affections of the heart, extensive experience and patient observation of human nature in public and in private life, are a few of the excellencies, which constitute these works into a code of instruction founded on the fundamental principles of our nature. We would enlarge on this subject, but that we are not aware that our views of it have been questioned in any respectable quarter, No one, certainly, who has made the originals his study, can doubt their importance in the formation of the tender mind. On one point, however, a difference of opinion prevails even at Oxford, on the expediency of that part of the statute which excludes the modern writers on moral philosophy from the schools. In favour of the exclusion it has been argued, "That in a christian community ethics is much more included within the province of religion than of philosophy; that without the sanction of religion the purest system of ethics would be comparatively lifeless and unfruitful; and without ethical instruction religion itself is vapid and even dangerous." It is argued, "That we should look to the pulpit for the fullest performance of this branch of education; and that it is a popular error to consider moral philosophy and metaphysics as inconsistent with the nature of a sermon." It is stated," that the Greek philosophy is always studied with a reserve in favour of christianity; and that, while popular modern works will be read without much specific encouragement, a foreign stimulus is almost always wanted to make an ancient treatise of any depth generally studied." But, on the other hand, it may be replied, that if we look to the pulpit with any such unreasonable expecta tion, we must look in vain. The duty of a preacher is to convey religious instruction, and exhort to the practice of morality; that of a moral philosopher consists in explaining the philosophy of the human mind, in investigating the faculties and princi. ples of our nature, and tracing the general laws of our constitution. Now the fact is indisputable, that no means of instruction in the latter are provided for the Oxford student, except what the study of the ancient writers affords; and that he quits the university with the same imperfect and erroneous notions in this most important of all the sciences, as if he had studied in the Academy or the Lyceum. Of the analysis of the faculties purely intellectual, which has been lately pursued with so much success, he is in almost total ignorance, and even his knowledge of our moral faculties, of the sources of our desires and affections, and of the first principles of moral obligation, is miserably deficient. In short, he is left to go about with a small candle, as Bacon somewhere expresses it, lighting up by turns every little cor ner of the mind, instead of collecting enlarged and general views of nature and of man. But it is unnecessary to enlarge on this subject so long as it is not asserted that the names of Bacon and his followers in intellectual philosophy have at any time dignified and profaned the pulpit of St Mary's; or that the University of Oxford supplies any advice, assistance, or encouragement in any other mode, public or private, in the depart ment of moral philosophy, excepting only the examination already men. *See an able pamphlet, entitled, "A Reply to the Calumnies of the Edinburgh Review against Oxford." tioned in the Offices of Cicero, and the Ethics of Aristotle. Such being the state of the fact, and, as far as the pulpit is concerned, there being no probability of any change, it is of no importance to dwell upon the impropriety of perverting the short space of time which sermons occupy to any subject not immediately connected with the practice of life, or the great articles of our faith. The more attentively it is considered, the more impracticable and dangerous will the proposal appear, to confound the doubtful speculations of the metaphysician, and the abstract discussions of the moral philosopher, with those great truths which are conveyed in the same plain and simple language to the learned and to the ignorant. On the whole, it would be affectation to conceal our conviction, that such an idea could only have originated in the most erroneous and mistaken views of the nature of this branch of education. With respect to the argument quoted above, its singularity will be at once explained upon this last principle, when our readers are informed that the same author broadly and repeatedly states his belief in the most dogmatical and unqualified terms, that "the whole organum of Bacon is exclusively confined to the department of physical science!"'*-a position which, from such a quarter, strongly marks the slow progress of knowledge, and amply justifies the retort, that "there are some modern works for the study of which a foreign stimulus is occasionally wanted." To some other positions of this author, to which he adheres with much pertinacity, we shall just allude, as curious historical facts. Such are his dogmas, "that it is a vulgar error to oppose the organum of Bacon to that of Aristotle;"" that the current notion is false, that Bacon invented the method of induction for arriving at those truths which Aristotle sought by means of syllogism;""that in the first book of the Novum Organum, the syllogistic method of reasoning is not once mentioned among the causes that seem to have obstructed the advancement of natural science;" and "that to propose this work as a guide for philosophical inquiries in the present age, is to mistake its nature and design." Such in