that the organ of the butchering trade is animated by the same profound sense of piety4 ,the great ,creator of all flesh1 it says1 gave us the beasts of the field1 not only for our food1 but for other purposes equally as essential to us4 ,the grass must be eaten by our flocks and herds1 otherwise the fertility of the soil would vanish4 ,it was a frightful punishment on the ,egyptian sic ,king that he should be reduced to the level of the beasts of the field and eat grass4#dh ,footnote #dh3 ,november #ai1 #ahib4 ,now1 waiving the fact that grass is not precisely the diet that vegetarians adopt1 and that it is1 therefore1 no reproach to vegetarianism if ,nebuchadnezzar1 not being a ruminant1 found such a regimen distasteful1 we must recognise that there is a widespread idea among religious people that the lower animals were sent us as food1 and that the practice of flesh-eating has the seal of biblical sanction4 ,in meeting this prejudice1 there is a right line and a wrong line of reasoning1 both of which have at different times been followed by vegetarian speakers4 ,the wrong line is to attempt to answer the texts quoted as favourable to flesh-eating by pitting against them other texts as favourable to vegetarianism--a course which not only degrades the ,bible into a text-book for disputants1#di but also surrenders the most sacred claim of the reformed diet--viz41 its appeal not to this or to that textual authority1 which some thinkers accept and others deny1 but to the universal principle of humanity and justice4 ,footnote #di3 ,as in the epigram1 ,hic liber est in quo qurit sua dogmata quisque1 ,invenit et pariter dogmata quisque sua3 which may be freely rendered1 ,this is the ,book1 to dogmatists well-known1 ,where each man dogma seeks1 and finds--his own4 ,the right line is to show1 first1 that it is wholly impossible1 in the face of modern knowledge and evolutional science1 to maintain the old anthropocentric idea which regarded man as the sum and centre of the universe1 a monarch for whose special benefit all else was created2 and1 secondly1 that the ancient ,hebrew scriptures1 whatever be their exact significance for ,christian readers 7a matter with which we are not here concerned71 cannot be regarded as affording any clue to the solution of modern problems which have arisen centuries later4 ,it would be no whit more absurd to argue that negro-slavery is justifiable because it was not condemned in the ,bible than to claim scriptural sanction for the cruelties of butchery because the ,jews were flesh-eaters4 ,and1 indeed1 such arguments have been advanced by religious people in support of slavery2 we read1 for example1 the following in ,john ,woolman's journal3 ,a friend in company began to talk in support of the slave-trade1 and said the negroes were understood to be the offspring of ,cain1 their blackness being the mark which ,god set upon him after he murdered ,abel2 that it was the design of ,providence they should be slaves1 as a condition proper to the race of so wicked a man as ,cain was4 ,but it is now time to introduce the textualist in person4 ,,textualist3 ,well1 sir1 ,i understand that you advocate vegetarianism4 ,what sort of a religion is that8 ,,vegetarian3 ,the real sort--the sort that has to be practised as well as preached4 ,,textualist3 ,if it is the real sort1 the proof is easy4 ,show me the passages in the ,book4 ,,vegetarian3 ,i beg to be excused4 ,i do not bandy texts4 ,,textualist3 ,what8 ,you can produce no verses in support of your religion8 ,i thought vegetarians relied on what they call the ,ten ,best ,texts1 and here ,i stand ready to meet them with five-and-twenty better ones4 ,,vegetarian3 ,i am sorry to disappoint you1 but ,i am not one of the text-quoting vegetarians4 ,i regard all such methods of reasoning as wholly irrelevant4 ,there is not the least doubt that the ,jews were a flesh-eating people2 indeed1 the very idea of vegetarianism 7that is1 a deliberate and permanent disuse of flesh-food for moral and hygienic reasons7 was wholly unknown to them4 ,what1 then1 can be the use of hunting up ,bible-texts which do not refer1 one way or the other1 to the point at issue8 ,,textualist3 ,but if it was unknown and unmentioned in the ,bible1 what hope for vegetarianism8 ,it perishes like all else that is unscriptural4 ,,vegetarian3 ,the same hope as for the abolition of slavery1 or any other humane cause that has had birth in our modern era4 ,we live and learn4 ,,textualist3 ,but it is written1 ,rise1 ,peter1 kill and eat4 ,what is your answer to that8 ,,vegetarian3 ,it needs no answer1 as you will see if you study the context4 ,,textualist3 ,then you have not a single text to set against the injunction with which ,i confront you8 ,,vegetarian3 ,not one--unless it be1 ,answer not a fool according to his folly4 ,to repel texts with texts is a futility to which vegetarians as a body have fortunately not committed themselves1 because vegetarianism appeals1 without reference to religion1 to the common sentiment of humaneness1 and numbers amongst its adherents men of every nationality and creed4 ,if biblical vegetarians have engaged in controversy with biblical flesh-eaters1 that is their own concern2 and we may rest assured that the battle will be a sham one1 as the firing is with blank cartridge on both sides4 ,apart1 however1 from such irrational argument1 there is a sense in which an appeal may be fairly made to the ,bible1 as to any other great ethnical scripture or world-literature--that is1 to the spirit1 as distinguished from the letter1 the context as distinguished from the text4 ,that vegetarians1 preaching and practising a doctrine of love and humaneness1 should quote1 ,behold ,i have given you every herb bearing seed 444 to you it shall be for meat1 as indicating the ideal primitive diet1 and ,they shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain1 as prophetic of the ideal future1 is just and appropriate1 for such passages1 though dealing with poetry rather than fact1 are far more suggestive than any textual evidence2 and when we come to ask what is the spirit of the ,new ,testament towards such instincts as that from which vegetarianism springs--the desire to increase the happiness and lessen the suffering of all sentient life--it is plain that here1 at least1 the vegetarian is on unassailable ground4 ,but the answer to the biblical flesh-eater lies still nearer at hand4 ,for the moment any attempt