ogy than speculation. Dr. Frederick A. Rauch, a favorite pupil of Daub, of Heidelberg, was President of a college at Mercersburg, Pennsylvania, where he died a few years ago, soon after publishing his “Psychology, or View of the Human Soul, including Anthropology.” He was a transcendentalist of the school of Hegel, and a man of genius. Laurens P. Hickok, D.D., of Auburn, published about a year and a half ago the most important systematic treatise that has yet appeared from the American press in this department, under the title of “Rational Psychology.” The style is inelegant and difficult, but the work displays a thorough mastery of the subject, and of its recent literature, especially in Germany, where the author received his education, and his characteristic principles. His strongest position is, that the mind is capable of constructing, a priori, pure forms in puré space; that is, that after perception, we can form in space general images, not having the qualities of particular bodies—a position of Brown against Berkeley and Stewart, but never so powerfully presented as in this treatise by Dr. Hickok. No American writer in this field has enjoyed so great a popularity as Dr. Wayland, President of Brown Univer. sity. Of his “Elements of Moral Science” nearly 50,000 copies have been sold, and his book on the “Limitations of Human Responsibility” has had much influence on opinions. The chief feature of his system is an attempt to harmonize the intellectual with the moral; he has perhaps suggested no new principles, disclosed no new motives, but he has clearly defined the limits and positions of subjects in which indistinctness is equivalent to uncertainty. Mr. George Ripley, who now conducts the literary department of the New York Tribune, contributed largely to the spread of French eclecticism, by his translation of the “Philosopical Miscellanies of Cousin, Jouffroy, and Constant; ” and by a book addressed to Andrews Norton in vindication of the transcendentalists, as well as by Various profound discussions in the “Boston Christian Examiner,” he displayed capacities which entitle him to a high rank in that party. He has since devoted much attention to the propagation of the doctrines of philosophical Socialism. The school of Boston transcendentalists began to attract attention about twenty years *go. Its apostles, Ripley, Emerson, Parker, and Brownson, were then in the Unitarian ministry, which all—except Parker, who receives but a doubtful recognition in the de

nomination—have since left. Brownson has become a Roman Catholic, and the rest have taken, we presume, to more congenial pursuits. The writings of Emerson are too well known in England to require characterization; his brilliant sentences, if they sometimes fail of illustration by the processes of logic, have always a ready and facile interpreter in the spirit, and the extent to which they are read places him, in position as well as by right of genius, among the foremost priests of the new age. Theodore Parker in many respects agrees with him, but he will never attain to his repose or power. Dr. Walker, Professor of Philosophy in Harvard College, though classed among transcendentalists, is rather a party by himself. A new man, having many affinities with the Boston school, is Henry James, of New York, author of a volume printed last year under the title of “Moralism and Christianity.” In what he has given to the world he has displayed so independent a spirit, so pure a method, such expansive humanity, and such ample resources of learning, as constitute him a teacher of the highest rank, and justify the most confident expectations of his distinction hereafter. We understand he intends soon to publish a new volume, in which he will discuss the “Symbolism of Property, Democracy and its issues, the Harmony of Nature and Revelation, the Past and Future Churches,” and perhaps include his original and powerful articles from the Tribune, on the “Institution of Marriage.” Opposed to all these writers we have last mentioned is Mr. Bowen, editor of the North American Review, who appears, from his “Critical Essays on Speculative Philosophy,” to be a general receiver of the principles of Locke, as modified by the progress of philosophical discovery. Professor Tayler Lewis, of Union College, who has edited Plato Contra Atheos, is now engaged on a translation of all the works of Plato. Philosophers and Theologians.—There are some writers distinguished alike in philosophy and in religion, or occupying a middle ground which has no name. Edwards was a type of the first class, and perhaps Emmons also, the most invincible theological gladiator of the last generation, who extended Berkeley's principle of an immediate divine agency in all the phenomena of the material world, to the same comprehensive and absolute efficiency in intelligence. In the latter class the most conspicuous American is Channing, nor let it be deemed an absurd fancy that leads us for a moment to consider Edwards and Channing together. Edwards conformed his life to the loftiest conceptions of his genius, and as much as Channing dissented from, nay abhorred, some parts of his theology, he readily apprehended the truth of his theory of beauty, which has been the germ of so much of the fine speculation of more modern times, and saw how harmonious were his walk and conversation with his philosophy. They were alike in person, of the same stature, the same spiritual presence, graceful manners, and fragile constitution; they shrank with the same sensitive delicacy from the turbulence and grossness of the world; they were both men of the closet, both earnest in their search after truth, both sincere in their worship of God and love of men. But one accepted for doctrine only results of the closest induction, while the other followed the law of consciousness. How happy for the world if the law were interpreted alike by all men, and in all bore such fruits! With the venerable heresy that God is honored by dishonoring the greatest of his creations which we can even in a degree comprehend, Dr. Channing had no sympathy. He felt that every good attribute of man was a substantial glory of God, and so found better employment than in diligently making himself sad about the depravity of his race. De Tocqueville has a chapter on the leaning to pantheism in democratic nations, and the thought may have been suggested by the Unitarian writer on the dignity of human nature. ... If Channing held views on this subject tending to the decay of adoration, he never apprehended such a consequence. His warmest friends and eulogists admit that he was wanting in capacity for metaphysical analysis and in logical acuteness. In the whirl and tumult of this busy and distracted age the Americans would remember the sun itself only while arranging gas lights by which to continue their occupations, and a great man is rarely spoken of among them after the installation of his successor. There was about Channing, however, such real greatness, he commanded so much sympathy as an impersonation of the loftiest spirit of his age, and he is so connected with the present as a prophet, that he may be regarded as more than any one else an exception to this humiliating truth. Still, ever since his death his fame has been decaying, and it will soon cease in any degree to obstruct the retrospective glances of his country men. Similar to Shanning, in some respects, is Dr. Orville Dewey; and here we must mention Dr.


