literature and of science, that they do not share this cowardly distrust of the human intellect, but will bravely follow as "through words and things it goes sounding on a dim and perilous way," we must rejoin that the very ability of the writers referred to is a proof how strong is that repressive power to which even they have recently found it necessary to succumb.1 Of all the forms of the passive obedience of the intellect, the commonest is that which it assumes where it comes athwart historical criticism-when it becomes simple childish credulity. In this credulity, and the kind of untruthfulness which is connected with it, no body of Christians, we might almost add of heathens, comes near the disciples of Rome. And this for a very obvious reason, namely, that in no other body of Christians are saints made an object of worship to the same extent; and it is about the lives of the saints that the great mass of incredible fables has clustered. We make bold to call them incredible, although Dr. Newman protests against their being so called, and quotes Bishop Thirlwall and Mr. Grote to prove that if we are to demand historic certainty, the greater part of what we call history will have to be swept away. But though philosophers may tell us that the difference between a solid body and a fluid is only a difference of degree; yet a plain man knows that a pool of water, or a quagmire, is not the same thing as a mass of rock. When Dr. Newman informs us, as a matter of fact for which he appears ready to vouch, that a certain "oil still flows from the relics of St. Walburga; that it is medicinal; that some think it is so by a natural quality, others by a divine gift, but that he himself inclines to regard it as on the confines of both," we are at once reminded of the theory which seems to have haunted his mind from earliest boyhood, -the theory that material phenomena have no real existence, except so far as they are the instruments whereby spiritual effects are produced.

Another circumstance which has laid the Church of Rome open to a special charge of untruthfulness, is that she alone of Christian Churches has found it necessary to develop a complete scheme of casuistry. So far as this necessity arose from the system of confession, she deserves no pity for the obloquy which it has brought upon her; and there can be little doubt that these "Counsels of Imperfection," though they may have been intended only for the use of Confessors, having got into the hands of ordinary readers, have produced upon the vast body of half-educated Roman Catholics in Italy, in France, and in Ireland, a demoralizing effect. On the other hand, candour must admit that if Protestants had set themselves to

1 See Cardinal Wiseman's Pastoral, and the last Number of the Home and Foreign Review.

do the same work, they probably would not have done it very differently. For ourselves, on the slippery ground of the lawfulness of equivocation we do not intend to trust our feet; especially with the spectacle before us of St. Clement and Alfonso da Liguori, and Jeremy Taylor and Milton, and Johnson and Paley, all losing their footing on the treacherous surface, and slipping or floundering about in a variety of ungraceful attitudes. But it is only fair to remark that throughout it all no one could hold himself more steady and erect than Dr. Newman; and it is pleasing to observe how cordially, on this knotty point, he and his antagonist are agreed.

If the Romish doctrines regarding equivocation remained as abstract doctrines, there would perhaps be little to be said against them. But, unfortunately, in intercourse with Protestants, they start at once into active and most mischievous life. Following his arrogant theory as to the exclusive possession of truth by his Church, the Romanist finds no difficulty in regarding Protestants as the swine before whom pearls are not to be cast; as children, or madmen, who are to be habitually treated, on religious subjects at least, with "economy." "Silence," " evasion," "playing upon words," "material lying," all the many forms of simulation and dissimulation, are allowable in dealing with the outer barbarians; nay, they are positively praiseworthy, if used with the design of "saving a soul;" in other words, of making a proselyte. Not that every Romanist would condescend to these arts. We have not the least suspicion, for instance, that Dr. Newman himself would. Many men, thank God, are better than their theories. But this is what the Romish theories necessarily lead to; and many a family throughout the land can sadly testify that this is the Romish practice.

To sum up what has been said on this subject. The system of the Church of Rome appears to have a special tendency to untruthfulness, and that in several different ways. The burden of its pretended infallibility crushes out of men's minds the sense of responsibility for their own beliefs on every important subject of human thought; its Hagiolatry gives them fables for food; its casuistry furnishes them with excuses for lying; and, as regards those who are without its pale, its assumed monopoly of saving truth sets them above the ordinary laws of fair dealing. And all these are but the different results and manifestations of one and the same central falsehood, the setting up of a human power to mediate between the soul of man and his Creator.

Before concluding these observations, we must turn, once more, for a moment, to that remarkable man who has given occasion to them; who, having set the example of treating

himself as a historical character, will no doubt pardon others for using the same freedom.

It has often been asked, How could a man of Newman's ability ever bring himself to leave our Church, and adopt all the follies and absurdities of the Church of Rome? Such a question savours, perhaps, of a kind of assumption which, if offensive in the mouth of a "Catholic," is simply absurd in the adherent of a professedly national communion. Anglicans may think they see in Romanism the very errors which were reproved in the Pharisees; but they cannot deny that many good and able men have been Romanists. If the language of the publican had been, "I thank thee that I am not as this Pharisee, who trusts in his own works," would he have gone down to his house justified rather than the other?

