in expounding the reverse. For example, he quotes in the note as pertinent to Division words of the original relative to Induction; and the instance (from the definition of Magnanimity) adduced to illucidate the one method, is in reality employed by Aristotle to explain the other. In the fifth place, his error is enhanced by seeing in his single method the subordinate of Aristotle's two; and in lauding as a peculiarly important part of the Aristotelic philosophy, a process in the exposition of which Aristotle has no claim to originality, and to which he himself, here and elsewhere, justly attributes only an inferior importance. In the sixth place, in contradiction equally of his whole philosophy and of the truth of nature, the Stagirite is made to hold that our highest abstractions are first in the order of time; that our process of classification is encentric not eccentric; that a child generalizes substance and accident before egg and white.Mr Hampden's statement of the Inductive method being thus the reverse of truth, it is needless to say that the etymological explanation he has hazarded of the term (ayy) must be erroneous. But even more erroneous is the pendant by which he attempts to illustrate his interpretation of that term. απαγωγής 'The anaywyn, Abduction, spoken of by Aristotle, (Anal. Prior. ii. c. 25,) is just the reverse,‚—a leading away, by the terms successively brought from the more accurate notion conveyed by a 'former one.' The abduction here referred to is no more such a 'leading away' than it is a theft. It is a kind of syllogism,—of what nature we cannot longer trespass on the patience of our readers by explaining. For the same reason we say nothing of some other errors we had remarked in Mr Hampden's account of that branch of the Aristotelic philosophy which we have been now considering. analytic argument of the chapter, of a methodus divisiva, and a methodus inductiva; and that Mr H., in his extemporaneous study of the subject, not previously aware that there were two opposite methods of investigating the definition, took up the notion that these were merely a twofold expression for the same thing. Mr Hampden is an able man; but to understand Aristotle in any of his works, he must be understood in all; and to be understood in all, he must be long and patiently studied by a mind disciplined to speculation, and familiar with the literature of philosophy. ART. X.-1. The Penny Magazine of the Society for the Diffu sion of Useful Knowledge. 1832. 2. The Saturday Magazine of the Society for Propagating Christian Knowledge. 1832. 3. Chambers's Edinburgh Journal. 1832. WE E have prefixed the titles of these popular publications to the few remarks which their object suggests, because their success is the fact from which those remarks chiefly spring; and it is a fact of the most cheering nature at the present moment. Differing in other respects, in this they all agree, that neither personal slander, nor any species of scurrility-neither party discussion, whether political or religious, nor invective of any description against men or things-nothing to excite the passions, to influence or corrupt-finds its way into their pages; and yet they are by far the most extensively circulated of any periodical works that issue from the press. When we say that there is nothing of attack or of a controversial description in these works, we might unfortunately make an exception; and that is in some of the unworthy remarks of the Society for Propagating the Gospel of Charity-that Gospel which teaches to think no evil.' We perceive insinuations of the most unwarrantable kind against the other cheap publications, as unfavourable, if not positively hostile, to religion; and no exception made in favour of the very work which gave rise to the Society's own Magazine. The High Church party on this, as upon every other occasion, suffered the lead to be taken by the Low Church and the Sects, or, at least, by those persons who love to convey instruction to all classes alike, without distinction of religious denomination. As soon as their labours proved successful, the clerical party came into the field; and we should not be surprised to find them hereafter assuming the merit of first printing cheap works, as they habitually, we perceive, take the credit of having begun the Education of the Poor! But at least those who preceded them, and whose pages are in no one line hostile to religion, but throughout most friendly to its interests, have a right to expect that they shall not be (though only in the way of insinuation) slandered on this score by their imitators. This Society's Magazine, we repeat, is a useful work, and it is executed with ability, both as to writing and embellishments: that it is a religious work, no one who reads it can pretend to fancy. There is hardly one article in twenty that bears at all upon religious topics. But our present object is to consider the great circulation of these works. We have before us the preface to the Penny Magazine. What may be the numbers printed of the two others we are not informed. But in the preface, the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge state, that of their Magazine two hundred thousand are sold. We have understood that about sixty thousand are sold of each of the other two. The sale of the Penny Magazine and of Chambers's Journal is entirely voluntary, and not forced by any fund whatever. The yearly published accounts of the Useful Knowledge Society prove this as to the Penny Magazine; and Messrs Chambers, being booksellers, of course can only sell their work on the ordinary terms of the trade. Whether any portion of the other Society's funds has been appropriated to give their work a forced circulation we know not; but any such impulse could only be temporary, and it may be reasonably assumed either that none was given, or that it has ceased, and that the natural circulation is what we have stated. Here then are three hundred and twenty thousand of these weekly publications actually sold to persons who can only purchase them in order to gratify a thirst for useful and pleasing information, for that which may improve their minds, and afford innocent and refined entertainment, without gratifying any feeling of a debasing, or unamiable, or even private kind. The price