long ago pointed out, and as Noiré and others have since maintained, rationabilis. Professor Müller is here brought in contact with Darwin and the Evolutionists, and an extremely lively discussion follows. For its various points we must refer the reader to the work itself (chapters ii. and iv. with chapter iii.) It must suffice here to say that Prof. Müller denies in the growth of language what Darwin himself, thereby differing from most Darwinians, denies in the growth of nature, namely one uniform beginning for all and everything, or one primordial cell for all organic beings and one primordial root for all words. On the other hand he joins issue with Darwin on the question of the origin of man, and denies that he is descended from some unknown animal ancestor, for the reason that he looks upon language as a property of man of which no trace, whether actual or potential, has ever been found in any other animal. Language, in fact, is with Prof. Müller the impassible barrier between man and the lower animals, and constitutes the specific difference between them.

Turning now to language, its constituent elements are of course roots. These are neither interjections nor imitations of natural sounds. The difference between them, it is pointed out, is that while roots are definite in sound but general in meaning, interjections and imitations are general, that is vague and varying in sound, but definite or singular in meaning. The Bow-wow theory is thus thrown overboard, though not for the first time by our author. Roots, he maintains, as a fact placed beyond all reasonable doubt by the Science of Language, are the signs of concepts. 'Every root,' he remarks, 'expresses a concept, or what is called a general notion, or more correctly, the consciousness of repeated acts, such as scraping, digging, striking, joining, etc. They express acts, transitive or intransitive, and the consciousness of such acts, if expressed by any signs, whether phonetic or otherwise must be considered as the first step towards the formation of concept.' What then is their origin? Noiré was the first to prove convincingly that it is impossible to separate the two questions, how concepts are framed, and how they are named, for the simple reason, as he showed, that no concept can be framed without a name, and no name can be framed without a concept. Noiré's theory, which was amply discussed in the pages of the last number of this Review, Professor Müller carries a step further, or rather it has suggested to him his own. According to Noiré the sounds associated with the repeated social acts of man became roots when they expressed the consciousness of these acts. In other words, roots owed their origin to the clamor concomitans of our early social acts. But, as Professor Müller points out, so long as they were simply involuntary sounds and without conscious significance there was no speech. Language arises as soon as the clamor concomitans is used to remind ourselves or others of the acts it accompanies. Professor Müller therefore sees the true origin of language and thought in the roots as signs of our acts. It is of these our own self-willed acts,' he observes, that we become conscious without any effort, and not till we have become conscious of these acts as acts, that is to say as perceived in their results, can we make the next step, that of naming the results our acts by the roots which signify these acts. Space will not allow us to follow Professor Müller further, but brief and imperfect as our analysis has been it will suffice to show the value of his work, though it must necessary fail to afford anything more than the faintest indication of the interest with which the subject is surrounded and the wealth of learning with which it is illustrated.

Extracts from the Records of the Royal Burgh of Stirling, A.D.

1519-1666; with Appendix, A.D. 1295-1666. Glasgow:

Printed for the Glasgow Stirlingshire and Sons of the Rock
Society, 1887.

Some three years ago the municipal authorities of Stirling, following the example of the authorities of one or two other towns, issued an extremely valuable collection of charters and documents illustrative of the history of their burgh. For some reason or other, doubtless a good and sufficient one, they seem to have rested from their labours in this direction, like the Provost and Magistrates of Dundee, and but for the generosity and public spirit of the society whose name appears on its title page, the present equally valuable volume would in all probability never have seen the light. While profoundly grateful for all that has been done in connection with the records of the Scottish burghs in the way of printing them, and what has been done can scarcely be too highly appraised, we cannot help feeling that it is a matter for regret that the publication or non-publication of the numerous burgh records yet unpublished is left in the hands and depends upon the will of local authorities or private societies, and that no Act of Parliament exists authorising and compelling their publication, or the publication of such parts as experts may fix upon as of sufficient importance to deserve printing. Thrown upon the local rates, and spread over a number of years, the expense would in many instances be almost inappreciable, while in other cases the pressure on the local rates might be relieved by grants from the imperial funds. That large quantities of the documents in question are deserving of publication few can doubt. A glance at either of the two volumes Mr. Renwick has now edited in connection with Stirling is sufficient, we should say, to convince the most sceptical. If it is not we should certainly give very little either for his intelligence or patriotism. In few books, in fact we will venture to say in no book, can so clear an insight be obtained into the social, religious, and even political history of the country as may be obtained from the volumes we have referred to, and from the similar volumes issued by the Spalding Club, and those more recently edited for the Burgh Records Society by Dr. Marwick.

