網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

Cosmological, and Ontological; at the third, Modified, Psychological, and Historical.1

In a final definition, we may, accordingly, describe Logic as "the science of human science," and the three parts into which its teaching is in consequence resolved may be thus exhibited :I. Pure or Formal Logic.

II. Mixed or Material Logic

1. Physical, Cosmological, and Ontological, conducting to 2. Modified, Psychological, and Historical.

This ideal thus summons the logical student to three departments of labour, of three degrees of difficulty, each related to the other, and all casting a reflex light on Science, by disclosing the formal laws of its formation, the physical and metaphysical limits within which it is possible, and its dependence on the human being by whom it is formed.

This is not the occasion for illustrating the past influence upon the progress of the sciences, and also as a principal organ in liberal education, of the occasional and more systematic efforts which have been made to analyse logically the Form and Matter of Science. The marvellous power of intellectual digestion manifested in the philosophy and theology of the middle ages must be referred to the medicinal properties of the formal Analytic of the Schools; the gradual purification and rectification of the modern code of physical discovery cannot be separated from the growth of juster logical views regarding physical causation, the order of nature, and the natural limits to our power of interpreting, either physically or metaphysically, the mysterious universe which is presented to us in space and time. These are two among many examples of the past and possible future

We have just lighted upon a passage in the Appendix to his Lectures (p. 243) in which a threefold division of Logic, somewhat similar in principle, as it seems, to that implied throughout this article, is thus hinted at by Sir William Hamilton :

"Perhaps, 1st, Formal Logic (from the laws of thought proper) should be distinguished from, 2d, Abstract Logic (material, but of abstract general matter); and then, 3d, A Psychological Logic might be added as a third part, considering how Reasoning, etc., is affected by the constitution of our minds."

? Metaphysics, on the view given above of the Logical System, is partly involved in that system; but it may also be treated at an independent point of view. In the current meaning of the term, Metaphysics is vaguely convertible with the Philosophy of Mind, or Psychology; in its stricter meaning it corresponds to Ontology, or the science which pretends to treat of Substance and Cause, apart from their manifestations in experience. As Ontology in particular, or Psychology in general, it may be approached (1) through Formal Logic,-when it becomes part of Logic, or (2) irrespectively of Logic, either on its own account, or (e.g.) through Ethics, and for purposes of Ethical Science in relation to the theory of Duty and the Good, instead of the theory of Science and the True.

Dr Mansel and M. Veitch.

427

influence of a study, which, more than any other, appeals to the higher mental faculties, and which has never, in any of its three phases, received the breath of human life, without reacting upon life in many direct and indirect ways.

The present article is purposely confined to some of those discussions regarding the Province of Logic, which arise when a science so comprehensive in its idea, and embracing elements which in the past have often been conflicting instead of conspiring, is recovering its prominence. We do not enter on the details of logical doctrine which the books before us present or suggest. We are, moreover, reluctantly compelled to keep back weighty passages contained in the Lectures which we had marked for quotation, including illustrations of the extracts from books far out of the reach of common readers, of which these volumes must always be regarded as an invaluable repertory. But they are of course in the hands of all students of philosophy, who will find several of the most interesting extracts to which we have now referred in the Lectures on the nature and occasions of error. They will also turn to the closing Lecture, on "Books as a means of Intellectual Improvement," by one whose personal intercourse with books, as the organ of information and speculative excitement, was probably more exclusive and intense than that of any other among his fellow-countrymen.

It is almost unnecessary to add, that these "Lectures" are, in their present form, a model of editorial ability. We may infer this from the deserved reputation of the editors for speculative acuteness and accuracy. Oxford and the Scottish Universities have been centres of logical study in Great Britain; and the most important British treatise in Formal Logic is appropriately introduced into the world by a representative of each. Dr Mansel is everywhere known as one of the foremost among living psychologists and logicians; and in the recent appointment of Mr Veitch to the Chair of Logic at St Andrews, the Universities of Scotland have an additional security for the transmission of their characteristic glory as lights of mental science in Europe.

ART. VI.-Lord Macaulay's Place in English Literature.

ALL the writings of Lord Macaulay, which, in his own judgment and in the judgment of his friends, seem worthy of a permanent place in English literature, have now been given to the world. His whole literary career, from an epitaph on Henry Martyn, written at the age of twelve, to the biography of William Pitt, the work of mature fifty-nine, is before us. Unfortunately we have nothing more to look for. It is well known that but little of the History has been left in a state which will allow of its publication; and Lord Macaulay's place in the world of letters must therefore be determined by what we already possess. His "Biography," it is true, has yet to be written. From that source, however, we can hope to hear nothing more of the writer; and it may even be doubted whether any very valuable addition will thereby be made to our knowledge of the man. The lives of most public men reveal their characters, and this was, in an especial degree, true of Lord Macaulay. Without being in any sense an egotist, he yet felt so warmly on public affairs, that in writing and speaking on them he unconsciously revealed himself. No one can handle themes of which his heart is full, without affording glimpses of his real nature. Lord Macaulay never wrote or spoke except on themes of which his heart was full; and hence in his writings and speeches the character of the man is more truly, because less intentionally, portrayed than in the writings of professed egotists like Byron or Rousseau. Nor should it be forgotten, that in political life, although the highest offices were denied him, he played no undistinguished part. He shared in the great Reform battles, in the storms which preceded the fall of the Melbourne Ministry, and in the bitterness of the opposition which arrayed itself against Peel. In these contests, and in the results which they entailed, ample opportunities were afforded for displaying all the qualities which dignify or discredit the career of a politician. No portraiture has yet been given to the public of Lord Macaulay's social and domestic characteristics, and on these, therefore, a stranger must be silent. But we know enough to enable us to assign him his place in the republic of letters, and to ascertain how far, in the great game of politics, his opinions were worthy to be accepted, and his example to be followed.

