means of promoting the general happiness of mankind." (The writer here makes positive assertions in one breath, but modifies them in the next, and wisely, for if his assertions were taken au pied de la lettre, the world would soon be a scene of general confusion and strife. We contend that "morals" lend no aid here, and that religion alone can set the balance right if thus disturbed by selfish lust of personal or national happiness, as he terms it; in both cases our regards are first due to God, and then to our fellow creatures or to ourselves, in such proportions as the highest wisdom, which is obedience to God and His laws, may dictate.)

(We will now conclude this tedious criticism-for such we feel it must be, though important in respect of making good our position-by showing what "morals," according to this writer, inculcate regarding man's relation to his Maker; it is this):-"Generally we may say that man ought (!) to entertain feelings of reverence and gratitude to God by reason of His superiority (what an expression!), and of the blessings He has conferred upon us. But the duty of entertaining these feelings, in this particular case, flows at once from the general duties of gratitude to a benefactor and reverence towards a superior." (Benefactor and superior! not a word about Creator, and only Source of all life and well being! Why, less emphatic expressions could not be used by a poor man, who should be given a pound or two by his wealthier neighbour, or by a tradesman to a lord. Surely if anything would prove the absolute necessity of religion being made the basis of "morals," this cool and indifferent style of expression from the creature towards his Creator would serve to establish it. If this is the result of the present system of studying and practising morals, defend us from such cold-blooded, soulless results, say we; for we are assured that if we knew nothing more than the grandeur, glory, and love of our Creator, and practised nothing less than feelings thence resulting would dictate, we should be more safely on the way to insure our own happiness, and to advance the welfare of all our fellow creatures, than any amount of such "moral science" could effect.)

What we have written may be deemed foolishness by the worldly-wise and the politic, or be denounced as mere

stuff by philosophers and men of science. We neither pretend to worldly wisdom nor to scientific knowledge. We can only go straight on in our course, satisfied that we see our way clearly, and have "a plain unvarnished tale" to tell, which we shall relate in the simplest manner and in the plainest language that we can command; and will proceed without apology or further preface, to explain our views of "morals," and to dissect, as well as we may, the physical, moral, and spiritual constitution of man; pointing out, to the best of our ability, how all human actions are influenced by two main motives, and that the happiness of man depends not on any merely selfish and artificial system of morals, but results from eternal principles of goodness and truth, of right and wrong; principles which underlie all human, nay, all universal life, and which flow from two main sources, to wit-love of God, and love of self; the one principle leading to virtue and happiness; the other to vice, sin, and misery.

We have only further to make a few remarks on the present state of psychological science: in this instance we have taken one of the latest and most approved works as our informant-Herbert Spencer's "Psychology," remarkable for its close and sustained reasoning, its philosophical spirit, and its endeavour to reconcile the realistic with the transcendental theories of life. It would be impossible for us, even had we the ability, to find space for the criticism and reflections involved in its perusal, and will, therefore, content ourselves with asking, What is to be thought of a science of the soul, in which every quality receives minute attention and is closely reasoned upon, except love, the life of the soul, which is briefly noticed and summarily disposed of in a chapter headed "The Feelings." (!) Surely this resembles an elaborate inquiry into the play of "Hamlet," in which the part of Hamlet is left out or only briefly alluded to at the close. Moreover, in this work no mention even is made of the love of God in man, which is, surely, to omit a most important feeling. But we are satisfied to quote some of the author's own last words: "Psychical changes," he submits, "either conform to law, or they do not. If they do not conform to law, this work (his work), in common with all works on the subject, is sheer nonsense: no science of psychology

