are right and just. But all through past history both men and nations have "consented" to bad laws, wrong social methods, and to the rule of selfish leaders. The people may have given this consent from their ignorance or from their lack of moral courage to ask or demand what was right. They consent to a multitude of laws which they afterward repeal and change. They often consent to a law or a measure as "being the lesser of two evils." They justify bad and defective laws and systems with the plea that "the world has never had anything better." "This government is the best in the world," they tell us, as though that were a sufficient reason why we should not wish for any changes in it !
When we accept the laws in the constitution of man as supreme authority in public or national life; when we measure present and past systems by this high and unchanging standard, then we perceive at once their vast defects, and we understand why they failed to establish the conditions of universal happiness. The great leaders were always "looking backward;" they were measuring everything in collective life or law and its results by past human experience. Their standard was itself imperfect.
If scientific men are fallible like other mortals, it is still true that scientific knowledge is always the most mature, the most certain and the most safe of all that human beings know. It is the most free from the warping influences of prejudice, passion and conserva
tive impulses. Its proofs are always open to exam
RIGHTS OF WEALTH. Man is normally a mem
ber of society and lie cannot acquire extensive wealth