inner soul; but “society” manners are exclusive
of such lofty standards; while conversely, our
good Dr. Holmes wittily and not unjustly remarks
that “there are two virtues which Christians have
found it very hard to exemplify in practice. These
are modesty and civility.”
It is high time that the real aristocracy of the
earth—its learned men and its men of genius—
should bear the outward signs of what the earth
has always called its “best society”; that how
ever poor their worldly estate —and, like Agassiz,
they are often “too busy to make money”—they
should know. how to carry themselves without
cringing, without todyism, and equally without
assumption, among those who consider themselves
—and whom all history has taught to consider
themselves—the “leaders” of the “world." To
quote Emerson again, “The clergyman who would
live in the city may have religion, but he must
have taste”—a saying which is so incisive that its
'flavor of mild cynicism is excusable.
No intellectual person can aspire to the position
of a social “swell.” But if social usages were
taught, as they. might be, in intelligent homes,
these “minor morals” which so much affect the
future of our boys and girls, scholars would not
lay. themselves open, as they do now, to the too
often deserved charge of “boorishness,” and
would not be the victims of covert sneers from
the gilded youth upon whom they may have an
opportunity to impress perhaps the first worthy
ideals.
Two brilliant women, powers in literature, liv
ing in different cities but exposed to similar influ
ences, have succumbed during the last five years to
the deteriorating poison of society simply because
they were ignorant of its ways. They were
brought up in, literally, the backwoods, and were
sufficiently educated. Their genius brought them
into prominence, and they became the “fashion"
among the “Leo Hunters.” Dazzled by the shal
low brilliancy of a society of which they had been
taught nothing, they were drawn- into its glitter
ing vortex, and they are .now devoted to its fads
THE FREE LANCE
and follies. Occasionally they still do a piece of
fair literary work, but nothing to what they might
have done if they had been brought up to rate fine
manners, and fine clothing to where they belong.
Aspasia was to a certain extent right when she
said, speaking of the uncouth manners of a very
great dramatist, “The movers and masters of our
souls have surely a right to throw out their limbs
as carelessly as they please in the world that be
longs to them, and before the creatures whom they
have created. ’ ’ There is a feeling that the kings
may do anything ; and yet, noblesse oblige. Also,,
when their kingship is disputed, it behooves them
to show that they are worthy of the title, even so
that those who have no conception of the value of
their gifts shall learn to respect them through their
kingly bearing.
On the other hand, the. comparative insignifi
cance of manners and the unworthiness of too
great social devotion should be thoroughly demon
strated. While the boy and the girl should be
made to feel the value of Montaigne’s maxim—
that “the knowledge of courtesy and good man
ners is a very necessary study”—they should be
much more deeply impressed with the paramount
value of that training which develops the mind
and the soul.
The study of Celtic in the universities of Eu
rope has gained a commanding place and made
rapid advances within the last few years. Schol
ars of the first order have taken it up, realizing its
importance for the study of the earliest antiquities
of a large part of the Continents and of the British
Isles; and for its bearing upon the history and de
velopment of districts where it was displaced by
the conquests of the Romans and the rise of the
Romance languages.
In Great Britain, and especially at the Scotch
universities, certain attention is given to this study
and the interest in it is on the increase. But the
German and French scholars pursue the subject
K. U. C.
CELTIC.