because all the refuse of old societies find such easy access into them.

I am very glad, indeed, that you like my Prophecy Sermons: the points in particular on which I did not wish to enter, if I could help it, but which very likely I shall be forced to touch on, relate to the latter chapters of Daniel, which, if genuine, would be a clear exception to my canon of interpretation, as there can be no reasonable spiritual meaning made out of the Kings of the North and South. But I have have long thought that the greater part of the book of Daniel is most certainly a very late work, of the time of the Maccabees; and the pretended prophecy about the Kings of Grecia and Persia, and of the North and South, is mere history, like the poetical prophecies in Virgil and elsewhere. In fact, you can trace distinctly the date when it was written, because the events up to the date are given with historical minuteness, totally unlike the character of real Prophecy; and beyond that date all is imaginary. It is curious that when there was so allowed a proof of the existence of apocryphal writings, under the name of the Book of Daniel,-as the Stories of the apocryphal Esther, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon,-those should have been rejected, because they were only known in the Greek translation, and the rest, because it happened to be in Chaldee, was received at once in the lump, and defended as a matter of faith. But the self-same criticism which has established the authenticity of St. John's Gospel against all questionings, does, I think, equally prove the non-authenticity of great part of Daniel: that there may be genuine fragments in it, is very likely.

CXCIX. TO ARCHDEACON HARE.

Fox How, January 26, 1840.

The Penny postage will allow me to trouble you with a question, which otherwise I should not have thought it

worth while to send to you. Wordsworth, I think, told me, on your authority, that Niebuhr had spoken with strong disrespect of Coleridge's Church and State. Now, as I respect Coleridge exceedingly, it pains me to think that Niebuhr should speak with actual disrespect of any work of his; and it seems to me that his habit of criticism was generally mild and considerate. On the other hand, Coleridge's Church and State does seem to me to be historically very faulty, and this Niebuhr would feel, I doubt not, very keenly. Can you tell me what Niebuhr's judgment of the book really was, and on what it was founded? You will be glad to hear, I think, that the volumes of Thirlwall's Greece seem to me to improve as the work advances. There never could be a doubt as to the learning and good sense of the book; but it seems to me to be growing in feeling and animation, and to be now a very delightful history, as well as a very valuable one.. Mr. Maurice wrote to me the other day, to say that he had sent to Rugby, for me, the first number of the Educational Magazine. I could not thank him, because I did not know his address, but I should be very sorry to appear inattentive to a man whom I respect so highly as I do Mr. Maurice.

CC. TO W. W. HULL, ESQ.

Fox How, January 24, 1840.

We are going to leave this place, if all be well, on Monday; and I confess that it makes me rather sad to see the preparations for our departure, for it is like going out of a very quiet cove into a very rough sea; and I am every year approaching nearer to that time of life when rest is more welcome than exertion. Yet, when I think of what is at stake on that rough sea, I feel that I have no right to lie in harbour idly; and indeed I do yearn more than I can say to be able to render some service where service is so greatly needed. It is when I indulge such wishes most

keenly, and only then, that strong political differences between my friends and myself are really painful; because I feel that not only could we not act together, but there would be no sympathy the moment I were to express any thing beyond a general sense of anxiety and apprehension, in which I suppose all good men must share.

CCI. TO MR. JUSTICE COLERIDGE.

Fox How, January 26, 1840.

We left Rugby this time so early, that your letter followed me down here, and I must have the pleasure of answering it before we go away, which alas, must be to-morrow morning. We talk of going to Norwich for a few days, to see the Stanleys, and to Cambridge, before we settle at Rugby; and really, in these most troublous times, it seems more than is allowable to be living, as we are here, in a place of so much rest and beauty.

Your letter interested me very deeply, and I have thought over what you say very often. Yet I believe that no man's mind has ever been more consciously influenced by others than mine has been in the course of my life, from the time that I first met you at Corpus. I doubt whether you ever submitted to another with the same complete deference as I did to you when I was an undergraduate. So, afterwards, I looked up to Davison with exceeding reverence, and to Whately. Nor do I think that Keble himself has lived on in more habitual respect and admiration than I have, only the objects of these feelings have been very different. At this day, I could sit at Bunsen's feet, and drink in wisdom, with almost intense reverence. But I cannot reverence the men whom Keble reverences, and how does he feel to Luther and Milton? It gives me no pain and no scruple whatever to differ from those whom, after the most deliberate judgment that I can form, I cannot find to be worthy of admiration. Nor does their number affect me, when all are manifestly under the

same influences, and no one seems to be a master spirit, fitted to lead amongst men. But with wise men in the way of their wisdom, it would give me very great pain to differ; I can say that truly with regard to your Uncle, even more with regard to Niebuhr. I do not know a single subject on which I have maintained really a paradox, that is, on which I have presumed to set up my judgment against the concurring judgment of wise men, and I trust I never should do it. But it is surely not presumption to prefer a foreign authority to one nearer home, when both are in themselves perfectly equal. For instance,suppose that any point in English Law, although steadily defended by English lawyers, was at variance no less decidedly with the practice of the Roman Law, and condemned by the greatest jurists and philosophers of other countries, there can be no presumption, as it seems to me, in taking either side strongly according as a man's convictions may be ; nor ought one to be taxed with disrespect of authority in either case; because, although one may be treating some great men as clearly wrong, yet other men no less great have justified us in doing so. Perhaps this consciousness of the actually disputed character of many points in theology and politics rendered it early impossible to my mind to acquiesce without inquiry into any one set of opinions; the choice was not left me to do so. I was brought up in a strong Tory family; the first impressions of my own mind shook my merely received impressions to pieces, and at Winchester I was well nigh a Jacobin. At sixteen, when I went up to Oxford, all the influences of the place which I loved exceedingly, your influence above all, blew my Jacobinism to pieces, and made me again a Tory. I used to speak strong Toryism in the old Attic Society, and greedily did I read Clarendon with all the sympathy of a thorough royalist. Then came the peace, when Napoleon was put down, and the Tories had it their own way. Nothing shook my Toryism more than the strong Tory sentiments that I used to hear at

though I liked the family exceedingly. But I heard language at which my organ of justice stood aghast, and which, the more I read of the Bible, seemed to me more and more unchristian. I could not but go on inquiring, and I do feel thankful that now and for some years past I have been living not in scepticism, but in a very sincere faith, which embraces most unreservedly those great truths, divine and human, which the highest authorities, divine and human, seem to me concurringly to teach. I have said this defensively only, for I am sure I meant to convey no insinuation against you for not being active in inquiring after truth. I believe I never think of you but with entire respect and admiration, and I never talked with you on any subject without gaining something, so far am I from venturing to think that I am entitled to think myself fonder of truth than you are. I am glad that you like the Sermons on Prophecy; I have not ventured to say that the principle is of universal application, but it is I think very general; and, in both the cases which you notice, I think it holds. Cyrus is said, in many commentaries, to be a type of Christ, by which I understand that the language applied to him is hyperbolical, and suits properly only Him who is the real deliverer of Israel, and conqueror of Babylon. And the passage about the "Virgin conceiving," &c., has a manifest historical meaning as applied to Isaiah's wife; the sign being one of time, that within the youth of an infant presently to be born, Syria and Israel should be overthrown. Emmanuel might improperly be the name of a common child, just as Jesus or Joshua was, but both apply to our Lord, and to Him only, in unexaggerated strictness. The state of the times is so grievous, that it really pierces through all private happiness, and haunts me daily like a personal calamity. But I suppose that as to causes and cure, we should somewhat differ, though in much surely we should agree.