is made by him to ally the modern religious spirit with the maintenance of the slaughter-house1 the incongruity of his position is revealed4 ,take grace before meat1 for instance1 and note the flat impiety of offering thanks to ,god over the body of a fellow-being that has been cruelly slaughtered for the sake of our pleasures of the table4 ,as ,leigh ,hunt has remarked3 ,it is not creditable to a thinking people that the two things they most thank ,god for should be eating and fighting4 ,we say grace when we are going to cut up lamb and chicken1 and when we have stuffed ourselves with both to an extent that an orang-outang would be ashamed of2 and we offer up our best praises to the ,creator for having blown and sabred his 'images1' our fellow-creatures1 to atoms1 and drenched them in blood and dirt4 ,this is odd4 ,strange that we should keep our most pious transports for the lowest of our appetites and the most melancholy of our necessities2 that we should never be wrought up into paroxysms of holy gratitude1 but for bubble-and-squeak or a good-sized massacre6 ,but why1 it may be asked1 if the practice of flesh-eating is such as it is here described1 do religious people acquiesce in it8 ,why indeed6 except that1 in these personal matters of every-day life1 the religionism of to-day1 like the stoicism of old1 has a tendency to respect the letter1 but disregard the spirit of its principles4 ,the complaint which modern vegetarianism brings against the religious flesh-eaters is that which the humaner philosophy made1 centuries ago1 against the carnivorous stoics3 ,who is this censor who is so loud against the indulgence of the body and the luxuries of the kitchen8 ,why do they denounce pleasure as effeminate indulgence1 and make so much fuss about it all8 ,surely it had been more logical if1 while banishing from the table sweet-meats and perfumes1 they had exhibited yet more indignation against the diet of blood6 ,for as though all their philosophy merely regarded household accounts1 they are simply interested in cutting down dinner expenses1 so far as concerns the superfluous dainties of the table4 ,they have no idea of deprecating what is murderous and cruel4#ej ,footnote #ej3 ,plutarch1 ,on ,flesh-,eating1 quoted in ,the ,ethics of ,diet1 by ,howard ,williams4 ,and so is it nowadays with the champions of ,bible and ,beef1 for1 like all formalists1 they sacrifice the substance of religion to the shadow1 and while for ever quoting the sacred names of justice and loving-kindness1 not only oppose those principles when in conflict with their own appetites1 but actually base their opposition on the authority of their scripture4 ,it would be impossible to do the ,bible a deadlier wrong than this2 for whether it be inspired or not1 it is by universal consent a great literary monument1 and those who profess to reverence it most should be the last to wish to utilise it as a handbook for reactionists--a store from which to draw irrelevant quotations for obstructing the progress of reform4 ,,the ,,flesh-,,eater',s ,,kith ,,and ,,kin ,there is nothing so pleasant as the reunion of long-separated kinsfolk1 and it is the cheerful duty of this chapter to exhibit the flesh-eater in what may be called his domestic relationship1 to wit1 his undoubted1 but somewhat forgotten1 connection with the cannibal and the blood-sportsman4 ,for1 disguise it as he may1 he cannot altogether escape the fact that this kinship is a real one4 ,kreophagist and anthropophagist1 butcher and amateur butcher1 are but different branches of one and the same great predatory stock4 ,the cannibal and the sportsman are the wicked uncles of the pious flesh-eater1 unrespectable descendants from a common ancestry1 who have failed to adapt themselves to modern requirements1 and1 like belated ,royalists in a ,commonweal1 have continued to play the old privileged game when its date is over-past1 an indiscretion which has caused them--the cannibal especially--to be ignored as much as possible by their more cautious relatives4 ,we are all familiar with that chapter of ,the ,egoist 7the ,minor ,incident showing an ,hereditary ,aptitude in the ,use of the ,knife71 in which the youthful ,sir ,willoughby ,patterne1 already an adept at cutting1 is not at home to his poor relation1 the middle-aged unpresentable lieutenant of marines4 ,considerateness dismisses him on the spot without parley4 ,even such is the attitude of the respectable flesh-eater towards the bloodthirsty cannibal1 and in a less extent also towards the devotee of murderous sport4 ,but to the student of the food question these antique types have no little interest1 as a survival from an earlier and more innocent phase of flesh-eating when the old brutality was as yet untempered by the new spirit of humaneness4 ,they exhibit kreophagy in its extreme logical form--an anachronism1 no doubt1 and a reductio ad absurdum in the present age--but at least logical1 and1 therefore1 not to be overlooked by those who1 in their hostility to food reform1 are so fond of appealing to logic4 ,the sportsman1 for instance1 is an old-world barbarian born into a civilised era1 a representative of the age when flesh-food could only be obtained by the chase1 and he is candid enough to avow that he does his killing1 not like the butcher1 in order to earn a livelihood1 but for the brutal reason that he enjoys it4 ,the instincts of the primeval man1 it has been well said1 food-hunting1 predatory1 self-preserving1 re-emerge in the modern3 moral sanctions are disregarded1 the rights of inferior races are forgotten1 and the hunter feels himself1 figuratively speaking1 naked1 savage1 bloodthirsty1 and unashamed4#ea ,a butcher he certainly is1 but an amateur butcher only1 for it can hardly be contended that the preserving of game increases the national food-supply1 in view of the fact that pheasants1 hares1 and even rabbits1 are sold at a price far below their actual cost of production1 and are thus a direct tax on the public resources4 ,the blood-sportsman1 then1 is a member of the carnivorous family by another line of descent1 which has kept a touch of the rank primitive wildness even to the present day2 and this one thing alone can be said in his favour1 that when he butchers in sport1 he at least does the butchery himself1 and does not delegate the filthy task to others4 ,he is his own slaughterman--a mere and simple savage4 ,footnote #ea3 ,robert ,buchanan4 ,preface to ,j4 ,connell's ,the ,truth about the ,game ,laws4 ,cannibalism1 again1 is simply flesh-eating1 free from those sentimental restrictions which ,sir ,henry ,thompson and his fellow scientists deplore1 and the cannibal's only fault1 judged from the scientist's standpoint1 is that he carries out the scientific doctrine not wisely but too well4 ,for this reason every lecture on vegetarianism ought to touch on cannibalism as illustrating a past chapter in the great history of diet--a past chapter as regards the leading and so-called civilised nations1 but to this day a present and very instructive chapter in the world's remoter regions1 from which we may learn certain lessons as to the feelings1 arguments1 and fallacies that attend the gradual process of transition from one dietetic habit to another4 ,the flesh-eater generally affects to look on cannibalism as something monstrous and abnormal1 a dreadful perversion of taste which has no connection with the civilised meat-diet on which our welfare is supposed to depend2 but the real facts show that the truth is quite otherwise1 and that the position of the cannibal who is being proselytised to give up his man-eating is in many ways analogous to that of the flesh-eater who is worried by the vegetarian propagandists4 ,the glories of the old ,english roast beef may be instructively compared with the glories of the old ,african roast man4 ,it is amusing to observe that the kreophagist who1 on the one side1 regards abstinence from flesh food as an absurd delusion is equally confident that cannibalism1 on the other side1 is an unpardonable infamy1 forgetting that many of the excuses that are made for flesh-eating might be made with as much justice for cannibalism also4 ,prejudice is strange1 says ,professor ,flinders ,petrie4 ,a large part of mankind are cannibals1 and still more1 perhaps all1 have been so1 including our own forefathers1 for ,jerome describes the ,atticotti1 a ,british tribe1 as preferring human flesh to that of cattle4444 ,does the utilitarian object8 ,yet one main purpose of the custom is utility2 in its best and innocent forms it certainly gives the greatest happiness to the greatest number4#eb ,nor can it be held that all cannibals are a specially degraded race1 for ,livingstone and later travellers quote well-authenticated instances to show that tribes addicted to man-eating are sometimes more advanced1 mentally and physically1 than those which abstain from such diet2 and as to the hygienic merits of the regimen1 does it not stand on record1 in an old ,english ballad1 that ,richard ,cur de ,lion was cured of a dangerous malady by eating a ,turk's head1 which was served up to him as the best substitute for pork8 ,the kreophagist at present is able to pass unlimited censure on the cannibal1 because the poor savage has not the wit to argue with the civilised man2 but if1 in these days of ,university ,extension schemes1 such a person as a scientific anthropophagist should ever make his appearance1 who can say that the position might not be somewhat reversed8 ,footnote #eb3 ,for interesting facts concerning cannibalism1 see ,professor ,w4 ,m4 ,flinders ,petrie's article1 ,contemporary ,review1 ,june #ahig2 ,the ,fall of the ,congo ,arabs1 by ,captain ,sidney ,l4 ,hinde1 #ahig2 and ,the ,land of the ,pigmies1 by ,captain ,guy ,burrows1 #ahii4 ,,vegetarian3 ,let me introduce you1 gentlemen4 ,you are blood-relations1 ,i think1 and should have much to say to each other4 ,the ,kreophagist--the ,anthropophagist4 ,,kreophagist3 ,good morning1 uncle4 ,but ,i cannot admit the relationship if it is true that you are addicted to the atrocious habit of cannibalism4 ,,anthropophagist3 ,how atrocious1 nephew8 ,if you eat one kind of flesh1 why should you abstain from another8 ,are you aware that they are chemically identical8 ,pig or long pig--where is the difference8 ,,kreophagist3 ,where is the difference8 ,can you ask me such a question8 ,,vegetarian3 ,it is uncommonly like the question you have been asking me6 ,,anthropophagist3 ,your objection to human flesh is altogether a sentimental one4 ,you are a food faddist4 ,it is the universal law of nature that animals should prey on one another4 ,,kreophagist3 ,it is not my nature to eat my fellow-beings4 ,,vegetarian3 ,why1 that is the very same answer that ,i made to you6 ,,anthropophagist3 ,and pray1 what would become of our paupers1 criminals1 lunatics1 and sick folk1 if we did not eat them8 ,would they not grow to a great residuum and overrun the land8 ,and the missionaries1 too--are they not sent us as food8 ,and what right have you to the name omnivorous1 if you restrict your diet in this way8 ,why omnivorous8 ,the discontinuance of cannibalism marks1 of course1 an immense step in humane progress1 and so long as the kreophagist does not absurdly claim that it is a final step1 his case against the anthropophagist is a sure one2 but if1 while denouncing anthropophagy as a barbarism of the past1 he refuses to see that flesh-eating must also1 in turn1 be replaced by a more humane diet1 he lays himself open to a raking fire of criticism4 ,observe1 for example1 in view of the historical facts of cannibalism1 the absolute helplessness of ,sir ,henry ,thompson's position1 when1 as an objection to vegetarianism1 he argues that the very idea of restricting our resources and supplies is a step backwards1 a distinct reversion to the rude and distant savagery of the past1 a sign of decadence rather than of advance4 ,it is true that mankind has1 on the whole1 largely extended its resources2 but it is none the less true that1 while it has acquired many new foods1 it has abandoned certain old ones4 ,it has advanced1 in short1 as already stated1 by a process not of omnivorism1 but of eclecticism1 which implies not only acceptance1 but rejection--a fact which knocks ,sir ,henry ,thompson's reasoning to atoms4 ,the power which has condemned cannibalism is that growing instinct of humaneness which makes it impossible for men to prey on their fellow-beings when once recognised as such4 ,a notable passage in one of ,olive ,schreiner's works may be quoted in illustration3 ,in those days1 which men reck not of now1 man1 when he hungered1 fed on the flesh of his fellow-man and found it sweet4 ,yet even in those days it came to pass that there was one whose head was higher than her fellows and her thought keener1 and as she picked the flesh from a human skull she pondered4 ,and so it came