further, let us explain of how many and what kind of parts poetry consists; and in our usual manner let us treat of such things as pertain to this topic, beginning, agreeably to nature, first with such things as are first."

Poets are imitators. It is the imitation, not the metre, which constitutes the poet. Out of the old materials of nature, history, feeling, thought, &c., they make something new; hence do they receive the name, poets. Imitations may either be of the good or the bad; and the manner of imitation may differ as well as the means.

Two causes, and these physical, seem to have produced poetry in general, viz., a tendency to imitation, and a love of melody. A note on the progress of tragedy and comedy follows, and these are thus defined. Comedy is an imitation, as to the ridiculous, of bad characters. The ridiculous is turpitude, or error, unattended by pain, and not destructive; but Tragedy is an imitation of a worthy or illustrious and perfect action, possessing greatness, expressed in pleasing language, by the use of several species of imitation in its parts, by men acting it, and not in narration, and purifying from similar passions by the operation of pity and fear. The plot includes six parts,-story, action, diction, sentiments, representation, and melodious composition. The difference between the poet's plot and the historian's recital is that the former should be probable, and the latter actual. The nature and essentials of plots, the passions they should inspire, and the means of exciting them, are next dwelt upon. The first part of tragedy ravels and the second unravels events. The different kinds of tragedies, and the specific diction to be employed in each, are thereafter explained, and the passage from tragic to epic poetry is made.

Epic poetry should possess unity of interest rather unity of action than of time. The nature, characteristics, diction, and form of epic poetry are well elaborated, and the affinity as well as the respective merits of tragic and epic poetry are carefully pointed out. It is probable that in the complete treatise an equally exhaustive analysis of comedy was given; and that the various other species of poetry were defined, explained, and characterized. But the portions here epitomized are all that remain of this work of the archcritic of antiquity.

We have now finished our series of Aristotelic papers. In them we have successively treated of the events of his life, the teachings of his logic, the method and results of his attempt to elicit a science of nature; and now we have striven to explain the chief elements of his practical philosophy. In these we have incidentally touched upon most, if not all, the special and noteworthy additions to or changes in speculation which we owe to the founder of the school of the Peripatetics. It remains for us now only to endeavour, in a word or two of characterization, to convey an idea of the thinkings and achievings of this great leader of human thought.

To compose an adequate eulogium is impossible. Ordinary terms of encomium are monopolized merely to express the actualities of his accomplishments. He was at once the most profound of

sages and the most indefatigable of investigators. He aimed at mastering the secrets of nature and thought. His eye swept the whole expanse of human knowledge with accuracy, precision, and insight. To him we owe the arts of classification, of demonstration, and of persuasion. The method of science unveiled itself to his farforeseeing genius before science itself was begotten by reason and experiment; and the discipline of the human intellect is more thoroughly and correctly taught by this chief didascalus of mankind than by all other ancient thinkers and teachers.

66

If inferior to Socrates in intense moral aspiration, or to Plato in the lofty grandeur of soaring ideality, his range was wider and his erudition more complete. In him Greek philosophy culminated. The thinking faculty of humanity never made before his day such vital efforts, nor has any single mind ever since acquired such enduring domination as that which has been granted to the Stagyrite. The whole subsequent history of philosophy and of human thought shows his influence. In ancient as in modern times, in the Eastern as in the Western empires of the earth, over Christian and Moslem alike, his mighty energy of intellect gave him supremacy. The very forms of human thought have been moulded according to the laws which he discovered and applied. The securities men take against deception in speculation or exposition owe their efficacy to him. The language of thinking men throughout the civilized universe conforms itself to the didactic genius of Aristotle, and the philosophical terminology he conceived and co-ordinated has established itself triumphantly as that of the intellectual nations of Europe. The impress of no single mind, save ONE, has been more indelibly engraven on the history of man, science, thought, and life.” When, thirteen years ago, this series of papers on "European Philosophy" was planned and commenced, it was the intention of the writer, in a few brief sketches, to picture broad spaces of the fields of speculation, but only to give glimpses of the lives and thoughts of the philosophers of olden days. As, however, the interest felt in these papers widened, their plan was extended; for no adequate, readily available, yet comprehensive exposition of ancient thought was then attainable by the readers of ordinary journals, even the leaders of literature eschewing these matters as too weighty for them. Hence have our articles gone far beyond the limits of their original design, and increased in number, as important speculations came before us. Now, however, we have attained a landing-place from which we may venture to sweep more rapidly along the pathways, and a few more papers-scarcely more than three-shall bring us to the end of our Survey of Pre-Christian Philosophy. It will be long before we meet again a rival to him whom we have already described as the mighty Stagyrite, that cool, clear, formal, acute, and daring thinker; that giant amid a race of giants; that eager, impetuous, deep-thoughted and truthloving soul; extensively learned, laboriously studious, enthusiastically enamoured of speculation, who has become one of the mightiest names of which the glorious land of Greece can boast. S. N.

NOTE ON

66

MODERN LOGICIANS-ARCHBISHOP THOMSON." 173

NOTE ON "MODERN LOGICIANS-ARCHBISHOP

THOMSON."

THE inevitable hearsay amid which men, occupying eminent public stations, live and move, and of which they are necessarily so much the objects, is often misleading. Although a considerable amount of care and of critical comparison of dates, on dits, &c., was employed in the collection and arrangement of the facts brought together in our paper on "The Right Hon. and Most Rev. Wm. Thomson, D.D., Lord Archbishop of York," in January, subsequent information has reached us, which seems to justify the issue of a note in our pages, corrective of some of the statements given therein-lest, being regarded as authentic, because not noticed, they should mislead our readers. The following are the material items.

