Abbildungen der Seite
[merged small][graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][graphic][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Strengthens the hair of children and adults ; contains no lead nor mineral ingredients; sold in golden colour also ; usual sizes,

38. 6d. ; 78. ; 10s. 6d., and 21s. Avoid spurious imitations. Sold everywhere. Can be sent by post by A. ROWLAND & SONS, 20 Hattun Garden,

London, on receipt of 3d. above these prices in stamps.

JUL 14 1884




No. LXXXIX.-JULY 1884.


Along these low pleached lanes, on such a day,

So soft a day as this, through shade and sun, With glad grave eyes that scanned the glad wild way,

And heart still hovering o'er a song begun,

And smile that warmed the world with benison,
Our father, lord long since of lordly rhyme,
Long since hath haply ridden, when the lime

Bloomed broad above him, flowering where he came. Because thy passage once made warm this clime,

Our father Chaucer, here we praise thy name.


year that England clothes herself with May, She takes thy likeness on her. Time hath spun Fresh raiment all in vain and strange array

For earth and man's new spirit, fain to shun
Things past for dreams of better to be won,

[blocks in formation]

Through many a century since thy funeral chime Rang, and men deemed it death's most direful crime,

To have spared not thee for very love or shame; And yet, while mists round last year's memories climb,

Our father Chaucer, here we praise thy name.

Each turn of the old wild road whereon we stray,

Meseems, might bring us face to face with one Whom seeing we could not but give thanks, and pray

For England's love our father and her son

To speak with us as once in days long done
With all men, sage and churl and monk and mime,
Who knew not as we know the soul sublime

for song's love more than lust of fame. Yet, though this be not, yet, in happy time,

Our father Chaucer, here we praise thy name.

Friend, even as bees about the flowering thyme,
Years crowd on years, till hoar decay begrime

Names once beloved ; but, seeing the sun the sa
As birds of autumn fain to praise the prime,

Our father Chaucer, here we praise thy name.



In days when duelling was common, and its code of ceremonial well elaborated, a deadly encounter was preceded by a polite salute. Having by his obeisance professed to be his antagonist's very humble servant, each forthwith did his best to run him through the body.

This usage is recalled to me, by the contrast between the compliments with which Mr. Harrison begins his article, “The Ghost of Religion, and the efforts he afterwards makes to destroy, in the brilliant style habitual with him, all but the negative part of that which he applauds. After speaking with too-flattering eulogy of the mode in which I have dealt with current theological doctrines, he does his best, amid flashes of wit coming from its polished surface, to pass the sword of his logic through the ribs of my argument, and let out its vital principle—that element in it which is derived from the religious ideas and sentiments that have grown up along with human evolution, but which is inconsistent with the creed Mr. Harrison preaches.

So misleading was the professed agreement with which he commenced his article, that, as I read on, I was some time in awakening to the fact that I had before me not a friend, but, controversially speaking, a determined enemy, who was seeking to reduce, as he would say to a ghostly form, that surviving element of religion which, as I had contended, Agnosticism contains. Even when this dawned on me, the suavity of Mr. Harrison's first manner con

* Excepting its last section, this article had been written, and part of it sent to the printers, by the 30th of May; and, consequently, before I saw the article of Sir James Stephen, published in the last number of this Review. Hence the fact that only in its last section have I been able (withont undue interruption of my argument) to refer to points in Sir James Stephen's criticism.

Concerning his criticism generally, I may remark that it shows me how dangerous it is to present separately, in brief space, conclusions which it has taken a large space to justify. Unhappily, twelve pages do not suffice for adequate exposition of a system of thought, or even of its bases; and misapprehension is pretty certain to occur if a statement contained in twelve pages, is regarded as more than a rude outline. If Sir James Stephen will refer to $$ 49–207 of the Principles of Sociology, occupying 350 pages, I fancy that instead of seeming to him 'weak,' the evidence there given of the origin of religious ideas will seem to him very strong; and I venture also to think that if he will refer to First Principles 88 24-26, $ 50, SS 58-61, § 194, and to the Principles of Psychology $$ 347–351, he may find that what he thinks 'an unmeaning playing with words ' has more meaning than appears at first sight.

tinued so influential that I entertained no thought of defending myself. It was only after perceiving that what he modestly calls (a rider,' was described by one journal as 'a criticism keen, trenchant, destructive,' while by some other journals kindred estimates of it were formed, that I decided to make a reply as soon as pending engagements allowed.

Recognising, then, the substance of Mr. Harrison's article as being an unsparing assault on the essential part of that doctrine which I have set forth, I shall here not scruple to defend it in the most effective way I can : not allowing the laudation with which Mr. Harrison prefaces his ridicule, to negative such rejoinders, incisive as I can make them, as will best serve my purpose.

A critic who, in a recent number of the Edinburgh Review, tells the world in very plain language what he thinks about a book of mine, and who has been taken to task by the editor of Knowledge for his injustice, refers to Mr. Harrison (whom he describes in felicitous phrase as looking at me from a very opposite pole ') as being, on one point, in agreement with him. But for this reference it would not have occurred to me to associate in thought Mr. Harrison's criticisms with those of the Edinburgh Reviewer ; but now that comparison is suggested, I am struck by the fact that Mr. Harrison's representations of my views diverge from the realities no less widely than those of a critic whose antagonism is unqualified, and whose animus is displayed in his first paragraph.

So anxious is Mr. Harrison to show that the doctrine he would discredit has no kinship to the doctrines called religious, that he will not allow me, without protest, to use the language needed for conveying my meaning. The expression “an Infinite and Eternal Energy from which all things proceed,' he objects to as being “perhaps a rather equivocal reversion to the theologic type ;' and he says this because in the Athanasian Creed the Third Person “ proceeds” from the First and the Second.' It is hard that I should be debarred from thus using the word by this preceding use. Perhaps Mr. Harrison will be surprised to learn that, as originally written, the expression ran—an Infinite and Eternal Energy by which all things are created and sustained ;' and that in the proof I struck out the last clause because, though the words did not express more than I meant, the ideas associated with them might mislead, and there might result such an insinuation as that which Mr. Harrison makes. The substituted expression, which embodies my thought in the most colourless way, I cannot relinquish because he does not like it or rather, indeed, because he does not like the thought itself. It is not convenient to him that the Unknowable, which he repeatedly speaks of as a pure egation, should be represented as that through which all things

? Knowledge, March 14, 1884.

« ZurückWeiter »