Bushnell, who is remarkable for his powerful instincts and strange incapacity to reason, Theologians.—In no other department is American literature so rich as in that of theology and religion. It would be curious to pass a month in the perusal of those three hundred and eighty works by Cotton Mather, of which not half-a-dozen have been reprinted since the Declaration of Independence, though they abound almost as much as old Burton's Anatomy in curious learning, and are frequently eloquent or ingenious. We have looked through many of his discourses and letters, as well as his immense folio on the “Ecclesiastical History of New England,” his “Essays to Do Good,” “Student and Preacher,” &c., and cannot help thinking that with all his weaknesses, vanities, and absurdities, he is underrated, and deserving of at least a partial exhumation. The New Eng: landers are directing attention to their Puri. tan “Fathers;” and we see in the latest journals from Boston advertisements of an edition, in six volumes, of the writings of the “learned and renowned Thomas Shepherd," one of Mather's contemporaries. We hope it will be followed by a selection of the most rare, practical, and curious compositions of Mather himself, who must always stand out more distinctly and largely than any other American of his times. The teachers of religion, whether metaphysical theologians, Biblical critics, or sermonizers, to whom the present generation is wont to listen, are Edwards, the elder and the younger, Bellamy, Hopkins, Dwight, (a grandson of the great necessi: tarian,) Emmons, (a Boanerges more grim and hardly less powerful than his master of Geneva,) Samuel Davies, Ashbel Green, John M. Mason, Daniel A. Clarke, Edward Payson, the Wares, Dr. Miller, Dr. Alexander, all of whom are dead—the last, at a great age, within a few weeks—and the living lights of the churches, Leonard Woods, (who, after having been half a century professor of theology at Andover, has just published a collection of his works in five large volumes) Lyman Beecher, (who is now printing a com: plete edition of his writings,) Moses Stuart, Charles Hodge, Addison Alexander, Albert Barnes, George Bush, Andrews Norton, William R. Williams, Professor Park, Professor Hacket, Professor Sears, Professor Ripley, Professor M'Clintock, Professor Schaf, &c.; all but two or three of whom are voluminous as well as very learned and able writers. In this list it will be observed that we have mentioned no member of the Episcopal

