work. Some of its finest touches are found in discriminations of character. A volume which treats of so many themes must content itself with suggestions of points of view, condensed judgments, and sufficient amplification and illustration to make itself everywhere clear and helpful. If a fitting bibliography could be added it would be of still more service to students of modern thought. a It would exceed our space, and is unnecessary for our present purpose, to follow the successive lectures. We can sufficiently further indicate the quality and method of the book by noticing the treatment of the opening topic, Coleridge as a Religious Thinker. The object proposed is not so much a critical estimate of the value of his influence, as a description of its transforming or moulding power. What new impulse did it give, what contribution did it make, to modern thought? is the question put and answered. Coleridge, it is claimed, originated a new and salutary movement; (1) by renovating current Christian ideas, (2) by promoting an advance in Biblical study, (3) by introducing an enlarged conception of the church. The first of these points is the most elaborated, and the material for the discussion is drawn chiefly from "The Aids to Reflection." Coleridge, our author says most justly, 66 was no mere metaphysician. He was a great interpreter of spiritual facts, student of spiritual life, quickened by a peculiarly vivid and painful experience." Christianity was definitely conceived of by him as a remedy for sin; indeed, sin and redemption are to him the two poles of its axis; but it is not an interpolation in human history, nor a mere scheme or means to an end outside itself. On the contrary, it reaches back to man's original constitution and onwards to his highest well being. It is not merely the principle of recovery to life, but also of complete and perfect education in all the spheres of human interest and action. No evangelical theologian or preacher has more strenuously insisted on the necessity of Christian faith; but faith was not divorced from reason, nor construed as a mere act of submission to outward authority whether of Rome or the letter of Scripture. It is an intelligent, rational, spiritual act, implying a "vital touch" of the infinite and absolute Reality which is correlated to the soul in all the departments of its being. Dr. Tulloch says most truly: "The really vital question is whether there is a divine root in man at all a spiritual centre answering to a spiritual centre in the universe. All controversies of any importance come back to this. Coleridge would have been a great Christian thinker if for no other reason than this, that he brought all theological problems back to this living centre, and showed how they diverged from it." Dr. Tulloch, in concluding his discussion of this aspect of Coleridge's teaching, calls attention to its discernment of the limits of human reason, and suggests that the greatest change to be expected in the theology of the future is its recognition of a region of the unknown. He admits, however, that Coleridge was in no sense an agnostic as the word is now applied. Indeed, there would be danger, if we mistake not, of an undue, or rather of an unbalanced, exaltation of reason, through his influence, unless it were realized how thoroughly ethical and spiritual is his conception of this power. If reason be conceived of as a purely intellectual attribute, the truths of faith can never become mere truths of reason, even when faith gives place to sight. Christianity is not so many new ideas communicated to men, nor a mere recovery of old ones. Person He is forever to be trusted in as well as known. If God is a Dr. Tulloch awards to Coleridge the honor of "having first plainly and boldly announced that the Scriptures were to be read and studied, like any other literature, in the light of their continuous growth, and the adaptation of their parts to one another." We trust that Dr. Tulloch's account of Coleridge's "Confessions of an Inquiring Spirit" will lead many to recur to it. We have been deeply impressed, in reperusing it, with its suggestiveness for the discussions concerning inspiration which are now engaging so widely the attention of the Christian public. The third aspect of the Coleridgian movement is presented by considering the work "On the Constitution of Church and State according to the idea of each." This treatise has less interest and value for us than for Coleridge's countrymen, important as it may be, and we will not follow Dr. Tulloch in his comments, which are noticeably brief. Dr. Tulloch rates Coleridge very high, but not, we are persuaded, at all too high. He has summoned many a man, as with a prophet's authority, really to think upon religious themes, and has caused him to face the problems of the spiritual life honestly and manfully. Coleridge cannot be held in too high honor in this regard, and his work is by no means done. This rapid sketch will suggest, perhaps, the method and spirit of Dr. Tulloch's book. It does no justice to its literary charm, nor to the lucidity, aptness, and range of its expositions. It will be widely read, as it deserves to be. A further suggestion may not be amiss. Dr. Tulloch speaks disparag ingly at times of religious dogma, meaning, as we understand him, not the primary truths of revelation, nor these as appropriated in Christian experience, but theological statements or propositions which have been elaborated by reflection. He regards such results as divisive. "Dogma," he says, "splits rather than unites, from its very nature." We think that this is a low and unworthy conception of dogma; and that a rational or scientific apprehension of Christianity ought not to be put in antagonism to the work of the Holy Spirit, whose office is to unite Christians in the knowledge as well as in the love of truth. AMERICAN COMMONWEALTHS. Egbert C. Smyth. Kansas: The Prelude to the War for the Union. By LEVERETT W. SPRING. 