as individuals; common terms are the names of classes thought of as constituted by individuals, or kinds of individuals. A given proposition is not adequately developed unless it has a form enabling us, without interpolation, to extricate from it all its possible results. The concept has parts both of extension and comprohension; it has parts when it is considered in relation to objects; it has parts when it is considered in its relation to attributes. Its totality is constituted by both kinds of parts taken together, not by either kind independently of the other. Extension and comprehension stand towards each other in an inverse ratio."

Part Second evolves "The Doctrine of Propositions," and its teaching includes the forms and laws of categorical predication, of definition, and of division. It is a very thorough-going analysis; minute, critical, clear, and consistent.

In Part Third, "The Doctrine of Inference" is most profoundly dealt with; and the difference of thought unevolved and thought evolved is shown to consist in explicating, in forms yielding propositions, implicit relations of given ideas and objects-the process of which is Reasoning, and the results of which are Syllogisms. Of its teachings the following are a few :

"Every inference contains, in expression as in thought, two parts,-that which is given, and that which is thought-the antecedent and consequent. An inference, whose antecedent is constituted by one proposition, is an immediate inference. An inference, whose antecedent is constituted by more propositions than one, is a mediate inference. The syllogism is the norm of all inferences whose antecedent is complex. Mediate inference is possible by contraposition, by subalternation, by opposition (proper), or by conversion."

The first division of the third chapter of this part intentionally deviates, as little as possible, from the exposition of syllogistic inference followed in the standard books, and therefore requires little notice here, except to commend it as a very complete and exhaustive view of the grounds and methods of syllogistic inference. The second division contains an evolution and explanation of the logical scheme of Sir William Hamilton, and is not only the best, but the most intelligible interpretation and exposition of the doctrine of quantification we possess, whether from the innovator himself, from Thomson, whose discovery was in part collateral, or from his disciples, Mansel or Baynes. The third division, on the functions of the syllogism and of the syllogistic figures, also contains much that is weighty, new, and important; especially a deep-lying and efficacious proof of the groundwork and relevancy of the different modes of inference called Figures. It includes a learned abstract of the teachings of the German logicians, and of the canons by which they propose to regulate explicative thought., In the fourth chapter, Complex modes of inference" are considered and discussed in all their varieties and modifications.

66

The book is one rich both in thought and learning. The views of upwards of sixty writers on the subject are more or less referred to, and many are spoken of frequently, e.g., Sir William Hamilton upwards of thirty times; Kant, Trendelenburg, Drobisch, Thomson, &c., more than a dozen times each.

The reprint might have, we think, been managed with more art. The paper on Fallacy ought to have been added as an appendix to chapter third. There ought also to have been an epilogue to the book, indicating what the author regarded himself as having accomplished. Yet it is a work which will form a landmark in the history of the science, and one which students will be thankful that the author wrote.

Spalding, during his incumbency in St. Andrew's, matured and developed, with equal philosophical exactness, a system of "Rhetoric," in which great acuteness and constructive sagacity were combined with studious reflection and careful illustration; and an unexampled mastery of the speculations of the theoretic Germans was shown, along with the most attentive subordination of his suggestions to the practical uses of thinkers, speakers, and writers. The indomitable industry of which he was capable, the patient and thoughtful reading in many literatures which he had undertaken, enabled him to lighten up the topic with splendid interspaces of quotation from the noblest thinkers of Greece and Rome; of Italy, Germany, and France; not less than from the grand immortals of our own literature.

We have been unable to carefully compare the treatise on Rhetoric, issued in the eighth edition of the "Encyclopædia Britannica," with that reprinted from the seventh; but we think, from a hurried perusal of parts of it, that it is highly superior, being more thoroughly systematic, and bearing a greater resemblance to the modern German works on the principles of criticism, imagination, moral influence, and oratory, than any other essay in our tongue. As it does not fall within the scope of this paper to analyze that disquisition, our comparative ignorance on this point is less material to our readers; though the connection between logic and rhetoric is so intimate, that the one forms, as it were, a supplement only to the other; for we in general think, that we may not only possess but distribute thought, and rhetoric teaches us the principles upon which thought may be effectively transferred from mind to mind. This was in a great measure the view which Professor Spalding entertained of its function and form.

To Griffin's "Dictionary of Biography" Spalding supplied upwards of a hundred sketches of English, German, French, and Italian writers; and to the "English Cyclopædia" he was also a considerable contributor. Independently of all these literary labours," he was the hardest working professor in Scotland, doing more for his students than any other three, and obtaining a commensurate return from them.'

In the very next volume of the " Encyclopædia Britannica” to

that in which his own article on "Rhetoric" was inserted, a brief notice of his life, doings, and death appeared from the pen of his friend Charles MacLaren. He had been long a martyr to rheumatism. In 1851 an attack of great severity affected the action of the heart, and made his recovery almost a marvel. Under the heavy

hand of disease, therefore, his greatest works were wrought. In the face of death itself his industry did not abate, nor did his activity of intellect decline. The greatness and nobility of his mind were displayed more and more as the terrible darkness closed round him. It has been truly said of him, that he snatched "the work of a very long life out of a short and feeble one," by invariably "discharging every duty with unhesitating honesty." After a lingering illness, racked by rheumatic spasms and asthmatic coughs, but with a serene mind and Christian hope, the vital action of the heart ceased, slowly and gradually. On 16th Nov., 1859, he passed away, and was added to the majority of the dead at the same time that he became one of the immortals. He was then in his fifty-first year. Four children and a widow survive him.

