The Sun.
London, England, 1865-01-23 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

THE " EXAMINER" ON THE PRUSSIAN PARLIA-
MENT.--The traditional policy of violence is once
more loud in self-gratulation at Berlin. Its haughty
scorn of liberalism has been thus more than justified
by the event, and the impotent murmurings of diplo-
macy have been put down as mere impertinence
by the triumphant invaders of Slesvig-Holstein.
Otto von Bismark walks with broth that he ima-
gines to be wreathed with laurels. He is and feels
himself the hero of the hour. It is a day of rebuke
and blasphemy against all that used to be called
popular right and international justice ' • and he, the
author and finisher of an otuwitted people's un-faith,
is at no pains to conceal his exultation. His royal
mouthpiece, at the re-opening of the Chambers, has
only repeated Bismark's crow on his own dungheap.
The majority are reminded that without the military
organisation against which they formerly contended,
Denmark could not have been so easily despoiled,
and the old repute of Prussia for rapine and appro-
priation of neighbours' goods could not have been
maintained. In bitter mockery, King William hopes
that his querulous Parliament, which recently bade
him God speed in his burglarious attack on the
Duchies, will see the importance of his always
having fit tools at his command for like enter-
prises, and the propriety of asking no curious
or jealous question as to when, where, or
why he—their Lord by Right Divine—may think
fit to use such implements. Of a truth, his maraud-
ing Majesty has fairly the laugh with him.' Liberal
deputies who might have won the sympathy of all
enlightened Europe by resisting the war policy of
the Court last spring, and initiated a counter policy
of peace and honour, certain eventually to make every
true man in Germany their fellow-labourer, find
themselves now apparently bereft of either national
repute or local power. They had the constitutional
game in their hands, and they miserably threw it
away. Now they propose to take it up again. After
prolonged resistance to the reactionary designs, they
suffered themselves to be drugged by their almost
baffled adversary, and while under the influence of
the potion stupidly accepted from his hand, they
abandoned their position in the van of enlightened
progress, and suffered him without dispute to wield
the resources of the State for a whole year. The
attention of the community has thus been concen-
trated during that time on the invasion of Denmark
and the annexation of its conquered provinces.
Herr von Bismark has kept his word. He inaugu-
rated his career as a Minister by the declaration
that the future greatness and prosperity of Prussia
must be asserted by " fire and steel." For this he
naturally sought the reorganisation of the army upon
a footing that would place it more irresponsibly at
the disposal of the Crown, as regarded mobilisation,
discipline, and pay. He wanted , to have it more
, ready for sudden use upon occasion, and conse-
quently less subject to the control of Parliament. In
short, he wished to divest it of whatever subordina-
tion to social and political sanctions it previously
acknowledged, and be able to wield it as a passive
instrument of despotic power. All this was perfectly
, natural to such a man; and, to do him justice, he
has shown no lack of courage or ability in following
up his purpose. It was equally natural that the
elected representatives of the people should oppose
his subversive and enslaving schemes. They refused
to vote for the Budget of 1863, and as they would
neither be browbeaten nor cajoled in the matter,
Parliament was dissolved. A still greater majority
of the new Chamber refused to yield. A loan to
meet the contingencies of war was rejected ; and
the Minister at the beginning of 1864 stood at bay.
It was at this moment that he conceived the hardy
project of plunging into hostilities, and challenging
Parliament to disown or sanction them. Forgetful
of all that had passed, and insensible to the sinister
motive by which the Minister was influenced, a
majority of the House of Representatives fell into
the snare, authorised the invasion of Holstein, sanc-
tioned the military convention with Austria, made
for the purpose, voted confidence in the administra-
tion of Otto von Bismark, and sine die adjourned
the further discussion of the constitutional question.
That episodical act of the new historic drama of
" Fire and Steel " being over, the orchestra pre-
pares us for a recovery of the lost thread of the
story, with a set of new variations on the old theme.
