a happier mood than was often vouchsafed to him in his decline, conceived his "Sad Shepherd." It might almost be surmised. that Randolph, now after his decease, was paying back to Jonson something of what he owed him. The glamour of Jonson's pastoral, stricken with a deep love-melancholy, bears a fraternal likeness to Randolph's Amyntas, who is similarly afflicted. The Sicilian shepherd is, however, considerably more demented than Robin Hood's woodland guest. The treatment of mental distraction by our early dramatists, excepting Shakspere, when it attempts the pathetic often becomes inexpressibly ludicrous; in cases where the effort was to be comic, the effect of laborious incoherency, and studious nonsense is at times sufficiently wearisome. Amyntas is quite as mad, but not disgustingly mad, as Fletcher's Jailer's daughter in the Two Noble Kinsmen. He is classically mad as becomes a Sicilian swain, and raves a sad quantity of Greek mythology. "Amyntas has been described as one of the finest specimens of pastoral poetry in our language." To be able to employ strong words like these it is necessary to read down one's judgment and taste to the very low standard of the average seventeenth century play; then the beauties of "Amyntas rise conspicuous. Perhaps it is treasonable, in this age of indiscriminate republication, to have confessed the secret of acquiring gratitude for such small mercies of poetry as are vouchsafed in the present volume.

as

Randolph's earliest dramatic entertainments are slight pieces written at the University Aristippus," in which a Cambridge student seeking instruction in philosophy is initiated by the founder of the Cyrenaic school, with large array of mocking logical terminology, into the one true philosophy, -that of sherris-sack; and "The Conceited Peddler," the monologue of "a Socratical citizen of the vast universe," untrussing his wares, and commenting, with special tips for Cambridge laughers, on each article produced. The "Jealous Lovers," printed in 1632, a comedy of the more ordinary type, containing a succession of ingenious incidents and intrigues, and much dull effort at fantastic mirth, is perhaps the best of Randolph's plays. It is noteworthy as containing an imitation of the grave-diggers' scene in Hamlet, running into less close a parallelism than the earlier imitation in Raynoldes's "Dolarny's Primerose." Last, "Hey for Honesty," an adaptation to the seventeenth century of the "Plutus' of Aristophanes, left unfinished by Randolph, and completed after his death, is of value chiefly on account of its crowded allusions to contemporary or recent events, objects, and persons. Shakspere wrote his comedy for Plutus' sake, says Chremylus. The Ghost of Hamlet is coupled with Jeronymo, as if a tradition of the Shaksperian Hamlet still survived; and the "rich rubies and incomparable carbuncles of Sir John Oldcastle's nose supply a metaphor.

"

pre

Mr. Hazlitt Las not allowed his task of editor to become over-laborious. A little more attention to punctuation would have saved several passages from becoming nonsense.

Monumental Inscriptions of the British West Indies from the earliest date, with Genealogical and Historical Annotations, etc. etc., chiefly collected on the spot. By Captain J. H. Lawrence-Archer. (London: Chatto & Windus, 1875.)

In the year 1815 was printed at Calcutta The Complete Monumental Register, a collection by M. Derozario of all the epitaphs and inscriptions in the different churches and burial-grounds in and about Calcutta, with others from Madras, Bombay, the Isle of France, etc. The compiler appears to have performed his work faithfully and conscientiously, and its value for purposes of British family history cannot easily be computed. Doubtless hundreds of the inscriptions thus preserved have already disappeared from their original localities, and would otherwise have been hopelessly lost. The volume is extremely rare in England-so much so that a perfect copy, in good preservation, would command from a genealogical collector almost any price its possessor might choose to demand for it. Having recently the good fortune to secure the only copy that has been in the London market for many years, the writer found it instantly available for perfecting several pedigrees, and clearing up various doubtful points in numerous family histories, the data for which he had vainly sought from every other source.

