strongly reminded of the stock fallacies of clerical logic at parish vestries and elsewhere, that we are naturally inclined to suspect some mystification. It, of course, occurs to us to ponder whether a theory of rights which, whilst in common with some more old-fashioned systems of morality, steers us clear of religious establishments, food monopolies,† and a few rocks and quicksands besides, strands us nevertheless on something very like communism and other unhospitable shores, can be an honest craft at all; and ought not to be challenged to hoist the black flag. Many ugly symptoms suggest the misgiving, that unless we are on the qui vive, we shall be suddenly entrapped. If, for example, fresh from witnessing and sympathising with the sufferings of some hapless young urchin, whose parent has certainly not proved his hatred to his son by sparing the rod, we should chance to be fascinated by the author's generous and chivalric doctrine respecting the rights of children,t we might have cause to repent it. We are told, what seems straightforward enough, and plausible enough,-" God wills human happiness; that happiness is attainable only through the medium of faculties; for the production of happiness, those faculties must be exercised; the exercise of them presupposes liberty of action; these are the steps by which we find our way from the Divine will to the law of equal freedom. But the demonstration is fully as complete when used on behalf of the child, as when used on behalf of the man. The child's happiness too is willed by the Deity; the child, too, has faculties to be exercised; the child needs scope for the exercise of those faculties; the child, therefore, has claims to freedom-rights as we call them-co-extensive with those of the adult."§ Gibbon tells us of a Persian king whose reign was longer than his life. If then, in the old dislocated state of things, an infant monarch was possible, what wonder if the new state of society, to which we are rapidly tending, should recognise infant citizens. And if so, just as poets were proscribed in Plato's republic, so very likely may vendors of rhubarb be dispensed with in Mr. Spencer's? Not a few might think this notion of rights of children passable enough, but how necessary it is to fear the Greeks, even when they bring us gifts, will appear, if we pause and reflect for a moment that, if we swallow the bait we are undone. It needs but to read "equine' for "human," and "horse" for "child," wheresoever it occurs in the passage we have quoted, and the latter day grimalkin pounces on us at once:-"among speculative persons, a question has sometimes risen: in the progress of emancipation, are we to look for a tinie when all the horses are to be emacipated, and brought to the supply and demand principle? Horses too have 'motives;' are acted on by hunger, fear, hope, love of oats, terror of platted leather; nay, they have vanity, ambition, emulation, thankfulness, vindictiveness; some rude outline of all our human spiritualities,-a rude resemblance to us in mind and intelligence, even as they have in bodily frame. The horse, poor dumb fourfooted fellow, he too has his private feelings, his affections, gratitudes, and deserves good usage; no human master, without crime, shall treat him unjustly either, or recklessly lay on the whip where it is not needed."

• Pages 304-310.

+ Pages 296-304.

Pages 172-192. We hope this chapter may not be printed separately as a New Boys' Own Book. § Page 172.

After all, however, it is but too plain, that the book is no jeu-d'esprit. Not the less, however, assuredly must we decline to hail Mr. Spencer as an ally in the great and sacred cause of freedom :—

"Non tali auxilio nec defensoribus istis

Tempus eget."