THE " OBSERVER" ON RUMOURED ALARMS IN
CANADA.—There was an absurd rumour—or per-
haps we might say a brace of rumours—brought by
telegraph in one of the last telegrams from New
York. It was unreservedly stated that fresh troops
were about to be sent to Canada, and as a motive
for this precautionary measure, that the Govern-
ments of France and England were about to ac-
knowledge the independence of the Southern Con-
federacy of America. Now, it seems almost super-
fluous to contradict these statements. There never
was a time when there was less reason to recognise
the Southern States, for they certainly have not
established any likelihood of being regarded as a
permanent Government, althoughthey have hitherto
maintained a stubborn resistance. The Emperor of
the French has repeatedly requested the English
Government to join him in recognition of the
Southern Confederacy, but the Cabinet finally re-
solved to maintain the neutrality which they have
avowed from the beginning as the wise and prudent
policy of this country. As to Canada, so far from
sending new troops there, a portion of those who
were so promptly sent out on the occasion of the
Trent affair have been withdrawn. It is known
that the two battalions of the Guards have returned
to England, as well as the Military Train, which is
only required in time of war, or of impending hos-
tilities. There is really nothing that would require
any additional strong military force in our North
American possessions at present. There is, in fact,
no more than the usual garrison in Canada. The
only difference is that the force employed there is
more concentrated, and not so much spread out in
small detachments. There is no doubt a great deal
of what the Americans themselves designate as
" tall talk" abont Canada amongst some unofficial
and idle people in the United States. But the Su-
preme Government has given no countenance to
those pronouncements. On the contrary, they have
lost no time in disavowing the foolish bravado of
General Dix in relation to the invasion of Ca-
nadian territory. The Canadian Government have
also done their part well in the matter of peace. So,
too, have the Canadian Courts, and, what is more
important than all, the Canadian people. We had
to complain of the Canadians when they defeated
the late Ministry on a vote for establishing the
militia on a sound and efficient footing. It was
shrewdly suspected at the time that there were
other reasons—which were at least sufficient in a
party sense—for the Ministerial defeat. This sus-
picion has proved to be true, for the present Minis-
try has not been wanting in all proper precautions
for the defence of the country against aggression,
whilst they at the same time took care to avoid any
occasion or excuse for a hostile attack. They have
made a very proper distinction between the right of
asylum for political refugees, and the harbouring of
persons who abused that sacred right for the pur-
pose of piratical or dishonest raids upon the indus-
trious and peaceable inhabitants of the border. For
the present, at least, the Canadians are pursuing a
prudent, as well as a patriotic course. They are
avoiding all just causes of offence, and at the same
time they are preparing, in conjunction with their
neighbours in the islands and on the continent, a
confederacy which will be strong enough for mutual
defence, and, we hope at the same time, prudent
enough to avoid any unjust aggression. We had
occasion some weeks back to speak approvingly not
only of this confederation but of the prudent and
patriotic sentiment of the delegates who assembled
to set it on foot. Everything that has since trans-
pired speaks well for the future of this wise and
.neighbourly combination. They have only to be
strong, and, at the same time, conciliating, and they
will not fail to secure the respect, or, at all events,
to check the ambition of their restless neighbours--

whilst they will certainly receive the support and
assistance of their fellow subjects in the old coun-
try in all just efforts to preserve their independence,
and their desire to live in peace and freedom.
THE " SATURDAY REVIEW" ON THE LEARNING
OF LANGUAGES.—The difference between scientific
and unscientific treatment of language, or indeed of
anything else, mainly consists in observing like-
nesses and unlikenesses' in classifying them, and in
tracing the facts back to their causes. It is a clear
and rational method instead of a confused and arbi-
trary method. It does not burden the memory
with arbitrary technicalities, but uses every word
employed in a sense at once clear and ac-
curate. As far as may be, it gives the reason for
everything. Of course there are cases in which this
is impossible. Even geometry has its postulates
and axioms, which we are required to believe with-
out being able to prove them. It is therefore no
blame to philology that it has its- postulates and
axioms also. Philology cannot say why the root
Vid should mean to see or know ; but if thus much
is granted, everything else that is wanted follows.