We have striven in the foregoing pages to write a notice of one who received little fame in his life-day, but who possessed modest and self-reliant merit, superior talent, indomitable earnestness, and the power of struggling against inhemming circumstances. Our intercourse with him was never personal, but only epistolary. We have, however, heard from many students the story of his labours for their welfare; of his special culture of exactness, even to punctiliousness, in everything; of his stern reproof of indolence or vice; of his warm, loving words of commendation; of his unflagging interest in the after life of his students, and of his exhaustless resources of instruction and entertainment; and we have learned to respect his memory and revere his character both for his work and his influence. [See British Controversialist, Feb., 1860, p. 128.]

The contemplation of such a life seems not unsuited to the close of another year, if it induce us to imitate his exemplary industry, conscientiousness, and energetic progressiveness; if it encourage us to persistent and dutiful labour; if it incline us to a sedulous culture of all given powers; and if it admonish us that time and life are both uncertain here, and that eternity alone affords to dutydoing man the glorious light of an unfailing day. If so taught, we shall enrich the years with effort, and, though early dying, find that

"Death

Can oft achieve what life may not fulfil."

S. N.

Philosophy.

IS THE PULPIT OR THE PRESS MORE POTENT IN THE PRESENT DAY?

THE PULPIT.-REPLY.

To discuss thoroughly and justly the claims of the two greatest engines of human life, it is necessary, above all, to have a competent knowledge of the literature of the present day: to place them in the scales is a point of comparatively indifferent labour; but the chiefest toil consists in first arranging with precision the balance, and to give the decision on whose side lies the preponderance. We consider, then, after a careful perusal of the articles on both sides, that we are justified more than ever in upholding the potency of the pulpit.

66

The opener of the negative side of the debate has produced arguments that are easily refuted, and the writing of the paper is certainly better than anything else it contains. He refers us to the times of old, and we willingly, in his own words, "take a comprehensive view of these times, and of their people." We own they were dark and unutterably devoid of anything pertaining either to intellectual or moral culture, they were clouded by prejudice and superstition; but certainly we cannot ascribe to the press the great march of genius in the latter cycles. Elpisticos" has made a gross blunder in history, when he asserts that the pulpit did nothing in those dark days for the culture of the intellect. We are indebted to the monks chiefly for such knowledge of the ancient history of Britain as we possess. They were they who taught the child to lisp on his mother's knee the Ave, Credo, and Paternoster, and instilled into him a love for his parents; they were they, too, who undertook his education, and all that he knew in after life came originally from them; and, finally, the proselytes of the church in those days were the only lights by which the people could be guided. This argument is about the most unfortunate that "Elpisticos" could have urged against the pulpit; for had he read even the wellknown historical romances of Sir Walter Scott, or had read the amount of history that_every schoolboy knows, he might have deduced this inference. In another paragraph the same writer adds, Has not the reading of good authors a tendency to subdue our passions, and enlarge our benevolence ?" This is true. But we do not find in books, be they ever so powerfully written, the animation of life. Whether of the twain impresses us most,-to hear Mr. Charles Dickens read his "Pickwick Papers," or to read them

66

66

66

when in print ourselves? We need not give the answer. Here is a passage, too, which is a bold assertion, but of which nothing explanatory is offered,-"The pulpit certainly possesses a special power to a greater extent; yet this, without the guiding influence of the press, has a somewhat diseased effect," &c. We are compelled to pass this over, for we know not to what the writer alludes. We presume "Clement" is apter at mathematics than controversy. He has spoilt his article by displaying his knowledge of statistics, which I doubt not he deems superior. The following remark, however, is rather stale, interwoven with a childish simplicity :-" To our mind, the ages preceding the fifteenth century appear always at best to have enjoyed only twilight in knowledge, and the appliances by which it might be gained, in comparison with the present time." He is willing, also, in espousing the cause of the press (p. 113), that he should be taken for either a heretic" or a "Lollard,"-an idea which, by-the-bye, appears to have unaccountably seized the generality of the writers on his side of the question. In allusion to the great personal danger such persons were in whilst England was at this miserable crisis, he asked a question, and made, we are glad to say, a suitable answer, which we gladly keep in his own language. "What has brought about the change? SIMPLY the press." We can no longer restrain our opinion concerning this luckless personage, and add, as our friend Punch would say, "By Jove, he has it!" The whole of page 115 is, as all his article, equally old; and really we must say (to use the scientific term) that he has a remarkable affinity for nothing new." The manner in which the unfortunate "Clement has escaped answering the first article on the "Pulpit" is sometimes quite ludicrous; he cuts the difficulty by quietly asserting (in a style of course admirable) that the paper does not at all bear upon the point at issue. There is a remark we cannot pass over without a smile. In apparent meekness he observes, "We have now done. Our subject is full of interest to the thoughtful mind." To the first of these necessities (he does not see it) we would only add the three monosyllables, "We hope so." To the second, "That having in the beginning of his paper likewise invoked thought (p. 118), we certainly made sure to see more of it exercised." In the sequent idea-which he has, as usual, most inartistically wrought out,-"Live two brothers," &c., we presume he has modelled his style after the romance in Punch entitled, "Mokeanna; or, the White Witness."

66

F. C. Cresswell has sadly blundered his whole paper. In this point, however, it is excusable, as the theme would warrant any inexperienced writer in making sad migrations from the genuine Saxon style, to relieve his feelings in a little "balderdash."

The first page and a half is a soliloquy as old as Adam, which has nothing whatever to do with the theme. The first argument is, "In the enunciation of its preachings, the press is more formidable than the pulpit." He proceeds, "Let a proposition but