in the analysis of the other leading ethical conceptions which arise from it? Or is it to be found in some other source of knowledge?" There was only one competitor; but his dissertation, written in German, and bearing the motto: "_To preach Morality is easy, to found it is difficult_"[1] we cannot adjudge worthy of the Prize. He has omitted to deal with the essential part of the question, apparently thinking that he was asked to establish some fundamental principle of Ethics.
Consequently, that part of the treatise, which explains how the moral basis he proposes is related to his system of metaphysics, we find relegated to an appendix, as an "_opus supererogationis_," although it was precisely the connection between Metaphysics and Ethics that our question required to be put in the first and foremost place. The writer attempts to show that compassion is the ultimate source of morality; but neither does his mode of discussion appear satisfactory to us, nor has he, in point of fact, succeeded in proving that such a foundation is adequate. Indeed he himself is obliged to admit that it is not.[2] Lastly, the Society cannot pass over in silence the fact that he mentions several recent philosophers of the highest standing in an unseemly manner, such as to justly occasion serions offence.
[1] The Academy has been good enough to insert the second "is" on its own account, by way of proving the truth of Longinus' theory (_V. De Sublimitate_: chap. 39, _ad fin._), that the addition or subtraction of a single syllable is sufficient to destroy the whole force of a sentence. (P. Longinus: _De Sublimitate Libellus_; edit. Joannes Vablen, Bonnae, 1887.)--(_Translator_) [2] I suppose this is the meaning of _contra esse