the use of the terms that reason is ever put where they meant the understanding; for, from other parts of their writings, it is evident that they knew and asserted the distinction, nay, the diversity of the things themselves,' &c. See also pp. 60, 98, 263; ii. 139. The Cambridge Platonists laid great stress on the distinction, and in this, as in the importance they attached to the divine witness of conscience, they may have prepared Coleridge for Kant. (See John Smith in Cambridge Platonists, ed. E. T. Campagnac, p. 139; Principal Tulloch, Rational Theology and Christian Philosophy in England in the Seventeenth Century, i. 381.)

22. both life and sense, &c. Par. Lost, v. 485. For 'in kind' the original has 'of kind'. Italics and capitals, it is hardly necessary to add, are Coleridge's.

PAGE 110 1. 5. To establish this distinction was one main object of The Friend. To Stuart Coleridge spoke of The Friend as a work for the development of Principles' (Letters from the Late Poets to D. Stuart, 1880, p. 117): and in a letter to Estlin (Estlin Letters, Dec. 1808) he writes: 'The first essay will be on the nature and importance of Principles. The blindness to this I have always regarded as the disease of this discussing, calculating, prudential age.' So too he wrote in the first number of The Friend: 'My object is to refer men to Principles in all things.' In the first issue of the Prospectus it is stated that one main purpose of The Friend is to provide 'Consolations and Comforts from the exercise and right application of the Reason, the Imagination, and the Moral Feelings'.

The distinction of Reason and Understanding may have been long familiar to Coleridge, but it was no doubt in Kant that he first learned its value as a weapon against the empiricists and necessitarians. In a letter to Poole (Jan. 1804; Letters, 454) he speaks of having found his way out of that labyrinth-den of sophistry (Necessitarianism), and of bringing with him 'a better clue than has hitherto been known, to enable others to do the same'. This 'clue' was no doubt the distinction of Reason and Understanding, which he had now scientifically formulated. In The Friend we have Coleridge's earliest expression of the distinction. (See Nos. 5 and 9.) Here the Understanding is distinguished as the experiential faculty from Reason, or the sciential faculty. All morality is grounded upon Reason, without which man is a Thing. Reason, again, is defined as the faculty of the supersensuous; Understanding as the faculty of the sensuous. Reason implies all that distinguishes man from the animals: the power of reflection, of comparison, of suspension of mind; whereas Understanding is but the same faculty as the instinct of animals, with the addition of self-consciousness. For Coleridge's subsequent elaboration of the distinction, see The Friend (1818), 'First Landing-Place,' Essay V; Aids to Reflection

(Bohn, XI, 135, 142, 143, 171); Statesman's Manual (1816), Appendix C; Letter to C. A. Tulk, Feb. 1821 (Letters, p. 712); the Essay on Faith, &c. In 1830 (T. T., May 30) he spoke of the distinction as the 'Gradus ad Philosophiam'. See, too, The Friend (1818), Sect. II, Essay II.

7. a work, which was printed rather than published. Coleridge refers to The Friend of 1809-1810, which was published at Penrith. The title-page ran thus 'THE FRIEND: a Literary, Moral, and Political Weekly Paper, excluding Personal and Party Politics and Events of the Day. Conducted by S. T. Coleridge of Grasmere, Westmoreland. Each number will contain a stamped Sheet of large Octavo, like the present; and will be delivered free of expense, by the Post, throughout the Kingdom, to Subscribers. The Price each Number One Shilling. . . . Penrith: Printed and Published by J. Brown'. The ill-success of The Friend cannot be explained merely by the inconvenience of the subscriptionlist plan. The irregularity in publication, the slowness of transit between Grasmere and Penrith, and Coleridge's own apathy and dilatoriness, all contributed to its failure. And, apart from these external causes, the contents of The Friend were not calculated to appeal to a large circle of readers. Cp. A. P., p. 213 (1810), 'Thought and attention are very different things. I never expected the former from the readers of The Friend. I did expect the latter, and was disappointed.' The first number appeared on June 1, 1809; the last on March 15, 1810: only twenty-seven numbers were printed in all. (See Life, pp. 170-76; Letters, ch. 10.) For the business details of The Friend, as well as for Coleridge's objects in publishing it, Pt. III of the Letter from the Lake Poets to D. Stuart should be consulted.

33. One gentleman procured me nearly a hundred names. Cp. Memorials of Coleorton, ii. 97, &c., where in a letter to Lady Beaumont, written in January, 1810, Coleridge informs her that his 'hopes concerning The Friend are at dead low-water', and proceeds to set forth the causes of its ill-success. According to this letter, the 'gentleman' here alluded to was Mr. Clarkson; but his words are somewhat differently given, the allusion to 'objects of Charity' being ironically suggested by Coleridge himself.

PAGE 111 1. 20. On my list of subscribers. This story of the Earl of Cork is also told in the above letter, and to the same effect.

PAGE 114 1. 13. Toward the close of the first year. Coleridge left Cambridge about the middle of December, 1795. In the following December he undertook the conduct of The Watchman, the first number of which appeared in March, 1796.

16. I was persuaded by sundry Philanthropists, &c. It is probable that Coleridge was as much the persuader as the persuaded. The 'sundry Philanthropists and Anti-polemists' probably

included the rest of the 'Pantisocrats' (Southey, Southey's friend
George Burnett, and Lovell, who married Mary Fricker), and other
friends, whom Coleridge had interested in the project (foremost
among them Josiah Wade, who was kept constantly informed by
Coleridge of the progress of his tour in search of subscribers).

18. that all might know the truth, &c. See copy of the
original Prospectus (Life, Appendix). The flaming prospectus to
which Coleridge here alludes was no doubt prepared specially for
the tour.

31. I was at that time, &c. Coleridge was converted to
Unitarianism while an undergraduate at Cambridge in 1793. His
conversion was due to the influence of W. Frend (Life, p. 25). In
an early notebook (1796) is the following entry: Unitarians
travelling from Orthodoxy to Atheism. Why?' And in a letter to
George Fricker (1807? Cottle's Reminiscences, p. 339) he declares
that disappointment in the only deep wish I had ever cherished'
first forced him to question his Socinian creed. This may refer to
the Mary Evans affair in 1794. Yet in 1797 he still thought of be-
coming a Unitarian minister (Letters, p. 228), and in 1802 he wrote
to Estlin: 'If there be any meaning in words, it appears to me that
the Quakers and Unitarians are the only Christians.' He adds, how-
ever, that ‘even of these I am sometimes jealous that some of the
Unitarians make too much of an Idol of their one God'. And his
wavering attitude appears in another letter of the same year (Estlin
Letters, July, 1802): My Confessio Fidei, as regards the doctrine of
the Trinity, is negative Unitarianism—a non liquet concerning the
nature and being of Christ.' So his daughter writes of him that
'his Unitarianism was purely negative: not a satisfaction in the
positive formal divinity of the Unitarians, but what remained to
him to the last, a revulsion from certain explanations of the Atone-
ment commonly received as orthodox'. In the same year (1802) he
wrote (A. P., p. 26): 'Socinianism, moonlight; Methodism, a stove;
O for some sun to unite heat and light!' And in 1805 (Gillman's
Life, p. 160): 'Seven or eight years ago, my mind then wavering in
its necessary passage from Unitarianism... through Spinosism and
Plato to St. John. This I now feel-that no Trinity, no God. That
Unitarianism in all its forms is idolatry'... 'O that this conviction
may work upon me and in me, and that my mind may be made up
as to the character of Jesus and of historical Christianity, as clearly
as it is of the Logos, and intellectual or spiritual Christianity'. It
was not until his return from Malta that Coleridge definitely declared
himself a Trinitarian (Cottle, Rem. pp. 314-25). See also Life, p. 165;
Biog. Lit. i. 136. For his later opinion of Unitarianism, see Letters,
p. 758; Emerson (on his visit to Coleridge) in English Traits;_and
for Coleridge's explanation of his attraction to the doctrine, T. T.,
June 23, 1834.

PAGE 117 1. 5. This took place at Manchester. Cp. letter to

Josiah Wade (Biog. Lit. 1847, Biographical Supplement, ii. 353), Jan. 1796: 'This morning I called on Mr. with H's letter.

66

Mr. received me as a rider, and treated me with insolence that was really amusing from its novelty. "Overstocked with these articles. People always setting up some new thing or other.""I read the Star and another paper; what could I want with this paper, which is nothing more?" "Well, well, I'll consider of it." To these entertaining bon mots I returned the following repartee- "Good morning, Sir."

PAGE 119 1. 15. how opposite even then my principles were. According to Dr. Carlyon (Early Years, &c., i. 27: quoted, Life, p. 41) Coleridge while still at Cambridge had occasion to correct a misapprehension on the part of the Master of his College, by informing him 'that he was neither Jacobin nor Democrat, but a Pantisocrat'. And of the Conciones ad Populum, delivered in 1795, Coleridge wrote, late in life: 'Except the two or three pages involving the doctrine of philosophical necessity and of Unitarianism, I see little or nothing in these outbursts of my youthful zeal to retract' (Biog. Lit. 1847, ii. 346). And the author of The Watchman is certainly no Jacobin. In April, 1798, Coleridge writes to his brother George: 'A man's character follows him long after he has ceased to deserve it; but I have snapped my squeaking baby-trumpet of sedition, and the fragments lie scattered in the lumber-room of penitence.' And in 1803 (?: Cottle, Rem. p. 110) to Miss Cruikshanks: 'As to my principles they were at all times decidedly anti-Jacobin and anti-revolutionary.' His disappointment in the outcome of the Revolution found expression in France: An Ode, written in Feb. 1798. As appears from the Ode itself, it was the base treatment of Switzerland by the revolutionary leaders which moved Coleridge to this public recantation. But no doubt his sympathy with the French Government had been for some time on the wane. Their detention of the Netherlands provoked him to a strong remonstrance in 1796. (See The Watchman, April, 1796.) But his assertion, made in 1832 (T. T., July 23, 1832), Before 1793, I clearly saw, and often enough stated in public, the vile mockery. of the whole affair,' is not supported by the facts. (See Life, p. 85 f. n.; and The Friend (1818), § 1, 'On the Principles of Political Knowledge,' where Coleridge reprints one of the Addresses of 1795, as documentary evidence of the fact that he was never at any time of his life 'a convert to the system.')

PAGE 120 1. 1. a most censurable application of a text from Isaiah. 'Wherefore my Bowels shall sound like an Harp,' Isaiah. Cp. Letters, 157 (March, 1796): The Essay on Fasting I am ashamed of, but it is one of my misfortunes that I am obliged to publish extempore as well as compose.'

4. disgusted by their infidelity, &c. Cp. letter to G. Coleridge,

April, 1798 (Letters, p. 240): Equally with you I deprecate the moral and intellectual habits of those men, both in England and France, who have modestly assumed to themselves the exclusive title of Philosophers and Friends of Freedom. I think them

at least as distant from goodness as from greatness.'

9. I levelled my attacks, &c. The article Modern Patriotism (Watchman, No. III) does not correspond to Coleridge's description. It is in effect an exhortation to the 'good citizen' to lead a moral life, give up Godwinism, and 'condescend to believe in a God, and in the existence of a Future State'. Neither in this nor other numbers do I find any reference to the 'gagging bills', or any plea for national education and the spread of gospels. Coleridge may, however, be thinking of the address delivered by him in the same year (printed in The Friend, 1818).

26. At the ninth number I dropt the work. Not at the ninth number, but the tenth. On the last page the reader was informed that This is the last number of the Watchman... The reason is short and satisfactory—the work does not pay its expenses'.

31. thrown into jail by my Bristol printer. According to Cottle (Rem., p. 83) 'Mr. C.'s memory was here grievously defective. The fact is Biggs the printer (a worthy man) never threatened or even importuned for the money. The whole of the paper (which cost more than the printing) was paid for by the writer (i. e. Cottle himself).

...

34. a dear friend, who attached himself to me. Sara Coleridge (Biog. Lit. 1847, i. 188) is apparently mistaken in thinking that Josiah Wade is here referred to. The dear friend is more probably Thomas Poole, at whose instigation a number of friends of Coleridge subscribed a purse of from £35 to £40, which reached him on the last 'magazine-day' of The Watchman (Life, p. 52; Thomas Poole and his Friends, by Mrs. Sandford, i. 142-5). Coleridge made Poole's acquaintance on his first visit to Bristol, 1794. Although after 1799 they saw and heard comparatively little of each other, they remained firm friends to the last.

PAGE 121 1. 5. Conscientiously an opponent of the first revolutionary war. Coleridge's chronology in this sentence is somewhat vague. The declaration of war with France took place in 1793: the invasion of Switzerland in 1798: and Coleridge's retirement to Stowey in 1796 (Dec. 30). See letter to Miss Cruickshanks (? 1803 Cottle, Rem. p. 110): ‘At that time (1793) I seriously held the doctrine of passive obedience, though a violent enemy of the first war.'

16. by writing verses for a London Morning Paper. Coleridge apparently did not (see Life, p. 85) begin writing for the Morning Post before Jan. 1798. Between that date and his departure for Germany the following poems were printed in this paper: Fire, Famine, and Slaughter; The Raven; Lewti; The Recantation