It is not, we confess, without hesitation that we attempt this subject. Lord Macaulay's death is still so recent, his loss is so irreparable to that most important branch of literature, the historical literature of our country, that we find it no easy matter

[blocks in formation]

to discharge, with fitting composure, the duty of a critic. It is hard to be impartial in the midst of regret. When the feeling is strong upon us that the place which has been left vacant can never be supplied-that the task which has been left unaccomplished will never be completed-we are hardly able to be coldly impartial. So much, too, has been written on Macaulay, that it is impossible to write anything better than has been written already. But it is possible to write something more. His works have been reviewed as they variously appeared; but, until the present time, all his writings have never been brought together. It is now in our power to regard his labours as a whole, to notice the gradual development of style, to remark the growth of his ideas, and to admire the stability of his convictions. Such a study cannot be unimportant or uninstructive; and we shall endeavour to pursue it with as much impartiality as our fervent admiration for the great historian whom we have lately lost will allow.

When Lord Macaulay's contributions to the Edinburgh Review first appeared in a collected form, the popularity which they obtained was quite unprecedented; nor has it been approached since by any of the compilations of a similar nature which have become so common. Sydney Smith's articles alone, from the humour, the sound sense, and the knowledge of the world which they display, are worthy to be placed beside them. But Lord Macaulay took a wider sweep than the accomplished churchman, and lent to a more varied range of subject the charm of a more brilliant style. Any detailed criticism of these essays now-a-days would be absurd. Everybody has read them, and the verdict of public opinion has been definitely pronounced. They are a perfect mine of information. We have criticism on poetry, on essay writing, and on novel writing, in the articles on Byron, on Addison, and on Madame D'Arblay. We have elaborate portraitures of the greatest English statesmen-of Burleigh, of Walpole, and of Chatham. We have solutions of the most vexed questions of English history, as in the article on Sir William Temple. We have the great difficulty of Church and State connection discussed upon rational principles. And, above all, we have the magnificent Indian disquisitions. It is not too much to say, that an effect equal to the effect produced by "Lord Clive," and "Warren Hastings," was never produced by any two articles since article-writing began. In the paper on Clive, surprise was expressed at the general ignorance of Indian affairs, even among educated Englishmen. The publication of these two essays went far to dispel that ignorance. They could not, indeed, narrate the whole. Yet, any one who studies them attentively will at least have laid a good foundation for further in

quiry. He will find that he has acquired not a little knowledge of the rise of our Indian empire, and of what may be called the Constitutional History of our rule in the East. And, what is of greater importance, he will find excited within him a very strong desire to learn more. India has been unhappy in her historians; but to these essays belongs the triumph that, in spite of the heaviness of Mill, the prolixity of Orme, and the commonplaceness of Elphinstone, Englishmen are at last beginning to know something of the "annals of that marvellous empire which valour without parallel has annexed to the throne of the Isles."

But Lord Macaulay, great though he was as an essayist, has won for himself a more enduring title to fame. His genius was essentially historical. His first essays were historical; his best essays were historical; and, last of all, we have the History itself by which his reputation will be finally determined.

All of us remember the manner in which the first two volumes of the History were received. No book, not even the best of the Waverley series, ever experienced such popularity. __ The Times devoted not only articles, but leaders, to its praise. Every Review in the country went into ecstasies. One notorious exception indeed there was; but that exception only sufficed to bring out more forcibly the otherwise universal concord. Such harmony was too beautiful to last. Gradually faint murmurs of disapprobation made themselves heard. As years went on, these increased in number and deepened in tone, until the reaction reached a height on the appearance of volumes III. and IV. The greeting accorded to them differed markedly from that which had welcomed their more fortunate predecessors. Faults before unnoticed were pointed out; blemishes before hinted at were enlarged upon; beauties before brought into strong relief, were passed over or denied. The whirligig of time brought round revenges which might have satisfied even the soul of Mr Croker. The Edinburgh Review itself, bound to render all suit and service to its great contributor, began to falter in its allegiance. This was no more than might have been expected. Such changes from one extreme of opinion to the opposite extreme, are as common in literature as in anything else. But the reactionary spirit leads into as great error as the original enthusiasm. Every part of Lord Macaulay's history possesses peculiar and appropriate merits; but were a choice forced upon us, we should give the preference to the third and fourth volumes over the other two. The first part of the work, indeed, possessed the charm of novelty. All the more prominent characters were brought on the stage; and the celebrated second chapter, from the nature of its subject, stands alone. The brilliant circle which surrounded Charles II. is painted with the pencil of

« 上一頁繼續 »