16mo, pp. vi., 334. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Co. 1885. He treats of Kansas THE sub-title gives the author's point of view. as the place where that conflict between slavery and freedom began which ended only when the entire nation became free. Thus he deals chiefly with five years of the life of Kansas, from the organization of the territory in May, 1854, to the adoption of the Wyandotte Constitution in October, 1859. There is a brief, compact chapter, into which is condensed what our author calls "The Congressional pother, which resulted in the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Bill." There is a single chapter devoted to the years of the war for the Union. The rest of the book deals with the days when the North was stirred by stories of "bleeding Kansas." Brief as is the period, it furnishes abundant material for many volumes, and compels a judgment upon the character of some con spicuous persons whose rightful place in history may always be matter of dispute. Professor Spring has diligently read, sifted, and weighed the voluminous literature of that mad time. He has also put the men of that turbulent period in the scales and has dared to declare their levity. If some in Massachusetts will not like to see it written of Charles Sumner that he "was at home in tasks of rhetoric rather than of statesmanship," all the worshipers of old John Brown, of Osawatomie, will be shocked to hear him described as a parenthesis in the history of Kansas;" while the surviving admirers of Senator General Jim Lane will be "fighting mad" when they read these closing words of his obituary: "Lane belonged to the basest, most mischievous class of politicians.' There is no 66 touch of poetic sentiment in such judgments. Indeed, all the poetry of the book is quoted from other authors and so indicated. His prefatory note intimates that his version is not "colored with the dyes in vogue twenty-five years ago." Little coloring matter, old or new, seems to have been used. The most conspicuous men of "bleeding Kansas арpear in various shades of black. There is one notable exception, Governor Robinson. He shines forth, luminous in his dark surroundings, brightening the darkness which our author has made for him, because of the paint with which he has covered him. It must be far more grateful to the governor than the dyes of the days when Mr. Jim Lane took the seat in the United States Senate which the governor very much desired. Yet even here our author, despite the demands of friendship, lets you see his hero as an abolitionist at the head of a party whose avowed purpose is to make a State in which there shall be no colored men, as a man depending on finesse rather than on the truth of his convictions to gain his ends. Professor Spring has accomplished a difficult task not only in the spirit of a careful student, but also with the calm tone of a severe judge. Not even the person whom he eulogizes most goes forth from his court spotless. There were neither heroes nor saints in Kansas in the years of her making, if here is spoken the final word. John Brown was the occasion of the earlier Missouri invasions, and Jim Lane of the later. Of the Jayhawkers compared with the Missouri Bushwhackers, the last word of the latest Kansas historian is "Jayhawkers were the superior devils." No student of literature will for a moment imagine that such a story as this will be accepted by a proud State as a true judgment on the men and the events of its early life. But those who wish to challenge its accuracy, to put in its place a more poetic account of those years of savage strife, would do well to wait until time has consigned to oblivion the evil and left only the good to stimulate the young to heroic lives. Even then this careful, merciless criticism of "bleeding Kansas" will be very attractive to all who appreciate an honest attempt to be strictly just, even when the just judgments uttered are not flattering. Professor Spring's book ought to be read by two classes of persons: first, those who have a very positive opinion about Kansas affairs; second, those who know nothing of Kansas history. The former will modify their opinions. The latter will learn what they can find nowhere else in such compact form, told in most attractive style. OTTAWA, KANSAS. James G. Dougherty. STUDIES IN SHAKESPEARE. BY RICHARD GRANT WHITE, editor of the Riverside Edition of Shakespeare's Works. Pp. 383. Boston and New York : Houghton, Mifflin & Co. 1886. MOST of the matter contained in this volume has previously appeared in magazines, and will not be new, therefore, to readers who keep themselves informed on current Shakespearean criticism. An introductory note, however, informs us that all the essays have been revised, and that the author added fresh matter to the paper on Shakespeare Glossaries and Lexicons, and a note on Mr. Walker's "Critical Examination of the Text." "It was while preparing this book for publication," says this introductory note, "that Mr. Grant White was seized by the long and painful illness from which recovery became impossible." We have here, therefore, the author's last utterances upon a theme that his scholarship, his good sense, and his wit have done much to illuminate. On this theme he had earned the right to speak with authority, and even the casual reader of this volume will see