The Press. — London, England, 1854-08-26 00:00:00

AUGUST 26, 1854. disputation in the forum, but in the discussion of sublime subjects we ought surely expect to meet with the serenity of the groves of the academy. - - - -- - The discussion of the unity of the human species is treated in this work with most offensive levity. It would be a pity if writers on ethnology should follow the tone adopted by these American authors, as geology for several years suffered in popular estimation from the irreverent tone employed by some of its least-distinguished expounders. None but a profound Bebraist (the very rarest kind of scholar) is competent to enter critically upon certain portions of the Old Testament. The sacred books ware given to man for the sub limest of all purposes—his spiritual nurture — and it is only a grovelling nature that can enter on their mysterious study with no more reverence than if they were catechisms of ephemeral knowledge. False philosophers might just as well object to the Old Testament because it did not equal " Pinnoek's Geogra phy " iu the nomenclature of places, as because it did not present generalised views of ethno logy. " There are men," says a German, " who " think of the sun only as a superior kind of 4 ‘ street•torch," and there are conceited " in quirers" who handle the Bible as if it were a collection of obsolete lectures from a me chanics institute in Palestine. Turning from the irreligious character of some portions of this work, we may observe of its contents that what Abernethy said of phrenology is strictly applicable to its general character. "It has much that is new and " much that is true, but the new is not true " and the true is not new." For example, there is a lengthy communication from Pro fessor Agassiz opening in the following style : There is one feature in the physical history of mankind which has been entirely neglected by those who have studied this subject, viz., the natural relations between the different types of man and the animals and plants inhabiting the same regions. The sketch here presented is intended to supply this deficiency, as far as it is possible in a mere outline delineation, and to show that the boundaries within which the different natural combinations of animals are known to be circumscribed upon the surface of our earth 'coincide with the natural range of distinct types of man. Such natural combinations of animals circumscribed within definite boundaries are called fauntr, whatever be their home—land, sea, or river. ►mong the animals which compose the fauna of a country we find types belonging exclusively there, and not occurring elsewhere ; such are, for example, the ornithorhynchus of New Holland, the sloths of America, the hippopotamus of Africa, and the walruses of the antics : others, which have only a small number of representatives beyond the fauna which they specially characterise, as, for instance, the marsupials of New Holland, of which America has a few species, such as the opossum ; and again others which have a wider range, such as the bears, of which there are distinct species in Europe, Asia, or America, or the mice and bats, which are to be found all over the world, except in the arctics. That fauna will, therefore, be most easily characterised which possesses the largest number of dis tinct types, proper to itself, and of which the other animals have little analogy with those of neighbouring regions, as, for example, the fauna of New Holland. Professor Agassiz states nothing new to us in the above passage, for a variety of British writers have treated of this distribution of man over the globe in relation to the animals of particular realms. We cannot show more conclusively the general character of this work than by extracting the ethnological creed of pne of its principal contributors, Dr. Nott:— 1. That the surface of our globe is naturally divided into several zoological provinces, each of which is a distinct centre of creation, possessing a peculiar fauna and flora ; and that every species of anima and plant was originally assigned to its appropriate province. 2. That the human family offers no exception to this general law, but fully conforms to it; mankind being divided into several groups of races, each of which constitutes a primitive element in the fauna of its peculiar province. 3. That history affords no evidence of the tiansforma ton of one type into another, nor of the origination of a new and permanent type. 4. That certain types have been permanent through all recorded time. and despite the most opposite moral and physical influences. 5. That permanence of type is accepted by science as the surest test of specific character. 6. That certain types have existed (the same as now) in and around the valley of the Nile from ages anterior to 84410 years a. c., and consequently long prior to any alpha- betic chronicles, sacred or profane. i. That the ancient Egyptians had already classified mankind, as known to them, into four races previously to any date assignable to Moses. THE PRESS. 8. That high antiquity for distinct races is amply sus tained by linguistic researches, by psychological history, and by anatomical characteristics. 9. That the primeval existence of man, in widely separate portions of the globe, is proven by the discovery of his osseous awl industrial remains in alluvial deposits and in diluvial drifts; and more especially of his fossil bones, imbedded in various rocky strata along with the vestiges of extinct species of animals. 10. That profligacy of distinct species, inter se, is now proved to be no test of common origin. 11. That those races of men most separated in physical organisation—such as the blacks and the whites—do not amalgamate perfectly, but obey the laws of hybridity. Hence 12. It follows, as a corollary, that there exists a genus homo embracing many primordial types or " species." If the third article of the foregoing creed be accepted, we should like to know to what type of mankind the people of the United States are to be classified, with their mixture of Anglo-Saxon, Gaelie, and Negro blood' . But we have not space for the discussion of views, arbitrarily adopted, in which facts and fancies are mixed up in the loose and presumptuous manner of the well-known work called "Ves tiges of the Creation." For some pasaages of a more amusing nature we shall probably return to this volume on a future occasion. Lectures on Education. Delivered at the Royal Institution. 