564 Retrofpett of Gerinan Literature... Moral Philofophye 
Fizes the three volumes which we have 
before us, gives us very little encourage- 
ment to expeét that he will be able to ac- 
complifh his promife. We fhall enter mi- 
nutely into the examination of the merits 
ef this work when it is fintfhed, and now 
only obferve, that it promifes not to come 
up to the Spirit of Pbhilofphy, publithed 
lately by prof. TreDEMAN, of Marburg, 
in Heffia. 
Die vornehmften Wabrheiten der natuer- 
lichen Religion und der Sittenlebre, &c. &e. 
von L. E. SNELL.. 1798. pp. 159. 8vo. 
The principal Truths of natural Religion 
and Morality, according to the Principles 
of pure Reafon, &c. &c. The author of 
this publication wifhes that the principles 
of critical philofophy may be rendered 
more generally vfeful. We cannot indeed 
deny, that he poffefies the talent of expref- 
fing his ideas in a clear dnd popular man- 
ner; however we mufi alfo obferve, that 
he exercifes it at the expence of folidity 
and confiftency. 
Woerterbuch xum leichtern Gebrauch der 
Kantifchen Schriflen, &c. &c. von C.Cur. 
E. ScuMmIp, &c. &c. 1798. p. 608. 8vo. 
Vocabulary for the better Ufe of the Kan- 
tian Writings, 4th enlarged edition. None 
of all the numerous writings which have. 
been publithed of late, to elucidate the 
new terminology of prof. Kant, has been 
received with a more general applaufe 
than the vocabulary of Mr. $. The clear- 
nels of his expofitions and examples ren- 
ders it really much fuperior to fimilar 
works; and we have every reafon to think 
that it will be deemed a very valuable ac- 
quifition to thofe who wifh to obtain a 
complete knowledge of the fyftem of prof. 
Kant, which hitherto has experienced 
much oppofition on account of its obfcur- 
ity, and the numerous mifconceptions to 
which his terminology gave rife. 
Allgemeine prattif be Philofopbie, &c. 8c. 
J. H. Apicut,, é&c. &c. 1798. pp. XIV. 
u. 338 8vo. General praétical Philo- 
fophy. The firft volume of the Philofo- 
phy of Morals ; fecond thoroughly revifed 
edition. The author’s fyftem 1s, as far 
as we can judge, nothing elfe but Eudae- 
monifm, and we with he would impartially 
enquire whether Eudaemonifm alfo can be 
morality? Diffufenefs, drynefs, and a 
heavy, and frequently obfcure, language, 
are the principal charaéieriftics of this 
work, which promifes to cuntribute little 
or nothing to the promotion of mora] hap- 
pinefs. 
Erklaerung der Rechiedes Menfchen und des 
Buergers, &c. &. yon TH. SCHMALTZ, 
1798. Exrofition of the Rights of Men 
and Citizens. A Commentary on the pure 
Law of Nature, and the natural Civil 
Law. This work is intended to elucidate 
and to correét the principal paffages of the 
pure law of nature, publifhed a few years 
fince by Mr. S. who is profeffor of law at 
Koenigfberg, in Pruffia. Laudable as it 
is in an author to revife his former affer-. 
tions from time to time, the franknefs with 
which Mr. S. ftates his objeétions againft 
prof. KaAntT’s metaphyfical do€trine of 
rights, redounds equally to his honour. 
For liberty of thinking is the firft rule 
which ought to be obferved in the public 
interchange of ideas. However, we mutt 
take the liberty of making the following 
obfervation, by way of reply to the notion 
which he entertains of his qualification for 
oppofing the fyfem of the philofopher of 
Koenigfberg. If a land-furveyor were to 
perfuade himfelf that he could meafure a 
field more accurately than many a great 
mathematician, he might be perfect] 
right. But were he to think himfelf ca- 
pable, as a mere land-furveyor, of mea= 
furing a field of any poffible figure, he 
would conceive this opinion becaufe he is 
a land-furveyor and no geometrician. In 
the fame manner a jurift by profeffion © 
would prove that he is no philofopher, 
were he to pretend that he, merely in the 
capacity of a civilian, was capable of “ fur- 
veying the numberlefs details which pre- 
fent themfelves in the application of ge- 
neral principles, and to point out their 
being erroneous where we expect it leaft.” 
For the fundamental principles of the doc- - 
trine of rights are no experimental know- 
ledge and principles of right; the latter 
are the laws of external legiflature, and 
confequently no fundamental principles. 
It is owing to principles originating from 
reafon, that fuch principles, of which we 
can have no other but an experimental 
knowledge, are neverthelefs to be regarded 
as laws of right. The knowledge of the po- 
fitive law, and the practical application of 
it, may indeed ferve to raife the confciouf- 
nefs of the notion of right, and to lead us 
to the knowledge of the fundamental prin- 
ciples of right, but never can ferve to 
point out the falfity or juftnefs of thofe 
general principles, as the author feems to 
think. We muit therefore conteft Mr. 
S.’s prefumed qualification, as a mere ci- 
Vilian, for refuting prof. Kant’s fyftem of 
rights, and are perfeétly convinced that 
he has advanced nothing that could invali- 
date it. The conclufion of this work, 
which treats on the notion of the fate and 
of 
