Under Deist and Theist, Kant's very peculiar discrimination between the two words is not noticed.

The definition of Kabala by Fleming is one of his worst. It is that of a man who stands completely outside of and away from his subject, but has gathered up some details about it. But neither Dr. Calderwood nor Dr. Krauth has supplemented it. For “Hosenroth" read "Christian Knorr von Rosenoth." The chief authorities after Franck, are Tholuck, Freystadt, Ginsburg, and Molitor's Philosophie der Geschichte oder über die Tradition im Alten Bunde, 5 vols., 1834-53, which last Fleming quotes in a partial French translation under the word Tradition, with which it has little to do. Fleming's dates for the Sohar or Zohar, and the Sepher Fezira or Jiecirah (not Tetsira) are now rejected by everybody but A. Franck, and those works are assigned to the Middle Ages.

The definition of Miracle, by Calderwood, does not represent any view but one. That of those who, with J. P. Lange, regard a miracle as the restoration of the divine order where disorder has occurred, or as the breaking through of a higher order into the sphere of the lower, is not referred to; and Strachey and Mozeley might have been mentioned among the authorities.

On Method, Coleridge we think at least as high authority as Des Cartes.

Calderwood's definition of Mysticism is far inferior to Dr. Krauth's own in Johnson's Encyclopedia, to which reference is made.

The definitions of Nation, from Temple and Krug, are worth quoting, but they both miss the mark. They define by what is accidental to some nations, not essential to all. Rev. E. Mulford's book on The Nation, would have furnished far better definitions, both his own and those of other political speculators.

The theological sense of Economy might have been given, with a reference to Newman's Arians, pp. 66-79 (third edition).

Under Pantheism both Master Eckart and Jacob Böhme are referred to, but neither was a Pantheist. Eckart indeed said things which led his enemies to offer that charge, but he distinctly declares that "God and I are one, not in being, but in beholding." Böhme is the greatest enemy of Pantheism, as Baader, Hoffman, Hamberger and others have shown. He has been charged with being such because of the gross misunderstanding into which even Schelling has fallen, of confounding "temporal nature" and "eternal nature," and thus, as he himself says, "putting cows and calves

into heaven." Hegel (who had read only Böhme's first work), Feuerbach and H. A. Fechner claim him as a Pantheist, and Staudenmaier, Neander and Hunt treat him as such. C. H. Weisse and F. D. Maurice are in doubt. F. C. Oetinger, J. U. Wirth, W. L. Wullen, F. Schlegel, Moritz Carriere, J. Sengler, I. H. Fichte, F. C. Baur, the later Schelling, F. von Osten Sacken, Lutterbeck, Fr. Bleek, J. Huber, K. P. Fischer, and indeed everybody (except Fechner, Feuerbach and Weisse) who has made his writings a special subject of study, describe him as a Theist. It may be said that he ought to be mentioned in this connection because he is so often spoken of in it; but those who feel an obligation to his writings will not be pleased that Dr. Krauth has even seemed to give his sanction to this slander.

The definition of Revolution does not bring into view its nature as an intended break with the past. Baader contrasts it with Evo

lution.

Under Rosicrucians, Fleming treats us to the mythological story of Christian Rosenkreutz's life. There never was any such person, except in Valentine Andrea's head, and in the noddles of those whom he duped. J. S. Semler (1786) is the authority on the subject.

Calderwood's definition of Socialism would suit Communism better. The former does not "advocate community of property," but the control and direction of industry by government. That of Saint-Simonism ascribes to the founder of the school plans of social reform which originated with his more practical disciples after his death.

As an economist, we are unable to accept the definition of Value. It is chiefly an emphasizing of the two words "intrinsic" and "extrinsic," and both in a non-natural sense.

Gold money has intrinsic
Mr. Carey's definition,

value; paper money has none, we all say. "the measure of nature's resistance," seems to us at once more real, more practical and clearer.

Authorities which might be added: Alchemy, Schmieder's Gechichte; Automaton, Jonathan Edwards, Huxley, Clifford; Being, Jonathan Edwards; Casuistry, Pascal, De Quincey, F. D. Maurice On the Conscience; Culture, Matthew Arnold, Shairp; Negation, (Hegelian,) K. P. Fischer; Ontology, Ubaghs and Dr. Ward in Dublin Review; Psychopannychia, John Calvin; Trichotomy, Franz Delitzsch, K. F. Göschel, and J. Beard. ROBT. ELLIS THOMPSON.

NEW BOOKS.

THE CARLYLE ANTHOLOGY. Selected and arranged, with the author's sanction, by Edw. Barrett. Pp. x. 386, 8vo. New York: Henry Holt & Co.

The same firm have recently published a Milton Anthology, and the two works suggest the question whether the greatest master of impassioned prose of the Victorian era is to be known to posterity, like the great master of that style in Commonwealth times, through anthologies and selections. It is true that Milton wasted much of his power upon the details of controversies which have lost interest for us. But the Areopagitica and several of his lesser treatises are of interest as broad and universal as Past and Present, while even his controversial treatises contain passages which in vigor of stately eloquence have never been surpassed; never equaled, indeed. And yet who reads Milton's prose? Will Carlyle's be read? To those of us who are old enough to have received the vigorous moral shock administered by Carlyle to the generation now passing the acme of life, the question seems almost blasphemous in its insinuation. We feel that if any books of our times deserve to live, then Heroes and Hero-Worship, Past and Present, Sartor Resartus, The French Revolution, and the Essays of the second period are they. We did not read them with critical coolness in those old days. We could not take them to pieces; they took us to pieces. For once we found that books are not the mere idle amusement of a literary life. This man's word pierced to the dividing of joint and marrow, and brought us into the presence of the reality which must judge us, not be judged by us. But a new generation is growing up, who read about Carlyle, before they read Carlyle. They come to his works with a certain preparation for what is unusual in them, and therefore incapacitated from being filled with the admiration which we felt in those days and weeks of surprise and enthusiasm. They have learnt to analyze his style, to investigate the secrets of his power, to discount his peculiarities. It is a pity of them, for they will never find either the use or the delight in his works, which they conveyed to those to whom the Titan was revealed in his greatness.

