dered at; for in that kind he had himself published only his Inquiry into the Relation of Cause and Effect (the success of which, indeed, on the supposition that here the previous criticism was right, may be thought to have been only too good). It was only of his poetry that Brown himself could, for the most part, have thought at any time that the idea of neglect occurred to him. And of his attitude in that regard, his biographer observes: "It is delightful to witness the calm confidence with which Dr. Brown anticipates the fame which, though he was not in this world to enjoy it, was to be!" "There is a moral sublimity in the noble spirit with which he repels the intrusion of scorn and discontent, and expresses his conviction of the substantial benefit that he had derived from the severity and injustice of his contemporaries!"

What was the character of the Dr. Brown who presumed to address to the author of Zoonomia his own We have to bear

Observations on it, will now be plain.

in mind here, however, that it was not the distinguished "Professor" whom Dr. Darwin had to meet, but only an unknown youth with an essay written at the age of eighteen. This youth, no doubt, writes with quite an exemplary politeness of dignity; but still it is a youth that writes, and he writes with all the self-complacency of the leader of the mutual improvement society. I know not that what he writes can be called specially good. There are not a few weak spots in the fortress of Zoonomia, and the future philosopher is able to confront them with that acuteness that is essential to his nature. Perhaps the best hit I remember is this. Almost the main position of Dr. Darwin is that "ideas are motions of the extremity of some nerve of sense; they are "a contraction, or motion, or configuration of the fibres which constitute the immediate organ of sense." Now, that

being so, says Dr. Brown (in effect), how about "different ideas with the same contraction"? The contraction that is the idea sound follows in me on the vibration of a bell that is heard; but when a second vibration takes place, there is exactly the same contraction, but this time with the addition of extraordinary new ideas, memory, time, number! How is that? How is that? A poser of this kind was not likely to conciliate the all-successful veteran ; and there might be also some little provoking accent of battle with all his polish-on the part of the not untriumphant youth. This latter had felt his power in these improvement meetings, and had even already shown, as to his Professor, a certain craving for the grip: "the disciple longed to combat his master," are the words of Dr. Welsh, the "master" being Stewart !

In regard to the correspondence with Dr. Darwin, Dr. Welsh observes that it evinces on the part of Brown a degree of ingenuousness and dignity of mind highly honourable." He desires us to know this: "As the letters of Dr. Darwin were not intended for publication, I shall insert only such extracts as are necessary to make the letters of his youthful correspondent in any degree intelligible, and as cannot in any degree be injurious to the fame of their ingenious author." "Dr. Brown's first letter is dated some months before he was nineteen years of age," and it opens in this way

"SIR,-In acknowledging the delight which I received from the perusal of Zoonomia, I only agree with the public voice. I am, however, surprised, that while every one has been delighted, no one as yet has answered—The transition is natural from passive admiration to a strict examination-Such, at least, was my mental history on reading-The reasoning appeared to me in some passages more specious than solid-I, therefore, for my own amusement, marked down my observations-My name is unknown to you, and unknown, indeed, in general to the literary world-It is not, however, the combat of names, but of arguments, that Truth regards-I will, therefore,

with your permission, send you a copy of the manuscript, in the hope of having misstatements, if any there be, corrected-You will have the goodness to let me know immediately whether it be agreeable to you to take the trouble of reading the manuscript; and if so, to inform me as soon as you conveniently can after receiving it."

A little peremptoriness here, perhaps, that might not prove altogether agreeable after the gall of "more specious than solid," and the general stilt of these propos about transitions, and names, and arguments, and truth, and that offered a result only of " amusement." Still, Dr. Darwin seems, directly on receipt, to have sent a very proper reply, expressing all polite willingness to receive, and read, and "correct any inaccuracies," etc.

