text:
Author:François Pierre Guillaume Guizot

Works

 * Lectures on European civilization, tr. by P.M. Beckwith, 1837
 * General History of Civilization in Europe, 1838
 * History of the English Revolution, from the Accession of Charles I.; translated by Louise H. Coutier, 1838 vol 1, vol 2; translated by William Hazlitt, 1848
 * Memoirs of George Monk, Duke of Albemarle, 1838
 * Essay on the character and influence of Washington in the revolution of the United States of America, 1840
 * Democracy in France, 1849
 * On the causes of the success of the English Revolution of 1640-1688, published 1850
 * Monk's contemporaries, 1851
 * Monk: Or the Fall of the Republic and the Restoration of the Restoration of the Monarchy in England in 1660, Publication date 1851
 * History of the Origin of Representative Government in Europe, 1852
 * Corneille and his times, 1852
 * History of Oliver Cromwell and the English Commonwealth, 1854 vol 1, vol 2
 * History of Charles the First and the English revolution, 1854 vol 1, vol 2
 * The married life of Rachel Lady Russell, 1855
 * The fine arts: their nature and relations, 1855
 * Meditations and moral sketches, 1855
 * Memoirs of Sir Robert Peel, 1857
 * Memoirs to illustrate the history of my time, 1858 vol 1, vol 2, vol 3, vol 4
 * An Embassy to the Court of St. James's in 1840 Publication date 1862
 * Love in marriage. An historical study. Lady Rachael Russell, 1864
 * M. de Barante: a memoir, biographical and autobiographical, 1867
 * Great Christians of France; Saint Louis and Calvin, 1869
 * Life of Oliver Cromwell, 1887

 * History of Richard Cromwell and the Restoration of Charles II.
 * La Civilisation en Europe
 * A Popular History of France from the Earliest Times (in four volumes; translated by Robert Black)
 * Volume 1
 * Shakspeare and His Times (1852)

Works about Guizot

 * Guizot in "Sketches of conspicuous living: characters of France" by Louis de Loménie, 1841
 * François-Pierre-Guillaume Guizot. Publication date 1874-05-01 in Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Volume 10.
 * Monsieur Guizot in Private Life, 1787-1874 by Madame de Witt, 1880
 * Guizot in the Early Years of the Orleanist Monarchy (1929) (not renewed, but scan at HathiTrust is locked)
 * Guizot in the Early Years of the Orleanist Monarchy (1929) (not renewed, but scan at HathiTrust is locked)

title: Author:François Pierre Guillaume Guizot


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/118

Rh papers on it, as like as possible to the ones she used to do at school. The other boys thought this awfully interesting, and insisted on joining, and they made slates for themselves, and sat round the table, writing and thinking hard about the questions she had written on another slate and passed round. They were the most ordinary questions—"What was the colour of Mother's eyes? Which was taller, Father or Mother? Was Mother blonde or brunette? Answer all three questions if possible." "(A) Write an essay of not less than 40 words on How I spent my last Holidays, or The Carakters of Father and Mother compared. Only one of these to be attempted." Or "(1) Describe Mother's laugh; (2) Describe Father's laugh; (3) Describe Mother's Party Dress; (4) Describe the Kennel and its Inmate."

They were just everyday questions like these, and when you could not answer them you were told to make a cross; and it was really dreadful what a number of crosses even John made. Of course the only boy who replied to every question was Slightly, and no one could have been more hopeful of coming out first, but his answers were perfectly ridiculous, and he really came out last: a melancholy thing.

Peter did not compete. For one thing he despised all mothers except Wendy, and for another he was the only boy on the island who could Rh

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/118


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/119

Rh neither write nor spell; not the smallest word. He was above all that sort of thing.

By the way, the questions were all written in the past tense. What was the colour of Mother's eyes, and so on. Wendy, you see, had been forgetting too.

Adventures, of course, as we shall see, were of daily occurrence; but about this time Peter invented, with Wendy's help, a new game that fascinated him enormously, until he suddenly had no more interest in it, which, as you have been told, was what always happened with his games. It consisted in pretending not to have adventures, in doing the sort of thing John and Michael had been doing all their lives, sitting on stools flinging balls in the air, pushing each other, going out for walks and coming back without having killed so much as a grizzly. To see Peter doing nothing on a stool was a great sight; he could not help looking solemn at such times, to sit still seemed to him such a comic thing to do. He boasted that he had gone a walk for the good of his health. For several suns these were the most novel of all adventures to him; and John and Michael had to pretend to be delighted also; otherwise he would have treated them severely.

He often went out alone, and when he came back you were never absolutely certain whether he had had an adventure or not. He might have Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/119


text:
Page:Language and the Study of Language.djvu/177

IV.] impressed and guided by feelings and experiences, differently swayed by the weight of existing analogies. Such tendency to variation is, to be sure, within comparatively narrow limits; individual speakers of English would not, if left to their own devices, rush madly off toward a Choctaw or Kamchatkan model of speech; yet its results are by no means imperceptible or insignificant; it is like the variation of the separate individuals of a species of plants or animals in respect to traits of structure and disposition, which, however slow its progress, would finally, if suffered to accumulate its effects, break up the species into well-marked varieties. Linguistic development is thus made up, as we may fairly express it, of an infinity of divergent or centrifugal forces.

But, in the second place, there is not wanting an effective centripetal force also, which holds all the others in check, which resolves them, giving value to that part of each which makes in a certain direction, and annulling the rest: this centripetal force is the necessity of communication. Man is no soliloquist: he does not talk for his own diversion and edification, but for converse with his fellows; and that would not be language which one individual alone should understand and be able to employ. Every one is, indeed, as we have already seen, engaged in his way and measure in modifying language; but no one's action affects the general speech, unless it is accepted by others, and ratified in their use, Every sign which I utter, I utter by a voluntary effort of my organs, over which my will has indefeasible control; I may alter the sign as I please, and to any extent, even to that of substituting for it some other wholly new sign; only, if by so doing I shock the sense of those about me, or make myself unintelligible to them, I defeat the very end for which I speak at all. This is the consideration which restrains me from arbitrariness and license in the modification of my speech, and which makes me exert my individual influence upon it only through and by the community of which I am a member. If those who form one community do not talk alike, and cannot understand one another, the fundamental and essential office of speech is not fulfilled. Hence,


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/120

Rh it so completely that he said nothing about it; and then when you went out you found the body; and, on the other hand, he might say a great deal about it, and yet you could not find the body. Sometimes he came home with his head bandaged, and then Wendy cooed over him and bathed it in lukewarm water, while he told a dazzling tale. But she was never quite sure, you know. There were, however, many adventures which she knew to be true because she was in them herself, and there were still more that were at least partly true, for the other boys were in them and said they were wholly true. To describe them all would require a book as large as an English-Latin, Latin-English Dictionary, and the most we can do is to give one as a specimen of an average hour on the island. The difficulty is which one to choose. Should we take the brush with the redskins at Slightly Gulch? It was a sanguinary affair, and especially interesting as showing one of Peter's peculiarities, which was that in the middle of a fight he would suddenly change sides. At the Gulch, when victory was still in the balance, sometimes leaning this way and sometimes that, he called out, "I'm redskin to-day; what are you, Tootles?" And Tootles answered, "Redskin; what are you, Nibs?" and Nibs said, "Redskin; what are you, Twin?" and so on; and they were all redskin; and of course this would have ended the fight had not Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/120


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/121

Rh the real redskins, fascinated by Peter's methods, agreed to be lost boys for that once, and so at it they all went again, more fiercely than ever.

The extraordinary upshot of this adventure was—but we have not decided yet that this is the adventure we are to narrate. Perhaps a better one would be the night attack by the redskins on the house under the ground, when several of them stuck in the hollow trees and had to be pulled out like corks. Or we might tell how Peter saved Tiger Lily's life in the Mermaids' Lagoon, and so made her his ally.

Or we could tell of that cake the pirates cooked so that the boys might eat it and perish; and how they placed it in one cunning spot after another; but always Wendy snatched it from the hands of her children, so that in time it lost its succulence, and became as hard as a stone, and was used as a missile, and Hook fell over it in the dark.

Or suppose we tell of the birds that were Peter's friends, particularly of the Never bird that built in a tree overhanging the lagoon, and how the nest fell into the water, and still the bird sat on her eggs, and Peter gave orders that she was not to be disturbed. That is a pretty story, and the end shows how grateful a bird can be; but if we tell it we must also tell the whole adventure of the lagoon, which would of course be telling two adventures rather than just one. A shorter adventure, Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/121


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/122

Rh and quite as exciting, was Tinker Bell's attempt, with the help of some street fairies, to have the sleeping Wendy conveyed on a great floating leaf to the mainland. Fortunately the leaf gave way and Wendy woke, thinking it was bath-time, and swam back. Or again, we might choose Peter's defiance of the lions, when he drew a circle round him on the ground with an arrow and dared them to cross it; and though he waited for hours, with the other boys and Wendy looking on breathlessly from trees, not one of them would accept his challenge.

Which of these adventures shall we choose? The best way will be to toss for it.

I have tossed, and the lagoon has won. This almost makes one wish that the gulch or the cake or Tink's leaf had won. Of course I could do it again, and make it best out of three; however, perhaps fairest to stick to the lagoon. Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/122


text: Peter and Wendy - Margaret Ogilvy/Chapter 7


text:
Woodruff v. Trapnall/Dissent Grier

Mr. Justice GRIER.