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][graphic]

Church; and it is remarkable that the American branch of the English Establishment has never furnished a man of first-rate abilities, or one whose writings have in them the elements of enduring life. Bishop White did not lack much of being an exception; he certainly was in all respects a most respectable person; but his distinction was rather in affairs than in authorship. The late Dr. Jarvis was learned in ecclesiastical history; the two Bishops Onderdonk (one of whom was deposed and the other suspended a few years ago for licentiousness) are clever men. Dr. Seabury is a sharp but not a strong dialectician; Bishops M'Ilvaine, Potter, and Hopkins, are industrious and sensible divines; Bishop Doane, Bishop Burgess, Dr. Hawks, (one of the most impressively brilliant and graceful of modern pulpit orators,) Dr. Hooker, and some others, are men of decided talents; but we do not find among them all any one to be compared with a dozen in the Presbyterian Church—to Dr. Williams in the Baptist, or Andrews Norton in the Unitarian denomination. The dearth of eminent capacities is still more noticeable among the Roman Catholics. Archbishop Hughes (an Irishman by birth) is a noisy, impudent, and superficial, but tolerably shrewd demagogue; Dr. Ryder's claims to distinction rest on a few discourses in which he denies that Lord Bacon was “in any sense a great man,” sneers at the inductive method as ridiculous, and asserts that “the Church '' was never un

- friendly to the march of science or the free

dom of thought ; and Bishop Kendrick, though he has filled several cumbrous octavos with decent Latin, has done nothing to preserve his name, except in the lists of the Roman Catholic Bishops of Philadelphia and Baltimore. Brownson, whom we have mentioned elsewhere, is but a splendid specimen of the theological Swiss guard. Sociologists.-In vindication of that philosophy of society of which Charles Fourier was the founder, there are several American writers of decided talent. We can here but refer to Parke Godwin, (the son-in-law of Mr. Bryant,) Horace Greeley, (editor in chief of the Tribune, and author of “Hints towards Reforms,” a “Sketch of his last Summer's sidence in Europe,” and some other works,) Charles A. Dana, Albert Brisbane, and John L. Dwight. Political Economists.-In Political Economy, America is represented by one of the strongest and most original writers of the age, Henry C. Carey, of Philadelphia. His works are not yet much known in England,

though they have been favorably reviewed in Blackwood, the Athenaeum, and other journals; but in France they furnished the late M. Bastiat with his leading ideas, and translations have made them familiar in other parts of the Continent. His theory of rents is regarded as a complete demonstration that the popular views derived from Ricardo are erroneous, and on the subject of Protection he is generally confessed to be the master thinker of his country. The Rev. Calvin Colton, who formerly resided some time in London, has within a few months published an able work defending a high tariff, under the title of “Public Economy for the United States;” and Dr. Wayland, the late Condy Raguet, and the ex-Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Walker, have been prominent advocates of Free-Trade. Historians.—Among the historians who have attained a high and deserved reputation in the United States within the last few years, we are inclined to yield the first place to George Bancroft. His great work on the “History of the United States’ has been brought down from the commencement of American colonization to the opening of the Revolutionary War, to which subject it is understood that he intends devoting the three succeeding volumes. His researches in the public offices of England, while he was Minister of the United States at the Court of St. James, have brought to light a great mass of documentary evidence on the antecedents and course of the Revolution, which have not yet been made public. With his critical sagacity in sifting evidence, his hound-like instinct in scenting every particle of testimony that can lead him on the right track, and his plastic skill in moulding the most confused and discordant materials into a compact, symmetrical, and truthful narrative, he cannot fail to present the story of that great historical drama with a freshness, accuracy, and artistic beauty, worthy of the immortal events which it commemorates. Mr. Bancroft is now exclusively occupied in the completion of this work. He pursues it with the drudging fidelity of a mechanical laborer, combined with the enthusiasm of a poet, and the comprehensive wisdom of a statesman. With strong social tastes, he gives little time to society. His favorite post is in his library, where he labors the live-long day in the spirit of the ancient artist, Vulla dies sine linea. ... His experience in political and diplomatic life, no less than his rare and generous culture, and his singular union of the highest mental faculties, enable us to predict with