66

What M. Derozario thus did for the East Indies, Captain Lawrence-Archer has now done, to a certain extent, for the British West Indies. He does not profess to give us transcripts of all the inscriptions decipherable at the date of his collections, and so far the volume is imperfect. He intimates that he has furnished all of the old, curious, or dignified epitaphs," and included "many of no particular interest, which can only be expected to acquire a slight value in the lapse of time." the lapse of time." But how does Captain But how does Captain Lawrence-Archer know that the very ones he has omitted are not now, or may not become in the lapse of time, of equal, if not greater importance than those at least which come under his second classification? It is difficult to see why he should have carefully preserved the brief inscription on the stone of "Mr. John Smith" (page 201), and left to almost certain speedy destruction the epitaphs which doubtless commemorate the virtues of many a Brown, Jones, and Robinson. As it is probable that some person exists to whom the inscription for "Mr. Smith" will be interesting, so it may be presumed that somebody would have been interested in almost everyone that was rejected as of comparative unimportance. The failure to secure all the inscriptions in the localities examined is the more to be regretted, because we are told in the preface that, in Jamaica especially, between the destructiveness of nature and the vandalism of man, the duration of a monument scarcely reaches half a century;

and also because it is not probable that more than once in fifty years an antiquary with the enthusiasm and perseverance of Captain Lawrence-Archer will make his appearance in those regions. On reading his brief and modest account of the difficulties he encountered, it is impossible to censure him for not having accomplished more, and would be unfair and ungenerous not to thank him for, and congratulate him upon, having done so much:

"In Jamaica," he says, "where the wild vege tation of nature is so remarkable, the explorer of its older and private cemeteries must resort to manual labour, and the author has not unfrequently passed days, from breakfast time until sunset, with the common woodman's cutlass, clearing away the dense and matted undergrowth, while approaching the objects of his search."

Under such circumstances we must not complain of, however much we may regret, the incompleteness of his labours, especially as we may be pretty certain that he has given us all the inscriptions relating to persons of such social standing that they are likely ever to be of much value, besides many others that may prove of more or less importance.

It is also to his credit that he did not reject the inscriptions that were partially illegible, but transcribed such portions as could be deciphered. A curious instance occurs on page 91, in the imperfect name ". . . . rneley." This inscription unques tionably refers to a person the date and place of whose death the writer had vainly sought for years. In the course of a few years more, probably the rest of the inscription would become illegible, and its facts lost beyond recovery. (Those possessing the volume may safely perfect the name by making it "Ferneley: he was of the heraldic family of that name in Suffolk.)

The most of the volume-342 out of 442 pages-is devoted to the monumental in scriptions in the churches and various burial. grounds of Jamaica. Barbadoes occupies fifty-six pages, and the rest are divided among Antigua, St. Christopher, and other colonies. The few annotations by the editor are generally interesting and suggestive, and the brief chronological tables, and lists of governors and other officials, will be found of great convenience. But the posi tive value of the book consists in the monu

mental inscriptions themselves, pure and simple-the "raw material" of genealogy and family history. The coats of arms, wherever they exist, are given both in trick and blazon, and the mechanical execution of the work-so far as type, paper, and binding are concerned-is entitled to unqualified praise. The volume is indeed a sumptuous one, and must necessarily find a place in the library of every antiquary. It is, therefore, to be regretted that the index and table of contents are not always to be depended upon, and that the proof-reader did his work so carelessly as to omit an important letter on the title-page itself. The former fault in a work of this sort is unpardonable, and the latter a grievous disfigurement in the eyes of a book-lover.

Now that the monumental inscriptions in both the East and West Indies have been secured, it would be well if they were sup

plemented by those relating to the earliest generations of British settlers in New England and the other American colonies, which would undoubtedly serve to fill many a hiatus in the pedigrees of British families. Those from Virginia would be especially valuable.

JOSEPH LEMUEL CHESTER.

History of Christian Theology in the Apostolic Age. By Edward Reuss, Professor in the Theological Faculty and in the Protestant Seminary of Strasbourg. Translated by Annie Harwood from the Third Edition, with a Preface and Notes by R. W. Dale, M.A. In Two Volumes. (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1874.) WE sincerely congratulate the religious public in England on having henceforward at its disposal a work of such remarkable excellence and power as the History of Christian Theology in the Apostolic Age by Professor Reuss of Strasbourg. Equally highly appreciated in Germany and France, and able to write and to write well in both languages,

**

Professor Reuss has become in the two countries one of the most authoritative masters of biblical criticism. He is about to crown the labours of his life by publishing in French his great work on the whole Bible, with translation, commentary, and special introductions to each book, and we in France owe him a great debt of gratitude for not allowing the official changes which have occurred in his professional relations with the Protestant churches of France to divert him from this immense work, from which we expect

the most valuable results.