With all respect for my brethren, I feel constrained to express my entire dissent from the opinion of the majority of the court, which has just been delivered.

There is no portion of the power and jurisdiction committed to this court which demands so much caution in its exercise, as that of declaring the legislation of a State to be null and void, because it comes in conflict with the Constitution of the United States. And more especially should this be the case where one of the States of this Union is really (though not nominally) the true party defendant, and is charged, not merely with legislation injuriously impairing contracts between her citizens, but with a direct and dishonest repudiation of her own solemn obligations. Such is the charge on which the State and people of Arkansas have been publicly arraigned before this court. But it is one I am unwilling to indorse or believe, without other evidence than the record before us contains. When a State is charged with a repudiation of her contracts, the party making it is bound to show, beyond dispute, that the State has made a contract; when, where, how, and with whom; and not leave it to surmise, strained inferences, or fanciful construction, as to the nature of the obligation, or the parties to it.

Assuming the State of Arkansas to be, for the purposes of this case, a private corporation, or an individual, and bound by the same principles of law and equity which affect other persons in their intercourse with the world, let us examine whether William E. Woodruff, the plaintiff below and in error, has shown a contract which entitled him to the remedy sought, in the Supreme Court of Arkansas, and which we are now called on to afford him. The record shows that his bond was given to the State of Arkansas on the 27th of October, 1836, before the act was passed which incorporated the Bank of the State of Arkansas. His contract, as it appears on the face of his bond, is [p210] to pay $300,000, "lawful money of the United States," subject to a condition which is forfeited. He was treasurer of the State, and between the date of his bond and the 21st of December, 1838, he received large sums of money, and among others, the sum of $286,757.49, in drafts from the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States. Of these moneys a balance remained in his hands, which he refused to pay over, and a suit was brought on his bond in 1840; and on the 23d of January, 1847, final judgment was recovered for the sum of $3,359 and costs; and an execution having issued for the same, Woodruff, for the first time, in February, 1847, tendered to the attorney of the State, not lawful money of the United States, which he had contracted to pay, and for which judgment was given against him, but notes of the State Bank of Arkansas, then and now insolvent, and the notes almost worthless. Woodruff then petitioned the Supreme Court for a mandamus to compel the attorney of the State to receive these worthless notes, in place of the money he had contracted to pay, and which he was condemned by the judgment of the court to pay; and because of the refusal of the Supreme Court of Arkansas to issue a peremptory mandamus, he has appealed to this court to compel them, on the ground that the law of the State which forbade its officers to receive payment of taxes and debts in any thing but specie or par funds, impaired the obligation of contracts. The twenty-eighth section of the act of 1836, incorporating the bank, directed that the bills and notes of the bank should "be received in all payments of debts due to the State of Arkansas." But another statute, passed in 1845, enacted, that "from and after the 4th of March, 1845, nothing shall be received in payment of taxes or revenue due the State, but par funds or treasury warrants of the State."

Now, for seven years and upwards after the default of the plaintiff in paying over money which he had received, he was permitted to pay in notes of this bank, but in all this time he made no tender of payment in such notes. When sued on his bond, he makes no tender of notes, pleads no set-off, but, after judgment of the court that he shall pay money, he claims a right to satisfy the execution by handing over that which is not money. If this claim be not just, it has at least the merit of novelty, as it is certainly without precedent, either in the courts of England or America.

Let us assume, for argument's sake, that every enactment of the legislature of Arkansas is in the nature of a contract or promise with some person, and cannot be repealed, and that the State had guaranteed or indorsed every note issued by the bank, or, what will make the case stronger for the plaintiff, that his bond was made payable in the notes of the State Bank [p211] of Arkansas. Is he entitled to the extraordinary process now demanded, or had he a right to allege such contract on the part of the State at this stage of the proceedings? If he had not, and the court below were right in refusing to issue the mandamus, whether the act of 1845 was void or valid, he has no right to call upon this court to reverse their judgment, because they may have given a wrong reason for it, and unnecessarily passed their opinion on the validity of an act which did not affect the plaintiff's case, or deprive him of any right.

If a creditor gives public notice to his debtors that he will accept, in payment of his debts, wheat, tobacco, or Arkansas notes, and his debtor for a course of seven years refuses or neglects to accept of the offer, and tender payment in such articles, and is afterwards sued upon his bond or note; and even after suit brought makes no such tender, or pleads his readiness to pay in such articles, and judgment is obtained against him on his bond for money due; can he afterwards ask a court to allow him to tender payment in any thing else than money, or have a rule on the plaintiff's attorney or a mandamus, to compel him to accept notes of a broken bank, or other specific articles, in payment of an execution issued on the judgment? Again, if the obligation sued upon is payable in specific articles, and no tender of them is made before suit brought, or plea that the defendant is ready and willing to pay according to contract, and the court give judgment against the debtor for a certain sum of money, as damages for his breach of his contract, can he afterwards compel the sheriff or the plaintiff's attorney to accept specific articles in satisfaction of a judgment and execution for money? And again, if a defendant hold notes drawn or indorsed or guaranteed by the plaintiff, he may plead them as a set-off, and obtain judgment in his favor. But if he enter no such plea, or demand no such set-off, and judgment is entered against him for the money due, can he purchase the plaintiff's notes after judgment, and ask the court to compel the plaintiff's attorney to accept them in payment? It does not appear, nor have the learned counsel asserted, that such is the peculiar law of Arkansas, and it certainly is not the law anywhere else.

When suit is brought on a contract, it becomes merged in the judgment; if the defendant claims a right to pay it in any thing else than money, he must plead it and set it up on the trial; for the court, on an action for money, can give judgment only for the payment of money. If, after trial, verdict, and judgment, the plaintiff on motion could raise a new question as to set-off, tender, or a right to satisfy his debt in some other way than by payment of money, the judgment of a court, instead of being the end of controversy, would be but the beginning of litigation. [p212] Of this, the present case is a most flagrant instance. The plaintiffs in error were sued on their bond in 1840, on an obligation to pay "lawful money of the United States." They contested the claim in court for seven years, never alleged by plea or otherwise any contract on the part of the State by which they were entitled to pay in anything but money, never tendered notes of the Bank of Arkansas, never alleged that the State was liable as guarantor of the notes of the bank, and bound to accept them as a set-off or in payment, but after final judgment affirmed in a court of error, and execution issued, they commence a new litigation, which has now lasted for four years more.

If a citizen of Arkansas had sued the defendants on their bond, and thus had claimed the right to tender payment of it in anything else than money, owing to some promise or contract of the plaintiff to accept the paper of a particular bank in payment of his bond, no lawyer can pretend that the defendants were not bound to make their defence on the trial, or that, after judgment to pay money, any court has the power to compel the plaintiff to accept anything else. That a sovereign State has not the same rights in a court of justice that are granted to her humblest citizens, is a doctrine that I have not heard advanced, and do not feel bound to disprove. And yet, if the Supreme Court of Arkansas had issued the peremptory mandamus asked by plaintiff, they would have assumed a power over the sovereign State which the law would not allow them to exercise over any of her citizens. The Constitution of the United States forbids any State "to make anything but gold and silver a tender in payment of debts;" yet it is claimed that this court has the power to compel a State to accept payment of a judgment for $3,000 lawful money of the United States, in worthless paper of a broken bank; or, in other words, in a collateral proceeding to set aside and reverse the judgment of the court condemning the defendants to pay money, and let them into a defence on some alleged contract of the defendant to guaranty the notes of a certain bank, or to accept payment in something else than money; and thus try the defence after judgment. If courts of justice have such a power, it would seem that this is the first instance in which they have been called upon to exercise it, as the books of reports can furnish no precedent of such a proceeding.