to pass that the next night1 when men were gathered round the fire ready to eat1 she stole away1 and when they went to the tree where the victim was bound1 they found him gone4 ,and they cried one to another1 ',she1 only she1 has done this1 who has always said1 ,i like not the taste of man-flesh2 men are too like me3 ,i cannot eat them4' ,into the heads of certain men and women a new thought had taken root2 they said1 ',there is something evil in the taste of human flesh4' ,and ever after1 when the flesh-pots were filled with man-flesh1 these stood aside1 and half the tribe ate human flesh and half not2 then1 as the years passed1 none ate4#ec ,footnote #ec3 ,trooper ,peter ,halket4 ,a strange comment this on the ,andrew ,wilson formula1 that we should eat that which is likest to our own composition6 ,for what if we have begun to recognise that the lower animals also are related to us by a close bond of kinship8 ,from our knowledge of the past we form our judgment of the future1 and see1 with ,thoreau1 that it is part of the destiny of the human race1 in its gradual improvement1 to leave off eating animals1 as surely as the savage tribes left off eating each other when they came in contact with the more civilised4#ed ,footnote #ed3 ,walden1 ,higher ,laws4 ,,vegetarianism ,,as ,,related ,,to ,,other ,,reforms ,it is sometimes held by the champions of vegetarianism that reform of diet is the starting-point and foundation-stone of all other reform--a panacea for the ills and maladies of the world4 ,this over-estimate on the part of a few enthusiasts of an unpopular cause is due1 presumably1 to a revolt from the contrary extreme of depreciation2 for a little thought must show us that1 in the complexity of modern life1 there is no such thing as a panacea for social ailments1 and that1 as there is no royal road to knowledge1 so there is no royal road to reform4 ,it is impossible for vegetarianism to solve the social question1 unless by alliance with various other reforms that are advancing pari passu--so interlocked and interdependent are all these struggles towards freedom4 ,it has been well said that1 ,by humanitarians1 socialists1 vegetarians1 anti-vivisectionists1 teetotalers1 land-reformers1 and all such seekers of human welfare1 this must be borne in mind--that each of their particular efforts is but a detail of the whole work of social regeneration1 and that we cannot rightly understand and direct our own little piece of effort unless we know it1 and pursue it1 as part of the great whole4#ee ,footnote #ee3 ,the ,new ,charter1 ,the ,humanitarian ,view4 ,still more mistaken1 on the other hand1 is that common prejudice against food reform which would exclude it altogether from the dignity of propagandism1 and would limit it to the personal practice of individuals4 ,there can be no objection1 says ,dr4 ,burney ,yeo1 to individuals adopting any kind of diet which they may find answer their needs and minister to their comfort2 it is only when they attempt to enforce what they practise on others that they must expect to encounter rational opposition4#ef ,unfortunately1 we have learnt by bitter experience that rational opposition is the last thing we can expect to encounter--as1 indeed1 is made sufficiently evident by ,dr4 ,yeo's argument4 ,for how could individual vegetarians have ever heard of the new diet except for the propaganda8 ,and why have vegetarians1 as a body1 less right than teetotalers1 socialists1 or any other propagandists1 not to enforce1 but to advocate their philosophy of diet with the view of ultimately influencing public opinion8 ,this professional attempt to class vegetarianism as an idiosyncrasy1 and not a system1 is as irrational as it is insincere1 and what its insincerity is may be seen from the fact that1 though we are told at one moment that there can be no objection to individual practice of the diet1 yet whenever individuals do attempt to practise it1 they meet with the strongest possible objection from the doctors themselves6 ,footnote #ef3 ,foods in ,health and ,disease4 ,thus it comes about that in this progressive age1 and even among those who label themselves progressives1 vegetarianism is so frequently regarded as a mere whim and crotchet1 with no practical bearing on the forward movement of to-day4 ,it is a marvel that so many advanced journals1 which have a good word for a host of worthy causes that are fighting an uphill battle against monopoly and injustice--social reform1 land reform1 law reform1 prison reform1 hospital reform1 and a hundred more--are dumb as death1 or speak only to sneer1 when the subject is food reform2 and thus lead their readers to suppose that1 whereas on all other matters there has been a great change of feeling during the past half-century1 on the one matter of diet there has been no sort of progress6 ,yet they might easily learn1 if they made serious inquiry1 that the reformed dietetics1 so far from being the outcome of mere sentiment about animals1 have a past record based as surely on moral and scientific reasoning as that of any cause included in the progressive programme4 ,vegetarianism is1 in truth1 progressiveness in diet2 and for a progressive to scout such ideas as valueless and ,utopian is to play the part 7as far as diet is concerned7 of a reactionist4 ,what is the meaning of this strange discrepancy8 ,it must mean1 we fear1 that to a large number of our social reformers the reform of other persons is a much more congenial battle cry than the reform of one's self4 ,hinc ill lacrym4 ,they call vegetarianism impracticable for the strange reason that1 unlike most isms1 it asks them to do something individually which they know they could do--if they wished6 ,it is impracticable because it does not suit them to practise it4 ,,reformer3 ,let me entreat you2 give up this fanciful scheme of vegetarianism and come and work for social reform4 ,,vegetarian3 ,social reform without food reform6 ,is not that rather a lame and lop-sided business8 ,,reformer3 ,not at all4 ,when we have so many things to do we must do the most important ones first4 ,,vegetarian3 ,and what are the most important8 ,,reformer3 ,well1 there is international peace and arbitration4 ,you will admit that our first duty is to avoid unnecessary bloodshed4 ,,vegetarian3 ,ah1 ,i see6 ,and the habit of living by bloodshed doesn't come within your scope6 ,,reformer3 ,then there is the land question1 and the need of relieving the