HERBERT SPENCER.*

IN Literature and Philosophy, as a general rule, long after the achievement which earned, follows the popular verdict that bestows, the laurel wreath. Schopenhauer was compelled to wait forty years after the publication of his work on The Will, before Germany consented to recognize his merit. Confident of the truths of his philosophy, and their ultimate recognition, he awaited, calmly and serenely, the fruition of his fame, seemingly regardless of the slurs and sneers of hireling critics and jealous contemporaries.

The case of Byron, who awoke one morning and found himself famous, is an anomalous one in the history of literature. The deeper the philosophy, the more profound the thinker; the higher, intellectually, the benefits that he renders to society, the slower the pace of his fame, and the less is the world disposed to acknowledge the merits of the man whose life is dedicated to its service.

A brawling demagogue, whose few ideas are derived from weak solutions of some one of the world's teachers, rides rapidly to honor and distinction, while he who supplied him with his stock in trade lives and dies in obscurity and poverty. Nay, more: the same rule holds true as to those to whom the world has given the name of Statesmen, and with common accord agrees to believe in their wisdom and originality. Sir Robert Peel was reluctantly compelled to accept the teachings of men who had written upon and solved the question of International Commerce, seventy-five years before Peel came to power; yet, hundreds and thousands know of him who are ignorant even of the names, much more the writings, of Adain Smith, Turgot, and Quesnay. By the far greater majority of the law reforms which have been made within the

* Social Statics: London; John Chapman, 1851. Education: New-York; D. Appleton & Co., 1865.

Illustrations of Universal Progress: New-York; D. Appleton & Co., 1864. Essays: Moral, Political, and Esthetic: New-York: D. Appleton & Co., 1865.

past century are due to Jeremy Bentham; yet the multitude. will ever regard Lords Brougham and Grey as the authors of the great judicial reforms of the age. The difference between the thinker who sows the seed, and the practical man who reaps the harvest, is, that the former is ahead of, the latter even with, his age.

It would be a debatable question, so far as the happiness of the individual is concerned, whether it is not as bad to be ahead, as behind, the age, in which it is his lot to be born, were it not for the fact that he who is in advance of his contemporaries, experiences an inward satisfaction, an elevation of spirit, which places him above the desire for applause, and soon renders him callous to the neglect of his fellow-beings. A thinker, who, during long years of undeserved obscurity, remains true to principles; who refuses to enter that rut of routine in which men far below him in capacity earn honors and distinction; who submits to social ostracism rather than be false to his convictions of right; who spurns the rich food and certain sustenance society offers if he but consent to become its pack-horse; and who prefers to run his own career according to his own understanding of his mission in lifetrusting to find sympathy and maintenance as best he canpresents a picture of moral heroism of which every age can boast but few examples.

To this class of men belongs HERBERT SPENCER. Not only that he ever remained true to his convictions of right, but he never lost faith in that society which neglected him. He constantly and steadily labored, and still labors, for the great cause of human progress and the liberty of man, notwithstanding the fact that society left him in poverty, and saw his distress with careless unconcern. When, years ago, SPENCER'S first work appeared, it fell still-born from the press. Learned societies vied not with each other for the honor of making him an associate member. Well-fed and comfortably-positioned professors did not hasten to lay the results of his reflections. before their classes. In the curriculum of universities his works were not catalogued. "Social Statics" could not boast of two hundred readers. His contributions to the periodical literature of England did not create a sensation. His profound work on Psychology was almost totally unknown even by

philosophers. Here and there some mention in a periodical or foreign quarterly, of his name, and dead silence again enshrouded the obscurity of his existence. All the charms of style, the most powerful thoughts, expressed in the tersest Saxon English, availed not to catch the ear of the populace. It is not surprising that the world refuses to read and pay heed to an author who has neglected to learn the rounding of a period, or the easy flow of a sentence; who chooses to surround the light of his ideas by an almost impenetrable wall of verbiage; and such a one cannot complain if the public will not undertake the task of deriving pleasure from his labors. But it may well be asked, with some degree of astonishment: From whence this neglect of one who had every element of success in the highest walks of literature; who unites the erudition of a Bentham with all the terseness and force of a Macaulay? The answer need not be long sought for. SPENCER is what the world persists in calling an impracticable man. He attacked, with vigor, every illegitimate vested in. terest in turn. His criticisms were directed against the existing evils of society:-evils upon which great classes feed, subsist, and prosper-and they became his mortal foes.

