circumstances, improve or disfigure the countenance, but in neither case has it, like the ear or the eye, its place and duty as a member of the body. Secondly, the interjection, though expressive of emotion, does not express it in the way of speech. We do not adopt the irreverent language of Mr. Tooke, who classes it with "sneezing, coughing, groaning, shrieking, and every other involuntary convulsion with oral sound;" nor, on the other hand, do we assent to the sportive bard who attributes to a still more ignoble sound all the emotional power of the interjection,

66

"Let lovesick swains who plead their sighs

A dust about emotions kick up;

None from the breast sincerer rise,

Or flow more warmly than a hiccup."

But we would draw a distinction between signs which are indicative only, and signs which are representative and can be substituted for the thing signified. The spoken word is a sign representative of a thought; the written word is a sign representative of the spoken. But the fall of the thermometer to 32° is indicative only of freezing, and the appearance of smoke rising from a chimney is indicative of the existence of a fire below. The head of the Marquis of Granby, suspended from a sign-post, is a sign representative of the features of the man; it is indicative only of entertainment to be had within. Accordingly, we can substitute the portrait for the person, and say 'this is the marquis;" but to say "this is meat and drink," would suggest an explanation of King Richard's meal of Saracen's head somewhat different from that usually adopted. Now the interjection is indicative of emotion, but not representative. The exclamation "oh !" may imply the existence of pain or astonishment in the utterer, but it is not, like the words "pain" and "astonishment," a sign representative of the feeling. Horne Tooke's somewhat hyperbolical metaphor, "the dominion of speech is erected upon the downfal of interjections," may be sobered into literal accuracy, if we say that the office of grammar is to determine the relations which the several parts of speech bear to the whole, as representative of corresponding relations in thought; and that therefore it does not notice such articulate sounds as are neither relative nor representative.

66

Before we conclude, we must express our thanks to the present proprietor of the Encyclopædia Metropolitana, for this republication of the most valuable portions of a work which in its original form was, like Henry Wynd's Sampson, somewhat ponderous," and in spite of (we had almost said in consequence of) its philosophical arrangement, by no means convenient of reference. Some of the principal treatises have for some time

past been before the public in a separate form. We have long wished to see others following in the same track, and none more so than the Universal Grammar of Sir John Stoddart, which, notwithstanding a few differences on points of detail, we consider as on the whole the soundest and most philosophical treatise of the kind in the English language. The plan of our remarks has compelled us to leave unnoticed some of its merits. We have said nothing of the many interesting illustrations, which the author's extensive acquaintance with English literature, especially with our older writers, has enabled him to supply. Nor have we done justice to the excellent philosophical spirit which pervades the whole; a spirit, indeed, necessarily developed only as a subordinate feature, and which will hardly be appreciated by those who now open the book for the first time as a new publication. But in 1818, when the article first appeared in the Encyclopædia, the brilliant sophisms of the French Ideology had far greater influence in the philosophical world than at present. The Eclecticism of Cousin was then in its infancy; and Maine de Biran, the Fichte of France, had not yet accomplished his revolt from the standard of Cabanis and de Tracy, and shewn that the union of physiology with mental science may contribute as much to a system of pure idealism, as to the sententious paradox, "les nerfs, voilà tout l'homme." * To Kant indeed, Sir John Stoddart, as might be expected in a friend of Coleridge, is in more than one instance indebted, and it is by no means one of his least merits that he should have appreciated and applied to a work of this character some of the most valuable speculations of the German philosopher, at a time when his writings, as his translator complains, were almost unknown in this country.

Neither Grammar nor Logic has as yet fully assumed its position as an offshoot of the science of mind; but to this desirable end the publication of works like the present will in no small degree contribute. And in the future history of the philosophy of language, the name of Sir John Stoddart will deserve honourable mention, as the author of one of the earliest and most energetic protests against the sensationalism and ultra-nominalism of Condillac and Horne Tooke; and as having laboured ably and successfully in his own province in accordance with the comprehensive maxim of one of the master-minds of the age, "la psychologie n'est assurément pas toute la philosophie, mais elle en est le fondement."

We speak of the publication, not of the formation of De Biran's opinions. They can hardly be considered as having been accessible to readers in general, till the publication in 1834 of his great posthumous work, "Nouvelles considírations sur les rapports du physique et du moral de l'homme."

ART. III.-The Life of Hugh Heugh, D.D., with a Selection from his Discourses. By his Son-in-Law, HAMILTON M. MACGILL, Minister of the United Presbyterian Congregation, Montrose Street, Glasgow. In two volumes. Edinburgh, 1850.

WE have heard it publicly stated, as the opinion given of these memoirs by a living theologian, fully competent, equally from his sound judgment, and his extensive reading, to form a just estimate, that there had issued from the press no biography so much fitted to stimulate and benefit students and young ministers of the gospel, since the publication of the Life of Philip Doddridge. We happen to have learned that the very same judgment, even to its comparative element, was expressed by an excellent and intimate departed friend of Dr. Heugh. The unconcerted coincidence is curious: and itself no inconsiderable presumption in favour of the accuracy of the opinion formed independently by two able minds with so minute an agreement. Leaving out of view, however, the comparison involved, we have no hesitation in recording our deep conviction, that the volume of biography before us is singularly full of the most valuable lessons for every one who would discipline aright his intellect and heart. We shall make it our principal aim in the few following pages to gather up some of these hints; conceiving that we can perform no more important service than that of directing the general public, and especially students of theology, and the younger clergy, to a fresh source of sanctified excitement and instruction.

