'
"Say away, my Lords.
"LORD MEADOWBANK.--This is a very intricate and puzzling
question, my Lord. I have formed no decided opinion; but at
present I am rather inclined to think the interlocutor is
right, though not upon the _ratio_ assigned in it. It appears
to me that there are two points for consideration. _First_,
whether the words libelled amount to a _convicium_ against
the Beetle; and _Secondly_, admitting the _convicium_,
whether the pursuer is entitled to found upon it in this
action. Now, my Lords, if there be a _convicium_ at all, it
consists in the _comparatio_ or comparison of the
_Scaraboeus_ or Beetle with the Egyptian _Pediculus_ or
_Louse_. My first doubt regards this point, but it is not at
all founded on what the defender alleges, that there is no
such animal as an Egyptian _Pediculus_ or _Louse in rerum
natura_; for though it does not _actually_ exist, it may
_possibly_ exist (if not in _actio_, yet in _potentia_--if
not in actuality, yet in potentiality or capacity); and
whether its existence be in _esse vel posse_, is the same
thing to this question, provided there be _termini habiles_
for ascertaining what it would be if it did exist. But my
doubt is here:--How am I to discover what are the _essentia_
of any Louse, whether Egyptian or not? It is very easy to
describe its accidents as a naturalist would do--to say that
it belongs to the tribe of _Aptera_ (or, that is, a yellow,
little, greedy, filthy, despicable reptile), but we do not
learn from this what the _proprium_ of the animal is in a
logical sense, and still less what its _differentia_ are.
Pages:
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311