confidence that this work will be reckoned among the genuine master-pieces of historical

enius. The volumes of the “History of the United States " already published are well known to intelligent readers both in Great Britain and America. They are distinguished for their compact brevity of statement, their terse and vigorous diction, their brilliant panoramic views, and the boldness and grace of their sketches of personal character. A still higher praise may be awarded to this history for the tenacity with which it clings to the dominant and inspiring idea of which it records the development. Whoever reads it, without comprehending the standpoint of the author, is liable to disappointment. For it must be confessed that, as a mere narrative of events, the preference may be given to the productions of far inferior authors. But it is to be regarded as an epic in prose of the triumph of freedom. This noble principle is considered by Mr. Bancroft as an essential attribute of the soul, necessarily asserting itself in proportion to the spiritual supremacy which has been achieved. The history, then, is devoted to the illustration of the progress of freedom, as an outbirth of the spontaneous action of the soul. It is in this point of view that the remarkable chapters on the Massachusetts Pilgrims, the Pennsylvania Quakers, and the North American Indians, were written ; and their full purport, their profound significance, can only be appreciated by readers whose minds possess at least the seeds of sympathy with this sublime philosophy. The chapter on the Quakers is a pregnant psychological treatise. Sparkling all over with the electric lights of a rich humanitarian philosophy, it invests the theologic visions of Fox and Barclay with a radiance and beauty which have been ill preserved in the formal and lifeless organic systems of their successors. The parallel run by the historian between William Penn and John Locke is one of the most characteristic productions of his peculiar genius. Original, subtle, suggestive, crowded with matter and frugal of words, it brings out the distinctive features of the spiritual and mechanical schools in the persons of two of their “representative men,” with a breadth and reality which is seldom found in philosophical portraitures. Mr. Bancroft was the son of an eminent Unitarian clergyman in Worcester, Massachusetts. He was born about the beginning of the present century, and is consequently a little more than fifty years of age. He graduated at Harvard University, with distinguished honors, before he had completed