paid by the vast numbers who thus buy, deserves to be considered. The works are indeed cheap beyond all former example; the cheapness is such as could only be attained by means of the extraordinary circulation; nevertheless, two of the works (the Magazines) cost six shillings a-year, exclusive of binding, and the Journal (being sold at three-halfpence, but we believe without the supplements which the others have,*) may cost six and sixpence. So that near three hundred thousand pounds a-year, (accurately L.296,000,) are thus expended by persons chiefly of the middle and poorer classes in gratifying their desire for knowledge. It is a most delightful reflection for the friend of human improvement, to think, that at the low price of a few shillings, the poor may obtain, and with all the accommodation which periodical publication affords, a volume of five or six hundred pages, * Let us not be understood as in the least degree intending to state Messrs Chambers's work as costing more than it ought. It is well worth the money, and was published before either of the others, in small folio, and upwards of three hundred excellent engravings. But it is far more delightful to reflect, that hundreds of thousands crowd round the sources whence the streams of pure and useful knowledge flow; and that the numbers who thirst for it, and can thus slake that thirst, may be reckoned by the million.* The growing taste for such works will not indeed deprive politics and polemics of their peculiar interest; but they will surely make the people more capable of judging soundly and charitably upon matters of controversy, whether civil or religious -and will, we confidently expect, purify the public taste even upon topics which too naturally excite the worser feelings of our nature. A reduction of the taxes upon one species of knowledge (the news of the day) will further this important amendment;-especially by encouraging provincial papers, perhaps the most important part of the periodical press; and by enabling those who are bent upon instructing all classes of the community to combine matter of ordinary intelligence with other less ephemeral information. The success attending such works as we are now speaking of, is a triumphant answer to those who, in disparagement at once of the People and the Press, are so fond of repeating, that nothing will sell which is not seasoned with ribaldry and libel. The taste for these has been, we admit, most deplorable-such as reflects deep and lasting disgrace on its contemptible victims. Who are they? Not the middle-and certainly not the lower classes, with the exception perhaps of a few hundreds in the greater towns-an exception not worth mentioning. But the part of the community which is a prey to the passion for slander,-which furnishes the whole demand for this vile produce of falsehood and spite,-which, indeed, can hardly drag on its existence without a periodical supply of the hateful debasing stimulus-is that which, clerical as well as lay,'† arrogates to itself the name of 'higher classes,' and the right (monstrous inconsistency!) of unceasing invective against the licentiousness of the press. That they should grudge the poor man his cheap book of wholesome * The preface above referred to, calculates the readers of the Penny Magazine at a million, and the three works most probably are circulated among different parts of the community. + There is but one opinion entertained, we find, among our southern neighbours, as to the encouragement given to slanderous newspapers by the High Church party. From this reproach our Church is happily free. VOL. LVII. NO. CXV. 2 information, and complain of those who provide him with it, is about as reasonable as it would be for a sot, whose vitiated palate can bear nothing weaker than brandy, to accuse the brewer of encouraging dram-drinking, or to denounce the waterdrinker as intemperate. In another point of view, and at the present crisis, we hold all these indications of popular improvement extremely important. They afford the most solid hopes of information and regular habits becoming so prevalent as to give the bulk of the people-even the poorest-a perceptible influence upon the conduct of public affairs; and their admission to a more direct share in the operations of representative government, cannot fail to follow in the course of a short time, not only with safety, but with benefit, to the security of all our institutions. We now see the leaders of the High Church party occupied in making secular knowledge so cheap, that every one above the lot of beggary may acquire it. Was this, could this have been, their vocation half a century ago? Was it forty years ago, at the breaking out of the French Revolution and War? Was it thirty years ago, when that war was renewed? Then who shall presume to say, that the same party may not, moving onward in their own improvement with an accelerated pace, in ten or twelve years more, have discovered that the best means of fixing our institutions upon an imperishable foundation, is making those love them for whom they exist,-the body of the people; and to the body of the people intrusting their defence? But the diffusion of sound information among the great body of the people-the humble as well as the middle orders-will, it is supposed, diminish the influence of the periodical press, that is, of the Newspapers; and hence may be perceived in many of these a growing dislike of cheap publications, and of all who promote them. If this is the worst that can be said of the increase of knowledge, its friends have little ground for uneasiness. Can any thing be more desirable than that the people should learn to think for themselves, and not be at the mercy of those who, to serve a secret purpose, or to prosecute a common object, in which they alone have an interest, may combine to mislead the public mind by every kind of exaggeration and mistatement? Mark the deep hatred of the Reformed Farliament which has already been displayed by many of the London Journals, which were the loudest in their cry for Reform, and the warmest in their praises of the Bill! The new House of Commons is spoken of almost in the terms of abuse which used to be lavished upon the old, except that hitherto Borough'mongery' has not been charged upon it. There is hardly any |