He

He attacked the evils of legislation, and every politician became his sworn enemy. He attacked the fetishisms of theology, and churchmen felt insecure in their livings. showed the corruptions in moneyed institutions and railway companies; and directors, presidents and secretaries regarded him with fear and disfavor. He threw down the glove to the landed aristocracy of England, and they recognized in him a dangerous adversary. He wrote a stinging, biting criticism of the antiquated curriculum of the universities; and Deans of Faculties, and Professors, Fellows and Ushers were filled with fear lest his words be heard, and they be forced to change the incrusted habits of years of routine duties.

The methods adopted by these vested interests to silence this redoubtable champion of the rights of man, and adversary of every one who made capital upon bigotry, hallucinations,. corruptions or fraud, were wonderfully alike;-they determined to silence him by silence. No pamphlet appeared attacking his positions; no work was written in opposition to his stand-point. Nothing was done which might ride SPEN

CER into notoriety, if not secure his lasting reputation; and the same policy was adopted as to him that was pursued by the representatives of improper and illegitimate interests against a kindred spirit of SPENCER in France, Frederic Bastiat, and which induced the latter to write to his friend Fontenay, "they will smother me with silence."

But, at last, despite neglect and misinterpretation, the genius of SPENCER has a vista opened for it; and the rays of its light break through the mist which, for twenty-odd years, has prevented the world from enjoying its beneficent rays. Thanks to a few progressive thinkers of Europe-thanks to a few enlightened men of this country (more especially Prof. Youmans), SPENCER's name is now known, his talents are recognized, his merits are being acknowledged, and his works are being read and studied. It is, perhaps, idle to hope that SPENCER will ever become a popular author, but he is fast becoming a well-understood and appreciated thinker. His direct influence will, in all probability, be restricted to a circle composed of a few thinking men in the community; but that suffices; as, from that circle, will be reflected-frequently discolored, perhaps, and scarcely recognizable-still, to a greater or less degree, reflected, upon the outside world the light of his ideas. From the Philosopher, who weaves SPENCER's ideas and forms of thought into the web of his philosophy, down to the mere scribbler in some obscure journal-who will use his arguments in an editorial, without knowing from whence they came or to whom he is indebted for his ideas; Spencerean philosophy will permeate and penetrate the world of thought; and, eventually, to the extent of the truths which he has taught, will influence human conduct.

SPENCER'S Social Statics was written to illustrate the conditions essential to human happiness. We do not think that we are asserting too much when we say, that, from this Work, will date modern Social Science; as it holds the same relation to the indefinite speculations that were called Social Science anterior to its publication, that Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" holds to that which was called Political Economy, prior to 1776.

In the Introduction to the Work, SPENCER successfully refutes some of the current maxims relating to Government.

The doctrine that "whatever is expedient, is right," is disposed of by him, by the following line of argument: that expediency, as a rule of conduct, cannot safely be relied upon, is evidenced by the fact, that no two persons will agree upon the expediency of any measure, if they differ in culture and education. The higher our civilization, the more we discover that expediency and right are almost convertible terms. It would, therefore, be much nearer the truth to say that "whatever is right, is expedient." That the doctrine of the greatest good to the greatest number-a doctrine lying at the foundation of the political speculations of Bentham—is no safe guide, or, in other words, no guide at all, is evidenced by the fact that it gives rise to an almost interminable question of what is the greatest good to the greatest number. A Tory, of England, will argue that it is for the greatest good of the greatest number that they be without the elective franchise, and that the people should intrust the affairs of Government to the hands of the nobility and gentry; whereas a Democrat will have a radically different conception of what will contribute to the greatest happiness of the greatest number. That which constitutes the greatest happiness of an Esquimaux Indian differs widely from that which forms the happiness of a civilized European. The military plans and schemes in which the genius of a Napoleon would delight, would prove no source of pleasure to a Quaker. Therefore, the rule of the greatest happiness of the greatest number means nothing at all, because an agreement upon the subject cannot be arrived at. The question, therefore, of a rule of conduct lies deeper than any of the utilitarian school of philosophers conceived it to be--it lies within the nature and essence of things themselves. Once admitting that man in society is governed by natural laws-clearly, conformity to these laws is the only rule of conduct, and must lead to the greatest happiness of the individual and the greatest wellbeing of society. Universal conformity to these laws implies an ideal society. When we say that man is simple, weak, frail, we mean that he does not habitually fulfill the appointed law. Imperfection is another word for disobedience.

"And yet," says SPENCER, "unable as the imperfect man "may be to fulfill the perfect law, there is no other law for