that he did not hesitate to exercise that right. Indeed, so authoritative is his tone that the reader who has but a tithe of Falstaffian spirit is sometimes moved to refuse assent, on the sole ground that if assent were given it would seem to be "on compulsion." The controverted questions that have made the field of Shakespearean criticism a picturesque and lively battle field hitherto are settled, one after another, in the most positive way; and were it not for the fact that these questions are perverse, and will not stay settled, there would be renewed occasion to inquire if life is worth living. That Shakespeare was unhappy in his marriage, — that his Sonnets are plainly autobiographical, that Hamlet was only feigning madness, that Jacques was an exhausted and cynical roué (Alexander Smith says "he had the making of a charming essayist"), that metrical tests are of little value, that German commentators are, of necessity, both foolish and impertinent, these propositions, and others of like character, are assumed or asserted with a confidence that would, perhaps, be more reassuring if it were not so strongly emphasized. And yet the reader — if he be not one of the unfortunate Germans, or the industrious Mrs. Pott, with her "Promus of Formularies"- cannot fail to be entertained by the very exuberance of Mr. White's emphasis. The contents of the book are classified under four divisions: On Reading Shakespeare; Narrative Analysis; Miscellanies; Expositors. The first division, On Reading Shakespeare, consists of directions, suggestive and admirable, in answer to the question which had often been asked of the author- How to read Shakespeare. Mr. White calls it a "strange question," but his answer to it is so good, and contains so much that is helpful and wise, that it appears to have been a good question to ask. His brief, running commentary on the plays of Shakespeare's three periods goes far, in itself, to modify the almost contemptuous tone with which the author speaks of commentaries, and advises the reader to avoid them. Indeed, one is tempted to ask if Mr. White did not speak thus because he had outgrown the need of commentary, and had attained a height of critical knowledge and insight that made commentaries an impertinence to him. It may be that Shakespearean comment is not unlike the ladder of which the philosophizing Brutus speaks : "Whereto the climber-upward turns his face; He then unto the ladder turns his back, Looks in the clouds, scorning the base degrees The second division, entitled Narrative Analysis, contains the stories of "Macbeth," "Hamlet," "Othello," and "As You Like It," told in plain narrative prose, with such connecting links of interpretation as seemed to the author necessary to make the stories consistent and clear. It is, upon the whole, the least valuable part of the book, and one comes upon sentences, here and there, that a writer less fastidious than Mr. White might justly criticise. 66 The third division, of Miscellanies, opens happily with the questionbegging title-The Bacon - Shakespeare Craze. The half-protesting, even playful, earnestness with which the author demolishes Mrs. Pott's "Promus of Formularies," and with it the whole theory which that remarkable book was written to advocate, is thoroughly enjoyable. In the light of this exposition, which is, as Shylock would say, "most sound," it is clear that, independently of her sex, Mrs. Pott has written herself down as one of the weaker vessels. King Lear," its text, its plot, and its personages, furnishes a subject which Mr. White treats in characteristic fashion, with a wealth of critical knowledge and a fineness of poetic insight that are admirable. He characterizes this drama as "the largest in conception, noblest in design, richest in substance, and highest in finish of all Shakespeare's works, and which, had he written it alone (if we can suppose the existence of such a sole production), would have set him before all succeeding generations, the miracle of time." Next follow some shrewd and sensible observations on the inconsistencies and feebleness of Stage Rosalinds, and we come to the last essay in this division, On the Acting of Iago. Here we have a thorough and masterly analysis of a popular, selfish, scheming, unscrupulous villain, such as Shakespeare created for the ruin of Othello. "The moral," says Mr. White, with a touch of cynicism, "of Iago's part in the tragedy is: Distrust the man whose peculiar faculty, or chief desire, is to make friends. He is likely to be selfish; and if selfish he needs only temptation and opportunity to be a scoundrel." The fourth and final division is devoted to Expositors, and is chiefly occupied with the derelictions, to call them by no severer name, of Mr. Dyce, Dr. Schmidt, and Mr. W. S. Walker. Mr. White was never a gentle critic, and his utterances in this review are far from having the chastened character which is thought to be fitting in last words. He is specially severe upon Dr. Schmidt's Shakespeare-Lexicon, primarily, of course, because he found much in it to condemn, but partly also, one suspects, because it is big, partly because it is grammatical, and partly because it is German. One who has frequently turned the pages of this elaborate work in a fruitless search for illumination does not feel like taking up the cudgels very earnestly in its defence, and yet it must be said that Mr. White allows his fervor sometimes to carry him beyond the bounds of fairness. He should, at least, have examined the book thoroughly before recording his condemnation of it. ""T were good you do so much for charity." Henry L. Chapman. BOWDOIN COLLEGE. VOL. V. NO. 25. 8 |