his fifteenth year. Soon after he sailed for Europe, and continued his studies at the German Universities, returning to his own country just before the attainment of his majority. Devoting himself for several years to literary and educational pursuits, he acquired a brilliant reputation as a poet, critic, and essayist; and at a subsequent period, entering the career of politics, he has signalized himself by his attachment to democratic ideas, and the eloqnence and force with which on all occasions he has sustained the principles with the prevalence of which he identifies the progress of humanity. The reputation of William H. Prescott as an elegant historian is well known to British scholars. His works have been translated into several of the continental languages, and have received a cordial tribute of admiration from eminent critics in various departments, including men of no less dissimilar pursuits and tastes than Humboldt and Hallam. Mr. Prescott is an indefatigable student. Labor. ing under the disadvantage of a partial loss of sight, while engaged in the composition of his elaborate histories he has shown an iron perseverance rarely equalled in the records of literary labor, and an almost incredible extent of research, reminding us of the as: tonishing diligence of Gibbon or Niebuhr. He is not a profound thinker; he seldom descends below the surface; he has no love for the investigation of first principles. Des: titute of all tendency to theory or to general views, he is never lost in the region of speculative ideas. His mind is singularly, free from the transcendental element. Nor is his imagination either plastic or suggestive. His sympathies are languid, and not cold, but lukewarm. He is never fired into a generous enthusiasm in the contemplation of a noble act. He looks at the whole field of history with a certain scholastic and gentlemanly indifference, without permitting the serenity of his good breeding to be disturbed by any thrill of passion. Hence, he is after all & mere collector of facts—a polished and charming story-teller—a graceful showman of the scenes of grand historic achievements —a lively and courteous cicerone, whose knowledge of details is rivalled only by the smooth facility of his descriptions. His style is doubtless admirable, in its kind—finished with dainty elaboration—clear and limpidos the gentlest rivulet which winds gracefully through a quiet New England valley—redo: lent of the choicest literary culture, and be: traying an almost affected air of good society. But without any intellectual muscularity, temperate to tameness, uniformly elegant, and as uniformly timid–free from anything that could violently impinge on the most fastidious tastes, and equally free from anything that can touch the higher sentiments of our nature and convert the field of history into a sublime arena where great thoughts and divine principles struggle for the mastery —it soon palls on the sense of the reader with its o'erhoneyed sweets, producing a profound impression of monotony, and a gasping feeling of suffocation, like that of breathing the air of a close greenhouse, in its most profuse luxuriance of winter blossoms. We long for one free native blast from the rocky hills in the midst of such costly artificial beauty. Mr. Prescott has taken the public, especially the British public, by surprise. The latter was by no means prepared for the advent of such a writer from the Boeotian, commercial, well-to-do New World; and his sudden appearance in the midst of the most refined circles was nearly as astounding as would be the discovery of a medieval Gothic temple in the backwoods of America. Jared Sparks can claim no higher merit than that of a diligent and careful compiler. He is familiar with the sources of American history. Devoted for many years almost to the exclusive study of the subject—possessing a plain, tough, sturdy common sense, and without the slightest particle of imagination —he has written several historical biographies, as those of Washington, Franklin, and Gouverneur Morris, which are of some value as works of reference, but as models of historical composition are entirely beneath criticism. Their style is heavy, lumbering, awkWard, and has not even the negative merit of simplicity. Often attempting an ambitious flight, he makes dire havoc of all rhetorical figures, producing admiration for his intrepidity at the expense of our confidence in his taste. In his selections from the papers of Washington, he has been guilty of what we can call by no milder name than a flagrant literary misdemeanor. We allude to the frequent substitution of his own language for that of Washington, under the pretence of preparing the writings of the latter for the public eye. By this process, the most familiar letters of Washington, written in the freedom of private friendship, are made to assume a grave and stately bearing, and elimimated of all the touches of nature, which, to a reader of the present day, are of more interest than the whole of the sententious wisdom which has been preserved with such scrupulous precision. We protest against

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

such tampering with the productions of the illustrious American. Nor do we always wish to see the father of his country in full dress. No doubt Washington had the heart of a man beneath the gravity of a statesman, and the suppression of the little escapades of humor or petulance, which sometimes occur in his letters, is a wretched tribute to his memory. A work of considerable learning and research has been written by Samuel Eliot, entitled “The History of Roman Liberty.” As a specimen of historical investigation, on a difficult and complicated subject, it is highly creditable to the diligence and accuracy of the author. His style is formed on classical models, but it lacks the ease and freedom of the practised writer. Nor does the work exhibit any remarkable traces of either profound or original thought. Mr. Eliot is evidently a man of high cultivation, but can lay no claim to genius. He is only safe when he follows his masters. Whenever he attempts to speculate on his own account, a signal failure is the consequence. His book is at once an illustration of the elegant culture which is given at Harvard College, the pride of Boston, and of the timid, conventional superficiality of thought, which distinguishes so large a portion of the scholars of that literary metroplis. Richard IIildreth is a more recent historian. He has written the “History of the United States down to the Administration of Thomas Jefferson,” and is now engaged in its completion to a later period. His work deserves more attention than it has received. It is a keen, ice-cold, anatomical analysis of American history, written with a bioodless freedom from passion, dissecting the motives and measures which have been usually surrounded with a brilliant halo of admiration, and persistently eschewing every appeal to sentiment, imagination, or emotion. The language is clear, terse, vigorous, and, for the most part, pure idiomatic English. It constantly reminds you of greater power than is exhibited. You leave the perusal of the work with the assurance that you have been following a guide, who, though severe, sombre, taciturn, knows well his road, and could exercise lusty sinews and muscles in case of need. Francis Parkman is a young author of singular promise. His recent “History of Pontiac" is an admirable production. Combining thoroughness of research with a picturesque beauty of expression, it presents a fascinating narrative of one of the most

« VorigeDoorgaan »