The selections presented in the present volume are made with great judgment. They are arrayed under six rubrics, suggested by the leading themes of Carlyle's works: (1) Life and the Conduct of Life; (2) Portraits and Characters; (3) Literature and the literary Life; (4) Religion; (5) Politics; (6) Historical and miscellaneous. Mr. Carlyle's writings lend themselves to such a selecting process very readily. Quotable passages abound in them, and his literary method, his effort at vividness of presentation, his illumination as by a lightning flash, makes every picture in a certain sense complete. And therefore the book is intelligible in itself, and is suit

able alike for those who are not familiar with Maister Tummas, and wish to know him better, and for those whose memories of past reading will be exercised at every step. One selection we would gladly see omitted. The painful description of Coleridge's last years, taken from the Life of John Sterling, is probably the worstnatured thing Carlyle ever wrote. It has a value, as showing the limits of his own greatness, and his utter incapacity, in spite of some earlier vague eulogies of Kant, to understand the philosophers. But we think it a pity that his great literary power should have been used to stamp on the retina of our generation this photograph of a man as great and as lasting in his influence as any whom Carlyle ever knew, and whose weaknesses the world of thinkers would gladly cover with the mantle of filial charity.

Carlyle's style was a scandal to a generation which thought it admired Addison, but in reality idolized Johnson and Burke. It is thoroughly Anglo-Saxon in its construction, but not in its vocabulary, being in this respect the reverse of Cobbett and Tennyson.

RECOLLECTIONS OF SAMUEL BRECK. With Passages from his Note Books (1771-1862). Edited by H. E. Scudder. Pp. 316, 8vo. Philadelphia: Porter & Coates.

"Read biographies, but especially autobiographies," Carlyle advises us. American literature is not specially rich in either department. We have few biographies that deserve to stand on the same shelf with Mrs. Childs's "Isaac T. Hopper: A True Life;" and few autobiographies to put alongside that of Benjamin Franklin. Mr. Breck's Recollections are therefore the more welcome, as belonging to a department of literature which is anything but overdone, and as forming at the same time a really interesting and readable book. And to Philadelphians it comes with the special recommendation of being a Philadelphia book.

Mr. Breck's life was not in any sense heroic or marked by striking adventure. But he was unusually furnished with opportunities of seeing and hearing things worth the telling. He was born in 1771, and in Boston, where his father resided until 1792, when he removed to Philadelphia because of his disgust at the high taxes imposed by his native city. Our author was sent to France in 1782 to receive his education at the Benedictine school of Soreze, returning in 1787, and again visited Europe in 1790-1, and heard Mirabeau address the National Assembly. With the rest of his family, he came to Philadelphia, and in 1797 built the Sweetbrier mansion on the Schuylkill, near Belmont, where he lived till 1838, and after that in the city. It is the period till 1797 that the narrative of his life, begun in 1830, really covers, but this has been supplemented from his diaries down to our own times.

Mr. Breck is an amusing and cheery narrator of what he had seen and heard, and if not always accurate in his recollections of

what had happened half a century previous, he is always candid, and valuable as a witness as to the broad characteristic of the period he describes. For a man of over sixty, he writes with remarkable freedom from the weakness of making unfavorable contrasts between later and earlier periods. He is no laudator acti temporis. He describes American society of the period which followed the Revolution, in such a way as might cure some good people of the historical and political blues, which at times affect their righteous souls. Some of our national heroes, notably his Excellency John Hancock, rather suffer by his candor; but if the whole truth were told, John Hancock would fill a very humble niche in the esteem of the American people. In 1787 or 1788, and until 1790, our author was apprenticed to commerce in a Boston countinghouse. "The lessons taught in this counting-house were of the most immoral character, chiefly owing to the disturbed and feeble state of the old Confederation Government, and inexecution of the revenue laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. So soon as a vessel arrived, one-half the cargo was hoisted into the upper part of the store, and the other half only entered at the customhouse, and thus we were initiated into the secret of smuggling. . . The only apology was the universality of the custom. The laws were a dead letter; the States, collectively and individually, were bankrupt; the public debt at ten or twelve dollars for a hundred. Each State was pulling against the other, and the fruit of our seven years' war did not then appear worth gathering. Disunited from Maine (sic) to Georgia, the elements of self-government seemed to be lost, and we were fast sinking into anarchy and confusion." And not only in great matters but in small things he notices equal improvement. Housekeepers who groan over the servants of our day, may thank their stars that they did not live when drunkenness, incontinence, and wholesale cheating was the rule among that class of persons, and had to be tolerated because good servants were too rare to be looked for. Mr. Breck, after recording his father's experience and his own, adds: "It is sufficient to say that the demeanor of servants at this day (June, 1830) is improved, and I hope I may with justice add, improving, for there is still ample room for amendment."

While the whole book is readable, some parts of it are very amusing. Such are the account of Tracy's dinner to d'Estaing with the frog soup made of whole frogs in their green hides, expressly to suit French taste; and the account of President Washington's visit to Boston, and his diplomatic tussel with Gov. Hancock.

We are obliged to complain that the editor has allowed one passage (p. 291) to appear just as the author wrote it, as it must give great offense to the friends of a gentleman still living, and of much greater eminence than Mr. Breck.