ORIGIN OF THE SYNTHETIC PHILOSOPHY. 33 



in part a follower of M. Comte, and when I decided to append to 

 " The Classification of the Sciences " the " Reasons for Dissenting 

 from the Philosophy of M. Comte," proving that M. Laugel's belief 

 was erroneous, I bethought me of the above partially-quoted letter. 

 On stating to Mr. Mill why I wanted it, he kindly returned it (not, 

 however, soon enough for use), and with it there came a letter from 

 himself. I give this letter, or rather the first paragraph of it — a para- 

 graph which, under ordinary circumstances, it would be bad taste in 

 me to publish, but which, under the present circumstances, I shall, I 

 think, be held justified in publishing : 



" Blackheath, April 3, 1864< 

 " Dear Sir : I am fortunately able to send you the letter you want. No 

 Englishman who has read both you and Comte can suppose that you have de- 

 rived much from him, No thinker's conclusions bear more completely the 

 marks of being arrived at by the progressive development of his own original 

 conceptions; while, if there is any previous thinker to whom you owe much, it 

 is evidently (as you yourself say) Sir W. Hamilton. But the opinions in which 

 you agree with Comte, and which, as you truly observe, are in no way peculiar 

 to him, are exactly those which would make French writers class you with him ; 

 because to them, Comte and his followers are the only thinkers who represent 

 opposition to their muddy metaphysics." 



To this I may fitly add a passage contained in Mr. Mill's work, 

 " Auguste Comte and Positivism," issued a year later, in which, dis- 

 tinguishing between that part of the Positive Philosophy which be- 

 longs to Comte and that which " is the common inheritance of think- 

 era," he says : 



"Mr. Spencer rejects nearly all which properly belongs to M. Comte, and in 

 his abridged mode of statement does scanty justice to what he rejects " (p. 5). 



Now, considering that Mr. Mill was a profound admirer of M. 

 Comte, kept up a correspondence with him, and raised funds to sup- 

 port him, and considering that when the above letter was written I 

 knew Mr. Mill personally only through two calls at the India House, 

 and was an antagonist of Comtean views which he accepted, and had 

 publicly combated one of his own views, it is manifest that any bias 

 he may be supposed to have had was against me rather than for me. 

 Such being the case, most persons will, I think, regard his voluntarily- 

 given opinion as decisive. Herbert Spencer. 

 Athen^um Club, September 8th. 



Mr. Harrison replied to the foregoing letter, which elicited the fol- 

 lowing rejoinder from Mr. Spencer : 



To the Editor of the Stay^dard.'" 



Sir : I regret further to occupy attention with a matter mainly 

 personal, but feel obliged to do so. 



*From the London "Standard" of September 15, 1884. 



VOL. XXVI. — 3 



