and carries out an independent discussion of the principal points in discussion, after an order and method of his own. This relieves the work from any too close relation to Mill's critique, and exalts it to the dignity and interest of an independent philosophical treatise.

It is charaterized by the same features which are observable in all of the writings of the author, the same excellencies and defects. Dr. M'Cosh is always clear, candid, and well informed-he is often acute and original. He is sometimes defective in precision of thought and statement and in closeness and vigor of logical connection. But he always adds something to the results of previous discussions, and hence his works are indispensable to the theological and speculative student. We hope that he will find in the interest which his works and his person awaken among us occasion for gratifying reflection-and an encouragement to labor with renewed assiduity for the large and interested circle of readers which his writings have made for themselves among us, as well as for his admirers in the mother country.

HERBERT SPENCER'S PRINCIPLES OF BIOLOGY.*-This is another volume in the series of Herbert Spencer's philosophical works. It is of course designed to illustrate and enforce the great doctrine of evolution which is the foundation principle of his whole system. The assumption of this doctrine, as explanatory of all development and every new form of being, as well as the application of it to account for every new phenomenon, must greatly diminish the philosophical value of every treatise, by this author, however, abundant are the facts which he has at command, or however appositely and readily they may be cited for his purposes. This volume is especially valuable for the complete command which it shows the author to possess over the singular facts and phenomena that are exhibited in the beginning and progress of life, and for the fairness of his mind upon every point except such as are involved in his fundamental philosophy. It is one of the most useful of the whole series, and will be highly esteemed even by those who reject the author's philosophical and theological theories.

*The Principles of Biology. By HERBERT SPENCER. Vol. I. New York: D. Appleton & Co. 1866. 12mo. pp. 475. New Haven: H. C. Peck. Price

HISTORICAL AND POLITICAL.

FROUDE'S HISTORY OF ENGLAND.*-Froude exemplifies that prevailing taste and method in historical writing, which may be termed realistic. The aim is to reproduce and represent a bygone state of things just as it was, after the intervening medium of modern prejudices and opinions, and traditional judgments, has been dispelled. Starting with a strong degree of historical scepticism, the writers of this school profess to explore anew the documentary and other evidence on which current beliefs respecting the past claim our credence, and to rectify, and even, in many cases, to reverse these beliefs. The admiring reader of former historians is disenchanted on seeing the characters, to whom he has paid homage, divested of the halo which they have long been permitted to wear. On the contrary, personages who have been compelled to stand, for generations, in the pillory-objects of general indignation-are delivered from their disgrace, and recommended to our esteem. It is evident that Froude is constantly actuated by the feeling that historical truth is hard to be reached, and that it is always difficult, and not always possible, to clear away the mist which gathers over the men and transactions of a former era. Hence, while seeming to have firm judgments and, occasionally, bold and dogmatic judgments, he still not unfrequently seems to write on both sides. His strong opinions are qualified by equally strong concessions. His tone appears to imply a lively sense, on his part, of the danger of falling into hasty conclusions, and conclusions that lack the support of positive evidence.

Froude writes under the influence of a prior, well-defined conviction or theory in regard to the merits of the great controversy in England in the first age of the Reformation. He is a champion of the Tudor policy, of the via media by which Henry VIII. sought to establish the religious independence of England without adopting the peculiar doctrines that gave life to the Protestant movement in other countries. Froude has no special sympathy, he manifests an indifference and, occasionally, a repugnance, for the distinctive creed of the zealous Protestant leaders during the

* History of England; from the Fall of Wolsey to the Death of Elizabeth. By JAMES ANTHONY FROUDE, M. A., late Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford. Vols. V. and VI. 12mo. New York: Charles Scribner & Co.

reigns which he commemorates. Detesting the Papacy as a foreign power, claiming the allegiance of England, and having no sympathy with Roman Catholic abuses, whether of doctrine or practice, he is, nevertheless, hardly less hostile to that which he calls "enthusiasm" and " fanaticism," but which Protestants generally judge to be a warm and enlightened and courageous love of the truth, than was Hume. His peculiar position, as an advocate of the Tudor, Anglican Reformation, against both Papist and Puritan, gives him a strong bias in favor of the promoters of that peculiar type of rebellion against the Church of Rome, and especially in favor of Henry VIII. His work is a defense of the public policy and personal character of this monarch. It is not to be denied that in regard to certain transactions the conduct of Henry is placed in a more favorable light. The impeachment of the character of Anne Boleyn is sustained by a formidable array of proofs, which go far towards establishing a verdict against this much pitied Queen. At the same time time, we do not think that Froude succeeds in his attempted vindication of Henry with reference to the charges commonly alleged against him. He is generally considered to have been of a tyrannical temper, and to have been indifferent to the shedding of blood. Let us consider, for a moment, two of the instances in regard to which our author sets himself against the common judgment, by which Henry is deeply condemned. The first is the case of Sir Thomas More. The genius and piety of More had made his name illustrious throughout Europe. A loyal subjects of the King, but unable to approve of the measures connected with the divorce, he had chosen to retire betimes from public office to the seclusion of private life. Under the inquisitorial statute requiring that every individual who may be called upon, shall declare that the marriage of Henry with Catharine was void, this old man is summoned from his home and arraigned before the Council. He is willing to declare that the children of Anne are legal heirs to the throne, for Parliament has so declared, and Parliament, in his opinion, is authorized to regulate the succession; but he cannot, in conscience, go so far as to affirm the illegality of the former marriage. For this opinion, which he shared with the great body of the Catholic Church, he is cast into prison. Once more he is summoned to give his adhesion to the doctrine of the King's supremacy in religion, and, as a faithful Catholic must, he refuses. For this his gray head is laid on the block. It would seem to be plain that both the statutes were in