The extracts which Mr. Renwick has now edited for the Glasgow Sons of the Rock Society, with a skill that needs no praise, extend over a period of close on four hundred years, and contain a vast mass of interesting information respecting almost every line of municipal life. The Provost and Magistrates of Stirling seem at all times to have been anxious for the preservation of the records and documents connected with their burgh. As early as 1522, as the present extracts show, they kept them under lock and key in a chest which is is described as 'the commoun kist quhair all the avidentis of this gud toune and the commoun seill ar in keipin.' The extract under date 5th July, 1552. is an inventory of the books deliverit be Johene Graheme of Baldorrane, commoun clerk of the burght of Striveling, to Johne Cragingelt of that ilk, provest of Striveling and put be hym in the thesaure hous in presens of Archbald Spittale, bailyie, Robert Cousland, &c., &c.,' and bearing that the clerk still holds in his hands 'the register buke of the few landis and sesingis of the townis,' as they are 'nocht yit compleit.' Of the eight volumes of records mentioned in this inventory, and which continue in an almost unbroken series from 1444 to 1550, only two have been found, those of 1519-30, and 1544-49. It is to be hoped that Mr. Renwick is not too sanguine in his expectation that the six missing volumes, together with the Reid Buke and the Register Buke, have only been mislaid, and will soon be found. In 1645 the Provost and Magistrates again show the same solicitous care for their municipal documents, ordaining the Dean of Guild to go, with certain others, to umquhile maister David Williamson, thair last clerk is hous and chaliner, and thair to resave the tounes haill bookis, prothogollis, and registeres, and

to putt tham in the tolbuith and counsalhous for the tounes use, and the rest to be put up in cofferis.'

As elsewhere the Provost and magistrates in Stirling exercised the most rigid supervision over all the affairs of their burgh. Not only did they punish wrong-doers, and attend to the defence of the town; they regulated trade, and interfered between buyer and seller in a way that would not now-a-days be tolerated. Without their consent no one could sell the smallest article in the burgh except under pains and penalties. They fixed the price of wine, malt, ale, wheat, bread, oats, tallow, candles, straw, &c. To sell ale before it had been tasted and tested by their cunners, and the rate at which it was to be sold fixed by the bailie of the quarter in which the brewster lived, was an indictable offence. The bakers were compelled to serve the town first, and to reserve a supply of bread sufficient for its needs. Hucksters were forbidden to purchase goods for sale before certain fixed hours of the day. In 1525 cake baking seems to have been a profitable business and many enterprising women appear to have gone into it; but on Nov. 3 the Provost and magistrates stepped in and prohibited all but six and fixed the size aud price of the cake. In all this of course they were but walking up to their light and were simply anxious for the welfare of the community. Boycotting is usually supposed to be a peculiarly Irish invention. Here, however, is a case of legal boycotting occurring in Stirling as far back as 1555. 'It is fund be the provest, baillies and counsall, that Jonat Donaldsone, the spous of Alexander Galloway, is ane woman of evill conditionis and nocht lauchfull to by nor sell with, nothir of hir husbandis geir nor nane utheris; and thairfor thai inhibit, be thir presentis, all and sindry thair nychtbouris and inhabitantes of the brucht of Striveling that nane of tham tak upone hand to by, sell, or tak in wod, ony manir of geir with hir, ondir pane of escheiting of the geir bocht, sauld orlaid in wod, etc. The more serious offences were punished with beheading, hanging, drowning, banishment. Here and there an atrocious crime is noted. The offences of slander and 'flyghting' seem to have been of frequent occurrence, the offenders in these cases being usually women. For being found 'ane pikair [thief] and apprehendit with saip, lynt and ane scheit' etc., one Jonet Wrycht was condemned to be burnt on the cheek and banished the town. In the case of Marioun Ray who had been found guilty of slander and threatening that scho suld lay the pynt stoup on the cheftis' of Agnes Henderson the court ordanis for penitioun that thair be maid ane standand gest furth fra the heid of the tolboitht, with ane pillie, ane tow and ane creile, and scho be put in the creile and hyng thair during the will of the provest and baillies.' William Duchok besides being fined for slandering Merione Aikman was condemned to drink wattir xxiiij houris becaus he wes drunkin quhen he missaid hir.'