congestion of our crowded cities by the revival of agriculture4 ,,vegetarian3 ,so1 of course1 you can't attend to a diet-system which would bring people back to the land6 ,,reformer3 ,there is also the temperance problem--the terrible evils of the drink crave4 ,,vegetarian3 ,which would disappear for the most part if we left off eating flesh4 ,,reformer3 ,and the welfare of animals--for to that also ,i devote myself4 ,we need some stringent legislation for the better prevention of cruelty4 ,,vegetarian3 ,we do4 ,but as such legislation would leave your reformers dinnerless1 don't you think you should revise your dietary meantime8 ,your reforms are excellent1 ,i grant you2 but what of self-reform8 ,does not reform1 like charity1 begin at home8 ,,reformer3 ,well1 well2 to everyone his taste--reform or self-reform4 ,i prefer the former2 you the latter1 ,i suppose4 ,,vegetarian3 ,no2 that is just where you are mistaken4 ,i prefer both at once4 ,reform and self-reform1 not reform or self-reform--that is the true key to the solution of the social question4 ,the work that we can do ourselves is the most wholesome condiment for the work that we can only do through society4 ,and here let me express the hope that1 as a matter of policy1 vegetarians will stand aloof from all philanthropic schemes of vicarious food reform in prisons1 reformatories1 and workhouses2 for there is no surer way of making a principle unpopular than by forcing it on the poor and helpless1 while carefully avoiding it one's self4 ,philanthropists1 if they be philanthropists1 will practise what they preach2 by their practice we shall know them4 ,to the so-called ethical1 no less than to the political1 school of thought the question of vegetarianism is unwelcome1 obtruding as it does on the polite wordiness of learned discussion with an issue so coarsely downright3 ,you are a member of an ethical society--do you live by butchery8 ,but the ethics of diet are the very last subject with which a cultured ethical society would concern itself1 and the attitude of the modern ethicist towards the rights of animals is still that of the medieval schoolman4 ,the ethicist does not wish to forego his beef and mutton1 so he frames his ethics to avoid the danger of such mishap1 and while he talks of high themes with the serene wisdom of a philosopher the slaughter-houses continue to run blood4 ,we surmise that the royal founder and archetype of ethical societies was that learned but futile monarch referred to in the epitaph3 ,here lies our mutton-loving king1 ,whose word no man relies on3 ,he never said a foolish thing1 ,and never did a wise one4 ,so1 too1 throughout the whole field of hygiene1 temperance1 and plain living1 to ignore vegetarianism is to ignore one of the most potent influences for self-restraint4 ,one is reluctant to quote the late ,sir ,henry ,thompson in any matter that tends to the praise of vegetarianism1 in view of the extreme irritability which that distinguished scientist exhibited as regards his sacred text1 with which you could never take the liberty of assuming that1 when it distinctly said one thing1 it did not mean the opposite2 yet he did say that a proportion amounting at least to more than one-half of the disease which embitters the middle and latter part of life1 among the middle and upper classes of the population1 is due to avoidable errors in diet4#eg ,if this be so1 it is obvious that diet reform 7of some sort7 is very urgently needed2 and ,i submit that it would be difficult to frame any intelligible scheme of diet reform in which vegetarian principles should play no part1 embracing1 as they do1 all the best features of temperance and frugality4 ,what is the use of for ever preaching about the avoidance of luxuries and stimulants1 if you rule out of your system the one dietary which makes stimulants and luxuries impossible8 ,the relation of vegetarianism to temperance1 of the food question to the drink question1 is that of the greater which includes the less4 ,footnote #eg3 ,nineteenth ,century1 ,may1 #ahhe4 ,but it is when we turn from philanthropy to zoophily1 and to the questions more particularly affecting the welfare of animals1 that the importance of vegetarianism1 in spite of the stubborn attempts of the old-fashioned animal lovers to overlook it1 is most marked4 ,here1 again1 ,i do not share the extreme vegetarian view that food reform is the foundation of other reforms1 for ,i think it can be shown that all cruelties to animals1 whether inflicted in the interests of the dinner-table1 the laboratory1 the hunting-field1 or any other institution1 are the outcome of one and the same error--the blindness which can see no unity and kinship1 but only difference and division1 between the human and the non-human race4 ,this blindness it is--this crass denial of a common origin1 a common nature1 a common structure1 and common pleasures and pains--that has alone hardened men in all ages of the world1 civilised or barbarous1 to inflict such fiendish outrages on their harmless fellow-beings2 and to remove this blindness we need1 it seems to me1 a deeper and more radical remedy than the reform of sport1 or of physiological methods1 or even of diet alone4 ,the only real cure for the evil is the growing sense that the lower animals are closely akin to us1 and have rights4 ,and here we see the inevitable logic of vegetarianism1 if our belief in the rights of animals is ever to quit the stage of theory and enter the stage of fact2 for just as there can be no human rights where there is slavery1 so there can be no animal rights where there is eating of flesh4 ,to keep a man1 slave or servant1 says ,edward ,carpenter1 for your own advantage merely1 to keep an animal that you may eat it1 is a lie2 you cannot look that man or animal in the face4 ,i am not saying that it is not a good thing that1 quite apart from food reform1 anti-vivisectionists should be denouncing the doings of the scientific inquisition1 while humanitarians of another school are exposing the horrors of sport1 for cruelty is a many-headed monster1 and there must at times be a concentration of energy on a particular spot2 but ,i do say that any reasoned principle of kindness to animals which leaves vegetarianism outside its scope is1 in the very nature of things1 foredoomed to failure4#eh ,footnote #eh3 ,take1 for example1 the rule to which some bird-lovers bind themselves1 to wear no feathers but those of birds killed