Thus far I have considered this case on the assumption, that the State of Arkansas, by her direction to her officers to receive payment of debts due to her in the notes of the bank, have become the guarantors and indorsers of such notes, and have thereby divested themselves of all power to lay and collect taxes payable in any other medium or currency than notes [p213] of the bank, and irrevocably made them a sufficient tender to her for all debts due, and shown, as I think, that the court below were justifiable in refusing to the plaintiff the writ prayed for in his petition. Let us now inquire whether there is any such contract between the parties in this case, which has been impaired by the legislation of the State. For it is well settled, that the plaintiffs have no right to invoke the aid of this court, to exercise the high power intrusted to them, of deciding on the validity of State legislation, unless some rights vested in them by contract with the State, or some other person, have been impaired or destroyed thereby. I admit that if the defendant, as treasurer of the State, had received debts or taxes due the State in the notes of the bank before the repeal of this law directing him to receive them, it would be a gross violation of their contract to refuse to receive from him such currency or specific articles as he had received in pursuance of law. But that is not the case before us. On the contrary, the bond given by the plaintiff was antecedent to the incorporation of the bank; their contract with the State was to pay "lawful money of the United States," and the subsequent act cannot be said to be incorporated in it, or make a part of their contract. The treasurer received for the use of the State money, not notes of the bank, as the record shows. They do not pretend that after the passage of the act, or even after its repeal up to the time that judgment was obtained against them, they ever held a dollar of these bank-notes, or ever tendered a payment of their debt in them. Where, then, is the contract with these plaintiffs, or how has it been impaired? If other persons have received these notes on the faith of their guaranty by the State, and their value has been diminished or destroyed by the refusal of the State to receive them in payment of their dues, what right have the plaintiffs to complain, or to come to this court for aid? Who is attempting to commit a fraud, or deny the obligation of their contracts, the State of Arkansas, or the plaintiffs themselves? For seven years after this balance was due from the treasurer (from 1838 till 1845), he was permitted to pay it in notes of the bank; but he refused to accept the offer. The bank becomes insolvent, the offer to receive payment in its worthless paper is withdrawn. And two years afterwards, and after the plaintiffs are condemned to pay their debt according to their covenant, in lawful money of the United States, after an execution has issued to compel a compliance with the judgment of the court, they ask this court to annul their contract and the judgment of the Supreme Court of Arkansas, that they may pay their debt in depreciated paper bought up for the purpose. It seems to me, [p214] that if the charge of fraudulent disregard of their contract be imputable to either of the parties in the argument, so far as it affects the contract between them, it is not the State which is justly liable to it, but the plaintiffs. The repeal of the twenty-eighth section of the act incorporating the bank, if it impaired the obligation of a contract with any person, certainly did not add to or change the obligation given by the plaintiffs, or impair it in any respect. If it was a contract at all, it was with the corporation. So far as it affected the plaintiffs, it was a gratuitous offer and direction or permission to the treasurer to receive, accept, and pay over debts due the State in a specific article not money, nor a legal tender as such. There is no complaint that the State ever refused to receive from the treasurer taxes or debts received by him in this currency, under this permission or direction of the act. For the seven years that he was permitted to pay his own debt in that medium, he refused to accept of the offer. If a wealthy creditor, for the purpose of sustaining the credit of a particular bank, publishes to the world that, if his debtors will pay him in notes of that bank, he will accept them, and after the bank fails gives notice that he will no longer receive them, can a debtor who for seven years has refused to accept this offer, and pay his debts in the manner proposed, allege that this is a contract binding on the creditor forever? Can he allege that this offer to receive payment in a specific article, unaccepted by him, has changed the nature of his bond, and that a demand of payment according to the letter of his obligation impairs any contract between them? Such a doctrine as regards the contracts of individuals has never been advanced in a court of justice. And why a different rule should be applied to contracts when a sovereign State is one of the parties, has certainly not been explained.

It needs no argument to demonstrate that a contract must have at least two parties, and that all laws made by a sovereign State are not necessarily contracts, and therefore irrevocable. The act of the legislature of Arkansas under consideration is entitled, "An Act to incorporate the Bank of the State of Arkansas." It creates a corporation and confers certain powers and privileges upon it. So far as it does this, as has been decided by this court, the act may be considered in the nature of a contract, and that these powers and privileges cannot be annulled or withdrawn, without the consent of the artificial power thus created, or the individuals for whose benefit the franchise was granted. It is true, also, that when a law is in the nature of a contract or grant, and absolute rights have vested under that contract, a repeal of the law cannot divest [p215] those rights. But the plaintiffs in this case are not corporators, or stockholders in the bank; they hold no franchise, powers, or privileges, under the act of incorporation; they are no parties to the contracts, nor have they any vested rights under it, which have been impaired by the repeal of the twenty-eighth section. If the corporation, or those who claim the franchises and powers granted to it, do not complain of an infringement of their contract, no other person can. As to them, it is a mere speculative question, which this court is not bound to decide. So far as it affected the plaintiffs, the twenty-eighth section was but a gratuitous offer to accept notes in place of gold and silver, if they would pay their debt, a mere license at the pleasure of the State if not accepted by them. To call it a grant, or vested right under a contract, seems to me a perversion and abuse of terms. But admitting that the directions given in this act to her public officers to deposit the funds of the State in this bank, and receive its paper in payment of its debts, constituted a part of the contract with the corporation, and could not be repealed, did it bind the State after the corporation ceased to perform the functions and duties imposed upon it? If a State creates a banking corporation with a certain capital, and requires it to pay its notes in specie on demand, and agrees to make it a depositary, and use and receive its notes as cash, is the State bound by its contract to do so, when the corporation fails or refuses to fulfil the duties and purposes of its creation? If such be the case, it is certainly a one-sided contract; there is no mutuality in it. Does it make any difference in the case, also, whether the stock of the corporation is furnished by the State or individuals? In neither case are the stockholders individually liable for the mismanagement or defaults of the corporation, unless previously made so by the act of incorporation. The State of Arkansas furnished one million of dollars as the stock upon which this banking corporation was to issue notes and discount paper. She has nowhere agreed to guaranty the solvency of the bank, or be liable for its issues. If individuals had furnished the stock, they would not be personally liable for its debts. If the stockholders had all made deposits of their money in the bank, and received interest on long deposits, and received its notes as gold and silver, it would not have amounted to a contract with the public, or note-holders, or any body else, that they should continue to deposit their money or receive its notes in payment of debts after the bank became insolvent and its notes worthless. The most refined legal astutia has thus far been unable to discover in such conduct of individuals an implied promise to receive broken bank notes in payment of debts, or a liability [p216] to the note-holders, because their conduct had given credit to the bank. But it seems there is a more stringent rule of morality with regard to sovereign States and their contracts. In their case, under some fiction of the law, without regard to the fact or their actual undertaking, there has been discovered an implied contract running with the paper, like a covenant running with land, which renders them liable for all the issues of the bank, into whosesoever hands it may come, and forever disables them to lay or collect a tax, or pay a debt, till they have lifted and paid every note of the broken bank in which they were stockholders, although they never directly pledged the faith of the State, or agreed to be liable for a single dollar issued by the bank. If individuals had furnished the one million of dollars capital under an act of incorporation which did not make the stockholders personally liable, every person who received the notes would do it on the credit of the capital paid in. Why it should not be the same case when a State furnished the capital, I am unable to perceive. Nor can I comprehend how a direction by a State to its officers to make deposits in a bank, and receive its notes in payment of debts, amounts per se to a contract running with the notes, which binds the State to receive them forever, whether the corporation be solvent or insolvent, dead or alive. But the liability of the State for these issues is argued and attempted to be proved by another legal fiction; to wit, that the State is the bank, and the bank is the State. And why? Because she created the corporation? No; for that would make her liable for the paper of every corporation created by the legislature.

It is, then, because she is owner of the stock, receives the profits, makes the bank her depositary, and gives credit to its notes by ordering them to be received in payment of her debts. And it is from this doctrine of identity, that this contract of guaranty, running with the paper, has been inferred, or rather imputed to the State. If the same identity exists when individuals stand in the same relation to a corporation, and the same contract of guaranty be imputed to them (and I can see no reason why it should not), it is strange that no traces of the doctrine can be found in our books of reports.

But there are certain inferences which necessarily follow as corollaries from this decision in this case, and certain doctrines for which it may be quoted as a precedent (although not directly asserted), that confirm me in refusing my assent to it.

1st. That if the same rules of law for the interpretation of contracts, and the rights of the parties to them, affect all persons, whether natural or artificial, the individual and the sovereign State, it may fairly be inferred hereafter, that, when a bond [p217] or note, payable in specific articles, is sued upon, the defendant is not bound either to tender them, or plead a tender, but, after judgment for a sum of money, he may make payment to the sheriff of the execution in specific articles, and not in money.

2d. That, after a court has solemnly adjudged that the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff a certain sum of money, they can compel him to receive in lieu of it worthless rags.

3d. That a defendant, who has been condemned by the judgment of a court to pay to the plaintiff a sum of money, may buy up notes drawn or indorsed by the plaintiff, and by mandamus or rule of court compel the plaintiff's attorney to accept them in payment.

4th. If these consequences are not legitimately to be inferred from this judgment, then it necessarily follows, that this court exercise a controlling power over sovereign States, and judgments obtained by them, which they cannot exercise over the humblest individual or petty corporation.

5th. That this court has the power to compel any State of this Union, who repudiates her debts, to pay them, because such refusal or repudiation impairs the obligation of her contracts.

6th. That so long as any portion of the three millions of dollars of notes issued by this bank before 1845 remains unpaid, the State of Arkansas cannot collect a dollar of taxes from her citizens in lawful money.

7th. That the courts have a right to compel a State to pay bank notes guarantied by them, before and in preference of all other debts.

8th. That the collectors of taxes, so long as any of this issue of bank-notes can be found, may buy them up at the rate of one dollar for ten or a hundred, and have the assistance of the court to compel the State to receive them at par, even where the collector has received gold and silver.

9th. That when a State, a corporation, or an individual publish to the world their willingness to accept payment of their debts in the issues of a bank, it amounts to a contract, by implication, with the public, and each individual composing it, to guaranty the notes issued by said bank, and that this contract runs with, and is attached to, said notes, in the hands of the bearer, provided the notes were issued before such offer is withdrawn.

As I cannot assent to any one of these propositions, and as I believe they are legitimate deductions from the decision of the court, I beg leave to express my dissent from it.

[p218] Mr. Justice CATRON.

I concur in the dissenting opinion just delivered by my brother Grier.

Mr. Justice DANIEL.

