4 8 4 
[August, 
Analyses of Books. 
are repeated by professional conjurers like Maskeiyne and Cooke, 
who disclaim any assistance from the unseen world. Mow here 
is precisely the difficulty. Maskeiyne and Cooke have never, as 
far as we are aware, succeeded in producing under fair test con- 
ditions even the simpler forms of “ psychogiaphy, _ .^ V j 
nev er— though the attention of one of them was especially called 
to the case— fixed on the wrist of a man an iron ring, like that ot 
Mr. Husk, too narrow to be passed over the hand. . the authoi s 
remarks on dreams, somnambulism, and mesmerism, however, 
are worth attention. . , 
Recurring to Carlyle, Mr. Laing makes some remarks of the 
highest value. He writes “ The spread of education (he might 
have added ‘ the quality of education ’) has given an extension to , 
the influence of words which threatens to become excessive. 
People read until they have no time to think, and find it easier to 
borrow the thoughts of others. And a large and ever-increasing 
portion of the community have learnt, in Yankee phrase, to 
< orate ’ and use the new-found faculty incessantly and lemorse- 
lessly. I refer ... to the undue influence which oratory tends 
to acquire in all constitutional countries. .A great orator is in- 
evitably a great power in the state, but it does not necessamy 
follow that he is a great statesman. 
In the next chapter, on Miracles, we find very sound remarks 
on their demonstration. He lays down as to the evidence re- 
quired to prove a miracle—" Clearly it must be evidence ot the 
most cogent and unimpeachable character, far more conclusive 
than would be sufficient to establish an ordinary occurrence. . 
It may be going too far to say with Hume that no amount ot evi- 
dence can prove a miracle ; ... but it is not going too far to say 
that the evidence to establish such a violation (of the laws ot 
Nature) must be altogether overwhelming and open to no other 
possible construction.” . , 
Passing over the discussion on miracles and on Christianity 
without miracles as not within our competence, we find certain 
remarks on education, against which a protest is needful ; need- 
ful because they seem to be a defence of the classicahsm, and 
consequent verbalism, against which our author has just pro- 
tested. He admits that “ the amount of positive knowledge, 
useful in after life, acquired at our English public schools, is really 
very little beyond the three R’s. A boy who could teach himself 
French or German in five months, spends five years over Latin 
and Greek, and in nine cases out of ten forgets them as soon as 
he leaves school. Almost everything we know that is worth 
knowing we teach ourselves in after life. But the discipline ot 
school is invaluable in teaching the lesson of self-conti o . . • • • 
The memory also is exercised, and the faculty of fixing the mind 
on work is developed by useless almost as well as by useful 
studies.” But the exercise of the memory is no gain, but a loss, 
if it comes instead of the due cultivation of the power of observa- 