for food4 ,one is reminded of ,thomas ,paine's epigram3 ,they pity the plumage1 but forget the dying bird4 ,vegetarianism is an essential part of any true zoophily1 and the reason why it is not more generally recognised as such is the same as that which excludes it from the plan of the progressive--that it is so upsetting to the every-day habits of the average man4 ,few of us1 comparatively1 care to murder birds in sport1 and still fewer to cut up living animals in the supposed interests of science1 but we have all been taught to regard flesh food as a necessity1 and it is a matter1 at first1 of some effort and self-denial to rid ourselves of complicity in butchering4 ,herein is at once the strength and the weakness of the case for vegetarianism--the strength as regards its logic1 and the weakness as regards its unpopularity--that it makes more direct personal demand on the earnestness of its believers than other forms of zoophily do2 for which reason there is a widespread1 though perhaps unconscious1 tendency among zoophilists to evade it4 ,yet that such evasion is a blunder may be seen from the outcry raised against it not by vegetarians only1 but by the vivisectionists and sportsmen themselves1 who are quick to ask the zoophilists why1 if they are so eager for the well-being of the animals1 they do not desist from eating them--a question which1 however insincere in the mouths of some who propound it1 must at least be allowed to be logical4 ,for it is simple truth that though vivisection is a more refined and diabolical torture1 and sport a more stupidly wanton one1 the sum of suffering that results from the practice of flesh-eating is greater and more disastrous than either1 and by being so familiarly paraded in our streets is a cause of wider demoralisation4 ,when one thinks of the aimless and stunted life1 as well as the barbarous death1 of the wretched victims of the slaughter-house1 bred as they are for no better purpose than to be unnaturally fattened for the table1 it makes one marvel that so many kindly folk1 keenly sensitive to the cruelties inflicted elsewhere1 should be utterly deaf and blind to the doings of their family butcher4 ,the zoophilist loves to quote the famous lines of ,coleridge3 ,he prayeth best who loveth best ,all things both great and small4 ,but what kind of love is that which eats the object of its affection8 ,there are hidden rocks in that poetical passage which a sense of humour should indicate to the pilot of zoophily4 ,our position1 therefore1 is this--that while we make no exaggerated claim for vegetarianism1 as in itself a panacea for human ills and animal sufferings1 we insist on the rational view that reform of diet is an indispensable branch of social organisation1 and that it is idle to talk of recognising rights of animals so long as we unconcernedly eat them4 ,vegetarianism is no more and no less than an essential part in the highly complex engine which is to shape the fabric of a new social structure1 an engine which will not work if a single screw be missing4 ,the part without the whole is undeniably powerless2 but so also1 as it happens1 is the whole without the part4 ,,conclusion ,the chief object of this work1 as stated at the outset1 has been to prove the logical soundness of vegetarian principles1 and the hollowness of the hackneyed taunt1 so often a makeshift for reasoning1 that vegetarians are a crew of mild brainless enthusiasts whose hearts are better than their heads4 ,how far ,i have been successful in this purpose it is for the reader to judge2 ,i trust it has1 at least1 been made plain that1 if it is logic that our friends are in need of1 we are quite ready to accommodate them1 and that nothing will please us better than a thorough intellectual sifting of the whole problem of diet4 ,only it must be a thorough sifting4 ,the great foe of vegetarianism1 as of every other reform1 is habit--that inert1 blind1 dogged force which time called into being1 and time only can outwear--and it is this which lurks behind the flimsy sophisms and excuses that the flesh-eater loves to set up1 in which1 as a rule1 though there is much show of controversy1 there is little real discussion4 ,to those of our opponents who honestly wish to grapple with the question of diet1 and to understand what vegetarianism means 7whether they agree with it or not71 ,i submit that the following points have1 at any rate1 been clearly set before them3 #a4 ,that the objections raised to the name vegetarian are founded on sheer ignorance of the word's origin1 and calculated1 if not designed1 to distract attention from the substance by fixing it on the shadow4 ,it is not nowadays seriously denied1 by any responsible authority1 that a vegetable diet1 with the addition of eggs and milk1 is quite adequate for nutriment2 but the method is this--to allow what is said 7rightly or wrongly7 of the sufficiency of a strictly vegetable diet to be misunderstood by the public as referring to vegetarianism4 ,thus1 ,dr4 ,j4 ,burney ,yeo1 in his ,food in ,health and ,disease1 first argues that vegetarians have no right to their title1 because they consume animal products1 and then proceeds to allege various reasons against a purely vegetable diet1 which by his own showing is not what vegetarianism represents4 ,this is a fair sample of flesh-eaters' logic4 #b4 ,that the immediate aim of vegetarians is not that which1 under various forms1 is so industriously foisted on them--viz41 a desire to attain at one step to the millennium1 by altogether ceasing to take the life of animals1 or by entire abstinence from animal products--but rather it is a practical1 intelligible1 though necessarily imperfect1 attempt to humanise1 as far as may be1 the present sanguinary diet system1 by the omission at least of its more loathsome and barbarous features4 #c4 ,that vegetarianism1 if once admitted to be practicable1 offers certain positive benefits of the utmost value1 humane1 sthetic1 hygienic1 social1 economic2 while1 on the other hand1 the denials that have hitherto been made of its practicability1 on the plea of structure1 laws of nature1 climate1 digestion1 and so forth1 are far too weak and illogical to bear the test of criticism4 ,there may1 of course1 be some conclusive reason against vegetarianism1 but if so1 why is its production delayed8 #d4 ,that in the greater number of the arguments brought against vegetarianism1 the importance of the moral aspect of the