The prolonged sensation produced in France by the work before us is due to the fact that it was the first which systematically

treated the books of the New Testament from the historical point of view. Hitherto, with a few not very noteworthy exceptions, the only point of view from which they had been regarded was the dogmatic. Mr. Dale has Mr. Dale has well summarised M. Reuss's principle of interpretation, when he says, in his preface:

"He is not anxious to make it appear that the authority of St. Paul can be alleged for any modern theory of the doctrine of justification; his only concern is to show what St. Paul himself believed. He writes the history of the theology of the early Church just as he would write the history of Greek philosophy from the age of Plato to the age of Plotinus."

This is perfectly right; only one may ask whether it is possible to remain always faithful to this principle of pure objectivity with out starting from a highly rationalistic principle with regard to the inspiration and authority of Scripture. How can the student preserve the perfect impartiality of the historian when he tells himself that, according to the results of his exegetical labours,

* The annotator of the English translation says in his preface that M. Reuss does not write good French. I cannot refrain from appealing against this over

strong statement. Of course his style is not altogether in accordance with academic or classical purity; it has what is called "the accent of the soil;" but, beside being always correct, it has a freshness and originality sui generis, in which in France, as I can certify, we find a very agreeable savour. To form an idea of it, it

would be enough to compare M. Reuss's writings in French with translations made directly from German originals, even when the work of skilful translators.

he will be driven either to believe in doctrines which are repugnant to him, or to renounce beliefs which he holds it of vital importance to retain? Should we be wrong in expressing a fear that Mr. Dale's notes often betray the difficulty of remaining faithful to historical impartiality, when the student believes himself threatened in the possession of doctrines which are dear to him, by the immediate consequences of the natural interpretation applied to the sacred books, as we should apply it to the writings of Plato, Aristotle, and Plotinus?

Thus, one of the most manifest results of the historical method is the difference, or even the divergence, between the various types of apostolic teaching. No scholastic subtlety can, without doing violence to the texts, suc

ceed in forcing under one Christological formula the varied conceptions of the writers of the New Testament with regard to the The inspired prophet, person of Jesus. ordained by God the Messiah of Mark and the Acts, the son of Joseph and Mary of the genealogies, the child miraculously conceived in a Virgin's womb of the first and third Gospels, the heavenly being manifested in earthly form, but a man in heaven and on earth of St. Paul, the Word made flesh of the fourth Gospel-are all so many differing and divergent notions which neither Arius

nor Athanasius, neither Socinus nor Calvin has ever succeeded in fusing into one harmonious whole. They can be explained historically, given the person of Jesus and dogmatically-and naturally enough, for his spiritual greatness; they cannot be fused they start from different principles. M. Reuss, without declaring himself on dogma, treats the narrative as an historian, and it does or does not agree with the rigour of scarcely troubles himself to know whether the dogma of the Trinity. This does not fail to alarm his annotator, and we must notice the care with which he strives to fill up the crevasses which, without thought or wish of its own, historical theology produces at every moment in dogmatic theology. Let us take as an instance the baptism of Jesus. It is clear to every interpreter who is writing the history of doctrines, that the account of this baptism, which is mentioned by neither John nor Paul because it would fit in but very ill with their favourite doctrines, proceeds from authorities to whom great importance was attached for marking the precise moment when Jesus of Nazareth, hitherto undistinguished in the bosom of his people, became the object of a divine declaration and of a supernatural gift of the Holy Spirit, which constituted him from that moment forward the Messiah de jure. But then it is clear that these same Judaeo-Christians scarcely thought of the second person of the Trinity incarnate for about thirty years in the body of a child growing to manhood. Mr. Dale has his explanation ready. "The supernatural powers, fulfil His ministry could not become His, on he says, vol. i. p. 395, "by which He was to the theory of the Incarnation, until His human nature was sufficiently developed to receive them." We must ask Mr. Dale to pardon us; but according to the theory of the Incarnation, Jesus has not to receive supernatural powers: He possesses them from