is possible. If they do conform to law, there cannot be any such thing as free will"-which appears to imply : If I, Herbert Spencer, and others of my kind, cannot discover and make clear the laws which direct the soul's life, I forbid and refuse free will to you all. But surely, in the first instance, he may aim at a power which he does not and cannot possess; and in the second case, his proposition would lead to volumes of argument—it is but a proposition; not a closing truth, to shut up all mouths and stop all pens on the question for ever. Then, as regards the definition of life, Mr. Spencer gives this as "the broadest and most complete; the continuous adjustment of internal relations to external relations" (p. 374). Arguing on this assumption, he concludes his chapter on "The Will" with these words: "Respecting this matter I will only further say, that free will, did it exist, would be entirely at variance with that beneficent necessity displayed in the progressive evolution of the correspondence between the organism and its environment. That gradual advance in the moulding of inner relations to outer relations, which has been delineated in the foregoing pages— that ever-extending adaptation of the cohesions of psychical states to the connections between the answering phenomena, which we have seen to result from the accumulation of experiences-would be arrested, did there exist anything which otherwise determined their cohesions. As it is, we see that the correspondence between the internal changes and the external coexistences and sequences must become more and more complete. The continuous adjustments of the vital activities to the activities in the environment must become more accurate and exhaustive; the life must become higher and the happiness greatermust do so because the inner relations are determined by the outer relations. But were the inner relations to any extent determined by some other agency, the harmony at any moment subsisting, and the advance to a higher harmony, would alike be interrupted to a proportionate extent there would be an arrest of that grand progression which is now bearing humanity onwards to perfection." Now, we hold that the harmony at present subsisting in human life, and the advance to a higher harmony, are so interrupted through the agency and influence of man's

N

will, and that by its means this "grand progression of humanity" is not indeed arrested, but is materially retarded; that the successive and perfect evolution of life progresses ever orderly in animals, precisely because they are not endowed with the will or power to counteract or thwart it; and finally, that freedom of the will is a distinctive characteristic of man, and through the perception and acknowledgment of its existence can the history of mankind alone become comprehensible, and the great object of human life be understood and appreciated.

We say, then, that regarding man as an immortal being, which we assume as granted, the science of psychology or ethics, to be of any value to him, must keep that immortality in view; nor can you, nor ought you, to separate the study of morals from man's immortality, except for purposes of study in regard to his temporary human life; but religion, of which the immortality of the soul is one of the fundamental principles, must form the basis of all science, spiritual, political, and moral, whether relating to the individual or to society. Such science, to be worth anything, must be grounded in the perception and acknowledgment, that the fear, love, and knowledge of God constitute the beginning of all true and fruitful wisdom, of what kind soever, and that all metaphysical science, in which we include all but the exact sciences, must have regard to immutable principles of Divine truth, of everlasting right and wrong, and to universal life.

THE SPIRITUAL ORGANISATION OF MAN.

We start, then, with the assumption, or supposition, that man is an immortal being, and that his soul is a spiritual organisation.

That he is a spirit by virtue of the immortal life with which his soul is endued.

That, consequently, when we speak of man as a spirit, we allude solely to him as a being possessed of immortal life; but that when we speak of him as a spiritual organisation, we allude to the spirit and soul in conjunction. When we speak of him as a soul, we mean a being with

an organisation, independent of his bodily organisation, quickened by the immortal spirit proceeding from the Creator himself, the Supreme Spirit, and source of all derived spiritual existence; and, as we have pointed out, his spiritual organisation arises from both in combination. This invisible but complete organisation as an immortal soul, is combined on earth with another, but material and visible organisation, the body, of which the brain is the seat and throne of the soul, and its various organs are the soul's actual agents. The body, the brain especially, is the instrument through which the soul thinks and acts, in a more or less perfect manner or degree, according as the body is more or less perfectly organised. The soul also acts not only through, but upon the body, and the body acts also on the soul. There is reciprocal action and reaction between both. The body, as an animal organisation, is posessed of wants and appetites in itself, quite irrespective of the soul, which is too apt to regard them with contempt, as inferior to its own affections and desires, and yet wrongly and unreasonably so; for, on the due satisfaction of such bodily wants, the health of the body depends, and a healthy state of body is closely connected with a healthy state of the soul.

The soul has life in itself from the spirit, and the body has life in itself from a vital principle, which is not the spirit, however, and which depends on particular organs of the body for its continuance and perfect development, and on the final disarrangement, injury, or loss of such organs, ensues its decay and final disappearance or disjunction, whence comes what we term "Death." This vital principle in man's body is known as "animal spirits," "vitality," "vital force," "nervous energy," and does not necessarily imply any corresponding amount of activity in the spiritual principle which vivifies the soul; nor vice versa, as may be seen by the fact that, the soul is often most active when the bodily vital power is weak; whilst, when the latter is most powerful, the spiritual activity of the man is comparatively inactive. Indeed, it would appear as a rule, that this correlative activity and sluggishness is general, and it is not very common to find a perfect soul and a perfect body working in harmony, though, when they do so act, man is in his most perfect state.