1. Physiology, by James Paget, F.R.S. 2. Economic Science, by Dr. Hodg son. London: Parker and Son. CRABBE wrote : " The world we call a school, for day by day We something learn till we are called away." And it is in the sense of the world being a school, in which education should continually progress, that these lectures are to be received. So long as it is supposed that education termi nates with school or college, we shall have no great reason to boast of the intelligence of our adult population. The chair of the lecturer may occupy a place midway between the schoolroom and the busy scenes of life. and carry forward the work of intellectual training as long as the mind is susceptible of the plea sure of receiving new ideas and acquiring knowledge. In all ranks of society education languishes more from social neglect than from any deficiency of educational institutes. The man immersed in active occupation, whether of the hands or the head, soon forgets what he has learnt as a boy, unless his mental faculties be in some way stimulated ; and perhaps the surest way of heightening the standard of edu cation is by giving our adult population a taste fir the higher branches of knowledge, that youth, in its homes and various walks of life, may perceive the use of that learning which it has acquired, instead of being tempted to dis cord it, through finding no occasion for its exercise in the society which makes up its world. Scientific pursuits, as they combine intellectual occupation with practical useful ness, are peculiarly calculated to help forward what may be called social education. Mr. Paget, with professorial earnestness, " claims for physiology the pre-eminence " among all sciences," and urges that "its " advantages are such as might be apprehended "by all classes of society" This principle is right, but he carries it too far. A person with ordinary opportunities of leisure may hope to gain a fair view of the whole world of science, but will not advance far if he admits the pre eminent claim of any one department of it. Sir George Stephen discussed lately pro and con the advantages of desultory and systematic reading, and gave the preference to the latter in the sense of restriction to one particular shape of study. We think he erred, through not perceiving that the aim of intellectual exercise should be to elevate and enlarge the whole mind, not to cram full one nook of it. Every man should know his own specialty well,—to that his first and most earnest atten tion is due; but, apart from that, it is better that his range of reading and study should be very wide than very restricted. Locke plea santly ridicules the humour of those amateurs who devote all their leisure to one pursuit, and tells of one gentleman of this kind ofhis acquain tance who discovered the elements of music in the Mosaic account of the six days' creation. What be says of "universality " is very just. Dr. Arnold, a. great educational authoritl t 809 insisted that general knowledge need not be superficial knowledge, and advocated a wide course of reading and study. lames Watt, according to Jeffrey, was renowned for the valt extent of his acquirements ; and Sir Matthew Hale relates how the varied reading of his leisure assisted him in his professional pur suits. The diffusion of scientific knowledge amongst the public is less desirable to raise up amateurs—who are often only quacks—than to render society more generally intelligent, more willing to encourage intellectual pursuits of all kinds, and more capable of judging of the truth and value of the discoveries or works which come before it. It seems one of the principles of this course of lectures that the utility of the study of each branch of science recommended should be demonstrated. Of course, science in every shape must he useful to society, through the medium of its professors ; but it is taking much too narrow a view of scientific teaching, as regards the public generally, to insist that each particular brunch of science may be useful to each particular person who takes an interest in it. We think the pursuit of science is phicpd on false grounds, when mixed audiences aro taught to expect that they may individnally derive some practical utility from the small share of knowledge they may expect to acquire. It would be better that the broader ground should be taken of representing that, in all which raises man above mere brutal existence; knowledge and life are identical, and that an intellectual life is vigorous and varied just in proportion as we extend the range and add to the stock of our ideas. That "knowledge " makes a man most like his Maker " is lite rally true, as it quickens, elevates, and im proves his intellectual being. The opposite of knowledge, ignorance, is intellectual death. We quite agree with Mr. Paget in his subse quent view that, while Providence has taken ample care for the good of man in those things winch are of natural ordinance, he is left by Providence to care for his own good in those conditions which he creates for himself. The senses and instincts of man are as sure a guide for him in his elementary state as they are for unreasoning creatures. It is not until he exercises his reason in founding a civilisation that reason and science are essential to enable him to guard against the dangers which are incident to his created arts. The following paragraphs are worth attentive study, and wo hope the day is not far distant when their admirable common sense will be practically acted on:— Men have disturbed, in successive generations, almost every simple and original condition of their existence. In every generation they have been striving, with intellectual labour, to add to the comforts and luxuries of life, to their control of the forces, and their independence of the ordi nary course of nature. And many of their successes in this strife, being achieved by the disturbance of some natural and fit condition of mere subsistence, have almost necessarily incurred some consequent evils, which have marred, though they may not have neutralised, the good, and have gradually accumulated to our damage. If indeed, in all the improvements of our means of life, only half the trouble had been taken to prevent or remedy the future evil, that was taken to a'.tain the present good, our state might have been far different. If, for examples, men had been as anxious to invent the means of destroy ing coal-smoke, as to gain the myriadbeneflts of coal.fire4 if they had thought as much and as soon of constructing drains below the ground, as of building above it ; as much even of clearing out the refuse of our gas-lights, as of tempering and diffusing their brilliancy for comfortable use ;—then we might have gained unalloyed benefits from every such disturbance of the natural conditions of life : the vast catalogue of diseases appertaining to our social state might have been unwritten ; and that which one age hailed as a national blessing might not have entailed upon the next. a national calamity, But this has not been done ; and thus, from age to age, the evil residues of good things have accumulated ; the good still happily preponderating, but the evils such as every man and every society of men have now to guard against, and such as can be averted or counteracted with no other human power than that of the intellect instructed in the science of health. Hence the necessity of sanitary science. Thu evils incident to civilisation may, and should be, checked by the skill which civilisation in duces ;—but what an insult is it to our scientific attainments, as well as to the requirements of the public, when a vulgar brawling man is ap pointed to the headship of aboard demanding, above all other offices, peculiar knowledge and experience for the due discharge of its duties ! The public generaily v;i11 feel most interested in those passages of this lecture which illus trate, in that style made so popular by Paley, T V