per

the beginning; they already exist in his son in all their fulness, in childhood as in manhood. Perhaps it will be said that they can only manifest themselves when the human nature shall be sufficiently developed. The supernatural, according to this view, is in remarkably strict subjection to the natural laws of development, and we confess that we do not clearly understand why Jesus at the age of twenty-five, for instance, should have been less capable than at thirty of revealing the double consciousness of man and God, or, if that expression be preferred, the consciousness of man-God which he bore within him. But what is certain is that he possessed all in himself from the first hour, and that he had nothing to receive afterwards.

account of his baptism comes to us from Christians of the earliest days, who thought, on the other hand, that he had much to receive from on high and from without to become the Messiah of Israel.

And no less certain is it that the

We attribute to the same repugnance to a frank adoption of M. Reuss's strictly historical point of view, the occasionally curious notes tending to identify the Pauline theory of justification with the Augustinian and Calvinistic doctrines of another age, or to diminish the character of" free composition" which distinguished the discourses of Jesus as reported by the fourth evangelist.

We regard M. Reuss's book on Apostolic Theology as an excellent introduction to the questions raised by criticism, rather than as offering us a definitive solution of these

questions. Very decided and very independent in his exegesis, M. Reuss is extremely prudent in his conclusions relative to the age and authenticity of the books of which rigorous postulates of historical criticism to he treats. It appears to us opposed to the refer to one body of theological doctrine the teaching contained in the whole of the epistles attributed to the apostle Paul, and decidedly impossible to force the theology of the fourth Gospel into the mould of the apostolic age strictly so called. In our opinion the last-named book presupposes a state of Christian thought and Christian theology which only finds its chronological place after the middle of the second century.

The Pauline Christology likewise seems to us a weak point of the work. In fact, M. Reuss reduces it to something very like Arianism, and does not in our opinion lay sufficient stress on all contained in St. Paul's favourite parallel of the "two Adams," which he seems to consider as the two poles, the two representations of humanity, at once earthly and heavenly. Therein lies a difficult problem, not yet near its solution, and bound up with that other question which is suggested by many special trains of thought to the great apostle. To what extent did Paul clearly distinguish between an historic and individual person, and the principle of which that person is the representative? Sometimes one is tempted to believe that for him the individual Adam is none other than the cap inherent in the earthly nature of man, and that the person of Inoous Xoroc passes insensibly into the category of the Trepa. Many of the obscurities of his special doctrine would be cleared up if we

could form an exact idea of the precise Rabbinical theories which he brought to his mode of conceiving what he called his Gospel. We can profit for the interpretation of the fourth Gospel by our exact knowledge of the course of Platonic or rather Philonic ideas of which this Gospel so unmistakeably bears the impress. Unhappily, the immense difficulties of Talmudic studies do not allow us, and perhaps never will allow us, to arrive at a like result with regard to the theological antecedents of the Pauline Epistles.

On the other hand, we must point out as a model of clearness, of demonstration that leaves no loophole for doubt, of positive results which force themselves on the ассерtance of all who are not blinded by the spirit of party, the magnificent chapter treating of the Apocalypse. We particularly recommend as a specimen of logical force completely overwhelming, the lucid and brief statement of the motives which have induced modern interpreters to read with their predecessors of the second century the name of Nero Caesar in the apocalyptic number 666.

It is pleasing also to review in company with so competent a guide the personal teaching of Jesus on the Kingdom of God or of Heaven. It gives one a clearer idea of how it is that the Christian principle, by virtue of its intrinsic religious worth, is so vastly superior to the successive orthodoxies which have claimed to give its sole legitimate explanation, and why, if it is true that Christianity in our day is to be greatly simplified by casting off its mediaeval accessories of ritual, sacerdotalism, and dogma, it has yet lost none of its salutary power to direct human society in the path of justice, and the individual Christian in that of a faith which is rich in consolation and in hope.