But in the case of a convert like Dr. Newman, the question is not without interest; and with this book before us it admits of easy solution. In the first place, it appears that some of the worst follies of Romanism, such, for instance, as the idolatrous worship of the Virgin, have never been accepted by him. How he has settled the matter with the authorities of his new communion he does not explain; but as to his own tenets his language is distinct "Such devotional manifestations in honour of our Lady had been my great crux as regards Catholicism. say frankly, I do not fully enter into them now." In the second place, most readers of this memoir will probably agree, that while it excites a warm personal interest in the writer, it does not leave the impression of a commanding intellect, such as used commonly to be attributed to him. The ore which he works is peculiarly pure and fine, but it is, after all, a thin vein. His theory of life fails to grasp, or rather ignores, some of the deepest problems of humanity. Instead of its being a matter of wonder that he should have joined the Church of Rome, it seems as if her system had been specially devised to suit the needs of such natures as his; that deep sentiment of religion, not only in the modern and good sense of the word, but also in its original and bad sense; that feminine refinement of taste and sensitiveness of imagination, that proneness to superstition, that distrust of the human intellect, that craving for a definite, authoritative settlement of points not ruled by the Word of God. Where this spirit is, whether among Catholics or Protestants, whether in Italy or in England, there will always be, in the germ at least, the most dangerous errors of the Romish system.

1 It has often been pointed out, and nowhere more forcibly than in one of Mr. Kingsley's sermons, that "religion" is never referred to in the New Testament except in a tone of reprobation. The changed use of the word tells a sad tale.

ART. IV. Report of Her Majesty's Commissioners appointed to Inquire into the Revenues and Management of certain Colleges and Schools, and the Studies pursued and Instructions given therein; With an Appendix and Evidence. Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty. Four Vols. London, 1864.

ENGLISHMEN are naturally and justly proud of their public schools. There gathers around such venerable institutions as Eton, Harrow, and Westminster the halo of an historic grandeur, the beauty and the dignity of a time-honoured name. The precincts where, for generation after generation, our ancestors have gathered such knowledge and such wisdom as is imparted to boyhood; where they have sat upon dingy and uncomfortable benches, harbouring thoughts of a character which need not be particularly described about the masters who were trying to instruct them; where they have left, often upon these very benches, the deep traces of their penknives; where they have struggled, or not struggled, with hateful tasks; where they have contended in games, violated rules, and displayed, in a thousand ways, the mischief that was in them; where, finally, we ourselves have faithfully followed in their footsteps, succeeding to the benches, the indescribable thoughts, the penknives, the tasks, the games, the mischief,-these precincts are, as they ought to be, as we hope they long may be, surrounded with feelings of special tenderness, and hallowed by associations of peculiar sanctity.

Nor can it be denied by the bitterest opponents of the system pursued at our public schools, that they have done and are doing much that is useful, much that is highly necessary for the education of boys. Abstracting entirely, for the present, the mental training, it will be conceded that a large portion at least of the physical and moral training they impart is of an invaluable character. The mere fact of boys being thrown thus early in life upon one another's company; the feeling of selfreliance, united with the esprit de corps, that is thus developed; the process by which foolish singularities, affectations, idiosyncrasies, are worn away, are benefits the importance of which will not be questioned. No doubt there is in this process of attrition a considerable danger; a danger the reality of which it would be well that parents should fully understand. We are not likely to suffer from too much originality, and it would be a deplorable thing if a single essentially real feature of a single mind should be driven, by the senseless ridicule of others, to hide itself in shame. But if, as is more likely at that age, it is only the non-essential features that are thus got rid of, it is

obvious that the result is almost entirely beneficial. If a public school can give emulation to the sluggish, readiness to the awkward, and confidence to the shy, it has at least done something to deserve our gratitude.

This tribute we pay the more willingly, because, in the following pages it will be our duty to dwell rather upon the defects than upon the merits of the schools in question. No useful purpose could be served by uttering a panegyric upon institutions, the excellence of which is universally allowed. Nor can we forget that those who hold authority in those institutions are never backward in saying everything that can be said in their own favour. It is reserved, in general, for outsiders to perform the ungracious task of dwelling upon faults which are hidden from the eyes of those who might the most easily apply a remedy. The fact is, that the advantages we have pointed out spring almost exclusively from the nature of the boys themselves, not from the masters. With regard to the character of the teaching, and the character of much besides that depends upon the masters, we have long felt that there was room for very great improvement. It was therefore with no ordinary anxiety that we looked forward to the publication of the Report of Her Majesty's Commissioners, who have now presented us with the result of an inquiry which occupied them from July 1861 to March 1864. Our expectations have been more than satisfied by the four bulky volumes of which it is composed. The Commissioners have performed their delicate duties with a degree of diligence, of candour, of impartiality, and good sense, of which it is impossible to speak too highly. We congratulate Mr. Grant Duff, who proposed the appointment of this Commission, upon the interesting and valuable Blue-book which his motion has secured.1

We proceed to describe as briefly as possible the manner in which the inquiry has been conducted. First, then, the Commissioners addressed a letter to the authorities of each school, accompanied by what Mr. Gladstone calls "a drastic set of questions" on the Revenues, the Management, and the Course of Instruction of the body to which they belonged. The answers to these questions sent by head-masters and others, are printed at length in Vol. ii. Appendix M. The next step, if we are not

1 It is right to mention the names of the Commissioners. They are the Earl of Clarendon, the Earl of Devon, Lord Lyttleton, the Hon. Edward Twisleton, Sir Stafford Northcote, the Rev. W. H. Thompson, and Mr. Halford Vaughan. Professor Montague Bernard acted as Secretary. The schools upon which they have reported are the following:-Eton, Winchester, Westminster, Charterhouse, St. Paul's, Merchant Taylors', Harrow, Rugby, and Shrewsbury.