Page images

that we must look for the Cromwells and Washingtons of humanity; but the Leibnitzes and Humboldts come from Germany.

It was in the prolific and commanding intellect of Leibnitz that were first matured, on a large scale, those seeds of thought which have since developed and expanded into the grand conceptions of Kant, Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel. It was in Leibnitz that we find the first clearly defined phototype of lumboldt. Yet, in vastness of intellectual compass, Leibnitz far excelled Humboldt, though less of a mere scholar in philosophy, or man of detail in positive science. Humboldt reigned only in the physical kingdom of universal science-Leibnitz alike in the physical and psychological. Humboldt and Schelling must alike pay homage to Leibnitz as their rightful master. To his transcendent intellect the realms of matter and of mind alike disclosed their deepest mysteries--the deepest, indeed, that any human intellect can ever bope to fathom. Before his stupendous powers of analysis, the universe was resolved into its elementary monads, the more inert and stupid of which, before the sublime constructiveness of his genius, segregated into all the manifold forms of matter, while the more active and sensitive were developed into the thousand-fold manifestations of mind, spirit, God.

These three extraordinary men, Bacon, Descartes, and Leibnitz, may be regarded not only the great representative men of their respective nations, or races, but also of the age, or epoch of philosophy, to which they belong. These were the three great commanding and prolific eminences, in the intellectual stratification of modern society, on which the seeds of thought, peculiar to the present ave, were first extensively ripened, and from which those seeds have been scattered far and wide over the modern world, which, falling upon the like congenial soil, bave yielded the vast and teeming harvest of ideas which render the present age illustrious.

Of these three great representative men of the present age, (Bacon, Descartes, and Leibnitz,) it may be fairly claimed, that Bacon is, more peculiarly that either of the other two, the representative man of the age, although he was decidedly their inferior intellectually, or at least in the purely rational powers of intellect. For this distinction, indeed, Bacon is indebted to his race, or rather to the fact that his race,


great, rugged, stern, indomitable, practical, matter-of-fact Anglo-Saxons, have given character to the age, have so impressed their leading characteristics upon


age, as to render themselves the greut representative race of the age; so that Bacon, by being the representative man of his race, becomes, ipso facto, the representative man of his age.

And this brings us to remark upon the distinguishing characteristics of the present age. This is a highiy important consideration, now that we are about to enter upon the consideration of the sociological theories and systems that have been developed during the present age. For as the character of the soil determines that of its vegetation, so do the fundamental characteristics of a nation, race, or age, determine the character of its ideas, and shape the course of its destiny.

The distinguishing characteristics of the present age, or among the most prominent of them, are its greater comprehensiveness of thought than any previous age has manifested, its larger intuision of ideas, and the diversity and intrinsic superiority of its nationalities or races.

I. As to the greater comprehensiveness of thought, which distinguishes

the present age. This is conspicuously manifested in the aspiration of Bacon to take “all knowledge for bis province;" in the vast scope of thought which has been displayed by the German metaphysicians, in their daring attempts to solve the whole problem of the universe; and in the disposition which has been extensively manifested, though chiefly among German and French philosophers, to realize the idea of Bacon, that the tree of knowledge is one and indivisible, and that “all partitions of knowledge should be accepted rather for lines and veins than for sections and separations.” It should be obvious enough that this greater comprehensiveness of thought, which characterizes the present age, is highly favorable to true discovery and real progress in knowledge, since nothing is more conducive to correctness of thought than comprehensiveness of thought..

II. As to the larger infusion of ideas, which distinguishes the present age. This is discernible in the Inductive method of inquiry, which has been extensively infused into modern reasonings, in addition to the Deductive, (and upon which we have already dwelt at sufficient length,) and in the introduction of the religious element, or the idea of a Divine right, which has mingled, to a very important extent, in modern discussions, especially those of a sociological bearing. This is indeed one of the most distinctive characteristics of the present age—the large infusion of the idea of right in the general current of its thoughts. In no respect, perhaps, will the discerning student of the distinguishing characteristics of different ages of human development, discover a more marked or more important and fundamental difference between ancient and modern times, than in this. It is true that, in all ages of the world, the idea of right, as contradistinguished from mere expediency, and from the mere arbitrary caprice of superior power, bas been recognized to some extent; but that recognition has been feeble in former times, and in a great measure restricted to the pbilosophical portion of mankind.