The references to the craft gilds throughout the volume are numerous. Several of the extracts show that women were admitted to them. The indications of the influence they had come out on almost every page. As might be expected the ecclesiastical and educational notes, but more especially the former, are frequent. Here and there we catch a glimpse of the invading armies of the English, the Queen's Majesty,' an Earl of Argyll, and traders from foreign lands. An entry on 3 Sept. 1529 shows that the deacon and members of the fleshers' gild were given permission to bait a bull of Sanccubartis day or on Sounday nixt thareftir.' The references to lepers are painfully numerous. From a philological point of view the extracts are especially valuable, many of the old forms of the language occurring, and not a few words now unused, some of them not to be found even in Jamieson.

A History of England in the Eighteenth Century. By W. E. H. LECKY. Vols. V. and VI. London: Longmans, Green & Co. 1887.

These volumes of Mr. Lecky's History bring the narrative down to the year 1793, and are concerned therefore with nine of the most important, if not eventful, years in the history of England and Europe during the Eighteenth Century. They are marked, it is almost needless to say, by the same admirable features as the four volumes by which they have been preceded, and fully sustain the reputation Mr. Lecky has won as a judicious, eloquent, and philosophical historian. Their contents are extremely varied-art, science, literature, agriculture, manufactures, dress and manners and popular amusements, as well as diplomatic and parliamentary history, being all treated with more or less detail. One or two

of the chapters might have been expanded into volumes. A long chapter, occupying about a fourth part of the fifth volume, on the French Revolution, seems at first sight somewhat out of place, but the profound influence which that movement had upon England and English affairs is sufficient to vindicate its insertion.

Among the brilliant statesmen who appear on the pages of these volumes, Pitt unquestionably stands out as in many respects the greatest. As a peace Minister he has probably been unequalled, certainly he has not been surpassed. Very appropriately, therefore, for he does not propose to narrate the failures which darkened Pitt's later years, Mr. Lecky opens his fifth volume with an elaborate analysis of the qualities requisite in a successful modern statesman. It is in passages

of this kind that Mr. Lecky excels, and the paragraphs in which it is contained are deserving of careful study. Originality and profundity of thought,' he remarks,the power of tracing principles to their obscure and distant consequences, the intellectual and imaginative insight which penetrates to the heart of things and expresses in a perennial form the deeper emotions or finer shades of human character, can be of little or no service in practical politics.' In the higher spheres of statesmanship the moral qualities of the hero or saint are not required. Passionate earnestness, uncalculating daring, delicacy of conscience, and extreme loftiness of aim are a hindrance rather than an assistance. The politician deals very largely with the superficial and commonplace; his art, therefore, is in a great measure that of skilful compromise; and he is likely to succeed best who is in closest sympathy with the average intelligence and ideals of his time. The first quality of a prime minister in a free country,' said Horace Walpole, is to have more common sense than any man;' and Mr. Lecky, after quoting this saying of Walpole's, goes on to add: Tact, business talent, knowledge of men, resolution, promptitude, and sagacity in dealing with immediate emergencies, a character which lends itself easily to conciliation, diminishes friction and inspires confidence, are especially needed, and are more likely to be found among shrewd and enlightened men of the world than among men of great original genius or of an heroic type of character.' Further on he remarks: The talent of an orator or debater who can carry his measures triumphantly through parliamentary controversies; the talent of a tactician skilful in the difficult art of party management; the talent of an administrator who can conduct the ordinary business of the country with vigour and sagacity; the constructive talent which, when a great change is to be accomplished, can carry it out by wise and well-conceived legislation; the political prescience which foresees the effect of measures, understands the tendencies of the time and directs and modifies a policy in accordance with them, must all meet in an ideal statesman.'