I dissent from the decision of the court in this case, and entirely concur in the arguments and conclusions expressed in the opinion delivered by my brother Grier.

title: Woodruff v. Trapnall/Dissent Grier


text:
Page:History of West Australia.djvu/559

Rh John Howard Taylor figures prominently among the many skilled mechanics who devoted themselves to the rearing of this structure. He has contributed an able share in the work of development, and was born in London in 1861, and underwent an extensive intellectual training both in England and Germany. Not choosing to embark on a professional career, he turned to the excitement and busy hum of commercial life. After finishing his schooling, he entered a stock and sharebroker's office in London. For a considerable time he followed these mercantile pursuits, till he thought himself fully qualified to take a place in the race of competition. He resolved to exercise his acquirements in the enticing fields of South Africa, and accordingly sailed for that fast-rising colony, now attracting the interest of the British public. Several reasons conspired to shorten his stay in the "Kaffir Circus." In the beginning of 1890 he left for Western Australia, and soon after his arrival he joined in the Ashburton rush. For four months he engaged in mining pursuits in the north-west territories with moderate success. Then there was an interval of mining inactivity. No reports of any importance, no results of any magnitude, enticed peaceful squatters and settlers from their rural homes. Meanwhile, Mr. Taylor confined his attention to farming pursuits in the southern districts.

In January, 1891, he walked from Northern to Southern Cross, and took a situation on one of the mines as surface trucker. Though actively employed in this capacity, he yet kept his eyes open as to the method of general operations. This physical labour was not barren of beneficial effects on his subsequent career. After two months hard manual exercise, he renewed his acquaintance with his intimate and familiar, though lately neglected, friends —stocks. In March of the same year he made his commercial debût in this colony at Southern Cross. Moreover, he was the pioneer stock and sharebroker on the Yilgarn Goldfields.

When Arthur Bayley arrived in Southern Cross in September, 1892, with the news of his rich discovery, Mr. Taylor was still in Southern Cross, but unable to share the enthusiastic excitement consequent on Bayley's report. A somewhat severe attack of rheumatism, which had seized on him some time before prevented his joining in the immediate general rush. His indisposition was unfortunate at such a time, and he naturally felt a little disappointed at missing so excellent a chance. Still, though unable to go himself, he invested some capital in a prospecting party, which went out to the scene of Bayley's find, and pegged out the Kelly's lease, next to Bayley's Reward. On his complete recovery from the enfeebling attacks of rheumatism, Mr. Taylor set out for Coolgardie in the following June. Having carefully surveyed the surrounding areas, he felt satisfied with the general appearances of the place, and resolved to return for a more minute search as soon as circumstances in Southern Cross would permit. In October he re-visited Coolgardie, and travelled over distant parts of the fields, carefully prospecting likely spots. Recognising from his own observations that Coolgardie was a field of immense possibilities in auriferous productivity, he finally left Southern Cross in April, 1894, for that centre, to conduct a broking business.

This transference of his commercial sphere was a fortunate one. He had not been long in Coolgardie before his reputation and his clientele went up by leaps and bounds. Mine after mine was floated with amazing rapidity, and speculators and investors came streaming in to catch the booming tide at its flow. Many of those with capital to invest repaired eagerly to Mr. Taylor's office, and bought shares, which rose amazingly, and the office was besieged with groups of anxious speculators. Mr. Howard Taylor has always evinced the greatest interest in public matters. When such an official as a town clerk was an unknown factor in Coolgardie, he stepped into the breach, and assumed the role of municipal secretary. When the town received municipal government, he stood for the first election as a candidate, and was returned to the council. He held that position till November, 1896, when pressure of political duties forced him to retire. During his period of officialdom great changes were effected. Many a weary hour did he sit in the council-room attending to the citizens' interests, framing municipal legislation and constructing the framework of the constitution. Subsequent legislators, who can patch on fleshy parts at will, cannot but think highly of the skill and abilities of those early pioneer councillors who inaugurated symmetry and harmony.

On the 3rd of August, 1896, Mr. Taylor was elected to the Legislative Council for the Eastern Province—a constituency whose territorial dimensions of 240,000 square miles are perhaps exceeded by no other in the world. As the responsible representative of this immense division, he has fulfilled his political duties so satisfactorily that the people's former confidence in his capabilities is strengthened.

He is one of the foundation members of the Coolgardie Masonic Lodge, and was the first secretary of and prime mover in the establishment of the Chamber of Mines in Coolgardie, an institution which since its inception has proved of value to the goldfields' interests. He acts as director for many mines, and owns large mining interests throughout the goldfields. Mr. Taylor's influence and weight, combined with his wide knowledge of the fields, and the mining industry in general, have rendered him a highly successful representative of mining interests in the Legislative Council. As a politician, the bare mention of his name carries with it the manifestations of esteem.

Since the above sketch was written, Mr Howard Taylor was one of the several delegates who represented Western Australia at the historical Federation Convention of 1897 in Adelaide.

title: Page:History of West Australia.djvu/559


text:
The Art of Cookery

 * The Art of Cookery Made Plain and Easy, multiple editions beginning in 1747, by Hannah Glasse.
 * other works by the same name

title: The Art of Cookery


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/123

 CHAPTER VIII

THE MERMAIDS' LAGOON

you shut your eyes and are a lucky one, you may see at times a shapeless pool of lovely pale colours suspended in the darkness; then if you squeeze your eyes tighter, the pool begins to take shape, and the colours become so vivid that with another squeeze they must go on fire. But just before they go on fire you see the lagoon. This is the nearest you ever get to it on the mainland, just one heavenly moment; if there could be two moments you might see the surf and hear the mermaids singing.

The children often spent long summer days on this lagoon, swimming or floating most of the time, playing the mermaid games in the water, and so forth. You must not think from this that the mermaids were on friendly terms with them: on the contrary, it was among Wendy's lasting regrets that all the time she was on the island she never had a civil word from one of them. When she stole softly to the edge of the lagoon she might Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/123


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/124

Rh see them by the score, especially on Marooners' Rock, where they loved to bask, combing out their hair in a lazy way that quite irritated her; or she might even swim, on tiptoe as it were, to within a yard of them, but then they saw her and dived, probably splashing her with their tails, not by accident, but intentionally.

They treated all the boys in the same way, except of course Peter, who chatted with them on Marooners' Rock by the hour and sat on their tails when they got cheeky. He gave Wendy one of their combs.

The most haunting time at which to see them is at the turn of the moon, when they utter strange wailing cries; but the lagoon is dangerous for mortals then, and until the evening of which we have now to tell, Wendy had never seen the lagoon by moonlight, less from fear, for of course Peter would have accompanied her, than because she had strict rules about every one being in bed by seven. She was often at the lagoon, however, on sunny days after rain, when the mermaids come up in extraordinary numbers to play with their bubbles. The bubbles of many colours made in rainbow water they treat as balls, hitting them gaily from one to another with their tails, and trying to keep them in the rainbow till they burst. The goals are at each end of the rainbow, and the keepers only are allowed to use their hands. Sometimes a dozen Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/124


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/23

on board H.M.S. ‚Beagle‘, as naturalist, I was much struck with certain facts in the distribution of the organic beings inhabiting South America, and in the geological relations of the present to the past inhabitants of that continent. These facts, as will be seen in the latter chapters of this volume, seemed to throw some light on the origin of species — that mystery of mysteries, as it has been called by one of our greatest philosophers. On my return home, it occurred to me, in 1837, that something might perhaps be made out on this question by patiently accumulating and reflecting on all sorts of facts which could possibly have any bearing on it. After five years' work I allowed myself to speculate on the subject, and drew up some short notes; these I enlarged in 1844 into a sketch of the conclusions, which then seemed to me probable: from that period to the present day I have steadily pursued the same object. I hope that I may be excused for entering on these personal details, as I give them to show that I have not been hasty in coming to a decision.

My work is now (1859) nearly finished; but as it will take me many more years to complete it, and as my health is far from strong, I have been urged to publish this abstract. I have more especially been induced to do this, as Mr. Wallace, who is now studying the natural history of the Malay Archipelago, has arrived at almost exactly the same general conclusions that I have on the origin of species. In 1858 he sent me a memoir on this subject, with a request that I would forward it to Sir Charles Lyell, who sent it to the Linnean Society, and it is published in the third volume of the Journal of that Society. Sir C. Lyell and Dr. Hooker, who both knew of my work — the latter having read my sketch of 1844 — honoured me by thinking it advisable to publish, with Mr. Wallace's excellent memoir, some brief extracts from my manuscripts.

This abstract, which I now publish, must necessarily be imperfect. I cannot here give references and authorities for my

title: Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/23


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/125

Rh of these games will be going on in the lagoon at a time, and it is quite a pretty sight.

But the moment the children tried to join in they had to play by themselves, for the mermaids immediately disappeared. Nevertheless we have proof that they secretly watched the interlopers, and were not above taking an idea from them; for John introduced a new way of hitting the bubble, with the head instead of the hand, and the mermaids adopted it. This is the one mark that John has left on the Neverland.

It must also have been rather pretty to see the children resting on a rock for half an hour after their mid-day meal. Wendy insisted on their doing this, and it had to be a real rest even though the meal was make-believe. So they lay there in the sun, and their bodies glistened in it, while she sat beside them and looked important.

It was one such day, and they were all on Marooners' Rock. The rock was not much larger than their great bed, but of course they all knew how not to take up much room, and they were dozing or at least lying with their eyes shut, and pinching occasionally when they thought Wendy was not looking. She was very busy stitching.