It cannot say why certain nations fail to pronounce
certain sounds, and other nations to pronounce other
sounds, but when the fact is once admitted, it can
group all the results of the fact in their proper rela-
tions to each other. I'Pofessor Muller gives a plau-
sible explanation of the secondary phenomena of
Grimm's Law, but no one can explain the primary
phenomena. He tells us the results produced on the
pronunciation of other letters by the fact that Latin
has no sound answering to or p, but he cannot
tells why a Roman, like a modern High German,
found a difficulty in uttering a sound which to a
Greek or an Englishman is perfectly easy. Com-
parative philology, in short, tell us as much about
its own matter as any other science can tell us and
no more. A scientific treatment of that matter
ranges the secondary phenomena in their proper re-
lations under the primary phenomena. In an un-
scientific treatment, the facts, even if accurately
given, are not put in any rational relation to one
another ; each fact is dealt with as isolated from
other facts, or, at best, the grouping is something
purely arbitrary and empirical. Let us explain our
meaning by examples. We will first show what we
mean by scientific and unscientific treatment of the
history of a whole language, and give some examples
of the same difference in points of detail. Let it be
required to write a short history of the English lan-
guage. An unscientific person would write a con-
fused chaos about Britons, Romans, Saxons, Danes,
Normans, and what not ; he would talk about words
" derived from the Saxon," and words derived from
the Latin ; he might go on possibly to talk about
" Semi-Saxon" and " Early English," and to talk
about English displacing " Saxon," and so forth.
A scientific description, very brief but accurate as
far as it goes, would be something like this. "Eng-
lish is a Low-German [better Low-Dutch] dialect,
brought into Britain by the Angles and Saxons. Its
grammar, its forms of words, the most necessary
parts of its vocabulary, still remains strictly Teu-
tonic. But its vocabulary has received a very small
Celtic infusion from the conquered Welsh, and a
very large Latin infusion, partly from the gradual
effects of the Norman Conquest, partly from later
influences. The loss of most of its inflexions, a
process common to it with the other most closely
allied languages, has been both hastened and ren-
dered more complete through the same causes."
This, we conceive, is a clear and accurate statement
of the case; leaving out nothing that is absolutely
essential to a correct view of the matter, though of
course requiring many things to be supplied and
amplified. And we venture to think that such a de-
scription is really easier to understand than the usual
vague talk. Of course it requires every word that
is used to be used in one precise and-clearly defined
sense ; but where is the hardship of this ? Such a
description puts the facts in their true relations to
one another ; it avoids any confusion between deri-
vatives and cognates ; it puts forth the difference
between a mere infUsion, however vast in extent,
and the native essence of a language; it wholly
avoids the common confusion about the supplanting
or displacement of languages by one another. What
we mean is this. The English of the eighth or ninth
century is no longer intelligible to Englishmen. The
provincial Latin spoken at the same time in Gaul,
Spain, or Italy is no longer intelligible to a French-
man, a Spaniard, or an Italian. English never dis-
placed Anglo-Saxon, French never displaced Latin.
There was no moment when French and English, as
wholes, displaced Latin and Anglo-Saxon. The
younger form grew out of the elder, and changed in
the process till the difference became so great that
the elder form ceased to be intelligible. This is a
totally different process from real displacement—a
process which has also gone on upon a large scale
both in Gaul and Britain. English has largely sup-
planted Welsh and Cornish. French has largely sup-
planted Basque, Breton, and German. In all these
cases there was a real displacement. The substitu-
tion of English for Cornish began when the first
native Cornishman spoke English only ; the substi-
tution ended when the last Cornish-speaking person
—Dolly Pentreath or anybody else—died, and the
language with her. No doubt this process is very
gradual, but it quite differs from the other process.
It is a process not of growth but of conquest ; it is
not that one thing is gradually developed out of or
is changed into another, but that one whole ready-
made thing gradually drives another whole ready-
made thing out of the field. And this process of
supplanting or displacement goes on with kindred
as well as with foreign dialects. The literary Eng-
lish has largely supplanted various local forms of
Teutonic ; the literary French has largely sup-
planted various local forms of Romance. People
gradually leave off speaking Provencal and Low-
land Scotch, and speak French or English instead.