In an extraordinary degree no one has ever possessed all these very various and dissimilar talents. Pitt, however, Mr. Lecky thinks, and most will agree with him, is the most remarkable of all instances of the combination of the more dazzling of them. At twenty-five he had attained a parliamentary ascendancy which his father had scarcely rivalled, and had won one of the most desperate parliamentary battles in English history against an Opposition consisting of the majority of the House of Commons directed by a group of orators and statesmen of the greatest eminence. During the nineteen years he held office as Prime Minister, he was as absolute in the Cabinet and Parliament as Walpole, and far more powerful. Such a minister,' Mr. Lecky observes, may have had great defects, but he must have had extraordinary merits.' The comprehensive picture' which Mr. Lecky gives of him is in many respects admirable, though the account of his oratory is somewhat disappointing. One would have liked to hear more, too, about Pitt's education, particularly of the seven years he spent at Cambridge. Exaggerated pride and extreme avarice of power' were his chief defects; 'indomitable resolution' was his great merit. Along with these he had to a very remarkable degree, the inestimable gift of reticence, great calmness and collectedness, and complete mastery over himself. Though cold and reserved in public, when among the few whom he thoroughly trusted, he was one of the most charming and even one of the gayest companions. As a statesman he showed like Walpole very little disposition to ally himself with men whose talents might in any way imperil his own ascendancy; but when he gave his confidence, he gave it without reserve. Mr. Lecky does full justice to his ability as a finance minister, and points out very clearly both the merits and defects of his policy.

6

The debates on the Regency Bill, and the Test and Corporations Acts afforded abundant opportunity to Pitt for showing his admirable skill as a leader, and Mr. Lecky narrates them with great minuteness, taking, while dealing with the latter, the opportunity of sketching the growth of religious liberty and the views advocated by Locke, Warburton, Burke and others on toleration. The complicated state of political affairs on the Continent is described at considerable length; what Mr. Freeman calls the Eternal Eastern Question' coming in for a large share of attention, as well as the ambitious designs of Prussia, the singular conduct of Gustavus III. of Sweden, and the Peace of Jassy, which released Pitt from his Prussian engagements. In the chapter on the Causes of the French Revolution, Mr. Lecky passes over much the same ground as Mr. Buckle. The effect of this movement on English politics is traced with great skill. Previous to the capture of the Bastile, which contained at the time but seven prisoners, of whom one was an idiot, and another was detained at the request of his family, the events transpiring in France were regarded in England with indifference. When the news of its capture arrived, Pitt with his official responsibility was of course silent. Fox wrote-' How much the greatest event it is that ever happened in the world, and how much the best!' Burke was in doubt and reserved his judgment. 'Our thoughts of everything at home,' he wrote to Lord Charlemont, are suspended by our astonishment at the wonderful spectacle whieh is exhibited in a neighbouring and rival country. What spectators and what actors! England gazing with astonishment at a French struggle for liberty, and not knowing whether to blame or applaud. The thing, indeed, though I thought I saw something like it in progress for several years, has still somewhat in it paradoxical and mysterious. The spirit it is not impossible to admire; but the old Parisian ferocity has broken out in a shocking