SOCIOLOGY AND FREE-WILL 



as presented by Mr. Froude ; and afterwards 

 the argument from the assumed lawlessness of 

 volition, as presented by Mr. Goldwin Smith. 



Mr. Froude begins ^ by dogmatically denying 

 that there is or can be such a thing as a science 

 of history. There is something incongruous, 

 he says, in the very connection of the two 

 words. "It is as if we were to talk of the colour 

 of sound, or the longitude of the rule-of-three." 

 But he carries on the thought in a way that 

 shows plainly his reluctance to grapple fairly 

 with the problem. In his next sentence he 

 says, " where it is so difficult to make out the 

 truth on the commonest disputed facts in mat- 

 ters passing under our very eyes, how can we 

 talk of a science in things long past, which 

 come to us only through books ? " Now to rea- 

 son like this is merely to shrink from the en- 

 counter. For the question is, not whether the 

 science is difficult, but whether it is possible. 

 Mr. Froude sets out to show that there can be 

 no such science, and his first bit of proof is that, 

 if there is such a science, it must be far more 

 difficult than any other ; a position which we 

 may contentedly grant. Let us follow him a 

 step farther. "It often seems to me as if his- 

 tory were like a child's box of letters, with which 

 we can spell any word we please. We have 

 only to pick out such letters as we want, arrange 

 1 Short Studies on Great Subjects, vol. i. 

 245 