While she stitched a change came to the lagoon. Little shivers ran over it, and the sun went away and shadows stole across the water, turning it cold. Wendy could no longer see to thread her needle, Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/125


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/24

 several statements; and I must trust to the reader reposing some confidence in my accuracy. No doubt errors may have crept in, though I hope I have always been cautious in trusting to good authorities alone. I can here give only the general conclusions at which I have arrived, with a few facts in illustration, but which, I hope, in most cases will suffice. No one can feel more sensible than I do of the necessity of hereafter publishing in detail all the facts, with references, on which my conclusions have been grounded; and I hope in a future work to do this. For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I have arrived. A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question; and this is here impossible.

I much regret that want of space prevents my having the satisfaction of acknowledging the generous assistance which I have received from very many naturalists, some of them personally unknown to me. I cannot, however, let this opportunity pass without expressing my deep obligations to Dr. Hooker, who, for the last fifteen years, has aided me in every possible way by his large stores of knowledge and his excellent judgment.

In considering the origin of species, it is quite conceivable that a naturalist, reflecting on the mutual affinities of organic beings, on their embryological relations, their geographical distribution, geological succession, and other such facts, might come to the conclusion that species had not been independently created, but had descended, like varieties, from other species. Nevertheless, such a conclusion, even if well founded, would be unsatisfactory, until it could be shown how the innumerable species, inhabiting this world have been modified, so as to acquire that perfection of structure and coadaptation which justly excites our admiration. Naturalists continually refer to external conditions, such as climate, food, etc., as the only possible cause of variation. In one limited sense, as we shall hereafter see, this may be true; but it is preposterous to attribute to mere external conditions, the structure, for instance, of the woodpecker, with its feet, tail, beak, and tongue, so admirably adapted to catch insects under the bark of trees. In the case of the mistletoe, which draws its nourishment from certain trees, which has seeds that must be transported by certain birds, and which has flowers with separate sexes absolutely requiring the agency of certain insects to bring pollen from one flower to the other, it is equally preposterous to account for the structure of this parasite, with its relations to several distinct organic beings, by the effects

title: Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/24


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/25

 of external conditions, or of habit, or of the volition of the plant itself.

It is, therefore, of the highest importance to gain a clear insight into the means of modification and coadaptation. At the commencement of my observations it seemed to me probable that a careful study of domesticated animals and of cultivated plants would offer the best chance of making out this obscure problem. Nor have I been disappointed; in this and in all other perplexing cases I have invariably found that our knowledge, imperfect though it be, of variation under domestication, afforded the best and safest clue. I may venture to express my conviction of the high value of such studies, although they have been very commonly neglected by naturalists.

From these considerations, I shall devote the first chapter of this abstract to variation under domestication. We shall thus see that a large amount of hereditary modification is at least possible; and, what is equally or more important, we shall see how great is the power of man in accumulating by his selection successive slight variations. I will then pass on to the variability of species in a state of nature; but I shall, unfortunately, be compelled to treat this subject far too briefly, as it can be treated properly only by giving long catalogues of facts. We shall, however, be enabled to discuss what circumstances are most favourable to variation. In the next chapter the struggle for existence among all organic beings throughout the world, which inevitably follows from the high geometrical ratio of their increase, will be considered. This is the doctrine of Malthus, applied to the whole animal and vegetable kingdoms. As many more individuals of each species are born than can possibly survive; and as, consequently, there is a frequently recurring struggle for existence, it follows that any being, if it vary however slightly in any manner profitable to itself, under the complex and sometimes varying conditions of life, will have a better chance of surviving, and thus be naturally selected. From the strong principle of inheritance, any selected variety will tend to propagate its new and modified form.

This fundamental subject of natural selection will be treated at some length in the fourth chapter; and we shall then see how natural selection almost inevitably causes much extinction of the less improved forms of life, and leads to what I have called divergence of character. In the next chapter I shall discuss the complex and little known laws of variation. In the five succeeding chapters, the most apparent and gravest difficulties in accepting the theory will be given: namely, first, the difficulties of transitions, or how a

title: Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/25


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/26

 simple being or a simple organ can be changed and perfected into a highly developed being or into an elaborately constructed organ; secondly the subject of instinct, or the mental powers of animals; thirdly, hybridism, or the infertility of species and the fertility of varieties when intercrossed; and fourthly, the imperfection of the geological record. In the next chapter I shall consider the geological succession of organic beings throughout time; in the twelfth and thirteenth, their geographical distribution throughout space; in the fourteenth, their classification or mutual affinities, both when mature and in an embryonic condition. In the last chapter I shall give a brief recapitulation of the whole work, and a few concluding remarks.

No one ought to feel surprise at much remaining as yet unexplained in regard to the origin of species and varieties, if he make due allowance for our profound ignorance in regard to the mutual relations of the many beings which live around us. Who can explain why one species ranges widely and is very numerous, and why another allied species has a narrow range and is rare? Yet these relations are of the highest importance, for they determine the present welfare and, as I believe, the future success and modification of every inhabitant of this world. Still less do we know of the mutual relations of the innumerable inhabitants of the world during the many past geological epochs in its history. Although much remains obscure, and will long remain obscure, I can entertain no doubt, after the most deliberate study and dispassionate judgment of which I am capable, that the view which most naturalists until recently entertained, and which I formerly entertained — namely, that each species has been independently created — is erroneous. I am fully convinced that species are not immutable; but that those belonging to what are called the same genera are lineal descendants of some other and generally extinct species, in the same manner as the acknowledged varieties of any one species are the descendants of that species. Furthermore, I am convinced that natural selection has been the most important, but not the exclusive, means of modification.

title: Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/26


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/126

Rh and when she looked up, the lagoon that had always hitherto been such a laughing place seemed formidable and unfriendly.

It was not, she knew, that night had come, but something as dark as night had come. No, worse than that. It had not come, but it had sent that shiver through the sea to say that it was coming. What was it?

There crowded upon her all the stories she had been told of Marooners' Rock, so called because evil captains put sailors on it and leave them there to drown. They drown when the tide rises, for then it is submerged.

Of course she should have roused the children at once; not merely because of the unknown that was stalking toward them, but because it was no longer good for them to sleep on a rock grown chilly. But she was a young mother and she did not know this; she thought you simply must stick to your rule about half an hour after the mid-day meal. So, though fear was upon her, and she longed to hear male voices, she would not waken them. Even when she heard the sound of muffled oars, though her heart was in her mouth, she did not waken them. She stood over them to let them have their sleep out. Was it not brave of Wendy?

It was well for those boys then that there was one among them who could sniff danger even in his sleep. Peter sprang erect, as wide awake at once Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/126


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/127

Rh as a dog, and with one warning cry he roused the others.

He stood motionless, one hand to his ear.

"Pirates!" he cried. The others came closer to him. A strange smile was playing about his face, and Wendy saw it and shuddered. While that smile was on his face no one dared address him; all they could do was to stand ready to obey. The order came sharp and incisive.

"Dive!"

There was a gleam of legs, and instantly the lagoon seemed deserted. Marooners' Rock stood alone in the forbidding waters, as if it were itself marooned.

The boat drew nearer. It was the pirate dinghy, with three figures in her, Smee and Starkey, and the third a captive, no other than Tiger Lily. Her hands and ankles were tied, and she knew what was to be her fate. She was to be left on the rock to perish, an end to one of her race more terrible than death by fire or torture, for is it not written in the book of the tribe that there is no path through water to the happy hunting-ground? Yet her face was impassive; she was the daughter of a chief, she must die as a chief's daughter, it is enough.

They had caught her boarding the pirate ship with a knife in her mouth. No watch was kept on the ship, it being Hook's boast that the wind of his Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/127


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/128

Rh name guarded the ship for a mile around. Now her fate would help to guard it also. One more wail would go the round in that wind by night.

In the gloom that they brought with them the two pirates did not see the rock till they crashed into it.

"Luff, you lubber," cried an Irish voice that was Smee's; "here's the rock. Now, then, what we have to do is to hoist the redskin on to it and leave her there to drown."

It was the work of one brutal moment to land the beautiful girl on the rock; she was too proud to offer a vain resistance.

Quite near the rock, but out of sight, two heads were bobbing up and down, Peter's and Wendy's. Wendy was crying, for it was the first tragedy she had seen. Peter had seen many tragedies, but he had forgotten them all. He was less sorry than Wendy for Tiger Lily: it was two against one that angered him, and he meant to save her. An easy way would have been to wait until the pirates had gone, but he was never one to choose the easy way.

There was almost nothing he could not do, and he now imitated the voice of Hook.

"Ahoy there, you lubbers!" he called. It was a marvellous imitation.

"The captain!" said the pirates, staring at each other in surprise.

"He must be swimming out to us," Starkey said, when they had looked for him in vain. Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/128


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/129

Rh "We are putting the redskin on the rock," Smee called out.

"Set her free," came the astonishing answer.

"Free!"

"Yes, cut her bonds and let her go."

"But, captain——"

"At once, d'ye hear," cried Peter, "or I'll plunge my hook in you."

"This is queer!" Smee gasped.

"Better do what the captain orders," said Starkey nervously.

"Ay, ay," Smee said, and he cut Tiger Lily's cords. At once like an eel she slid between Starkey's legs into the water.