The fitness of the volume of biography before us for the study of the younger pastors of the Church of Christ, is enhanced by two considerations, the mention of which may seem, for a moment, but doubtful commendation. First, it is not the biography of genius. In saying so, we are far, certainly, from intending to disparage the intellectual endowments of the late Dr. Heugh. He was not one of those lights whose splendour dazzles and amazes, but, what is principally valuable, he was one of those whose beams shine and guide. Let the balance, however, be adjusted as it may between genius and gifts less brilliant, in regard of the power lent to their respective living possessors, it might be shewn, we think, by obvious considerations, that the biography of a man of genius must form, generally speaking, an inferior field for imitative study. Even were the majority of readers themselves "great wits," endowed with this "mens divinior," if we must call it so, it might well be questioned whether the best

Not the Biography of Genius.

69

culture for their young strength would be found in the contemplation of those ethereal models presented by the life of genius. But the mass of readers are ordinary mortals, and to the youthful aspirant after eminence, himself no winged soul, it is of less importance to learn how the eagle on his own strong and swift pinion can reach the mountain crest, than to acquire a knowledge of the path by which, with slower and more laborious course, yet not less surely, a man may plant his footstep on the summit. Or if there should be some height inaccessible to pedestrian toil-incapable of approach save by a pathway of air, it is well to know it, and eschew the "unearthly fluttering" of vain attempts to reach it. Most men need lessons, not how to soar, but how to climb. There is a twofold effect, incidental to the study of the life of genius, disastrous to the young reader. On the one hand, juvenile vanity may whisper, as he reads, that the same fire burns within himself, and the mistaken apprehension lead to the waste of his faculties in the pursuit of an unattainable position, to the neglect of that which is within his reach. Or, on the other hand, conscious that he lacks this ethereal inspiration, the ingenuous youth wonders and admires, indeed, but rises from his reading without stimulus to action, concluding that the lessons of such a life can only be for the aristocracy of intellect. The biography is to him a spectacle, not a pattern. It will be hard for the readers of the present memoirs to glide into either error. We do not mean that the mental gifts of their subject belonged to the common level of endowments, so that the ordinary reader, in supposing himself equally equipped, should run no hazard of thinking more highly of himself than he ought to think. On the contrary, we are inclined to think that faculties individually so high as his -and in their combination so felicitously balanced-mental powers, especially, so finely under control, so promptly and nicely obedient to the helm, are rarer than, in one form or other, genius itself is. But then Dr. Heugh's talents were precisely of that sort which a man cannot dream himself into the belief of possessing; there is a daylight, a distinctness, a practicalness about them, which defy the persuasive tongue of vanity itself to argue a man into the seeming consciousness of inheriting them. We believe, that for every half-dozen young readers who, in perusing memoirs of some great orator or poet, might fancy themselves born to rival him, hardly one will be found imagining himself such a man as the subject of this biography. Something higher, to his idea, he might suppose himself to be, but not quite this. Yet, while scarcely any reader will miss the lessons of this book by supposing, against truth, that he was born to be all its subject was while the majority of readers will naturally

look on the standard here exhibited as too difficult of attainment for themselves to reach, the feeling superinduced will be far from one of discouragement or despondency. For, perhaps, the prominent instruction of the book consists in the exhibition it gives of what resolute system, and discipline based on principle, may make a man, whatever they find him. The ingenuous reader of these volumes will readily say to himself,-I may never equal this model; my starting point, in respect of natural endowments, may be far lower than his, but with similar plans, pursued in a similar spirit, I may conquer faults, supply defects, and strengthen powers possessed, so as to reach a position honourable and useful, and higher, it may be, than all my present hopes.

Few

But there is another consideration which commends the “Life” before us to the earnest study especially of the young pastor. It is the record of a life of action. The reader of this biography is not conducted into the intellectual laboratory of some copious author; deep research, vast learning, years spent in the library, profound and masterly written works, are not the objects he is called to contemplate. He will find Dr. Heugh, indeed, in his study, and, beyond many, busy there. things have surprised us more than the evidences produced in this life of his untiring industry in his retirement, by his pen in the study, as truly as otherwise on the arena of public life. But he wrote chiefly for the pulpit; or, if for the press, it was in those forms, and on those occasions, which demand not patient plodding investigation, but energetic readiness: the prompt tact and power of one to whom, as he seizes the passing juncture, printing his present thoughts, is just another form of action. His writings, after all considerably numerous, are the extempore of the press, bearing, to more elaborate works, something like the relation which the unpremeditated speech bears to the set oration; the former, in both cases, being often the more effective production. The prominent type, therefore, of his character is not associated with the seclusion of the library. His life is not contemplative, but active. Now, we certainly have no intention to disparage profound learning, or to underrate the value of those productions which bespeak large consumption of the midnight oil. Nor are we indifferent to the great importance of obtaining, universally, a well-educated ministry. But the majority of Christian pastors cannot be pre-eminent for learning, Our men of varied lore we must have, competent to deal with any question, archæological, critical, or philosophical—able to meet, if need be, the perverted thought and learning of scepticism or pantheism on its own ground. But to have the mass of our ecclesiastical workmen such, is neither possible nor desirable. We do not need a whole army of sappers and miners;