321 
both with the non-religious and with some of the religious portions 
ot the community; the former anticipating, the latter dreading, 
the expected “ searching analysis 4 * * * * * * 11 (p. 4) of all the grounds of 
Theism. 
3. Another source of interest in the subject was doubtless 
found among those who had observed the Theistic And by his 
controversy from a higher ground. The more recent, expected treat- 
and too evidently feeble, surrender in some quarters “g"cai °argu! 
of the a priori defence of “first truths,” (and therefore Theism as t0 
of the Religious first truths), raised among many 
the anticipation of a great dialectical display — (some sort of 
attempt perhaps like that of Professor Clifford and others to 
resolve into simpler elements the axioms and postu- 
lates of Euclid): or, again, it was surmised that booi/now‘ist 
Mr. Mill could not help dealing with the a posteriori have see ( usap- 
as Mr. Herbert Spencer had done, or might possibly be pointed aii 
found working very near to Professor Huxley’s proto- paltlCi 
plasm, or to Professor Tyndall’s molecules. — The result, how'ever, 
of the publication of Mr. Mill’s book has been the disappointment 
probably of all classes. They who long persisted in saying 
that the candidate for Westminster might be a believer in God, 
have found that they were mistaken. They who were hoping 
for some new force of argument to support unbelief were not 
prepared for so halting a champion. They who expected a 
really scientific manipulation of these solemn subjects may justly 
have a sense of surprise, if not humiliation. The collapse was 
unprecedented in literature. The editorial Preface, with natural 
partiality perhaps, expresses an opinion that these Essays are 
“ exhaustive.” The editor of the Fortnightly Review is scarcely 
of that opinion. Indeed it should be added, in justice to 
Mr. Mill’s kind panegyrist, that it is acknowledged also, in her 
Preface, that the Essays are not a l( connected body of thought.” 
{See Preface .) 
4. We find ourselves of course under a kind of necessity, in 
examining a book on such a subject, to compare it Three 
as we go on with principles we ourselves vindicate. Essays to be 
It must be remembered, however, that we are not "(IT defective 
writing a treatise, but examining one which comes j£ ent arrange ' 
from an assumed master on his side of the ques- 
tions raised. And we shall insist on good reasoning at all events. 
The titles of the Three Essays are f ‘ Nature,” “ Utility 
of Religion,” and “ Theism,” — an arrangement, we would 
observe, somewhat illogical, leading to a certain overlapping 
of the subjects, and not providing for the entire discus- 
sion. This is an inconvenience to begin with. — Lord Bacon, 
for example, in the De Augmentis Scientiarum, having 