Of course Wendy was very elated over Peter's cleverness; but she knew that he would be elated also and very likely crow and thus betray himself, so at once her hand went out to cover his mouth. But it was stayed even in the act, for "Boat ahoy!" rang over the lagoon in Hook's voice, but this time it was not Peter who had spoken.

Peter may have been about to crow, but his face puckered in a whistle of surprise instead.

"Boat ahoy!" again came the voice.

Now Wendy understood. The real Hook was also in the water.

He was swimming to the boat, and as his men showed a light to guide him he had soon reached them. In the light of the lantern Wendy saw his Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/129


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/130

Rh hook grip the boat's side; she saw his evil swarthy face as he rose dripping from the water, and, quaking, she would have liked to swim away, but Peter would not budge. He was tingling with life and also top-heavy with conceit. "Am I not a wonder, oh, I am a wonder!" he whispered to her, and though she thought so also, she was really glad for the sake of his reputation that no one heard him except herself.

He signed to her to listen.

The two pirates were very curious to know what had brought their captain to them, but he sat with his head on his hook in a position of profound melancholy.

"Captain, is all well?" they asked timidly, but he answered with a hollow moan.

"He sighs," said Smee.

"He sighs again," said Starkey.

"And yet a third time he sighs," said Smee.

"What's up, captain?"

Then at last he spoke passionately.

"The game's up," he cried, "those boys have found a mother."

Affrighted though she was, Wendy swelled with pride.

"O evil day!" cried Starkey.

"What's a mother?" asked the ignorant Smee.

Wendy was so shocked that she exclaimed, "He doesn't know!" and always after this she felt that Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/130


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/131

Rh if you could have a pet pirate Smee would be her one.

Peter pulled her beneath the water, for Hook had started up, crying, "What was that?"

"I heard nothing," said Starkey, raising the lantern over the waters, and as the pirates looked they saw a strange sight. It was the nest I have told you of, floating on the lagoon, and the Never bird was sitting on it.

"See," said Hook in answer to Smee's question, "that is a mother. What a lesson! The nest must have fallen into the water, but would the mother desert her eggs? No."

There was a break in his voice, as if for a moment he recalled innocent days when—but he brushed away this weakness with his hook.

Smee, much impressed, gazed at the bird as the nest was borne past, but the more suspicious Starkey said, "If she is a mother, perhaps she is hanging about here to help Peter."

Hook winced. "Ay," he said, "that is the fear that haunts me."

He was roused from this dejection by Smee's eager voice.

"Captain," said Smee, "could we not kidnap these boys' mother and make her our mother?"

"It is a princely scheme," cried Hook, and at once it took practical shape in his great brain. "We will seize the children and carry them to the Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/131


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/132

Rh boat: the boys we will make walk the plank, and Wendy shall be our mother."

Again Wendy forgot herself.

"Never!" she cried, and bobbed.

"What was that?"

But they could see nothing. They thought it must have been but a leaf in the wind. "Do you agree, my bullies?" asked Hook.

"There is my hand on it," they both said.

"And there is my hook. Swear."

They all swore. By this time they were on the rock, and suddenly Hook remembered Tiger Lily.

"Where is the redskin?" he demanded abruptly.

He had a playful humour at moments, and they thought this was one of the moments.

"That is all right, captain," Smee answered complacently; "we let her go."

"Let her go!" cried Hook.

"'Twas your own orders," the bo'sun faltered.

"You called over the water to us to let her go," said Starkey.

"Brimstone and gall," thundered Hook, "what cozening is here!" His face had gone black with rage, but he saw that they believed their words, and he was startled. "Lads," he said, shaking a little, "I gave no such order."

"It is passing queer," Smee said, and they all fidgeted uncomfortably. Hook raised his voice, but there was a quiver in it. Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/132


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/133

Rh "Spirit that haunts this dark lagoon to-night," he cried, "dost hear me?"

Of course Peter should have kept quiet, but of course he did not. He immediately answered in Hook's voice:

"Odds, bobs, hammer and tongs, I hear you."

In that supreme moment Hook did not blanch, even at the gills, but Smee and Starkey clung to each other in terror.

"Who are you, stranger, speak?" Hook demanded.

"I am James Hook," replied the voice, "captain of the Jolly Roger."

"You are not; you are not," Hook cried hoarsely.

"Brimstone and gall," the voice retorted, "say that again, and I'll cast anchor in you."

Hook tried a more ingratiating manner. "If you are Hook," he said almost humbly, "come tell me, who am I?"

"A codfish," replied the voice, "only a codfish."

"A codfish!" Hook echoed blankly, and it was then, but not till then, that his proud spirit broke. He saw his men draw back from him.

"Have we been captained all this time by a codfish!" they muttered. "It is lowering to our pride."

They were his dogs snapping at him, but, tragic figure though he had become, he scarcely heeded Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/133


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/134

Rh them. Against such fearful evidence it was not their belief in him that he needed, it was his own. He felt his ego slipping from him. "Don't desert me, bully," he whispered hoarsely to it.

In his dark nature there was a touch of the feminine, as in all the greatest pirates, and it sometimes gave him intuitions. Suddenly he tried the guessing game.

"Hook," he called, "have you another voice?"

Now Peter could never resist a game, and he answered blithely in his own voice, "I have."

"And another name?"

"Ay, ay."

"Vegetable?" asked Hook.

"No."

"Mineral?"

"No."

"Animal?"

"Yes."

"Man?"

"No!" This answer rang out scornfully.

"Boy?"

"Yes."

"Ordinary boy?"

"No!"

"Wonderful boy?"

To Wendy's pain the answer that rang out this time was "Yes."

"Are you in England?" Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/134


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/135

Rh "No."

"Are you here?"

"Yes."

Hook was completely puzzled. "You ask him some questions," he said to the others, wiping his damp brow.

Smee reflected. "I can't think of a thing," he said regretfully.

"Can't guess, can't guess!" crowed Peter. "Do you give it up?"

Of course in his pride he was carrying the game too far, and the miscreants saw their chance.

"Yes, yes," they answered eagerly.

"Well, then," he cried, "I am Peter Pan!"

Pan!

In a moment Hook was himself again, and Smee and Starkey were his faithful henchmen.

"Now we have him," Hook shouted. "Into the water, Smee. Starkey, mind the boat. Take him dead or alive!"

He leaped as he spoke, and simultaneously came the gay voice of Peter.

"Are you ready, boys?"

"Ay, ay," from various parts of the lagoon.

"Then lam into the pirates."

The fight was short and sharp. First to draw blood was John, who gallantly climbed into the boat and held Starkey. There was a fierce struggle, in which the cutlass was torn from the pirate's Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/135


text:
User talk:86.72.172.208

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikisource! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * Help pages
 * Style Guide
 * Inclusion policy

You are welcome to continue editing articles without logging in, but you may wish to  [ create an account] . Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits. For one thing, if you continue to edit without a username, your IP address is used to publicly identify you.

In any case, I hope you enjoy donating your time to grow the Wikisource library that is free for everyone to use! In discussions, please sign your comments using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question here (click  [ edit] ) and place  before your question. Again, welcome! — billinghurst  sDrewth  09:50, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:86.72.172.208


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/136

Rh grasp. He wriggled overboard and John leapt after him. The dinghy drifted away.

Here and there a head bobbed up in the water, and there was a flash of steel followed by a cry or a whoop. In the confusion some struck at their own side. The corkscrew of Smee got Tootles in the fourth rib, but he was himself pinked in turn by Curly. Farther from the rock Starkey was pressing Slightly and the twins hard.

Where all this time was Peter? He was seeking bigger game.

The others were all brave boys, and they must not be blamed for backing from the pirate captain. His iron claw made a circle of dead water round him, from which they fled like affrighted fishes.

But there was one who did not fear him: there was one prepared to enter that circle.

Strangely, it was not in the water that they met. Hook rose to the rock to breathe, and at the same moment Peter scaled it on the opposite side. The rock was slippery as a ball, and they had to crawl rather than climb. Neither knew that the other was coming. Each feeling for a grip met the other's arm: in surprise they raised their heads; their faces were almost touching; so they met.

Some of the greatest heroes have confessed that just before they fell to they had a sinking. Had it been so with Peter at that moment I would admit it. After all, this was the only man that the Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/136


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/137

Rh Sea-Cook had feared. But Peter had no sinking, he had one feeling only, gladness; and he gnashed his pretty teeth with joy. Quick as thought he snatched a knife from Hook's belt and was about to drive it home, when he saw that he was higher up the rock than his foe. It would not have been fighting fair. He gave the pirate a hand to help him up.

It was then that Hook bit him.

Not the pain of this but its unfairness was what dazed Peter. It made him quite helpless. He could only stare, horrified. Every child is affected thus the first time he is treated unfairly. All he thinks he has a right to when he comes to you to be yours is fairness. After you have been unfair to him he will love you again, but he will never afterwards be quite the same boy. No one ever gets over the first unfairness; no one except Peter. He often met it, but he always forgot it. I suppose that was the real difference between him and all the rest.

So when he met it now it was like the first time; and he could just stare, helpless. Twice the iron hand clawed him.