Brown, however, has to wait exactly another month before he can write Dr. Darwin again

“DEAR SIR,—I am extremely sorry that, after having placed you in that disagreeable state of suspense which the unexpected attack of a stranger must in some degree occasion, the transmission of the manuscript should have been so long unavoidably delayed-There are some terms, absurdity, etc.-Such unavoidable harshnesses, I trust your candour will forgive-Your remarks will, of course, be limited to the premises from which my reasonings are drawn, to the fair or unfair manner in which I have stated your own opinions."

The young man has his head a little in the air here, and is perfectly unconscious of any supererogatory stab which he may give, or of the possible impertinence of the imposition of limits just suitable for himself! But we have now to see the effect of the perusal of the manuscript on Dr. Darwin. This, however, we cannot see directly. Brown's last letter was dated November 27, and Dr. Darwin's reply, after he had read the manuscript, seems to have been written on December 2. That is, Dr. Darwin must have read and written at once, for Derby and Edinburgh were very far apart in those days. And what he wrote, we can judge to have been tremendous; for we are only allowed partially to see Brown in return, and Dr. Darwin

himself (in this reply) not at all! Of this latter Dr. Welsh says, "As this letter could not have been designed for publication, I do not feel justified in inserting it; but the answer of Dr. Brown must not be suppressed!" Something, however, of the nature of this unseen reply of Dr. Darwin's we may guess from certain expressions in the rejoinder of Dr. Brown. Dr. Brown, too, must have written at once; for the date now is only December 5.

"SIR, I this morning received your letter. Its asperity I might possibly have retorted, had I been in the slightest degree irritated by it; but it was too profuse to excite any other emotion than that of surprise. From the contemptible light in which you view the manuscript it can no longer be interesting to you. I shall therefore expect to receive it by the first conveyance. I am, Sir, yours."

So far as we may venture to judge of the probable unpleasantnesses that may have invaded his ear, a very excellent self-control must have been exercised by the young man here. Brown, indeed, was never wanting to himself in that sort of formal dignity. One of those who started the Edinburgh Review, and even writing the leading article in its second number, he was offended with "some of the liberties that were taken with one of his papers by the gentleman who had the superintendence of the publication of the third number, and he withdrew his assistance from the work." "Though repeatedly and earnestly solicited to join again, he constantly declined." Dr. Welsh remarks of Brown's article on Kant, which is here in reference, "every one who has attended to the subject will allow that he has made it as intelligible as its nature admits;" and he presently declares of Brown that he “dipped deeply into the German philosophy!"

Evidently, however, so far as the position itself is concerned, Darwin must have read in a fume and written in a fume-must have written, in fact, rudely or even coarsely. We are not allowed to see much more of the

correspondence,-which, after all, seems to have continued a little longer, but we may venture to use for inference an expression or two in later letters on the part of Dr. Darwin, as, "I shall mention those of your objections which I can recollect-you would write English well if you would lay aside the nonsense of metaphorsmetaphors, in an argumentative philosophical treatise, are a disgrace." This of December 20, seems in reply to Dr. Brown of the 5th; and on the 28th Brown's pen is again at work. "You accuse me," he says, of descending to personalities;" but he emphatically denies any personality which might not be called such simply as "confuting an opinion," and as tantamount then to the assertion "that the author of that opinion is wrong." And, no doubt, that for Brown is true. The hit about metaphors Brown takes meekly. He is "conscious that there was a superabundance of metaphors in the papers sent," they being "the first taken." "I have always found it best," he explanatorily adds, "not to chill the ardour of composition by pausing to correct, but to wait till the whole be finished, and then to prune whatever is luxuriant!" He is staunch to the loyalty of his objections: "I should be guilty of an attempt to deceive the world, if I were to profess a belief to which my conscience could not assent;" and he is indignant that Darwin should hint that "truth was not his object in publishing," and that he had been "actuated by sentiments of personal ill-will." Darwin seems really to have thought the latter allegation true; for, duly to impress Brown with a sense of the importance of the personage he (Brown) was addressing, he intimates in the course of his surrejoinder of the 12th of the following month-what has very much the look of being only lugged in: "My second volume has brought me many patients from even London and distant parts of England,