XI.

CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE.

1.-Political Science, or the State Theoretically and Practically Considered. BY THEODORE D. WOOLSEY, late President of Yale College. 2 vols. New York: Scribner, Armstrong & Co. 1878. 8vo, pp. x.-585, vi.-626.

DR. WOOLSEY justly observes in his introduction that the theory of the state and the theory of rights are closely connected, and he accordingly proceeds at the outset to examine the doctrine of rights, as the starting-point for the consideration of organized society. He then proceeds to assume, as the foundation of his argument, the moral freedom of man, the moral order of the world (non-utilitarian), and a system of final causes. Then follows a discussion of rights, which, we are not surprised, leads to the conclusion that "natural rights" are "those which by fair deductions from the present physical, moral, social, and religious characteristics of man he must be invested with, and which he ought to have realized for him in a jural society in order to fulfill the ends to which his nature calls him." It is not difficult with such a definition to do what we please with the science of politics, and we confess a sense of obligation to Dr. Woolsey for not having done more than construct a treatise in which, whatever the method of reasoning may be, the conclusions are in general only those which agree with the best opinion of the time as to government. But, taking his system as he states it, a fair deduction from man's characteristics can be arrived at only in two ways, either by accepting Dr. Woolsey's statement of it, or by taking the common consent of mankind on this point; the fulfillment of the ends to which his nature calls him must be got at in the same way. So that we are really very much where we were at the beginning, notwithstanding the important assumptions at the outset.

We have not the space to discuss Dr. Woolsey's treatise as it deserves, and we merely desire to point out here certain defects in the philosophical foundations he lays down at the outset, which prevent us from being able to regard the book as a contribution to science, properly so called. The great test of true science is the possibility of successful prediction, and the most perfect illustration is that given by astronomy, in the case of verified predictions of the movements of the heavenly bodies. Science has, however, invaded the domain of human social life so little as yet, that, in most of the branches relating to law and government, prediction is not thought of, except in an empirical way, as a forecast of things likely to hap-' pen in the future from what has happened in the past. But here and there true science has made its appearance, most notably in political economy, but also in matters not connected with economies. As has been pointed out by an able writer in the pages of this REVIEW, political economy has taken its place among the sciences in precisely the same way that astronomy has. The science proceeds upon the postulate of man as an animal seeking profit. Abstracting his other qualities, it proceeds to declare consequences from this assumption. Hence the objection made in certain quarters of recent years, to the science, that it overlooked the other motives, appetites, and desires of man, is not merely beside the point, but shows an incapacity on the part of those raising it for the discussion of the subject; for it is precisely by this abstraction that the science is possible at all. Now, political economy proves itself to be a true science by the pos sibility of successful prediction. The laws relating to currency have been verified over and over again, by the expulsion of the more valuable of two currencies from circulation. The law of profits and that of demand and supply are verified every day in the courts. So, too, in law, though it would be absurd to claim that this prudence has reached the position of a true science (and indeed the practical part of it must always remain an art), there are still many matters already connected with it which have been rescued from the domain of empiricism. The effect of certain sorts of legislation-for instance, on pauperism and on crime-can be predicted with absolute certainty, and the theory of its action is as well understood as that of gravity. So, too, with politics, there are certain laws which can now be formulated with considerable precision. The effect of an elective judiciary combined with universal suffrage can be foretold with certainty; so can the effect on administrative machinery of rotation in office. We do not, any longer, in either case, ask em

pirically what has been found to be the effect of these systems in the past; but we inquire on what motives, appetites, and desires of the judge the system of election by a wide popular constituency acts. Finding that they act necessarily on motives the activity of which tend to make him unjust, oppressive, partial, and corrupt, ready to sacrifice the interests of the public to his own, we infer that all this will tend to make him a bad judge; and we shall have no hesitation in predicting that there will always be a tendency in any community having such a judiciary to have judicial scandals and a bad administration of justice. And so in the other case we have mentioned.

In order to advance political science in this direction, it is necessary to follow this true scientific method: that is, to abstract from the persons charged, under any form of government, with the performance of particular duties, all other than their official qualities, and then ask ourselves what effect on them in their official character will this or that political arrangement result in. A great and perhaps the most valuable part of the Federalist consists of speculations of this kind, directed to ascertaining the probable effect on President, judges, senators, etc., etc., of the proposed Constitution of the United States. Political science had already, at the time of the Federalist, made such advances that the speculations of Hamilton, Madison, and Jay, have been generally verified by the event.