iquitous, and that, whatever character belongs to them, the arraignment of the old statesman was a needless and gratuitous act of cruelty. Yet Henry did this deed without scruple and without compunction. And Froude gives no sign of disapproving his conduct in this transaction which, when it occurred, sent a thrill of horror through Europe. The other instance illustrative of Froude's strong bias in favor of Henry is found in the case of Cromwell. The character and public conduct of this minister are praised by the historian up to the very point where he becomes the object of partisan hatred and accusation. His wisdom, his courage, his fidelity, are constantly exhibited in the animated record of his career. Yet his bloody execution is described without a murmur of condemnation. We are given to understand that it was inevitable and right. It was, in truth, a foul act of ingratitude and cruelty, which a heart less hard than that of this blood-thirsty monarch could never have consented to perpetrate.

These remarks will convey an idea of the defects of this readable and instructive historical work. The style is excellent; the researches appear to be thorough, and there is little doubt that it will take rank among our English classics.

BROWNSON ON THE AMERICAN REPUBLIC.*-This work presents the final views of its author upon politics. He is a veteran in speculation. For a long period he has been at work in thinking, and writing on themes of the highest moment. He now feels himself to be fast anchored as regards religious questions; and on questions relating to government, he declares that the present volume will be his last, and renounces everything in his previous writings which is incompatible with its doctrines. It is a work of marked ability. It is incomparably superior in this respect to the climatic and atmospheric philosophy propounded in Draper's production on the same subject, which was reviewed in our Jan. num. ber. Being Protestants, we dissent from some of the propositions of Dr. Brownson's book, especially from his remarks on the prospective religion of America. But we are glad that he has written, and heartily wish that more works of this kind might be produced, in which the philosophy of government, and the character of our government in particular, should be made the subject of dispas

* The American Republic; its Constitution, Tendencies, and Destiny. By O. A. BROWNSON, LL. D. New York: P. O'Shea, 104 Bleecker street. 1866. 8vo. New Haven: Judd & White. Price $3.

sionate consideration, on a platform lifted above the contentions of party. Dr. Brownson first devotes a series of chapters to an examination of the origin of government. The theories which he examines are eight in number. The doctrine that government originates in the right of a father to govern his child is sound, if the question is confined to the origin of government as a fact; for patriarchal government is the oldest. But the right of government to govern cannot be thus deduced, for the parental right itself is not ultimate or complete; the right of society is paramount to the right of the parent. The theory of the social compact is next subjected to a searching scrutiny and a complete refutation. This theory, as Dr. Brownson truly observes, was entertained more than any other by Jefferson and other statesmen of the Rev. olution. They derived their political theories largely from Locke and Sidney. One of the best features of the volume before us is the exposure of the fallacies and mischiefs of the social-compact theory. The third doctrine is that sovereignty is inherent in the people; not individually, but collectively, or the people as society, ordaining the constitution of the State, and defining its rights and powers. Society is a living organism, not a mere aggregation of individuals. It does not exist without individuals, but it is something more than individuals, and has rights not derived from them and which are paramount to theirs. This theory is not wrong in assuming that the people collectively are more than the people individually, or in denying that society is a mere aggregation of individuals, and has no rights but what it derives from them; but it is wrong in asserting that the people are sovereign in their own native or underived right or might. The theory would warrant an unlimited social despotism. The fourth is, the Positivist theory that government is a spontaneous development of nature-as the bee constructs her cell or the beaver builds her dam. Questions as to the origin of government, beyond the simple fact, are discarded. The general spirit of the Positivist speculations is well censured by Dr. Brownson in the passage in which he treats of this theory. Legitimate governments, it is confessed, are instituted under the natural law, but this is by no means the concession of government as a natural development. The reason and will of which the natural law is the expression, are the reason and will of God. The natural law is not a natural force developing itself in nature, like the law of generation, for instance, and therefore proceeding from God as first cause, but it proceeds from God as