eggs, &c., until improved modes of cooking, family arrangements, the usages of society, and other influences would allow them to relinquish those products without causing inconvenience, discomfort, or injury to health. Principles might be true in the abstract, and the reduction of them to practice might be of the greatest possible benefit, when not opposed by adventitious circumstances, which might be such as to render the principles inoperative. No one would lower the standard of Christian morals because of his inability to reach it in his present social position; nor should the Vegetarian flinch from the acknowledgement of his mental convictions with regard to the best and most natural food of man, although unfavorable conditions might, for the present, render the carrying out of them impracticable or inconvenient. When, therefore, a Vegetarian advocated an exclusively fruit and farinaceous diet, he might take circumstances into consideration, and believe he had a right to make use of milk, eggs, &c., if he found it more convenient, more agreeable, or more to his advantage to do so. If even he determined to exclude all such articles at home, he might find it almost impossible at present to avoid the use of them when separated from his own domestic circle; but, entertaining those opinions, the conscientious Vegetarian would endeavour to dispense with them as much as possible, and he (Mr. Smith) felt persuaded that a purely fruit and farinaceous diet would be attended with the most satisfactory results, when domestic and social arrangements favoured its adoption. (Applause.) There were some earnest members who thus carried out their convictions, and rejected all animal productions from their diet, and he trusted the apparent sacrifices they made would be amply compensated by sound health and a happy life. (Hear, hear, and applause.) Any discrepancies, however, between the principles and practices of Vegetarians, were no more a confutation of the evidence they advanced in favour of their diet, than the inconsistent conduct of Christians was a refutation of the truth of Christianity (Applause.)
Vegetarian Messenger, vol. i (1851), appendix, p. ii. G. P. (Bramley) says: "Having a desire to be convinced of the truth of the Vegetarian principle, and having tried a little of the Vegetarian practice, and doubt [sic] not but it is conducive to health, I offer the following questions for your consideration, and if answered satisfactorily, I doubt not but I may become a Vegetarian in the fullest sense of the term: 1. Can a man be called a Vegetarian who takes milk, butter, cheese, and eggs?" We beg to reply that the majority of Vegetarians partake of these articles, and that a few only do not, whilst all are alike denominated Vegetarians, the principle of the movement being simply to abstain from the flesh and blood of animals, which cannot be procured except by means of slaughter; the abstinence from, or use of, the animal substances named, being regulated by the choice of the individual. "2. Do not milk, butter, cheese, and eggs contain the same kind of matter as animal food does?" Strictly speaking, inasmuch as any article of food contains elements of nutrition, these elements are identical; but the form of the matter in which they are contained may be very different in producing or not the heating and stimulating effects which are opposed to the healthy condition of the body. Chemistry shews, moreover, that the elements of nutrition originate in vegetables. . . . Blood, perhaps, is the most objectionable form of nutriment; flesh, being principally composed of blood, is next to it in its gross, stimulating, and exciting qualities; whilst eggs, cheese, butter, cream, and milk are less and less stimulating in the order in which they are here placed, approaching, as they do, to the qualities of vegetables and fruits.
The Vegetarian Messenger, vol. ix pp. 79, 80: Another hindrance to our