The great prominence which the idea of right has received in the present age, may, without question, be attributed mainly to Christianity. For although the idea undoubtedly existed before the time of Christ, as did the Inductive method of reasoning before the time of Bacon, yet it was unstable, unsettled, and floated vaguely in the minds of men. In short, as Bacon crystalized the Inductive method, it may, with still greater force and propriety, be said that Christ has crystolized the idea of a Divine right in human affairs. If, indeed, this justly revered character bad achieved for mankind no other good than this, his life and death would have been of incalculable benefit to the race. For whatever of truth there may be in the sublime idea of Pope, that “whatever is is right," and however true it may be that, in the higher sphere in which the gods move, and some philosophers, the distinctions between good and evil have no existence, and all things are absolutely right, yet in this lower state in which men live, and move, and have their being, there is, beyond all doubt, a right, as contradistinguished from wrong, and which it is of great importance to men that they should recognize and strive unceasingly to realize.

III. As to the diversity and intrinsic superiority of the nationalities or races of the present age. This is, of all the distinguishing characteristics of the age, beyond all question, by far the most important, as it is the most fundamental and comprehensive. It has been remarked by a late

writer, with a justness of perception which it has been rare to witness hitherto, that “all history, in its ultimate analysis, is a history, not of kings and laws, but of races.' Bearing in mind this profound and eminently just observation, we shall be the better able to appreciate the vast advantages which the present age derives from the diversity and inherent superiority of its races.

In the first age of philosophy and civilization, although there were three distinguished races, the Egyptian, Grecian, and Roman, yet they did not flourishi together, or co-exist in the vigor of manhood, Egypt having declined before Greece attained its full development, and Greece, in like manner, before Rome. In the second age, the Arabians were the only distinguished race. But in the present, or third age of philosophy and civilization, there are three distinguished races, all flourishing together, and all enjoying, at the same time, the vigor of intellectual manhood, the Germanic, French, and Anglo-Saxon; and in addition to these predominant races, the Scandinavian and Italian. These three predominant races, tbe Germanic, French, and Anglo-Saxou, may be regarded as the three grand divisions of the great central column, while Scandinavia and Italy may be respectively considered as the right and left wing of bumanity, as it is at present displayed, on the great field of creation, to do battle for the truth and scientitic discovery.

Each one of these three predominant races, moreover, may be regarded as intrinsically superior, both intellectually and morally, to any other race that has preceded them, unless, indeed, we should except the Grecian. Nor are the Scandinavians or Italians to be despised, or lightly regarded, as contributors to the great intellectual force that is now operating in the field of science; for Scandinavia bas contributed Swedenborg and Oxienstern, and Italy its Dante, Angelo, Campanella, and Macchiavelli.

Each one of these three predominant races, moreover, seems to be endowed with a peculiar genius, or order of talent, which peculiarly fits it to blend and harmonize with the other two, so as to give to all three one homogeneous, consistent, and united character, thus illustrating, in the intellectual structure of the present age, the grand formula upon which the universe, and every integral part of it, seems to be organized, of " Trinity in Unity.” Germany is metaphysical, France mathematical, Anglo-Saxondom practical. Germany is profound, France exact, AngloSaxondum efficient. Germany cogitales, France experiments, AngloSaxondom executes. Great, earnest, deep thinking, oracular Germany utters ber grand oracles, like voices from the unfathomable depths of creation ; subtil, ingenious, skillful France analyzes and dissects them; grave, thoughtful, cautious Anglo-Saxondom passes judgment upon them, and decides how far they may be relied upon or turned to useful account, either in the speculative or practical sciences. In short, Germany is the great Delphic Temple of the present age, where the high priests of nature, the German philosophers, give out their obscure but deeply significant oracles; France is its great polytechnic school, with vast laboratory and experimental apparatus; while Anglo-Saxondom is the great praotical, efficient work shop of the age, with its sturdy mechanic-kings, trade-princes, and State-philosophers.

* See Harpers' Magazine for May, 1836, article on

The Rise of the Dutch Republic."

While remarking on the distinguished nationalities or races of the present age, allusion should not, of course, be omitted to the great Russian nation, or the Slavonic race, of which it is the great embodiment. It is difficult to determine what are the precise relations of this race to the age, the more especially as their character has not as yet been fully developed. This much, however, we may safely venture to say, that they are so essentially different from the three predominant races already noticed, as to constitute an antagonistic force in the sociological system of the present age, and so that, considering this triune force, of the Germanic, French, and Anglo-Saxon nationalities in its unitary character, and designating it, as we may well enough do, the great Teutonic element or force of the present age, the Slavonic race will constitute the other and opposing element or force, thus illustrating the grand dual principle, which, not less than the “trinity in unity” principle, seems to pervade creation, and is ever to be detected in the sociological, not less than in the physiological and astronomical, system of the universe.