the nineteenth century are the opinions of an author of very respectable talents and attainments, and who speaks the language of a person of some note in this famous university. And here let us lament with Aristotle that melancholy species of ignorance, which proceeds not from the difficulty attending the objects of our knowledge, but from the stubbornness of our own hearts, and which renders the eyes of the human soul as blind to the clearest truths, as the eyes of bats to the light of day.t To expose the contradictions of this author with respect to Bacon's philosophy, or indeed to entertain controversies of any sort, is not very consistent with the nature of this work; but the reflection, that his errors cannot be peculiar to himself, and the magnitude of their practical * See a Second Reply to the Edinburgh Review. † Ίσως δε και της χαλεπότητος εσης κατα δυο τρόποις, εκ εν τοις πραγμασιν, αλλ' Εν μεν το αίτιον αυτής. ώσπερ γαρ και τα των νυκτερίδων ομματα προς το φέγγος έχει το μεθ' ήμεραν, οντω και της ημετερας ψυχης ὁ νας προς τα τῇ φύσει φανερώτατα παντων. Metaphys. II. 1. consequences in the system of education, which it is our object to describe, may apologize for a very few curso. ry observations. The author having been fairly driven from his position, that the Novum Organum is confined to natural philosophy,* still makes a shew of defending the other point, that it has an object totally different from the Organum of Aristotle, and that they are in no respect in opposition to each other. His error, as far as it is intelligible, seems to consist in conceiving the object of induction to be limited to making discoveries in the proper sense of the word, and in not understanding it to be equally necessary in the acquisition of knowledge previously discovered. But the process of acquiring knowledge must be admitted to be precisely the same, whether it has been previously discovered or not, unless it be contended that the nature of the knowledge itself is altered by the discovery. The truths in Locke's Essay are acquired by the reader by the same inductive mode of reasoning by which they were at first presented to the mind of that great philosopher. Nor did Bacon, when he recommended induction as the only mode of discovering truth, or Locke, when he afforded so splendid an exemplification of his doctrine, lay claim to any other praise, than that of steadily and systematically directing the attention of learned men to the same logic, by which alone the common sense of mankind in preceding ages had unconsciously provided for the wants and desires of individuals, or in any way extended the empire of human reason. Now it is perfectly obvious, that no fact, old or new, was ever added to any man's stock of knowledge by the lo gic of the schools; and it is a manifest absurdity to argue that a young man's mind should be directed to the syllogistic form of reasoning to the exclusion of the method of induction, until " he learns the arts in their present form and condition." Induction is nothing else than the natural operation of the mind when all obstructions are removed; and if it were possible to exclude it altogether, the first principles of all knowledge would be wanting, and the very ma terials with which syllogisms are con structed. But it can never be denied, that the great object of all philoso phical instruction is nothing else than to open the way for the natural developement of our faculties. Upon this ground, while the statements of Locke and Bacon remain unanswered, it may be maintained, without the fear of contradiction, that the logic of the schools cannot be applied with safety to any branch of philosophy, physical or intellectual, but is the mere science of words, and relates only to the application and arrange ment of knowledge previously acqui red; "que disputationes alat, sermones ornet, ad professoria munera et vitae civilis compendia adhibeatur et valeat ;" and which consequently, instead of the first and leading object, ought to form one of the last and least important parts of a system of liberal education. The position already mentioned, that the novum organum, or new machine, as it has been called, for working with the understanding on all subjects, is not intended as a substitute for the old logic of Aristotle, is refuted by the very title and by every • See Mr Home Drummond's Observations suggested by the Strictures of the Re view, and by the Two Replies, and an Answer to Mr Drummond in the Appendix to a Third Reply. successive page of that work, which continually contrasts the new system and the old, which points out the limited application of the latter, enumerates the evils that have arisen from its adoption, and states why it is rejected, and induction substituted, per omnia, et tam ad minores pro. positiones quam ad majores." It is refuted by the inconsistencies of the author himself who advances it, and who by turns admits that Aristotle sought to discover truth and acquire knowledge by syllogism, and yields to Bacon, that syllogism is useless for these ends; who one moment confesses its barrenness in facts and principles, and the next recurs to the assertion, that it is the "necessary foundation on which every solid intellectual fabric must be raised." Enough, we trust, has been said to expose the erroneous views by which it is attempted to justify the study of the old logic to the exclusion of the new system recommended by Lord Bacon, and of all the modern acquisitions that have been made in moral philosophy by the method of induction. In opposition