THE REV. JAMES MARTINEAU. 517 
Beyond this I defy him to go; and yet he rashly it 
might be said petulantly kicks away the only philosophic 
foundation oil which it is possible for him to build his 
religion. 
He twits incidentally the modern scientific interpretation 
of nature because of its want of cheerfulness. '"Let the' 
new future/' he says, "preach its own gospel, and devise, 
if it can, the means of making the tidings glad." This is 
a common argument: "If you only knew the comfort of 
belief!" My reply is that I choose the nobler part of 
Emerson, when, after various disenchantments, he ex- 
claimed, "I covet truth!" The gladness of true heroism 
visits the heart of him who is really competent to say this. 
Besides, "gladness" is an emotion, and Mr. Martineau 
theoretically scorns the emotional. I am not, however, 
acquainted with a writer who draws more largely upon this 
source, while mistaking it for something objective. " To 
reach the Cause," he says," there is no need to go into the 
past, as though being missed here, He could be found 
there. But when once He has been apprehended by 
the proper organs of divine apprehension, the whole life 
of Humanity is recognized as the scene of His agency." 
That Mr. Martineau should have lived so long, thought so 
much, and failed to recognize the entirely subjective 
character of this creed, is highly instructive. His " proper 
organs of divine apprehension" given, we must assume, 
to Mr. Martineau and his pupils, but denied to many of 
the greatest intellects and noblest men in this and other 
ages lie at the very core of his emotions. 
In fact, it is when Mr. Martineau is most purely 
emotional that he scorns the emotions: it is when he is 
most purely subjective that he rejects subjectivity. He 
pays a just and liberal tribute to the character of John 
Stuart Mill. But in the light of Mill's philosophy, 
benevolence, honor, purity, having "shrunk into mere 
unaccredited subjective susceptibilities, have lost all 
support from Omniscient approval, and all presumable 
accordance with the reality of things." If Mr. Martineau 
had given them any inkling of the process by which he 
renders the " subjective susceptibilities " objective, or how 
he arrivesat an objective ground of " Omniscient approval," 
gratitude from his pupils would have been his just meed. 
But, as it is, he leaves them lost in an iridescent cloud of 