That the archbishop was educated at St. Bees' school is, we find,

an error.

A new reading of the archbishop's position on the class-list has been suggested to us. An unwise bye-law-in the interests of mediocrity no doubt was operative in Queen's College in his day, that any scholar thereof who "did not obtain honours" would lose his chance of a fellowship; but a third class was sufficient to secure it. It is thought that the archbishop limited his aim for his examinationnot his studies-to what would gain him that class, and no other; and that accordingly he offered for examination too small a number of books for the highest honours. The archbishop could not have been so unskilled in logic as is implied in our paper; indeed, we have good authority for saying that, prior to 1840, Wm. Thomson was known in Oxford as an innovator in logic,-thoroughly acquainted with Kant's logic, Aristotle's " Organon," and a large number of logical and philosophical books; and that even then his Laws of Thought were sketched and partly written. The kind of information on the subject which he brought before the examiners-so different from the Oxford logic of that day-may have given rise to the rumour which enlarged itself into the statement on which we relied.

66

Another Oxford incident has been wrongly reported. Both candidates for the provostship of Queen's voted for themselves-a custom usual in such college elections, unless when the rivals vote for each other, which obviously does not alter the result. The votes for Dr. Thomson were eight, and for the other candidate five, and as the facts were publicly known, there was no cause for rumours on this head.

Some of the dates given, on re-collation, have been found erroneous. The Rev. Wm. Thomson was Curate of Guildford, 1843-5,

and Curate of Cuddesdon. He became Tutor in Queen's in 1847, not 1844.

We find that, by some inadvertence, we have attributed to the Eboracan prelate the authorship of a work on "The Messiah and His Kingdom," which another writer claims.

We take the present opportunity of noting with approval the earnest and hearty way in which the archiepiscopal logician has acted in regard to popular education and on church extensionsubjects sufficiently cognate to each other in themselves, though often disjoined. In both departments a great work may be done by a judicious and enthusiastic prelate. We believe that the day of indifference to men's educational elevation is well-nigh past. We have already allowed too much drifting into ignorance and vice, if not crime, through negligence in this matter. It may be, it probably will be, much more difficult to draw back those who have been treated as aliens into the fold of the church now than it would have been at the right time to have retained them in it. If careful and Christian effort be unceasingly used, great results may be anticipated for the conjoined movements in which the archbishop has so earnestly interested himself, and we hope that life, strength, and grace may be granted to him to widen and deepen in his province a knowledge of Christ and of His kingdom.

S. N.

AN AFFECTED MAN carries himself like his dish (as the proverb says) very uprightly, without spilling one drop of his humour. He is an orator and rhetorician, that delights in flowers and ornaments of his own devising to please himself and others that laugh · at him. He is of a leaden dull temper, that stands stiff, as it is bent, to all crooked lines, but never to the right. When he thinks to appear most graceful, he adorns himself most ill-favouredly, like an Indian that wears jewels in his lips and nostrils. His words and gestures are all as stiff as buckram, and he talks as if his lips were turned up as well as his beard. All his motions are regular as if he went by clockwork, and he goes very true to the nick as he is set. He has certain favourite words and expressions, which he makes very much of as he has reason to do, for they serve him upon all occasions, and are never out of the way when he has use of them as they have leisure enough to do, for nobody else has any occasion for them but himself. All his affectations are forced or stolen from others; and though they become some particular persons, where they grow naturally, as a flower does on its stalk, he thinks they will do so by him, when they are pulled and dead.Samuel Butler.

Politics.

ARE THE WORKING CLASSES QUALIFIED FOR
PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION ?

AFFIRMATIVE ARTICLE.-II.

THE working classes are qualified for parliamentary representation, because the mere matter of parliamentary representation is to give a vote for a gentleman who has studied politics to sit in the council of the nation to advise on its wants and requirements, and the means by which its prosperity may be promoted.

A parliamentary representative is not amenable and responsible only to his constituents, or to the persons who actually voted for him. He is a responsible adviser of the Crown and thinker for the country. He is responsible to his conscience, to the House, and to the Government. It is quite a mistake in representation to say that a member is a delegate from his constituents to promote their interests and advocate their opinions. A representative goes to Parliament as the supporter of a particular theory of government or legislation, but he is bound to forego his own predilections and his constituents' wishes, when it is proven to him in discussion that the requirements of his country are not to be best met by these suggestions. Working men are quite well qualified to give an opinion on what form of policy they regard as best for the country, and hence they are quite qualified to vote; for the sending of a member to Parliament is only registering the opinion of the country in favour of certain modes of government, and sending a man to see that, as far as possible, these opinions shall have due weight in the council of the nation.

Working men are best qualified for parliamentary representation because, from their great numbers, it would be impossible to bribe them, whereas the small constituencies which are in use at the present time are peculiarly bribable-or there would not be so many bribery trials and acts. Working men are peculiarly touchy upon any matter that has even the appearance of getting them to entertain an opinion upon any other score than its correctness. Their independence and outspokenness is proverbial.

Who are the men that stickle for their rights? Not your petty shopkeepers in the off-lying streets of electoral towns, or small tradesmen in cities. They are too often sneaks, whose vile humility towards those who have anything to give secures the scorn of working men. They are the men who do not speak out at public meet