'Geist' is forbidden by nature to flourish in an aristocracy.

"So do not," he continued, "suffer yourself to be deceived by parallels drawn from times before 'Geist.' What has won this Austrian battle for Prussia is 'Geist;' 'Geist' has used the King, and Bismarck, and the Junkers, and 'Ungeist in uniform,' all for its own ends; and 'Geist' will continue so to use them till it has triumphed.1 It will ally itself with 'Geist' where it finds it, because there it has a ground for mutual respect and understanding; and where there is no 'Geist,' it has none.

"And now," this odious man went on, "now, my dear friend, I shall soon be leaving you, so one word more. You have lately been writing about the Celts and the Germans, and in the course of your remarks on the Germans you have said, among many impertinences, one thing which is true. You have said that the strength of North Germany lay in this, that the idea of science governed every department of human activity there. You, my dear friend, live in a country where at present the idea of clap-trap governs every department of human activity. Great events are happening in the world, and Mr. Goldwin Smith tells you that 'England will be compelled to speak

1 I am unwilling to triumph over Arminius in his grave; but I cannot help remarking that "Ungeist in uniform,” as Mr. Bottles observes to me, has just given a pretty good account of the “Geist” in French democracy; and I have a shrewd suspicion it will give an equally good account of the 'Geist" of Arminius's educated and liberal friends in Prussia. Perhaps Arminius was taken away from the evil to come!--ED.

at last.' It would be truly sad if, when she does speak, she should talk nonsense. To prevent such a disaster, I will give you this piece of advice, with which I take my leave: Get Geist.'"

Thank God, this d-d professor (to speak as Lord Palmerston) is now gone back to his own Intelligenz-Staat. I half hope there may next come a smashing defeat of the Prussians before Vienna, and make my ghostly friend laugh on the wrong side of his mouth. Meanwhile, I shall take care that he hears whatever answers he gets. I know that they will be conclusive, and I hope that they will be speedy, and in this hope,

I am, Sir,

Your obedient servant,

MATTHEW ARNOLD.

To the EDITOR of the PALL MALL GAZETTE.

LETTER II.

ARMINIUS APPEARS AS HIS OWN INTERPRETER.

BERLIN, July 31, 1866.

SIR,AN English friend of mine, Mr. Matthew Arnold, seems to have rushed into print with an idea or two he picked up from me when I was in England, and to have made rather a mess of it; at least, he sends me some newspapers which have answered him, and writes me a helpless sort of a letter at the same time, asking me how he is to parry this, and what he is to say in reply to that. Now, I have a regard for this Mr. Matthew Arnold, but I have taken his measure, and know him to be, as a disputant, rather a poor creature. Again and again I have seen him anxiously ruminating over what his adversary has happened to say against his ideas; and when I tell him (if the ideas were mine) that his adversary is a dummkopf, and that he must stand up to him firm and square, he begins to smile, and tells me that what is probably passing through his adversary's mind is so and so.1

1 A very ill-natured and exaggerated description of my (I hope) not unamiable candour.-ED.

I see your hideous truss manufactory in Trafalgar Square comes up in this controversy, and that very manufactory brings to my mind a ridiculous instance of my poor friend's weakness. I had been running over with him a few of the principal violations of æsthetic laws in London, illustrating the lesson by reference to the stucco palaces of my beautiful Berlin. After despatching the Duke of Wellington's statue and the black dome and gray pepper-boxes of your National Gallery, I came to Coles's manufactory. "Can anything be more atrocious?" I asked. "It is bad," answered my poor friend; "and yet," he went on, "and yet, Arminius, I have a tenderness for that manufactory. That manufactory, with other things in London like it, is one of my favourite arguments for the immortality of the soul." "What folly have you got in your head now?" said I. "Remember," said he, "what is told us of the statue of the Olympian Zeus by Phidias. It was life enough to have seen it; felicity had then reached its consummation; the spirit could grasp no more, and the man might end. And what therefore, I ask, must not be in store for the British ratepayer, who in his life has only seen the Duke of Wellington's statue and Coles's truss manufactory His felicity must surely be yet to come. Somewhere, beyond the grave" . . and for a good twenty minutes my simple friend went on with stuff like this, which I will not weary you with any more of.

I, Sir, as a true Prussian, have a passion for what is wissenschaftlich (I do not say "scientific," because

then you English will think I mean I have an interest in the sea-bear, or in the blue lights and smells of a chemical lecture). I am, I say, wissenschaftlich; I love to proceed with the stringency of a philosopher, and Mr. Matthew Arnold with his shillyshallying spoils the ideas I confide to him. Therefore I write to you myself, to tell you (since I like your nation for the sake of the great men it has formerly produced, and of its brave-hearted, industrious people) where the pinch of the matter for you really lies.

It lies here-there is in you "kein Ernst, der ins Ganze geht." You peck at the mere outside of problems; you have not got your mind at work upon them; you fancy they will solve themselves without mind, if only you keep making bottles, and letting every one do what is right in his own eyes, and congratulating yourselves at the top of your voices on your own success. "Individualism and industrialism will in time replace Coles by a worthier edifice," says one of your prophets. Not without an "Ernst der ins Ganze geht," I answer. Not without "Geist " and

faith in " Geist;" and this is just what your individualism and industrialism has not got. "A selfadministering community is surely an ideal."-That depends entirely on what the self-administering community is like. If it has "Geist," and faith in "Geist," yes; if it has not, no. Then another of your prophets asks: "Why should 'Geist' care about democracy? Democracy is government by the masses, by the light of their own vulgar tastes."-Your democracy perhaps, but this is just what makes