1. Cosmos. By Alex. Von Humboldt. 2. Recent Progress of Astronomy. By Elias 1. The Public General Acts of the United King- dom of Great Britain and Ireland, passed in the THE SOUTHERN REVIEW. No. XV. JULY, 1870. ART. I.-1. Sermons upon Human Nature, or Man Considered as a Moral Agent. By the Right Reverend Joseph Butler, D. C. L., late Lord Bishop of Durham. New York: Robert Carter & Brothers. 2. The Active and Moral Powers of Man. By Dugald Stewart. [His Works, Vol. V.] Cambridge: Hilliard & Brown. 1829. To the statesman, or the legislator, the most important, the most indispensable, of all the branches of knowledge, is that which relates to the nature of man. No one can indeed begin to comprehend the length, the breadth, or the depth, of either the science or the spirit of laws, without a full, accurate, and profound insight into the wonderful workings of the human heart. Hence the great writers on government usually begin their works, as they had begun their studies, with an examination of the active principles and powers of human nature. The Ethics of Aristotle is the prelude and propedeutic to his Polities. In like manner, the paper Republic of Plato is prefaced by, and based on, his views of human nature, or of man as a moral agent. And these two great types of the human mind,-Plato and Aristotle, standing at the opposite poles of political philosophy, have, in all ages, drawn their respective followers, each to himself, from among those who have the most nearly coincided with the master's views respecting the nature of man. If, indeed, we only know what a man thinks about human nature, we may easily tell, whether he naturally inclines to the political school of Plato, or to that of Aristotle. Plato called Aristotle 'the mind of his school.' He was, indeed, in the science of morals and politics, the mind of antiquity. Not more certainly was Archimedes the geometer, Hipparchus the astronomer, of the ancient world, than was Aristotle its moral and political philosopher. The divines of the present day, said the late Archbishop Whately, may learn much from the Ethics of Aristotle. The politicians of the present day might learn much more from his Politics. This book is, indeed, a vast storehouse of political wisdom, from which the Bacons, the Montesquieus, and the Burkes of after ages have drawn immense supplies. Yet his method is worth infinitely more than his book, which is merely one of the results of that method. How different the speculations of Plato! With his rationalistic method, Plato spins an entirely new system of government out of a few abstract notions, which is to banish discord from society, and to introduce a perfect harmony! Aristotle, on the contrary, pursues the historic method. He examines all the actual forms of government, in all their combinations, and from the experience of the past draws lessons of practical wisdom for the future. The one seeks to change the very course of Nature, even in its purest instincts, and in its holiest affections; the other only aims to fortify, to guide, and to aid in its development. The one is, in short, the great archetype of all the radicalism of the modern world; the other, the great master of political wisdom, both in his method and in his doctrine, for all after ages. The fundamental error of Platonism has, in fact, played a most conspicuous and terrific part in the most awful and bloody tragedies of the modern world. The Republic of Plato, considered as 'a vision of justice,' contains, no doubt, many admirable things, many sublime and 'Republic, Book V. 2 beautiful views. But then, it should be remembered that this is a vision of justice in the abstract; it is when he comes, in the fifth book, to organize justice, that he only disorganizes society, and wages a mad war against the very course of Nature, and its irreversible laws. By Rousseau, and by other philosophists of the eighteenth century, it is said, that the Republic is not a scheme of government at all, but the most perfect system of education the world has ever seen. Viewed as a system of education, it likewise contains many admirable things; but, on the other hand, it is based on the radical vice, on the great fundamental error, which pervades Plato's whole scheme of thought. Nor is this all. For precisely the same view, the same error, pervades the thinking of all the philosophers, of all the legislators, and of all the political reformers, of the eighteenth century, both in France and in America; and, caus ing all their proud schemes for the regeneration of the human race to crumble into dust and ashes, has overspread the whole face of society with scenes of carnage, desolation, and death. Socrates maintained, as is well known, that every man would lead a perfectly virtuous life, if he only knew the right. If this were so, then how easy the work of the philanthropist, or how rapid the progress of man! For if ignorance be the sole source of evil, then is knowledge the universal panacea, the sole and sufficient remedy for all the disorders of society. Then, in the language of Xenophon, the disciple of Socrates, we should 'furnish ourselves with an inexhaustible fund of virtue, when we treasure up the writings of great men.' Then would the brightest be always the best of mankind. But is this so? We might, indeed, without further notice, let this error pass, but for the tremendous part it has played in modern times. The mischief it has wrought in the world, as well as the inherent weakness of its own nature, still remains, so far as we know, to be exposed. We shall, then, show the bitter fruits of this element of Platonism in all ages. a Our business, at present, is with Plato himself, the grand archetype of the political reformer and dreamer. With such view of human nature as that universally ascribed to Socrates, In his Emile. he could have devised no sensible, or safe, scheme for the advancement of society. The attempt to frame such a scheme was reserved for his great disciple, Plato. Having adopted the notion that no one is ever knowingly or willingly wicked, he mistook the cause, and consequently the remedy, of the evils and disorders of the world. He found the source of all these disorders, not in the nature or in the present condition of man himself, but in the external arrangements of society. Hence, by a new organization of society, he fondly imagined that all discord might be banished, and a beautiful harmony introduced. Property is one great source of strife, one great disturber of this mundane sphere. It engenders cares, anxieties, troubles, crimes, and luxuries. Hence, in order to banish these evils, the institution of property must be abolished, and all things must be in common among the harmonious rulers of his harmonious Republic. There are, also, miserable dissensions among men about their wives, their children, and their near relations, as well as about their property. Hence the institution of marriage must be abolished, the family sacrificed, and all the sweet charities of home given to the winds. Wives must be in common. The most tender and endearing relations of society, as established by the great ordinance of Nature herself, must be greatly improved, by inducing each child to regard every man as his father, and each man to regard every child as his offspring! Thus did this great man, this mighty dreamer, this uncompromising iconoclast, grope in the dark, and strike down the most beneficent institutions on earth; just because he did not comprehend the real origin of the disorders of society. Thus did he corrupt, in their very fountains, the purest streams of earthly bliss, and open the flood-gates of social desolation. Thus, in the madness of his reform, did he tear away the safeguards of virtue, in his wild attempt to or ganize and establish justice. But Plato, it should be remembered, lived before the appearance of Him who 'knew what was in man,' and who shed the illumination of a divine wisdom on the real causes of all the mighty convulsions of the social frame. No such apology can |