We would rather take occasion, from the appearance before the public of these crude speculations, to offer our frank warning to the friends of real liberty to take good heed with whom they share the perils and the honours of the daily thickening combat. We are quite sure, that to promulgate the creed, which is everywhere embodied in these pages, that "evil is good in the making;" to loosen the bands of families, by preaching to wives and children that they are slaves; to proclaim, that "government is essentially immoral" and "the offspring of evil;" to sneer at men's being content with the station of life to which God has called them; to represent evil as the harsh music made by a grinding law of adaptation, rather than the result of sin, from which along with its cause, a Redeemer has appeared to liberate us; to divorce morals as widely as possible from religion; to deny immortality; and to ignore revelation is the very likeliest way to rivet the shackles of mankind. And to shew, that our caution is not altogether unnecessary, we may refer to the fact, that whilst penning these animadversions on this very objectionable volume, we have seen it recommended to the perusal of young politicians in the principal Liberal daily organ. In many of the leading-articles of the Daily News, we, in common, we daresay, with many of our readers, have rejoiced to recognise a decidedly Christian tone. In the struggle with the shiny ecclesiasticism of the age, it has wisely taken its stand on the only vantage ground on which the hydra can be fairly strangled-the New Testament of the universal priesthood; and has displayed throughout a great mastery of the momentous questions involved. We feel sure, therefore, that the notice in question must have proceeded from a subordinate. Still we could wish that it might be the last of its kind. For surely, to allow such a flatulent philosophy as this to go forth from the scrutiny of the censor, not only without protest, but even with commendation, is to play into the hands of the enemy. If our author is displeased with us for the utterance of our honest sentiments, he will, perhaps, permit us to remind him of an observation of one, to whom he will probably more readily listen,-Mazzini,-"religion and politics are inseparable. Without religion, political science can only create despotism or anarchy." This is our firm belief, and the work before us, strikes as being a remarkable illustration of its truth. The author has undertaken to construct society by the aid of science alone, and the result is, a grammar of anarchy.

V.

THE PHILOSOPHY OF HUMAN NATURE.

The Nature of Man as Spiritual, Immortal, and Responsible, will be the most frequent topic of this department: though sometimes we shall introduce MISCELLANEOUS Subjects.

SHAKSPERE-HIS COMEDIES.

It has often been a question with thinking persons, why such writers as Shakspere, notwithstanding some undoubted moral blemishes in his works, should be given up into the hands of the irreligious as their exclusive possession: this, at least, will be admitted by all, that it is better for our youths to read him intelligently by their own fire-sides, than to visit those "canker-blossoms" of public morals, our-theatres.

It has been the fate of Shakspere's writings, to secure the unbounded admiration of a great many, and an equally unbounded condemnation from others; though of this latter sort, the majority have never read him, but have seen only a few bad specimens of sour grapes, brought by treacherous spies.

We have nothing to do here, with those critics, who on intellectual grounds, and from the formal laws of dramatic productions, the unities of time and place, and action, condemn the sea, because it will not be compressed into a nut-shell; or think the sun very much out of his latitude, because they cannot climb to it, by the aid of the tallest bean-stalk;— with such, we have not even controversial sympathy. Nor have we any

sympathy with those who, on religious grounds, would condemn Shakspere as a writer of plays: but we have a sincere respect for such, as on religious and moral grounds, condemn certain blemishes,-spots of impurity, which here and there diminish the fairness of his beauty: these we can lament with them; at the same time we must maintain the immense preponderance of higher qualities; useful practical truths, wrapped up gracefully, in witty expressions: elevated and noble sentiments, uttered in language of befitting sublimity; and altogether calculated to wipe out baser impressions, except with those whose impurity needs but slight occasions; for in reading Shakspere, as in everything else, it is "every one to his taste," and men will select their own appropriate food. Those who wish to enlarge their thoughts, to escape from every-day littleness, to refresh and invigorate their whole mental frame, by an excursion into the vast world of intellect, with its forests and mountains and torrents, and its quieter scenes of loveliness, have here a large and free domain, conquered and secured to them, as a perpetual inheritance.

There is, however, another obstacle in the way of cultivating this new world, discovered to us by the Columbus of genius; viz., the readiness with which men admire Shakspere: he is more known, than read; more praised, than studied and examined; and this certainly makes against him.

It can, therefore, not be out of place, to attempt a still further commendation of him; that readers may be drawn from mushroom novels to this great oak forest, which will ever abide as the fresh chaplet and crown of literature.

There has been a great deal written about Shakspere, but the best and easiest method of knowing him, is by reading him for yourself. Some help, no doubt, may be derived from those who, with the brevity that is the soul of wit, point out his peculiar excellencies; but the best criticism is that which leads you to become critics yourselves: not of the small analyzing and anatomical sort, that must pull a flower to pieces, and give hard names to the fragments, before seeing its beauty; but which takes the excellent piece of nature's witch-craft, in its integrity; and gives itself up to the unsophisticated impressions, which this wonder produces.