The Slavonic element in modern society may be said to be related to the Teutonic, as the Roman element, in ancient society, was to the Gre cian, and if this element should overrun Europe, as it threatens to dr, and superimpose upon the present Teutonic stratum of European society a layer of Slavonic muterial, civilization in the present age, unless, indeed, it should be rescued from that fate by America, would experience a depression and deterioration similar to that which was occasioned by the superimposition of Roman on Grecian civilization in a former age.

It was, doubtless, with a profound appreciation of the great vital antagonism between the Teutonic and Slavonic races, that Napoleon the First, who was an eminently sagacious observer, not less than illustrious actor, made that famous remark, so often since quoted, " In a half-century, Europe will be Republican or Cossack.” He would have spoken with more scientific precision, if not more philosophical profundity, though to the same result substantially, bad he said-it will be Anglo-Saxon or Cossack. This Anglo-Saxon family, into which the whole destiny of the Teutonic race seems destined to merge, is the true antagonist of the Slavonic race. As goes the battle between these two races, so goes

the character of civilization, the cause of science, and the general destiny of humanity for many centuries to come.

With these very general remarks on the different nationalities or races now most prominently developed on the surface of human society, we must take leave of the more peculiarly historical method which we have hitherto followed in our review. In contemplating the vast field upon which we are now about to enter, of modern ideas, theories, and speciilations in Sociology, it would be preposterous to attempt to consider them in detail, or with any special reference to the historical order of their development, or with any other than very slight regard for the persons to whom they inay be attributable. We must, in short, totally abandon the analytical method, and adopt the synthetical. Instead of considering different nations or races in detail, with a view to extracting their peculiar ideas in Sociology, as we have hitherto done, we must henceforth seize upon the ideas, without any regard to the time, or place, or manner of their development, in doing which we shall strictly conforın to the order of synthetical classification which we have heretofore laid

down,* and in which we have regarded all sociological theories, or ideas, as belonging either to the Political, Politico-economical, or Malthusian schools. Our review, which has been heretofore more peculiarly IlisTorical, becomes benceforth more peculiarly Critical.



To determine the true value of a life policy, we must have correct rates of mortality for every age of life. The nearest approximation to this is to be obtained by an average of the best tables. In making this average we shail exclude all the early tables that were founded on deaths only, because the hypothesis of a stationary population, or one increasing in geometrical progression, by which the numbers of the living were obtained, is tvo uncertain and unreliable for the determination of this essential element in the rate of mortality.

We must also exclude all these places where the mortality is known to be excessive because of climate, local peculiarities, or antiquity of observations. Our offices do not insure at their regular premiums south of the thirty-fifth degree of latitude, and as this corresponds to the forty-fifth in Europe, following the isothernal lines, we shall exclude Italy, Austria, and the south of France from our average. The depressing effects of cold do not seem as important as the malarious influences of beat. England has a lower mortality than France, and even in Norway the chances of living are as good as in Hanover or Prussia.

It is generally believed there has been a great improvement in the value of human life since the seventeenth century, but as the lowest mortality of any of our tables is in the Carlisle, where the observations were made about 1780, we must not confine our inquiries to the present century. The tables of Mr. Finlaison seem to show that some improvement has taken place between his earliest and latest observations, as appears by the following comparison :

Rate of mortality at the age of Tontine, from 1693 to 1783, (1,002 persons).... .0109 .0212 .0230 0301 .0237 From 1745 to 1826, (2,552 lives, 156 still living) .0073 .0130 .0136 0187 .0132 From 1773 to 1826,13,557 lives, 1,564 still living) .0106 .0110 0119.0145 .0120 From 1789 to 1826, (3,518 lives, 2,203 still living) .0109 .0101 .0121 .0150 .0120 Farr’s English, 1838 to 1844

.084 .0100 .0127 .0166 .0119 English registration, 1945 to 1854..

.086 .0102 .0133 .0192 .0128 This comparison seems to show some improvement since the first half of the eighieenth century, but none in the last hundred years. The observations in Sweden indicate a change in the mortality since 1750, but if the returns be analyzed, it will be seen that the whole improvement is in early life, which does not affect the business of a life company. In Dr. Price's observations, which extended from 1754 to 1775, the ratio of the living to the dying was 1 in 35; in Milne's, from 1775 to 1795, it was 1 in 37; in Farr's, from 1795 to 1815, it was 1 in 37; and from 1815 to




50. Av'age.

* See No, ii. of this review, in November number of merchants' Magazine for 1859.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »