memory was all that even the most instructed men imagined they had any occasion to desire.

In this benumbed and torpid state of the human mind, the appearance of such a man as Hobbes, who challenged so many received and fundamental opinions, and exhibited his own views, with evidence and brevity, was calculated to produce very extraordinary effects. It is hardly, as Sir James somewhere acknowledges, too much to say, that the character of modern speculation was to a great degree determined by the writings of Hobbes.

Works of this importance assuredly required, in an historical view of moral philosophy, to be very carefully expounded; their matter to be luminously displayed, its value accurately appreciated, and the effects produced by its promulgation profoundly investigated.

Toward this Sir James has done three things. I. He tells us what were the causes of the influence obtained by the writings of Hobbes. II. He gives us an account of his philosophy. III. He makes remarks on the philosophy. I. He tells us what were the causes of his influence. They were these:

1. His genius for system.

2. His dogmatism.

3. The goodness of his style.

These things, says Sir James, account for his influence.

II. He gives us an account of Hobbes's philosophy.

1. It is cold. Hobbes shows no feeling but

arrogance.

2. Hobbes's moral system was established for the sake of his political; and his political was this-that the ends of government are best attained by the rule of one man, to whom unlimited obedience is secured.

This is Sir James's account of Hobbes's philosophy.

III. His remarks on the philosophy, meaning his objections to it, are the following:1. Hobbes does not distinguish thought from feeling.

2. He makes desires instances of objects deliberately pursued.

3. He strikes the affections out of human nature; and does not recognize the moral sentiments.

4. It results from this that personal advantage is the only motive.

5. Acknowledging with all men, the utility of morals, and the coincidence of private and public good, Hobbes wants moral sensibility; which leads him to the principle of utility, a pernicious error.

This is all which Sir James has to say to us, on the subject of Hobbes's philosophy.

A man could not give a more signal proof of incapacity for the work he had undertaken. There

is not a single thought of any the smallest value in the article; though a finer scope for the reflections of a superior mind is not afforded by any name in the annals of philosophy.

I. The causes which he assigns for the influence of the writings of Hobbes, are first presented to our notice.

"He owed his influence," says Sir James, "to various causes; at the head of which may be placed that genius for system, which, though it cramps the growth of knowledge, perhaps finally atones for that mischief, by the zeal and activity which it rouses among followers and opponents."

First of all, we need to understand what Sir James means by "the spirit of system;" which produces so much evil, but at the same time so much good, that Sir James declares he knows not which preponderates.

Sir James gives us something of a clue to his meaning; but unhappily that clue leads to two meanings.

In a note on the words "it cramps the growth of knowledge," he gives us a quotation from Bacon, whom he cannot pass without a smearing from his brush, and absurdly calls him "the Master of Wisdom."

"Another error is the over-early and peremptory reduction of knowledge into arts and methods, from which time it commonly receives small augmentation. Method, carrying a show of total and

perfect knowledge, has a tendency to generate acquiescence;" (Advancement of Learning.) Upon which Sir James is in an ecstacy. And exclaims, with a mark of admiration," What pregnant words!"

Every man acquainted with the writings of Bacon knows well what he means. It is the syllogistic method, which he is speaking of. This had been often considered as an all-sufficient instrument for the discovery of truth. It was necessary for Bacon to show that it was not; and that such "arts and methods" if too peremptory, and made too early, are apt to do harm. But this is wholly inapplicable to Hobbes. Sir James's talk is perfectly beside the matter. no man that ever wrote could the spirit of system, in this sense, be less truly ascribed, than to Hobbes. It is evident that Sir James did not understand the words which he quoted from "the Master of Wisdom."

Το

There is another expression of Sir James, which points to another meaning of his "spirit of system."

In the sentence next to that I have quoted above, he says, "A system which attempts a task so hard as that of subjecting vast provinces of human knowledge to one or two principles, if it presents some striking conformity to superficial appearances, is sure to delight the framer; and for a time, to subdue and captivate the

student too entirely for sober reflection and rigorous examination.”

Sir James's habit of talking loosely was so complete and blinding, that he did not perceive when he was, or was not, expressing his own opinion. He affirms here, that a system (aiming, as he describes it, at the true end of philosophy), delights its framer, and subdues his followers, only if it is bad. This seems extraordinary, but observe how true.

He says, that the system delights and subdues, under one condition; that is, if it presents some striking instances of conformity to superficial appearances. What Sir James meant to say may be guessed at. He meant to say that the system delights and captivates, if it does what he says, though it is so imperfect as to do nothing more. He has in reality said something nearly the opposite.

Endeavouring "to subject vast provinces of human knowledge to one or two principles," is that which Sir James now presents to us, as what he means by the spirit of system. The propensity to express himself badly is more unrelaxing in Sir James than in any other man. He begins by making a system the agent. "A system," he says, which attempts subjecting," &c. Sir James forgets that the system is the thing made, not the maker. A system is the arrangement, by some man or men, of a certain number of ideas, in a certain order, for a certain