There are several ways in which the works of Shakspere may be commented on; we may take a survey of his entire genius, and its relation to dramatic art; or we may take a single play, and analyze the scope, the characters and impressions naturally produced, or its historical sources: or we may take up the separate characters brought forward, this would form an instructive picture gallery: every one has his own face: indeed, a good subject for lecture or disquisition, would be the CHARACTERISTICALNESS OF THE CHARACTERS IN SHAKSPERE: there is none of Pope's small leading or master passion, as the key to the entire man: for what is one single principle or passion, but a fragment? It is no more a character, than one cerulean lock, is a picture of Jove; or a wooden leg, is the outline of an old soldier. Shakspere has none of this, his personages are entire personages, not made up of one idea, but each is a web of a mingled yarn;" including all the variety of human feelings, but so peculiarly mingled, as to constitute a separate and definite INDIVIDUAL.

We shall not, however, on this occasion, give the plan of the entire garden; nor confine ourselves to a single tree; but shall endeavour to wreathe a garland of flowers plucked here and there: not flowers that have stood to wither in some drawing-room vase, or "book of beauty," those sickly exotics of literature: but fresh from the garden; culled with our own hand, for the especial gratification of our friends. We shall, therefore, beg your acceptance, of

"An odorous chaplet of sweet summer buds:"

and though not gracefully put together, our apology shall be a good intention, and your own generosity:

"For never anything can be amiss,

When simpleness and duty tender it."

Still we cannot forget our inaptitude; and most sincerely invoke the aid of that facile courtier, whose

"Eye begets occasion for his wit; For every object that the one doth catch,

The other turns to a mirth moving jest ;
Which his fair tongue, conceit's expositor,
Delivers in such apt and gracious words,
That aged ears play truant at his tales,
And younger hearings are quite ravished,
So sweet and voluble is his discourse."

Love's Labour lost. Act II., Scene 1.

There are some people, however, who, do or say what you will, are determined not to laugh;

"Nature hath framed strange fellows in her time;
Some that will evermore peep through their eyes,
And laugh, like parrots at, a bag-piper:
And other, of such vinegar aspect,

That they'll not shew their teeth in way of smile,
Though Nestor swear the jest be laughable."

This stubbornness is unfortunate, since

"A jest's prosperity lies in the ear

Of him that hears it, never in the tongue
Of him that makes it."

And the reason some people are no friends to wit, is, because they are not witty like "that blind rascally boy, that abuses every one's eyes, because his own are out."

We do not, it is true, pretend to know much; but subscribe to the Shepherd's philosophy:-"I know that the more one sickens the worse at ease he is; and that he that wants money, means, and content, is without three good friends: that the property of rain is to wet, and of fire to burn: that good pasture makes fat sheep: and that a great cause of the night, is lack of the sun that he that hath learned no wit by nature or art, may complain of good breeding, or comes of a very dull kindred." All this, we have learned, through being companion to a gentleman "that hath been a courtier,"

"And in his brain,

Which is as dry as the remainder biscuit

After a voyage, he hath strange places cram'd

With observation, with which he vents

In mangled forms."

For the rest, Sir Nathaniel shall defend us. "Sir, he hath never fed on the dainties that are bred in a book; he hath not eat paper, as it were; he hath not drunk ink: his intellect is not replenished; he is only an animal, only sensible in the duller parts." We cannot, therefore, be expected to equal those, who "have been at a great feast of languages, and stolen the scraps," or "have lived long on the alms-basket of words." Nor to come up to the level of you, who "have an exchequer of words, and I think no other treasure to give to your followers." No one can say of us,

"The fool hath planted in his memory
An army of good words."

"Fye, that you'll say so! he plays o' the viol-de-gamboys, and speaks three or four languages, word for word, without book." Though "methinks sometimes I have no more wit than a Christian, or an ordinary man has: but I am a great eater of beef, and I believe that does harm to