This, of course, is but a small branch of political science; but, within the narrow limits that it covers, it is true science. The chief fault that we find with Dr. Woolsey's treatise is that it is not science at all, but either, first, an encyclopedic statement of facts connected with a variety of political systems or experiments; or, second, a highly-confused medley of principles drawn from all sorts of philosophies which do not advance the subject, and indeed would naturally tend to induce the reader to believe that political science was something like alchemy or astrology. Dr. Woolsey is bound, if he discusses rights at all, to adopt or reject the theory of natural rights. We cannot make out that he does either. On the first pages of his book he states, as the object of what he calls a "just" state (it is obvious that this term is incapable of precise definition), the protection of personal rights. But, perceiving that this limits his abstract state to a jurisdiction beyond which all actual states go, he adds that it "has other most important objects placed before it" (page 2). It would be interesting to know what these objects are, but how are we to discover this? If, as he says (page 4), the individual must,

"in order to fulfil his work in the world," have certain "powers of action" (rights), and these powers of action are "lodged in the individual by nations " (page 6), it would seem as if the first thing for the state to do was to find out what the work to be fulfilled was, and then give the appropriate powers of action or rights. But, on the contrary, we find (page 4) that "society was never meant to be the principal means by which the perfection of the individual was to be secured." From these few quotations it is obvious that the fundamental assumptions of Dr. Woolsey's system are strangely confused. The reason is, that he has at every stage introduced theological conceptions into his reasoning. He assumes throughout, as he says, the doctrine of final causes. He does not regard man as a political animal, but as "fulfilling a work." Society he does not regard simply as an organized aggregation of individuals, but as existing for religious ends. Now, we do not say that this is untrue. But politics as a science will make no progress while such considerations are admitted to its discussions-and this for a very simple reason: no two people are agreed about the doctrine of final causes; no two people are agreed as to the religious mission of man or of the state; and, therefore, in any discussion into which they are brought, one term of it is practically unknown, and, at the same time, variable at the pleasure of the disputants. That politics should ever be approached in this way, shows how little advanced the scientific conception of it is. If any one were to begin a treatise on political economy, or even on law, with reference to the "mission" of the state, and the fulfillment of the individual's "work in the world," and the final causes, and make them part of his argument, he would simply be regarded as an unscientific man. But in politics we are still, as a Comtean would say, in the theological or metaphysical stage; we confess to a disappointment at finding the former head of one of our oldest institutions of learning doing so little to help it forward to the position of a positive science.

In what we have said we have simply had in mind the philosophical portions of Dr. Woolsey's work; with regard to all that large portion which discusses prractical political questions, and the history of government, what he has to say is often valuable and interesting. 2.-Myths and Marvels of Astronomy. By RICHARD A. PROCTOR. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. 1877. 8vo, pp. vi.-363. THIS book consists of a number of essays on matters connected with astronomy, of a popular sort. Mr. Proctor is one of the not

small number of English savants of celebrity who have devoted a large part of their time to the popularization of the science. Scientific men who do this always run the danger of arousing the suspicion and distrust of their professional brethren in the exact ratio of their success with the non-professional public; and this danger Mr. Proctor has not escaped. As he incurs it in the interest of the public, the least the public can do in return is to express its indebtedness to him for his self-sacrifice; and no one who reads his present book can fail to feel a lively gratitude to the author. The "myths" of which it gives an account are, some of them, the old legends (such as those which still survive in the names of the constellations), and some the later inventions, fancies, and paradoxes, which have sprung up even in the broad scientific daylight of modern times. Perhaps the most interesting chapter is that in which the author discusses the “Mystery of the Pyramids," and proposes a solution of it, which is, to say the least, highly ingenious. His theory is, that the kings who successively erected them did so at the instance of astrologers, and for the purpose of having their horoscopes calculated and their lives protected (as was always supposed possible) by frequent consultation of the stars. Mr. Proctor points out that many if not all the facts we know about the pyramids-their shape, the fact that each pyramid was built by a separate king (as would be necessary if the purpose related to each one's individual life), and so on-are all explicable on his theory, but not on any of those usually advanced. He has also some very curious speculations on the antiquity of the constellation-figures, or rather on their origin, founded on astronomical calculations as to the apparent position of the stars in them in periods of remote antiquity; and he gives a perhaps unnecessarily full account of the once-famous "moon-hoax "-a story which does not heighten the reader's respect for the condition of public intelligence in this country forty years since.

3.-The Life and Words of Christ. By CUNNINGHAM GEIKIE, D. D. New York: D. Appleton & Co. 1877. 2 vols., 8vo, pp. xvi.-588, iv.-670.

DR. GEIKIE states in his preface that he has tried to restore as far as possible the world in which Christ moved, the country in which he lived, the people among whom he grew up and ministered, the religion in which he was trained, in fact all the surrounding circumstances and events necessary to a full comprehension of his life.