This, though happening between kindred languages,
is the same process by which English supplanted
Cornish; not the process by which modern
English was developed out of the primitive
form of the tongue. Now, surely all this, if
clearly and simply put, is perfectly easy
to understand, and/to look at the history of a lan-
guage in this way must make it far more attractive
than it can be made by the usual vague and con-
fused way of describing things. Let us now take a
case in detail. We hold—and we speak from expe-
rience—that a child, when learning any language,
should be taught from the beginning so much of
Grimm's Law as is applicable to the languages
which he learns. A child learns German, and is
told that 7 ochter is " German for" daughter; he
learns Greek, and he is told that S-vyarqp is "Greek
for" daughter. Put so, these are arbi4ary bits of
information, to be remembered by a Mere process
of memory. A quick child may find out for him-
self that Tochter and daughter are the same ' • but it
is very unlikely that any child will see for himself
that daughter and -vrinip are the same ; and it is
utterly impossible that any child should see for him-
self that Kt;cov and hound are the same. But the law
of formation is perfectly simple. Show the child
that OvraTV, ToCHTeR, DauGHTER are really
the same sounds, that they are composed of essen-
tially the same letters ' • show that the law which
rules the initial letters of &ttycirrip, Tochter, daughter
rules the initial letters of Np, Thier, deer, of
Thiire door; and the thing is no longer a matter of
mere memory; it is a matter of reasoning and com-
parison. That such explanations make the learning
of a language incomparably more interesting no man
can doubt. Children to whom a mere grammar
lesson is no more attractive than to other children
will listen to a lesson in Comparative Philology with
almost the interest of a story.

THE DRAMATIC CRITICS-,-DAILY AND WEEKLY,
FROM THE " LONDON REVIEW."—Some of our
weekly oontemporaries—foremost amongst whom we may
name the Reader and the Examiner—have been attacking
the dramatic critics of the daily press for their sugary
criticisms. Such censures would have had more force if
they had been less general, and more firmly grounded on
facts. They assume that all dramatic criticisms are written
by dramatic authors, whose interest it is to please the
managers and actors, and not to serve the public. Let us
see how far this assumption will bear examination. The
Mites is represented at the theatres by an active dramatic
author ; the Morning Star is similarly represented ; the
Daily Telegraph critic writes pantomimes for one or two
houses, but has not been, for many years, a general dramatic
author ; the ',standard and Herald are represented by a gen-
tleman who is not a writer of plays ; the Morning Post is
similarly represented; the Daily News, which includes the
Express, is represented by a gentleman who wrote a little
farce about seven years ago, but is not in the market as a
dramatic author; and the Advertiser is represented by a
gentleman who wrote a tragedy more than a quarter of a
century ago, but who has added nothing since to our
dramatic literature. The Globe and the Sun, which are not
represented by dramatic writers, complete the list of Lon-
don daily papers, and give us nine journals whose critics
are not active dramatic writers, against two journals that
are represented by dramatic authors and adapters. The
.Examiner appears to think that dramatic criticism is in the
hands of the gentlemen who supply our theatres with bur-
lesques, but the above list contains no regular burlesque
writer. The Reader abuses the daily press for its subservi-
ency to managers, on the ground that its critics are dramatic
authors, and praiSes the weekly press on opposite grounds
Let us examine the weekly press in this matter. The
Saturday Review's dramatic articles are written by an active
dramatic author ; the Weekly Dispatch is represented by one
of our most prolific dramatists, and the Athenwum, the
illustrated London News, and the Illustrated Times, are repre-
sented by dramatic authors. The Observer, the Examiner,
the Reader, and our own paper, are represented by gentle-
men who are not dramatic authors ; the Spectator never has
regular dramatic notices, and the Era and Sunday Times are
professedly theatrical papers. This gives up five dramatic
authors who are dramatic critics on the weekly press against
four dramatic critics who are not dramatic authors.
None of these author-critics are burlesque writers.
We need not enter into a discussion as to how far dramatic

notices—no matter by whom written—are honest or dtir,
honest ; we may admit that they are all far too gel',i
The fault, however, is one for which audiences are chi
responsible. _