question is studiously kept out of sight4 ,thus1 ,sir ,henry ,thompson1 in his ,nineteenth ,century article of #ahhe1 while admitting the possibility of abstaining from flesh foods1 gave judgment on the whole in favour of a moderate use of them--but without allowing the smallest weight to humane or moral considerations4 ,writing on the same subject in #ahih1 he so far repaired this oversight as to argue that it is really kinder to eat animals than not to do so1 because otherwise they would not be bred at all6 ,that is the amount of attention the moral side of vegetarianism receives from its opponents1 a great humane issue being set aside by a sophism more suited for a ,savoy comedy than for serious discussion4 ,but there is the further question--and as far as these chapters are concerned1 the final question--why1 if vegetarianism is part and parcel of a genuine progressive movement1 does it not more rapidly progress8 ,why so little result from your propaganda8 is the frequent sneer of the flesh-eater1 and the vegetarian himself is sometimes fain to be down-hearted at the seeming slowness of his advance4 ,does vegetarianism progress8 ,yes and no1 according to the expectations1 reasonable or unreasonable1 that its supporters have been cherishing4 ,if we have fondly hoped to witness1 in the future1 the triumph of the humaner living1 it must be allowed that the actual rate of progress is extremely disheartening2 but if1 on the contrary1 we work under a rational understanding that a widespread change of diet1 like any other radical change1 is a matter not of years but of centuries1 then we shall not find in the slow growth of our movement any reason for dissatisfaction4 ,revolution in personal habits1 be it remembered1 is even more difficult than revolution in political forms1 and needs a greater time for its fulfilment1 and1 looked at in this light1 vegetarianism has made as much progress during the past half-century as any other cause which aims at so far-reaching a change4 ,but what of the many individual failures1 it is asked1 among those who make trial of vegetarianism8 ,taking the circumstances into account1 the failures cannot be regarded as numerous2 for in every such movement there are half-hearted people who are impelled by motives of restlessness and curiosity1 rather than of real conviction1 and in view of the personal obstacles that beset the path of the vegetarian it is not surprising that in food reform1 as in drink reform1 there are a certain number of backsliders4 ,in an ordinary household every possible influence1 social and domestic1 is brought to bear on the heretic who abstains from flesh foods4 ,anxious relatives and indignant friends adjure him to remember the duty he owes to himself and to his family1 and urge him for the sake of those dear to him1 if not for his own1 to return to that great sacramental bond of union between man and man--the eating of our non-human fellow-beings4 ,is he smitten by one of the numberless ailments that are the stock-in-trade of the physician1 and of which flesh-eaters are daily the victims in every part of the world8 ,the doctor looks wise1 shakes his head1 and informs a sorrowing circle that it is the direct result of his vegetarianism4 ,above all1 the fear of ridicule1 acting on the natural unwillingness of mankind to venture along unknown paths1 is a strong deterrent2 for there are still many persons to whom the idea of abstinence from butchers' meat is positively a matter for merriment1 and it seems fated that vegetarianism1 like every new principle1 must be a target for such shafts4 ,well1 so be it6 ,we know that the struggle will be a long one1 and if vegetarianism has got to run the blockade of ,noodledom1 and a huge amount of foolish talk must perforce be fired off1 the sooner the battle commences1 and the sooner it is concluded1 the better for all concerned4 ,and ridicule1 as the flesh-eater will learn1 is a weapon which can be wielded by more parties than one4 ,for1 to be frank1 the dietists of the old-fashioned kreophagist school have talked1 and are talking1 a great deal of downright nonsense in their tirades against vegetarianism1 and the only reason why they have not been more widely brought to book is that they speak in orthodox quarters where no reply is permitted4 ,the oracle1 of course1 must not be answered or criticised4 ,so far as they have condescended to state a case against food reform1 it is a case which would be laughed out of court1 as a string of quibbles and absurdities1 in any open discussion2 for the specialist1 that most humourless of persons1 is apt to forget that the moment he quits the ground on which he has made himself a master 7and such ground has very narrow limitations7 he is no longer infallible1 and that if he thinks to exorcise modern feeling by the repetition of ancient formulas1 he will only make himself ridiculous4 ,and as a matter of pure humour1 apart from humanity1 which is the more comical--the man who can live in simple affluence on a supply of food which is as little costly to himself as it is burdensome to others1 or he who cannot be content unless he gluts an ogreish appetite on animals slaughtered for his larder1 and then pharisaically pretends that he has done them a kindness by eating them8 ,it is custom1 and custom alone--the thraldom of that ceaseless round of mutton and beef to which the dead level of civilisation reduces us#ei--that prevents civilised men from seeing the essential silliness of maintaining the diet of savages4 ,footnote #ei3 ,richard ,jefferies1 ,field and ,hedgerows4 ,that a percentage of those who make trial of vegetarianism should return to their former habit is in accordance with what always happens in the fight between the new and the old1 and at the utmost--that is1 in the rare cases where such trial has been a genuine one--proves only that a change of diet is much more difficult for some persons than it is for others1 a fact which all rational food reformers have recognised4 ,but from the force of affirmative testimony there is no escape1 when1 as in the case of vegetarianism successfully practised1 and yielding the best results1 the instances are drawn from every rank and temperament1 and are amply sufficient in number to prove the experience trustworthy4 ,it is idle to go on asserting that a thing cannot be done1 when you are face to face with some thousands of people who not only have done it1 but are happier and healthier