to the writer already quoted, it is argued, that if a knowledge of the ancient moralists continue to be indispensably required in the examinations, the admission of the modern writers also, at the option of the candidates, will not by comparison diminish, but rather confirm their respect for the former when it is well founded; and that those who from any cause find a difficulty in mastering the one, will not in this way be allowed to distract their at tention with the other, while an additional road to distinction will be opened to youths of readier talents or greater application. But on the whole, we should be inclined to be satisfied with the examination-statutes, as at present constituted, if each of them were to come into operation a year sooner, and if the year immediately preceding the first degree, with such residence as is afterwards required, were devoted to attendance on public lectures. It has been usual to charge the Oxford professors with neglect of duty; but though it must be owned that this is a defective part of the system, the defect often appears to have been traced to very inadequate causes. Public lectures are at present read on various subjects; but the college exercises and studies preparatory to the public examinations must of necessity form the principal occupation of under-graduates. When hearing public lectures forms the sole and exclusive occupation, they must of necessity be in more repute than where they are only a secondary and inferior object of attention. Were the examinations for degrees, and the whole system of college instruction abolished, the university lectures would soon claim their share of popularity; but it is absurd to expect that they should at present receive the same encouragement as if the time of under-graduates were not devoted to a different course of more laborious study. In the year 1809, of twenty-three professors, fourteen enjoyed sine • "Huic nostræ scientiæ finis proponitur; ut inveniantur non argumenta, sed artes, nec principiis consentanea, sed ipsa principia; nec rationes probabiles, sed designationes et indicationes operum. Itaque ex intentione diversa diversus sequitur effectus. Illic enim adversarius disputatione vincitur, hic natura opere.”—Bacon Inst. Mag. cures; viz. the professors of Hebrew, Greek, Civil Law, Common Law, Ancient History, Poetry, Music, Laud's Arabic, Lord Almoner's Arabic, Medicine, Aldrich's Medicine, Aldrich's Anatomy, and the Clinical and Anglo-Saxon professors. The following nine professorships were efficient:-Regius Divinity, Lady Margaret's Divinity, Modern History, Botany, Natural Philosophy, Astronomy, Geometry, Tomline's Anatomy, and Chemistry; that is to say, the professors in these branches were always ready to lecture or teach, though in some instances a term, or even a whole year, might elapse without their being able to obtain an audience. The lectures most numerously attended were, we believe, those in Divinity, Modern History, and Geometry, though on this point we cannot speak with confidence. Oxford can never be a medical school; but in some of the other branches small classes might perhaps be formed of those who have been examined; although while the examinations continue on their present footing, there is not sufficient encourage ment to induce professors who have slept for ages to emerge from their long retirement. The only exercise required after the examination, is the public reading of two Latin discourses, or, in place of one of them, the recitation of some Latin verses composed by the candidate; an exercise altogether inefficient, and which will probably soon dwindle into a form. What we would suggest as the best occupation during the fourth year and subsequent residence, would be to enforce attendance on public lectures in natural and moral philosophy and political economy. In the two last of these most im portant branches of knowledge, Ox ford is two thousand years behind the rest of the world, and is very deficient even in the first. Of moral philosophy enough has been already said. As to political economy, has been stated, that the leading doc trines are taught by the professor of modern history; but if our informa tion be correct, though we entertain the highest respect for his labours, and should be extremely sorry to see them discontinued, we are inclined to doubt whether this statement of their subject has not originated in similar erroneous views of its nature to those which directed us to the pulpit for instruction in moral philosophy. We have heard indeed of the curious and interesting discussions, introduced by that learned person upon the theoretical history of modern governments, but we never heard that he travelled so far from his own province, as to explain the general principles of tional wealth and prosperity. It has been demonstrated, that the recent improvements have had the effect of diminishing the numbers that attend even the lectures in natural philoso phy, for which the mathematical ex amination is so well calculated to prepare. These branches are less adapted for examinations than for public lectures, and in all probability will never receive any effectual en couragement at Oxford, until an ob ligation to attend the latter is imposed. Education is certainly one of those subjects, to which the usual arguments against restraint and monopoly will not apply, and it is generally ad mitted to be an instance in which Doctor Adam Smith's opinions are somewhat biassed by a love of system. The supply of useful knowledge to all ranks must have some |