ALBERT REVILLE.

Erasme, Etude sur sa Vie et ses Ouvrages. Par Gaston Feugère. (Paris: Hachette et Cie, 1874.)

The Life and Character of Erasmus. By the Rev. Arthur Robert Pennington, M.A. With a Preface by the Bishop of Lincoln. (London: Seeley, Jackson & Halliday, 1875.)

Ir there were any single clue to the complexities of Erasmus's character, any one principle capable of reconciling the seeming inconsistencies of the man who has been alternately embraced and repudiated by Romanist and Protestant; at one time almost passionately claimed as a devoted son of the Catholic Church (for does not M. l'Abbé Richard innocently take for true gospel Erasmus's witty story of a visit which he pretends was vouchsafed him by St. Francis ?), and at another fiercely denounced as the prime author of the great schism which cost the Church her fairest provinces ; at one time hailed as the champion of reform, and at another reviled as a concealed Protestant, wanting the courage of his opinions; and then again regarded as an entire sceptic, laughing at everything, and having no fixed opinions of his own-we might easily agree with M. Fenugère in looking for that principle and that clue in his devotion to the cause of letters. That was, indeed, one of the ruling passions of his life, and fully

explains how the man who was never tired of exposing the ignorance and superstition of the monks, who had thrown doubts on almost every tenet of the Church, and spoken not too respectfully of the Popes themselves, might yet, with the most perfect consistency, refuse to identify himself with those who, in whatever respects they might appeal to his authority and example, seemed to him only likely to involve the world in fresh troubles, and to substitute a new tyranny for the old one. M. Feugère himself, however, warns us against attempting to give to Erasmus's character a unity which it does not possess, and unless we are willing to see in him a certain weakness of fibre which made him, while "bold in words," yet often "timid in his conduct;" a vanity not offensive, but which never permitted him to lose his self-consciousness; a nature full of reserves and hesitations; a wonderful dexterity in extricating himself from false positions, and turning against his adversaries their own weapons; a delicacy of organisation which made him peculiarly sensitive to annoyances of all kinds; a desire to keep on good terms with all parties and give offence to none, which made him long halt between two opinions; and, moreover, a sceptical rationalising turn of mind, which loved better to raise difficulties than to solve them, to deny or at least doubt than to affirm; and unless further we study him, with all these failings and merits, in his relation to the time in which he lived-a time when in a special degree "to be weak" was "miserable;" and when the rising waves of revolution were sure to show no mercy to the man of compromise and conciliation-we have made no approach to understanding him. All this, indeed, M. Feugère sees clearly enough, and no one who accepts his guidance will be in danger of missing any important feature in the character of his hero. There is but one point which perhaps he might have emphasised a little more strongly. We do scanty justice to Erasmus until we recognise in him as fundamental that solid goodness, that thorough soundness of heart, which led him so greatly to prefer the practical teachings of the New Testament to the dogmas whether of Rome or of the Reformation, which made him love next to learning--nay, even before it, those bonos mores which the reviving Paganism of the Italian Renaissance threatened to overwhelm-which the conduct of the Protestants did not seem to him always calculated to promote.

Was Erasmus a sceptic? In the philosophical sense of the word, certainly not. He never attacked the foundations of human knowledge, never even approached them. He never raised a doubt as to the supernatural origin of the Christian religion. His scepticism was precisely that of the man of letters, who, by the study of the Greek and Roman moralists, has learned that the Church enjoys no monopoly of goodness, and that truth is truth whether it is found in the writings of heathens and heretics, or proceeds from the most orthodox lips. But it was also the scepticism of the rationalist. In a later age Erasmus might have been found carrying his doubts to

much more fundamental questions of divi nity. For him it was going a good length to raise questions about the Trinity, transubstantiation, and original sin. M. Feugère agrees with those who suspect Erasmus of Arianism, and despite his protestations sees "an affinity between his mind and a doctrine which, denying the unity of substance in the three Divine persons, and so suppressing the supernatural side of Christ's nature, has always proved so seductive to human nature."