A few minutes afterwards the other boys saw Hook in the water striking wildly for the ship; no elation on his pestilent face now, only white fear, for the crocodile was in dogged pursuit of him. On ordinary occasions the boys would have swum Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/137


text:
Template talk:Translation

Name collision with Template:Translations
This template needs to move to another name and this page become a dab. See discussion at: Template talk:Translations.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 09:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

title: Template talk:Translation


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/138

Rh alongside cheering; but now they were uneasy, for they had lost both Peter and Wendy, and were scouring the lagoon for them, calling them by name. They found the dinghy and went home in it, shouting "Peter, Wendy" as they went, but no answer came save mocking laughter from the mermaids. "They must be swimming back or flying," the boys concluded. They were not very anxious, they had such faith in Peter. They chuckled, boy-like, because they would be late for bed; and it was all mother Wendy's fault!

When their voices died away there came cold silence over the lagoon, and then a feeble cry.

"Help, help!"

Two small figures were beating against the rock; the girl had fainted and lay on the boy's arm. With a last effort Peter pulled her up the rock and then lay down beside her. Even as he also fainted he saw that the water was rising. He knew that they would soon be drowned, but he could do no more.

As they lay side by side a mermaid caught Wendy by the feet, and began pulling her softly into the water. Peter, feeling her slip from him, woke with a start, and was just in time to draw her back. But he had to tell her the truth.

"We are on the rock, Wendy," he said, "but it is growing smaller. Soon the water will be over it." Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/138


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/27

 * Causes of Variability — Effects of Habit and the use or disuse of Parts — Correlated Variation — Inheritance — Character of Domestic Varieties — Difficulty of distinguishing between Varieties and Species — Origin of Domestic Varieties from one or more Species — Domestic Pigeons, their Differences and Origin — Principles of Selection, anciently followed, their Effects — Methodical and Unconscious Selection — Unknown Origin of our Domestic Productions — Circumstances favourable to Man's power of Selection.

Causes of Variability

we look to the individuals of the same variety or sub-variety of our older cultivated plants and animals, one of the first points which strikes us, is, that they generally differ much more from each other, than do the individuals of any one species or variety in a state of nature. When we reflect on the vast diversity of the plants and animals which have been cultivated, and which have varied during all ages under the most different climates and treatment, I think we are driven to conclude that this greater variability is simply due to our domestic productions having been raised under conditions of life not so uniform as, and somewhat different from, those to which the parent-species have been exposed under nature. There is, also, I think, some probability in the view propounded by Andrew Knight, that this variability may be partly connected with excess of food. It seems pretty clear that organic beings must be exposed during several generations to the new conditions of life to cause any appreciable amount of variation; and that when the organisation has once begun to vary, it generally continues to vary for many generations. No case is on record of a variable being ceasing to be variable under cultivation. Our oldest cultivated plants, such as wheat, still often yield new varieties: our oldest domesticated animals are still capable of rapid improvement or modification.

As far as I am able to judge, after long attending to the subject, the conditions of life appear to act in two ways, — directly on the whole organisation or on certain parts alone and indirectly by affecting the reproductive system. With respect to the direct

title: Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/27


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/28

 action, we must bear in mind that in every case, as Professor Weismann has lately insisted, and as I have incidentally shown in my work on 'Variation under Domestication,' there are two factors: namely, the nature of the organism and the nature of the conditions. The former seems to be much the more important; for nearly similar variations sometimes arise under, as far as we can judge, dissimilar conditions; and, on the other hand, dissimilar variations arise under conditions which appear to be nearly uniform. The effects on the offspring are either definite or in definite. They may be considered as definite when all or nearly all the offspring of individuals exposed to certain conditions during several generations are modified in the same manner. It is extremely difficult to come to any conclusion in regard to the extent of the changes which have been thus definitely induced. There can, however, be little doubt about many slight changes,—such as size from the amount of food, colour from the nature of the food, thickness of the skin and hair from climate, &c. Each of the endless variations which we see in the plumage of our fowls must have had some efficient cause; and if the same cause were to act uniformly during a long series of generations on many individuals, all probably would be modified in the same manner. Such facts as the complex and extraordinary out-growths which invariably follow from the insertion of a minute drop of poison by a gall-producing insect, shows us what singular modifications might result in the case of plants from a chemical change in the nature of the sap.

Indefinite variability is a much more common result of changed conditions than definite variability, and has probably played a more important part in the formation of our domestic races. We see in definite variability in the endless slight peculiarities which distinguish the individuals of the same species, and which cannot be accounted for by inheritance from either parent or from some more remote ancestor. Even strongly-marked differences occasionally appear in the young of the same litter, and in seedlings from the same seed-capsule. At long intervals of time, out of millions of individuals reared in the same country and fed on nearly the same food, deviations of structure so strongly pronounced as to deserve to be called monstrosities arise; but monstrosities cannot be separated by any distinct line from slighter variations. All such changes of structure, whether extremely slight or strongly marked, which appear among many individuals living together, may be considered as the in definite effects of the conditions of life on each individual organism, in nearly the same manner as the chill effects different men in an in definite manner, according to their state

title: Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/28


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/29

 of body or constitution, causing coughs or colds, rheumatism, or inflammation of various organs.

With respect to what I have called the indirect action of changed conditions, namely, through the reproductive system of being affected, we may infer that variability is thus induced, partly from the fact of this system being extremely sensitive to any change in the conditions, and partly from the similarity, as Kölreuter and others have remarked, between the variability which follows from the crossing of distinct species, and that which may be observed with plants and animals when reared under new or unnatural conditions. Many facts clearly show how eminently susceptible the reproductive system is to very slight changes in the surrounding conditions. Nothing is more easy than to tame an animal, and few things more difficult than to get it to breed freely under confinement, even when the male and female unite. How many animals there are which will not breed, though kept in an almost free state in their native country! This is generally, but erroneously attributed to vitiated instincts. Many cultivated plants display the utmost vigour, and yet rarely or never seed! In some few cases it has been discovered that a very trifling change, such as a little more or less water at some particular period of growth, will determine whether or not a plant will produce seeds. I cannot here give the details which I have collected and elsewhere published on this curious subject; but to show how singular the laws are which determine the reproduction of animals under confinement, I may mention that carnivorous animals, even from the tropics, breed in this country pretty freely under confinement, with the exception of the plantigrades or bear family, which seldom produce young; whereas, carnivorous birds, with the rarest exception, hardly ever lay fertile eggs. Many exotic plants have pollen utterly worthless, in the same condition as in the most sterile hybrids. When, on the one hand, we see domesticated animals and plants, though often weak and sickly, breeding freely under confinement; and when, on the other hand, we see individuals, though taken young from a state of nature perfectly tamed, long-lived, and healthy (of which I could give numerous instances), yet having their reproductive system so seriously affected by unperceived causes as to fail to act, we need not be surprised at this system, when it does act under confinement, acting irregularly, and producing offspring somewhat unlike their parents. I may add that as some organisms breed freely under the most unnatural conditions (for instance, rabbits and ferrets kept in hutches) showing that their reproductive organs are not easily affected; so will some animals and plants withstand domestication

title: Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/29


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/139

Rh She did not understand even now.

"We must go," she said, almost brightly.

"Yes," he answered faintly.

"Shall we swim or fly, Peter?"

He had to tell her.

"Do you think you could swim or fly as far as the island, Wendy, without my help?"

She had to admit that she was too tired.

He moaned.

"What is it?" she asked, anxious about him at once.

"I can't help you, Wendy. Hook wounded me. I can neither fly nor swim."

"Do you mean we shall both be drowned?"

"Look how the water is rising."

They put their hands over their eyes to shut out the sight. They thought they would soon be no more. As they sat thus something brushed against Peter as light as a kiss, and stayed there, as if saying timidly, "Can I be of any use?"

It was the tail of a kite, which Michael had made some days before. It had torn itself out of his hand and floated away.

"Michael's kite," Peter said without interest, but next moment he had seized the tail, and was pulling the kite toward him.

"It lifted Michael off the ground," he cried; "why should it not carry you?"

"Both of us!" Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/139


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/30

 or cultivation, and vary very slightly — perhaps hardly more than in a state of nature.

Some naturalists have maintained that all variations are connected with the act of sexual reproduction; but this is certainly an error; for I have given in another work a long list of "sporting plants," as they are called by gardeners;— that is, of plants which have suddenly produced a single bud with a new and sometimes widely different character from that of the other buds on the same plant. These bud variations, as they may be named, can be propagated by grafts, offsets, &c., and sometimes by seed. They occur rarely under nature, but are far from rare under culture. As a single bud out of many thousands produced year after year on the same tree under uniform conditions, has been known suddenly to assume a new character; and as buds on distinct trees, growing under different conditions, have sometimes yielded nearly the same variety — for instance, buds on peach-trees producing nectarines, and buds on common roses producing moss-roses — we clearly see that the nature of the conditions is of subordinate importance in comparison with the nature of the organism in determining each particular form of variation;— perhaps of not more importance than the nature of the spark, by which a mass of combustible matter is ignited, has in determining the nature of the flames.

Effects of Habit and the Use or Disuse of Parts; Correlated Variation; Inheritance.

Changed habits produce an inherited effect as in the period of the flowering of plants when transported from one climate to another. With animals the increased use or disuse of parts has had a more marked influence; thus I find in the domestic duck that the bones of the wing weigh less and the bones of the leg more, in proportion to the whole skeleton, than do the same bones in the wild duck; and this change may be safely attributed to the domestic duck flying much less, and walking more, than its wild parents. The great and inherited development of the udders in cows and goats in countries where they are habitually milked, in comparison with these organs in other countries, is probably another instance of the effects of use. Not one of our domestic animals can be named which has not in some country drooping ears; and the view which has been suggested that the drooping is due to disuse of the muscles of the ear, from the animals being seldom much alarmed, seems probable.

Many laws regulate variation, some few of which can be dimly

title: Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/30


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/31

 seen, and will hereafter be briefly discussed. I will here only allude to what may be called correlated variation. Important changes in the embryo or larva will probably entail changes in the mature animal. In monstrosities, the correlations between quite distinct parts are very curious; and many instances are given in Isidore Geoffroy St. Hilaire's great work on this subject. Breeders believe that long limbs are almost always accompanied by an elongated head. Some instances of correlation are quite whimsical; thus cats which are entirely white and have blue eyes are generally deaf; but it has been lately stated by Mr. Tait that this is confined to the males. Colour and constitutional peculiarities go together, of which many remarkable cases could be given among animals and plants. From facts collected by Heusinger, it appears that white sheep and pigs are injured by certain plants, while dark-coloured individuals escape: Professor Wyman has recently communicated to me a good illustration of this fact; on asking some farmers in Virginia how it was that all their pigs were black, they informed him that the pigs ate the paint-root (Lachnanthes), which coloured their bones pink, and which caused the hoofs of all but the black varieties to drop off; and one of the "crackers" (i.e. Virginia squatters) added, "we select the black members of a litter for raising, as they alone have a good chance of living." Hairless dogs have imperfect teeth; long-haired and coarse-haired animals are apt to have, as is asserted, long or many horns; pigeons with feathered feet have skin between their outer toes; pigeons with short beaks have small feet, and those with long beaks large feet. Hence if man goes on selecting, and thus augmenting, any peculiarity, he will almost certainly modify unintentionally other parts of the structure, owing to the mysterious laws of correlation.

The results of the various, unknown, or but dimly understood laws of variation are infinitely complex and diversified. It is well worth while carefully to study the several treatises on some of our old cultivated plants, as on the hyacinth, potato, even the dahlia, &c.; and it is really surprising to note the endless points of structure and constitution in which the varieties and sub-varieties differ slightly from each other. The whole organisation seems to have become plastic, and departs in a slight degree from that of the parental type.

Any variation which is not inherited is unimportant for us. But the number and diversity of inheritable deviations of structure, both those of slight and those of considerable physiological importance, are endless. Dr. Prosper Lucas' treatise, in two large volumes, is the fullest and the best on this subject. No breeder

title: Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/31


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/32

 doubts how strong is the tendency to inheritance; that like produces like is his fundamental belief: doubts have been thrown on this principle only by theoretical writers. When any deviation of structure often appears, and we see it in the father and child, we cannot tell whether it may not be due to the same cause having acted on both; but when among individuals, apparently exposed to the same conditions, any very rare deviation, due to some extraordinary combination of circumstances, appears in the parent — say, once among several million individuals — and it reappears in the child, the mere doctrine of chances almost compels us to attribute its reappearance to inheritance. Every one must have heard of cases of albinism, prickly skin, hairy bodies, &c., appearing in several members of the same family. If strange and rare deviations of structure are truly inherited, less strange and commoner deviations may be freely admitted to be inheritable. Perhaps the correct way of viewing the whole subject would be, to look at the inheritance of every character whatever as the rule, and non-inheritance as the anomaly.

The laws governing inheritance are for the most part unknown; no one can say why the same peculiarity in different individuals of the same species, or in different species, is sometimes inherited and sometimes not so; why the child often reverts in certain characteristics to its grandfather or grandmother or more remote ancestor; why a peculiarity is often transmitted from one sex to both sexes, or to one sex alone, more commonly but not exclusively to the like sex. It is a fact of some importance to us, that peculiarities appearing in the males of our domestic breeds are often transmitted, either exclusively or in a much greater degree, to the males alone. A much more important rule, which I think may be trusted, is that, at whatever period of life a peculiarity first appears, it tends to reappear in the offspring at a corresponding age, though sometimes earlier. In many cases this could not be otherwise; thus the inherited peculiarities in the horns of cattle could appear only in the offspring when nearly mature; peculiarities in the silk-worm are known to appear at the corresponding caterpillar or cocoon stage. But hereditary diseases and some other facts make me believe that the rule has a wider extension, and that, when there is no apparent reason why a peculiarity should appear at any particular age, yet that it does tend to appear in the offspring at the same period at which it first appeared in the parent. I believe this rule to be of the highest importance in explaining the laws of embryology. These remarks are of course confined to the first appearance of the peculiarity, and not to the primary cause

title: Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/32


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/33

 which may have acted on the ovules or on the male element; in nearly the same manner as the increased length of the horns in the offspring from a short-horned cow by a long-horned bull, though appearing late in life, is clearly due to the male element.

Having alluded to the subject of reversion, I may here refer to a statement often made by naturalists — namely, that our domestic varieties, when run wild, gradually but invariably revert in character to their aboriginal stocks. Hence it has been argued that no deductions can be drawn from domestic races to species in a state of nature. I have in vain endeavoured to discover on what decisive facts the above statement has so often and so boldly been made. There would be great difficulty in proving its truth: we may safely conclude that very many of the most strongly marked domestic varieties could not possibly live in a wild state. In many cases we do not know what the aboriginal stock was, and so could not tell whether or not nearly perfect reversion had ensued. It would be necessary, in order to prevent the effects of intercrossing, that only a single variety should be turned loose in its new home. Nevertheless, as our varieties certainly do occasionally revert in some of their characters to ancestral forms, it seems to me not improbable that if we could succeed in naturalising, or were to cultivate, during many generations, the several races, for instance, of the cabbage, in very poor soil (in which case, however, some effect would have to be attributed to the definite action of the poor soil) that they would, to a large extent, or even wholly, revert to the wild aboriginal stock. Whether or not the experiment would succeed is not of great importance for our line of argument; for by the experiment itself the conditions of life are changed. If it could be shown that our domestic varieties manifested a strong tendency to reversion,— that is, to lose their acquired characters, while kept under the same conditions and while kept in a considerable body, so that free intercrossing might check, by blending together, any slight deviations in their structure, in such case, I grant that we could deduce nothing from domestic varieties in regard to species. But there is not a shadow of evidence in favour of this view: to assert that we could not breed our cart and race-horses, long and short-horned cattle, and poultry of various breeds, and esculent vegetables, for an unlimited number of generations, would be opposed to all experience.

title: Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/33


text:
Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/34

 Character of Domestic Varieties; difficulty of distinguishing between Varieties and Species; origin of Domestic Varieties from one or more Species.

When we look to the hereditary varieties or races of our domestic animals and plants, and compare them with closely allied species, we generally perceive in each domestic race, as already remarked, less uniformity of character than in true species. Domestic races often have a somewhat monstrous character; by which I mean, that, although differing from each other and from other species of the same genus, in several trifling respects, they often differ in an extreme degree in some one part, both when compared one with another, and more especially when compared with the species under nature to which they are nearest allied. With these exceptions (and with that of the perfect fertility of varieties when crossed,— a subject hereafter to be discussed), domestic races of the same species differ from each other in the same manner as do the closely allied species of the same genus in a state of nature, but the differences in most cases are less in degree. This must be admitted as true, for the domestic races of many animals and plants have been ranked by some competent judges as the descendants of aboriginally distinct species, and by other competent judges as mere varieties. If any well marked distinction existed between a domestic race and a species, this source of doubt would not so perpetually recur. It has often been stated that domestic races do not differ from each other in characters of generic value. It can be shown that this statement is not correct; but naturalists differ much in determining what characters are of generic value; all such valuations being at present empirical. When it is explained how genera originate under nature, it will be seen that we have no right to expect often to find a generic amount of difference in our domesticated races.

In attempting to estimate the amount of structural difference between allied domestic races, we are soon involved in doubt, from not knowing whether they are descended from one or several parent species. This point, if it could be cleared up, would be interesting; if, for instance, it could be shown that the greyhound, bloodhound, terrier, spaniel and bull-dog, which we all know propagate their kind truly, were the offspring of any single species, then such facts would have great weight in making us doubt about the immutability of the many closely allied natural species — for instance, of the many foxes — inhabiting the different quarters of the world. I do not believe, as we shall presently see, that the whole

title: Page:Origin of Species 1872.djvu/34


text:
Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/140

Rh "It can't lift two; Michael and Curly tried."

"Let us draw lots," Wendy said bravely.

"And you a lady; never." Already he had tied the tail round her. She clung to him; she refused to go without him; but with a "Good-bye, Wendy," he pushed her from the rock; and in a few minutes she was borne out of his sight. Peter was alone on the lagoon.

The rock was very small now; soon it would be submerged. Pale rays of light tiptoed across the waters; and by and by there was to be heard a sound at once the most musical and the most melancholy in the world: the mermaids calling to the moon.

Peter was not quite like other boys; but he was afraid at last. A tremor ran through him, like a shudder passing over the sea; but on the sea one shudder follows another till there are hundreds of them, and Peter felt just the one. Next moment he was standing erect on the rock again, with that smile on his face and a drum beating within him. It was saying, "To die will be an awfully big adventure." Rh

title: Page:Peter and Wendy.djvu/140