causes, the whole of that portion of the species which is
affected by the calamity, comes out of the ordeal so much
impoverished in vigour and health, that no progressive evolution
of the species can be based upon such periods of keen
competition.

Consequently, when my attention was drawn, later on, to the
relations between Darwinism and Sociology, I could agree with
none of the works and pamphlets that had been written upon this
important subject. They all endeavoured to prove that Man, owing
to his higher intelligence and knowledge, may mitigate the
harshness of the struggle for life between men; but they all
recognized at the same time that the struggle for the means of
existence, of every animal against all its congeners, and of
every man against all other men, was "a law of Nature." This
view, however, I could not accept, because I was persuaded that
to admit a pitiless inner war for life within each species, and
to see in that war a condition of progress, was to admit
something which not only had not yet been proved, but also lacked
confirmation from direct observation.

On the contrary, a lecture "On the Law of Mutual Aid," which
was delivered at a Russian Congress of Naturalists, in January
1880, by the well-known zoologist, Professor Kessler, the then
Dean of the St. Petersburg University, struck me as throwing a
new light on the whole subject. Kessler's idea was, that besides
the law of Mutual Struggle there is in Nature the law of Mutual
Aid, which, for the success of the struggle for life, and
especially for the progressive evolution of the species, is far
more important than the law of mutual contest. This suggestion--