It is time, however, to give some more particular account of this new contribution to the study of the life and work of the great leader of the Renaissance. M. Fengère writes as a Catholic-a very liberal onebut he neither repudiates Erasmus as an apostate and a traitor, nor endeavours to reconcile all he said and did with the character of a faithful son of the Church, and with the strictest orthodoxy.. Of the man himself his estimate is eminently fair, kindly, and discriminating. He apologises for his not having taken the sacrament on his death-bed, on the plea that he died in a city where the exercise of the Catholic religion was prohibited, and defends the expression addressed to his sorrowing friends "Your tears might make me think you did not believe in the resurrection of the dead "-as an affectionate reproach inspired by the most delicate feelings. He will not admit with Bayle and others that Erasmus was the forerunner of Luther, and remarks, quite truly, that his exegesis tended not to Lutheranism, but to rationalism. He defends his attacks on the corruptions of the Church, arguing that the Church had always tole rated satire directed against the human and variable elements in her constitution, and acknowledges his services in the secularisa tion of morals, which, under the influence of scholasticism, had become a confused mixture of Aristotle and St. Augustine. He reminds us that the famous Sancte Socrates, ora pro nobis was anticipated by Abelard, who placed Socrates among the saints; and that Dante, while refusing to open the gates of Paradise to Virgil, yet saved him from the hell into which he had no scruple in hurling popes and cardinals of the Holy Church. Evidently, however, he does not regard Erasmus as an altogether safe ally; he complains that by his procedure the faith itself was disturbed and menaced, compares him with Bayle, Montaigne, Lessing, Voltaire, and confesses that he hardly knows whether he has to do with a friend or a subtle foe who makes no open attack, but like a fine sharp point darts hither and thither, and wounds without being seen. Erasmus is treated here as theologian, re former, satirist, moralist, man of letters-in all these characters the criticism upon him is just and discriminating; the lights and shadows are skilfully disposed, and the works chosen as illustrations examined with taste and discernment. Only in one respect is the book a disappointment; and the author must thank himself if by the prominence which he gives, in his preface, to the name of Voltaire, he raises an expectation which he does not fulfil. A comparison more elaborate and full than has

Lives of the Engineers. By Samuel Smiles. New and Revised Edition. (London: Sampson Low & Co., 1874.)

MR. SMILES has written a series of books which are extremely interesting not only to the engineer but to the general reader. They have been for some years before the public, and have deservedly met with much success, which will be increased by the present cheap edition. Among engineers the Lives are now and then rather unjustly criticised as being like historical novels, though, indeed, the resemblance to good historical novels is striking enough, for each life has the charm of a novel with an interesting hero, whose story is painted with a background rich in historical detail. Mr. Smiles has a true instinct, leading him to choose those details only which add life and reality to the picture. No one can feel surprised that the life of Watt or George Stephenson should be interesting, but there is something remarkable in the charm which leads a reader amused and instructed through two hundred pages treating of John Rennie, even although it be known at the outset that John Rennie was an excellent engineer.

Mr. Smiles is a true artist. If his principal figure is a really great and noble one, he concentrates his light upon it and the background sinks into insignificance. Where the proportions of his hero are less colossal the setting is so charming as to give dignity and beauty to the entire scene. Moreover, so far as I know, the historical details and statistics are accurate, and must have been gathered with great labour, while, although the books in no way pretend to be scientific treatises, yet the engineering knowledge displayed is very considerable, and I have come upon no blunders.

Here and there, it is true, one cannot help suspecting that the hero did not fight all the fight single-handed, that besides Achilles there were many chiefs who fought before Troy, and that even following these lesser captains there were thousands of good men and true who all helped to win the town; but the writer of A's biography, must not be too severely judged if he forgets to tell us quite all about the other letters of the alphabet, and there is no conscions unfairness to be traced in the Lives. Moreover there is a natural tendency to give merit to those who have much already, and great wits, great captains, and great engineers all alike bear, and perhaps ought to bear, the honours earned by the lesser men around them.

