because in his system, unless I am greatly mistaken, those social laws which 
are derived, not from experience, but immediately by revelation from God’s 
■word, are ignored. A Sociology which ignores a personal God and lawgiver 
must be, to say the least of it, as incomplete as would be a solar system in 
which no reference is made to the existence and influence of the sun . I look 
to the Victoria Institute to set Mr. H. Spencer right upon this point. 
Mr. Ground. — I have to thank the meeting for the very kind way in 
which it has received this paper. As there is very little time remaining to 
me, I must apologise for having to pass by very much of the criticism by 
which the paper has been met, but which I am very glad to have heard, and 
about which I may say a word or two. I would first refer to what has been 
said as to my references to Mr. Herbert Spencer’s genius. It is possible I 
was over-impressed by this, but I read his philosophy at a particular time, 
and as I read it I thought that although never before had I met with any 
argument which in the least degree seemed to shake the foundations of 
Eevelation, yet that here was something which, unanswered, was certainly 
startling, and might have that effect. In that state of alarm IMr. Spencer 
loomed as a giant before me, and perhaps I thought his proportions greater 
than they are. We seldom do estimate aright a living man. We need to 
portray him on the canvas of Eternity, if his true shape and size are to be 
seen. I feel sure, however, that some in this Institute greatly underrate 
Mr. Spencer, — a mistake which, in my judgment, would, if not corrected, 
bring disastrous consequences, but it is possible that I may have gone to the 
opposite extreme. In reading his Philosophy I am distinctly conscious that 
vaster thoughts are before me than when reading Shakspeare. Shakspeare 
one can take up any time, as the companion of any idle hour, and the 
amount of mental stimulus he gives is relatively trifling. Not so is it with 
Spencer. It is only when the eye is keenest, the will strongest, the nervous 
force most abundant, that you can be sure of following him. The first 
carries you through the gentle undulations of an English county, and his 
highest elevations are hardly so much as going up Snowdon or Helvellyn, 
but Spencer carries you up the awful Alpine ranges, where the spaces of 
thought over which the eye roves are incomparably vaster, and where the 
exertion demanded is far greater. Spencer has a certain Miltonic grandeur. 
I could name places in his Philosophy where views are given us of creation 
in which, if we add the spiritual conceptions of which I spoke, the idea 
presented rises, to my mind, in extent, sublimity, and overpowering greatness, 
above everything I have yet met with in all uninspired literature. To grasp 
his system is like standing in the Sistine chapel, and bearing the full weight 
of the conceptions of Michael Angelo. Whilst this fact explains the 
fascination Mr. Spencer exerts over many, it also shows us the great danger 
either of letting his system continue, as it no doubt is, the reigning philo- 
sophy of the world, or of depreciating it below its just value. So long as it 
remains enthroned, a deadly paralysing force is exerted on aU the higher 
circles of thought, and all the freshest and most ingenuous spirits ; and out 
of this force an infidelity of a very terrible type can hardly fail to come. 
