agitation, and was united with Broughata, Mackintosh, Russell, Althorp, and other notabilities of his party, in the establishment of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge. His 'View of the State of Europe during the Middle Ages,' pronounced by foreign critics to be "beyond contradiction" the best of his works, was published in 1818; his 'Constitutional History of England in 1827; his Introduction to the Literature of Europe during the 15th, 16th, and 17th Centuries,' in 1838-39. In 1830 George IV. instituted two gold medals for the best historical works of his reign and Hallam and Washington Irving were the historians that his Majesty delighted to honour. Hallam's works are praised for industrious research and dignified impartiality; his Constitutional History is accepted as the standard work on that subject. He had great reputation as a scholar; Byron calls him "classic Hallam much renowned for Greek:" but it may be doubted whether his Introduction to the Literature of Europe was not too ambitious a work for any one man not possessed of the resources of Faust. Certainly his criticisms of English writers, though always expressed with elegance, will not always bear close examination, and too often give evi ence of very superficial and second-hand knowledge.1 Ornate, dignified elegance is the characteristic of his style for popular purposes it is perhaps too Latinised.

Sir Archibald Alison, Bart., the historian of Modern Europe, born December 29, 1792, was the son of the Rev. Archibald Alison, author of the Essay on Taste,' who, at the time of his birth, was vicar of Kenley in Shropshire. His father removing to Edinburgh when he was five years old, he received his school and university education there, and became, in 1814, an advocate at the Scotch bar. He was at Paris in 1814, "when Talma played before a pitful of kings;" and there conceived the idea of recording from its first beginnings the stirring series of events that was supposed to have terminated in the meeting of the Allied sovereigns. The prosecution of this idea cost him "fifteen subsequent years of travel and study, and fifteen more of composition" the first instalment of his History of Europe from 1789 to the Restoration of the Bourbons in 1815' making its appearance in 1833, and the concluding volumes in 1844. Meantime this was far from being his sole occupation: he pub ished 'Principles of the Criminal Law of Scotland' in 1832, and 'Practice of the Criminal Law' in 1833; and from 1834 he discharged the duties of the sheriffdom of Lanarkshire. He was a frequent contributor to 'Blackwood's Magazine'; a selection of his contributions in three volumes was published in 1850. He wrote also 'Principles of Population,' 1840; Free Trade and Protection,' 1844; England in 1815 and in 1845'; 'Life of the Duke of Marlborough,' 1847.

1 For example see p. 213 of this work.

66

In the latter years of his busy life he continued his History to the accession of Louis Napoleon in 1852; the successive volumes appearing between 1852 and 1859. He was created a baronet by Lord Derby's Ministry in 1852. His death took place on the 23d of May 1867.-Sir Archibald was in politics an extreme Conservative: he remained an uncompromising opponent to the principles of Free Trade, and he never ceased to represent the Reform Bill of 1832 as inaugurating an era of disorganisation and decay. Two of his opinions in particular have been subjected to much criticisın: one that crime is increased rather than diminished by merely intellectual education a doctrine inculcated also by Auguste Comte, and which presents a considerable field for casuistry; and the other relating to the amount of harm done to British commercial interests by the return to a metallic currency after the conclusion of the Napoleonic wars. His peculiar views are strongly enounced in the later continuation of his History. But, as is admitted by the sharpest critics of this work, his Toryism and his crotchets are not allowed to interfere with the fairness and candour of his narrative, or with his estimates of political opponents. The 'Edinburgh Review' credits him with "an entire freedom from all mean and petty jealousies or rancorous sentiments towards his antagonists;" and affirms that he has a generous and hearty appreciation of all merit which he perceives, and can bestow praise in no stinted measure even on those most opposed to him." In addition to this, one of the first requisites for the supremely difficult task of writing contemporary history, Sir Archibald displayed the greatest industry in collecting materials for his work; all agree in bearing testimony to the thoroughness of his researches. Very little exception has been taken to the accuracy of his facts, as regards either omission or positive error-less than has been taken in the case of Macaulay's History of England'; adverse critics have confined themselves principally to his opinions. His s'yle has been exposed to considerable animadversions: grammarians have cited from his pages numerous violations of grammar, and the Edinburgh Review' charges him with verbosity, and with excessive pomp in the enunciation of his general reflections. These, however, are faults that occur chiefly to the critic and the cynic; and the critics of Sir Archibald's style do not appear to have sufficiently accounted for the extraordinary world-wide popularity of the work. The History of Europe,' widely circulated at home, has been translated into all European languages, and also into Arabic and Hindustani: in a work designed for general reading, such popularity may be taken as a proof of excellence, unless good reasons can be assigned to the contrary. The intrinsic interest of the events narrated, absorbing as that undoubtedly was, and the author's industrious accuracy, great as that was, do not constitute

་

a sufficient explanation; the interesting story is undeniably told with high narrative skill. When we disregard minute errors of s ructure, and look to general effects, we find many excellences of style that help to explain his popularity. The historian possesses a flowing command of simple an 1 striking language, always equal to the dignity and spirit of the events related, and enlivened by happy turns of antithesis and epigram. He had a feeling for dramatic contrasts, and introduces them with striking effect. He visited the scenes of all the important engagements, and his descriptions have the freshness and animation of pictures drawn from nature. Finally, what is of prime importance in such a work, though he deals with highly complicate affairs involving the interaction of several different powers, he keeps the concurring streams of events lucidly distinct, and brings the reader without perplexity to their joint conclusion. His explanatory episodes are peculiarly elaborate and luminous. In short, it has been well said that "if the art of engaging the reader's attention, and sustaining it by the vigour, spirit, and vivacity of the narrative be a high merit, many popular and many great historians must cede superiority of this kind to Sir Archibald Alison."

PHILOSOPHY.