Mr. Smiles never falls into the error of deifying his hero-he paints a very living, fallible man; he dwells indeed with relish on his difficulties and his failures, for does not the charm of the story consist in these? We know the end, success, already. It is the difficulty, the struggle, which comes home to us.

Watt's life is a sad one, but it teaches a most useful lesson to those who think that an invention springs full limbed and armed for conquest from the inventor's brain. The material difficulties, the financial difficulties, the moral difficulties, to be overcome before the simple idea of a

separate condenser could bear its fruit in the perfect steam-engine are admirably told by Mr. Smiles, and notwithstanding

the ultimate success the tale is sad. One lesson should be laid to heart. It is impossible to read the story without feeling that we owe the steam-engine to the patent laws quite as much as to James Watt.

The story of George Stephenson forms a great contrast to that of Watt. Watt was an inventor; any engineer can put his finger on half-a-dozen real inventions which were all Watt's own. It would be very difficult to lay hold of one real invention due to George Stephenson alone; but Stevenson was an engineer. What he laid hand to, worked: he improved the neighbours' clocks and their clothes as a boy. Then an engine was put up in his neighbourhood, which failed in its duty. George Stephenson tinkered at it, lengthened this and shortened that, and then that engine pumped the pit dry. The locomotive was not his invention. I am even heretic enough to have doubts about the steam-blast, but I have no doubt that George Stephenson is the man who made locomotives of real use. I have my doubts whether the introduction of the railway system was wholly due to one man, strong through he was, but I feel sure that the roads he laid were enormously better than any made by his predecessors. Then there is a good-humoured strength about this giant which makes him an admirable hero.

In fine, Mr. Smiles has not written a series of scientific essays on the engineering improvements or inventions made by each man. Such essays would have interested few; but he has written with excellent feeling and taste a series of stories about our great engineers, and in these stories he has displayed sound engineering knowledge, much historical research, and thorough sympathy with his subject. FLEEMING JENKIN.

NEW NOVELS.

A Passionate Pilgrim and other Tules. By Henry James, jun. (Boston: J. R. Osgood & Co.; London: Trübner, 1875.) Eglantine. By the Author of "St. Olave's." In Three Volumes. (London: Hurst & Blackett, 1875.)

Jocelyn's Mistake. By Mrs. J. K. Spender. (London: Hurst &

Pulleyne. In Three Chapman & Hall,

He has his reward too, for he has caught much more than the mere trick of style, by no means difficult to imitate, and has succeeded more nearly than any other writer we have met in entering into Hawthorne's psychology, with its half morbid and entirely weird conception of life. We incline to think "The Madonna of the Future" the most artistic of his tales, though that which gives the title to his book is most fully worked out, and is very subtle in treatment, recalling here and there the "Septimius" of his model. There is one blot in the book, the material ghastiness of the ending of one story, the "Romance of certain Old Clothes," which is more like Poe than Hawthorne, and which, we think, the author will feel on reflection would have gained in impressiveness by the omission of the last detail, and the substitution of a mere look of frozen terror on the dead face. The incident as it stands mars the whole conception of Perdita, with which it is entirely out of keeping.

Eglantine makes no advance, but rather retrogression, in its author's literary work, for it is by no means so good a novel as any of its three precursors. There are tokens throughout of too much facility in mere production of copy, and too little pains in reducing that copy to symmetrical form, to say nothing whatever of artistic conscien tiousness in detail, which is not atoned for by the occasional introduction of clever sen tences and paragraphs. The story, if it may be so called, is an autobiographical monologue, with but little interest, since the only attempts at special delineation of character depict types which are tediously common in the modern novel, such as the gracious and insincere matron of society, and the mature young lady who affects gushing childishness. And in these days of realistic painting it is not too much to ask even a lady author to be correct in details meant to give local colour and finish. The daughter of a great scientific philosopher of wide general learn ing, as the narrator of the story is supposed to be, would not again and again cite the "differential calculus" as the tremendously abstruse subject which her father's distin guished visitors habitually discussed with him. They would be just as likely to discuss the rule of three. Nor would she include Gibbon's English History as forming along with the Decline and Fall part of the favourite reading of her model coastguards

man.

little