in consequence4 ,with the question of the right choice of food1 and how to adopt vegetarianism1 ,i am not here concerned2 such information is readily accessible in current vegetarian literature4 ,but it must be said in conclusion--and this is the thought which1 above all others1 ,i would leave in the mind of the reader--that the surest warrant of success in the reform of diet is a sincere belief in the moral rightness of the cause4 ,the spirit in which one takes up vegetarianism is the main factor in the result4 ,it is useless to look for any absolute proof in such matters--the proof is in one's self--for those1 at least1 who have heart to feel1 and brain to ponder1 the cruelty and folly of flesh-eating4 ,it is an issue where logic is as wholly on the one side as habit is wholly on the other1 and where habit is as certainly the shield of barbarism as logic is the sword of humaneness4 ,,index ,adams1 ,b4 ,k41 quoted1 #fh1 #fi sthete1 the1 #ea-ed ,alarmist1 the1 #hd-hi ,all-or-,nothing argument1 #aj-ab ,see ,consistency ,animals1 what would become of them8 #hf1 #hg ,animal products1 use of1 #e1 #f1 #db1 #dc1 #aji1 #aaj ,anthropoid apes1 #ah-bb ,anthropologist1 the1 #bd-bh ,anthropophagist1 the1 #ie-ih ,asceticism1 #aa1 #gb ,athletics1 vegetarian1 #fj ,axon1 ,w4 ,e4 ,a41 quoted1 #ha ,bible and ,beef1 #hi ,bon ,vivant1 the1 #cj-cb ,brahminism1 #dc1 #dd1 #hg ,british ,islander1 the1 #fg1 #fh ,british ,medical ,journal1 quoted1 #bi1 #cd1 #fb1 #fc ,buchanan1 ,robert1 quoted1 #if ,butchery1 effect on character1 #dg-ej ,canine teeth1 argument from1 #ai ,cannibalism1 #aj1 #fd1 #fe1 #gc 7note72 its relation to flesh-eating1 #ie-ig ,carnalist1 the1 #gc ,carpenter1 ,edward1 quoted1 #ga 7note71 #ajf ,cartesian theory1 #bf ,carus1 ,dr4 ,paul1 quoted1 #hf ,cattle transit1 #ca ,chemical argument1 #i1 #aj ,chemist1 the1 #fd-ff ,cheyne1 ,dr41 quoted1 #fj ,chicago shambles1 #ce1 #cf1 #di1 #ee ,climate1 argument from1 #fg-gj ,cock-and-,bull argument1 #db1 #dc ,coit1 ,dr4 ,stanton1 quoted1 #ci ,consistency1 true and false4 ,see ,all-or-,nothing1 #da-df ,cramming system1 #ge1 #gf ,darwinian theory1 #be1 #bf ,dembo1 ,dr41 quoted1 #cb ,de ,quincey1 quoted1 #ee ,digestibility of foods1 #fb-fe ,diseased flesh1 #eh1 #ei ,drover1 the1 #ca ,economy of vegetarian diet1 #gg1 #gh ,esquimaux1 what would become of them8 #fh ,ethics of ,diet1 #ae 7note71 #ic ,ethical ,societies1 attitude towards ,vegetarianism1 #ci1 #ajd ,fish-eating1 #de1 #df1 #hb 7note7 ,flinders ,petrie1 ,professor1 quoted1 #ig ,franklin1 ,benjamin1 #bd1 #bh ,fraser1 ,j4 ,f41 quoted1 #ee ,frugivorous nature of ,man1 #ah-bb ,gordon-,cumming1 ,c4 ,f41 quoted1 #fe ,grace before meat1 #ib1 #ic ,greg1 ,w4 ,r41 quoted1 #gi1 #hj ,habit1 influence of1 #aji1 #aac ,haig1 ,dr4 ,a41 #fj1 #fa ,herbivora1 the1 #bj1 #fb ,hofmann's ,experiments1 #fd1 #fe ,hudson1 ,w4 ,h41 quoted1 #cf ,humanity1 synonymous with culture1 #ea1 #ed ,hunt1 ,leigh1 quoted1 #ed1 #ic ,hygienic ,aspect of ,vegetarianism1 #eg1 #eh ,keith1 ,dr4 ,g41 quoted1 #ge ,kingsford1 ,dr4 ,anna1 #ac 7note71 quoted1 #gd ,kropotkin1 ,prince1 quoted1 #be1 #bf1 #ha 7note7 ,land question1 the1 #hj ,lawrence1 ,sir ,william1 quoted1 #fh ,leather1 what should we do without8 #hd-hf ,lester1 ,h4 ,f41 quoted1 #dh1 #ej ,life1 relative value of1 #aj1 #bg1 #bh1 #db ,logic1 uses of1 #a1 #aji ,man is what he eats1 #ga ,manure question1 #he ,maxwell1 ,sir ,h41 #ch ,mayor1 ,rev4 ,professor ,j4 ,e4 ,b41 #e1 #ba ,meat ,trades ,journal1 quoted1 #cb1 #hi ,metaphysic of the larder1 #cg-ci ,michelet1 ,jules1 quoted1 #cc1 #cd ,monastic orders1 vegetarian diet of1 #ad1 #gd ,moral aspect of diet question1 #aj1 #cd1 #gb-gd1 #aaj ,nature1 argument from1 #bd-bh ,newman1 ,professor ,f4 ,w41 quoted1 #eh1 #hj ,nordau1 ,max1 quoted1 #ha ,oldfield1 ,dr4 ,j41 quoted1 #ba 7note71 #fe1 #gj ,omnivorism1 #bj1 #ba1 #ii ,owen1 ,sir ,richard1 quoted1 #ah ,paley1 ,dr4 ,william1 quoted1 #hi ,patriot1 the1 #ae1 #af ,philanthropist1 the1 #hd1 #ajh ,plutarch1 #ad1 #ic ,progressive movement1 relation of ,vegetarianism towards1 #ajb1 #ajc ,psychic philosopher1 the1 #gb1 #gc ,pythagorean diet1 the same as ,vegetarianism1 #d1 #f ,reform and self-reform1 #ajd ,reformer1 the1 #ajc1 #ajd ,richardson1 ,sir ,b4 ,w41 quoted1 #ai1 #dg1 #eg1 #ei1 #fe1 #ff1 #ge1 #gg1 #gh ,rights of animals1 #aaj ,ritchie1 ,professor ,d4 ,g41 #ea ,roman soldiery1 diet of1 #ae ,russell1 ,hon4 ,r41 quoted1 #ac 7note71 #gh 7note7 ,schreiner1 ,olive1 quoted1 #ii ,scientist1 the1 #ai-bc ,shaw1 ,g4 ,bernard1 quoted1 #ed ,slaughter-house1 the1 #cb2 reform of1 #ci1 #dj ,slaughterman's work1 effect on character1 #dg-ej ,slavery1 justified by ,bible texts1 #ij1 #ia ,smith1 ,dr4 ,t4 ,p41 quoted1 #cc1 #dc ,sophist1 the1 #cg1 #ch ,sport1 in relation to flesh-eating1 #ie1 #if ,stead1 ,w4 ,t41 #ce1 #cf1 #dc1 #dd ,stephen1 ,leslie1 #ch ,superior ,person1 the1 #i-aa ,temperance ,movement1 #fi ,tertullian1 ,contra ,psychicos1 #gc 7note7 ,textualist1 the1 #ia ,thompson1 ,sir ,henry1 #e-g1 #de1 #if1 #ii1 #aje1 #aaj ,thomson1 ,j4 ,arthur1 quoted1 #bf ,thoreau1 quoted1 #ga1 #gb1 #gi1 #ajj ,tuberculosis1 danger of1 #eh ,turkish soldiery1 diet of1 #af ,vegetarian1 the name1 origin1 #d2 objections urged against it1 #d-h1 #aji1 #aaj2 why retained1 #g1 #h ,vegetarianism1 misunderstandings of1 #a1 #b2 grades of1 #f1 #aa2 its real purpose1 #i-ab1 #aaj2 a moral principle1 #i1 #aj1 #bi1 #dg1 #gc1 #gd1 #aaj2 relation to other reforms1 #aja-ajh2 individual failures and successes1 #aaa1 #aab1 #aaf2 inconvenience of1 #gh ,vegetarian ,society1 its founding and principles1 #d1 #e1 #de ,verbalist1 the1 #d1 #e ,wages question1 in relation to ,vegetarianism1 #gi ,wallace1 ,dr4 ,alfred ,r41 quoted1 #cf ,wilson1 ,dr4 ,andrew1 #dd1 #de1 #fd1 #fe1 #ajj ,wollaston's ,religion of ,nature1 #bi1 #cj ,women's work at ,deptford1 #dh ,woolman1 ,john1 quoted1 #ij1 #ia ,yeo1 ,dr4 ,j4 ,burney1 quoted1 #gg1 #aja1 #ajb1 #aaj ,zoophily1 as related to ,vegetarianism1 #aje-ajg ,,billing ,,and ,,sons1 ,,ltd41 ,,printers ,,guildford ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,footnotes3 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,transcriber's ,note #a4 ,punctuation and capitalization have been normalized4 ,variations in hyphenation have been retained as they were in the original publication4 ,index1 ,anthropophogist changed to ,anthropophagist4 #b4 ,italicized words and phrases are presented by surrounding the text with underscores4 #c4 ,this book uses signs to begin and end ,bold type4