Sir William Hamilton, Bart. (1788-1856), the greatest British supporter of a priori philosophy in this century, was the son of Dr W. Hamilton, Professor of Anatomy in the University of Glasgow. He was the lineal representative and was adjudged heir to the title of Sir Robert Hamilton, the leader of the Covenanting forces at Drumclog. His father died when he was two years old. He received his schooling partly at home, partly at the public schools of Glasgow, and partly at private schools in England. He passed through the curriculum of Arts in Glasgow, and spent a winter at Edin urgh in the study of medicine, which he was inclined to make his profession. In 1807 he went to Oxford as an exhibitioner on the Snell Foundation. There he became engrossed in the study of mental philosophy, and in the final examination professed a knowledge of an unusual (though currently very much exaggerated) list of books, and was passed with the highest distinction. About this time he abandoned his design of entering the profession of medicine, and ultimately settled at Edinburgh as a lawyer, being called to the bar in 1814, three years after his graduation as B.A. at Oxford. In 1820 he was an unsuccessful candidate for the Chair of Moral Philosophy, vacated by the death of Brown, the appointment being given to John Wilson. In the following year he was appointed to the poorly-salaried Chair of Civil History. His appointment to the Chair of Logic did not take place till 1836.

By this time, through articles contributed to the Edinburgh Review,' and subsequently reprinted under the title of Dissertations and Discussions in Philosophy,' he had obtained European reputation as a philosopher. In 1844 his health was much shattered by an attack of paralysis of the right side, which, while it left his mind uninjured, permanently disabled the side affected, impairing his eyesight and his speech, and leaving him with an imperfect use of his right arm and right leg. "He had so far recovered from his illness in the winter of 1844-45 as to be able to resume his studies, and he continued the work of reading and thinking with but slight interruptions till a few days before his death in May 1856. The editing of Reid, which had suffered so much from interruptions, was resumed. The work was finally published-though without being completed-in November 1846. The supplementary dissertations D** and D* * * had been written before his illness." His class lectures on Logic and Metaphysics were published after his death, under the editorial charge of the late Dean Mansel and Professor Veitch, his pupils.-In his youth Hamilton was a very handsome, athletic man. He is described by Carlyle as having "a fine firm figure of middle height; one of the finest cheerfullyserious human faces, of square, solid, and yet rather aquiline type; and a pair of the beautifullest kindly-beaming hazel eyes, well open, and every now and then with a lambency of smiling fire in them, which I always remember as if with trust and gratitude." "He was finely social and human in these walks or interviews. His talk was forcible, copious, discursive, careless rather than otherwise; and on abstruse topics, I observed, was apt to become embroiled and revelly, much less perspicuous and elucidative than with a little deliberation he could have made it. lucid questioning you could get lucidity from him on any topic.' In company he had no pretensions to shine as a talker, and listened quietly without showing any disposition to strike in, unless he had a special interest in the subject, when he became animated and fluent. "He did not accommodate himself to the prevailing opinions of the company; but rather took delight in running atilt against them in a good-humoured way. He had great pleasure in stating and defending some paradox or startling opinion (of which he would perhaps afterwards make a joke), not because it exactly represented his own opinion, but sometimes merely for the sake of argument, and more frequently with the wish to uphold the unpopular side of a question under discussion." 1 "The prevailing opinion on a subject, when strongly put, had a tendency to arouse in him a feeling of opposition." "As in intellect he was critical, so in temperament he was strongly polemical, even finding a certain enjoyment in conflict for its own sake" "His views on

1 Professor Veitch's Memoir of Sir William Hamilton, p. 142.

By

University matters brought him pretty frequently into sharp collision with some of his colleagues. For with all his lovableness, even tenderness of nature, Hamilton was yet a man of resolute will, and high and somewhat uncompromising temper." From the time of his extraordinary examination at Oxford, his erudition and encyclopedic reading became a subject of wonder and exaggerated rumour. He seems to have had something of the same bookdevouring turn as Johnson. Johnson is described as 66 tearing out the heart" of a book, and Sir William, in a coarser modification of the phrase, as "tearing out the entrails"-expressions that point to the same habit of glancing at the table of contents, the index, or the marginal annotatious, and reading only what one happens to be interested in. The two men agreed further in combining with this literary epicureanism (or rather gluttony) a reluctance to compose; but Hamilton, who had a decided mechanical turn, preserved the results of his reading in an elaborately ingenious commonplace-book, whereas Johnson left what he read to the chances of resuscitation by his powerful memory. Of late years both the extent and the accuracy of Hamilton's scholarship' have been questioned, but with all deductions he still remains what he was represented to De Quincey as being "a monster of erudition."--We do not here a tempt any outline of his philosophy; and his philosophical abilities are still matter of dispute.— As regards style, he had, with his prodigious memory, a fine command of language; his command of the language of controversy, especially for the purpose of summarily "putting down" an antagonist, is at least as good as his command of the language of philosophical exposition. In both operations he is masterly. He had a taste for antithesis and pithy compression. He was also notably studious of method, of good arrangement; more, apparently, from a love of mechanical symmetry, than from any lively sympathy with the difficulties of the reader.

MISCELLANEOUS.

Francis Jeffrey (1773-1850), the chief of the originators of the 'Edinburgh Review,' was the son of a depute-clerk of the Court of Session, and received his early education at the Edinburgh High School. He pursued university studies partly at Glasgow, partly at Oxford, and partly at Edinburgh, exercising himself all the while voluminously in English composition. At Oxford he remained only nine months, and left with a sense of relief, finding the routine subjects of study very uncongenial. He was called to the Edinburgh bar in 1794. Entertaining the then unpopular principles of the Whig party, his career was for several years the re1 Professor Veitch's Memoir of Sir William Hamilton, p. 383.