Rvfiew of Recieics, IjlllOS. 



Lemdiag Articles. 



493 



PSYCHOLOGY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE. 



The most important paper in tiie Philosophical 

 Review for July is that of Professor James H. Tufts, 

 on " Some Contributions of Psychology to the Con- 

 reption of Justice." It will strike the reader as 

 hrlonging much more to the realm of sociology than 

 psychology. The doctrines of psychology on which 

 he proceeds are (i) — the individual is complex, not 

 simple ; (2) th<' individual is both habit and adjust- 

 ing activity, continuity, and growth; (3) forms 

 without contents are empty. From these abstrac- 

 tinns he proceeds to develop a very concrete 

 method of dealing with our problems of corrective 

 justice, distribution of wealth, and of education. 

 The Law Courts ought, he urges, to consider a man 

 as a complex being, subject to influences of here- 

 dity and environment, with a future as well as a 

 past, instead of viewing him, as at present, as '• ab- 

 stract criminal " or innocent. Distributive justice 

 rules nut the fictitious freedom of contract between 

 uiiequals. It would supplement the abstract maxim 

 " To every man according to his deserts," with the 

 maxims. " To every man acconling to his efforts,'' 

 and, still more, " To every man according to his 

 needs. " These recognise the complexity of per- 

 snnalitv. The writer proceeds to show that in this 

 full sens;j of justice no distribution of property, 

 viewed as an exclusive interest, either is or is likely 

 to be just. The fuller justice demands therefore 

 a fuller participation in the higher goods of life, 

 in a broader education, and in fuller social satis- 

 factions. He concludes with the hope that " the 

 goods which are not private, the goods which are 

 so largelv the product of social co-operation, may 

 increase in value, and may be the share of every 

 member of society. " These fragmentarv jottings 

 may suggest the course of a most interesting and 

 fruitful line of argument. 



Professor \. E. Taylor insists that the place of 

 psychology properly lies among the natural sciences 

 and not among the philosophical. 



DID LUTHER COMMIT SUICIDE? 



Not l(jng ago Miss J. M. Stone, writing in the 

 DitbUn Rcviciv, asked, " Was Luther Tnsane ?" In 

 the Meiiiirc dc France of August ist, Charlotte 

 Chabrier-Rider goes farther and suggests that he 

 • ".ommitted suicide. 



Luther <li<'d in the presence of three theologians, 

 .ind yet for more than three and a-half centuries his 

 sudden end has been the subject of the most violent 

 controversies. Coelius, one of the witnesses referred 

 to, wrote what may be called the official account of 

 Luther's death, and every pains was taken to cir- 

 culate his stor\ as widelv as possible. It was trans- 

 lated into several languages, and was inserted at 

 the end of Luther's works, and ever since it has been 

 the " high authentic source '' of all Luther's Pro- 

 testant biiigraphers. 



But if Luther died a natural and peaceful death, 

 as his witnesses pretended, why did they cry ana- 

 thema on .ill who should venture to find their pious 

 story obs(nire and contradictory? The writer thinks 

 the mere fact of the precautions and threats suffi- 

 cient to rouse suspicion as to the truth of the story 

 thev took so much trouble to circulate. Notwith- 

 standing all their efforts, we learn that a rumour to 

 the effect that Luther died a violent death con- 

 tinued to gain in belief even in the Protestant city 

 of Ei^leben. 



It is now repeated that Luther hanged himself, 

 and the original authority for the story was none 

 other than Luther's special attendant and confident 

 — not an ordinary servant, but a man who had been 

 a student at the University of 'Wittenberg, and of 

 whom Melancthon spoke highly. As soon as the 

 news was known. Protestantism made everyone who 

 knew it swear never to divulge the secret, and this 

 " for the honour of the Gospel.'' After keeping the 

 .storv a profound .secret for some time, the servant 

 at last spoke out, and Sedelius published the details 

 in a book in 1606. 



This version of Luther's death certainly clears up 

 some of the obscurity and the contradictions of the 

 official account. It is now evident why the doctors 

 and apothecaries tried to restore Luther to life, 

 \vhich was inexplicable while Luther was supposed 

 to have died in sweetness and peace in the anns of 

 the Saviour. It also explains other physical signs 

 described at length by Coelius. 



The writer thinks there is nothing remarkable in 

 the hypothesis of suicide. She says we have but to 

 remember that the Reformer was aware of the 

 failure of his work ; his doctrines had placed him in 

 a miserable position, his home life was unhappy, his 

 wife was anything but an angelic being, and the 

 state of his health was most unsatisfactory. There 

 was no rest for him anywhere. He was tortured by 

 doubt, not merely religious doubt, but nervous 

 doubt, which made him unable to act. And what 

 hell could equal that of the Reformer who was 

 filled with doubt as to his work and his mission ? 

 Exhau.sted bv nervous strain, obsessions and hallu- 

 cinations, it is no wonder he wished to end his life. 

 Yet the real end of Luther will probably remain a 

 mvsterv, one of the numerous enigmas of historv, 

 although several historians have adopted the theory 

 of suicide. 



One of the most perfect and beautiful of Norman 

 churches in this countrv is Steetley Chapel in Derb\- 

 shire, which is the subject of an interesting article bv 

 G. I.e Blanc Smith, in the April number of the 

 Reliquary. For years this church was used as a 

 fowl-house, and it was fast falling into irreparable 

 decav. Mr. Pearson, however, has made '■ a com- 

 plete and scrupulously correct restoration.'' The 

 church is much hidden by trees, and is very gloomy 

 inside. 



