The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-11 00:00:00

LITERATURE.

On Liberty. By John Stuart Mill. Parker. & Sonl
. This is, in every respect, a remarkable work]
The writer is one whose keen intelligence and
broad grasp of mind have already done good service
in some of the most arduous branches of literature.
The name of John Stuart Mill is one that commands
the respect of the reader, of whatever sect or party,
if only from the vast amount and research of his
labours, whether as the historian of British India,
the expounder of the principles of political economy;
the upholder of a new system of logic, or the author
of any of those other works which have instructed
and gratified his readers. He now gives to the
public a short treatise with a simple title, which
discusses some of the fundamental principles of
social economy, and makes the common .place asset.,
tions and prejudices around us come forth into the
light of reason and bear the brunt of his tren-
chant arguments. The Liberty he speaks of is not
what is usually understood by the term. It is not
the freedom of action, the possession of a constitu-
tional government, the abolition of slavery, or any
such view of the question. The Liberty he speaks
of is the right of every rational man to obtain a
fair hearing for his opinions, an individual in-
dependence of thought and word, an enfranchise-
ment from the tyranny of society and custom. In
his introductory chapter he speaks as follows :
The object of this Essay is to assert one very simple
principle, as entitled to govern absolutely the dealings of
society with the individual in the way of compulsion and
control, whether the means used be Physical force in the
form of legal penalties, or the moral coercion of public
opinion. That principle is, that the sole end for which
mankind are warranted, individually or collectively,
in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their
number, is self-protection. That the only purpose
for which power can be rightfully exercised over
any member of a civilised community, against his will,
is to pfevent harm to others. His own good, either
physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot
rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be
better for him to do so, because it will make him happier,
because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or
even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with
him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or entreat-
ing him, but not for compelling him, or visiting him with
arty evil in case he do otherwise. To justify that, the con-
duct from which it is desired to deter him, must be calcu-
lated to produce evil to some one else. The only part of
the conduct of any one, for which he is amenable to society,
is that which concerns others. In the part which merely
concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute.
individual
is himself, over his own body and mind, the
is sovereign.
The first department of the subject Is fully
discussed in the first chapter, "On the li-
berty of thought and discussion." This great
question has advanced with rapid strides
in the last century. It is impossible to
overrate its importance. It is the keystone of all
our rights and liberties, and it will always be a
matter for national rejoicing that En land has been
the foremost in the proclamation and upholding of
this invaluable right of rational and responsible
beings. The author carries this principle out to its
fullest extent; he would fearlessly encourage dis-
cussion on every subject, maintaining it to be the
touchstone of truth and the most powerful method
of impressing men's minds with the reality of their
own convictions. He attaches the greatest impor-
tance to the free circulation of the mental atmo-
sphere. He would rather have a hurricane than a
dead calm. " Truth gains more even by the errors of
r one who, with due study and preparation thinks for
himself, than by the true opinions of those who only
hold them because they do not suffer themselves to
think. Not that it is solely, or chiefly, to form great
thinkers that freedom of thinking is required ; on
the contrary, it is as much, and even more in-
dispensable, to enable average human beings to
attain the mental stature which they are capable of.
There have been, and may again be, great indivi-
dual thinkers, in a general atmosphere at mental
slavery. But there never has been, nor ever will
be, in that atmosphere an intellectually active
people." In one point we do not quite coincide
with Mr. Mill's argument, which has something
too material in its tone. He says, "It is proper to
state that I forego any advantage which could be
derived to my argument from the idea of abstract
right, as a thing independent of utility. I regard
utility as the ultimate appeal on all ethical ques-
tions ; but it must be utility in the largest sense,
grounded on the permanent interests of man as a
progressive being." Even taking this elevated view
of utility it would be dangerous to make it our guide
independent of any higher consideration. Unless we
hold firm to abstract principles we shall find our best
philosophy will have a downward instead of an up-
ward tendency. In his forcible arguments against
intolerance, he cites several remarkable proofs of
its now acknowledged error and fallacy. Among
these he mentions the career of Marcus Aurelius,
and gives a striking sketch of the notions and
theories which led " the gentlest and most amiable
of philosophers and rulers, under a solemn sense of
duty, to authorise the persecution of Christianity."
He adds—" To my mind this is one of the most
tragical facts in all history." On the subject of
religious theories and doctrines, we cannot agree
with Mr. Mill that the New Testament only con-
tains part of a system of morality, insufficient for
the guidance of its followers on questions of right
and wrong. " And this being so, I think it a great
error to persist in attempting to find in the Chris-
tian doctrine that complete rule for our guidance
which its author intended it to sanction and en-
force, but only partially to provide." Of course it
would be folly to expect to draw from it practical
directions for every difficulty that arises in the
complicated relations of life. But the theory of
the morality is complete enough to furnish an un-
failing gu;de in the formation and adoption of
acted thoroughly up to the morality of the New
mental principles ; and could we find a man who
Testament, we do not think philosophers or fellow-
citizens would have much cause to complain of his
defective theory. The Christian doctrine includes
within itself the principles of the highest morality,
adapted to every clime and suited to every age,
only it gives them in their simplest and purest
form, leaving successive generations to add
to that foundation the superstructure best
fitting their race and time. The reader will
recal that fine passage in St. Augustine's writings
in which he asks for such fathers, such children,
such teachers, such rulers,
above all, such public
men and citizens as Christianity would give us, to
prove its power to aid the progress of the human
race. After this able chapter on the liberty of
thought and discussion, we come to one perhaps even
more striking from the greater novelty of its subject.
It is on " Individuality as one of the elements of
well-being." It is highly interesting, and sets
forth a valuable truth which in these days is over-
looked. Everything now is done by the force of
numbers and majorities. Mr. Bright furnishes a
striking sample of this theory in his proposed re-
forms, where numbers are everything. Though at
first sight bearing a fair appearance, this is a most
dangerous doctrine. It prevents the arbitrUry
dictation of the few, but it encourages the more
formidable tyranny of the many. After pourtray-
ing the general conformity to custom, in accordance
with which, in purely personal matters, people do
not ask what is best for their own moral character
or most suited to their own disposition, but what
is usually done by persons of their position, Mr.
Mill asks, " Is this a desirable conditionfof human
nature ?"

It is so, on the Calvinistic theory. According to that,
the one great offence of man is self-will. All the good of
which human'ty is capable, is comprised in obedience. You
have no choice ; thus you must do, and no otherwise :
" whatever is not a duty, is a sin." human nature being
radically corrupt, there is no redemption for any one until
human nature is killed within him. To one holding this
theory of life, crushing any out of the human faculties,
capacities, and susceptibilities, is no evil; man need no capa-
city, but that of surrendering himself to the will of God; and
if he uses any of his faculties for any other purpose but
to do that supposed will more effectually, he is better with-
out them. That is the theory of Calvinism; and it is held,
in a mitigated form, by many who do not consider them-
selves Calvinists ; the mitigation consisting in giving a less
ascetic interpretation to the alleged will of God ; asserting
it to be His will that mankind should gratify some of their
inclinations : of course not in the manner they themselves
prefer, but in the way of obedience, that is, in a way pre-
scribed to them by authority; and, therefore, by the neces-
sary conditions of the case, the same for all.
In some such insidious form there is at present a strong
tendency to this narrow theory of life, and to the pinched
and hidebound type of human character which it pat-
ronises. Many persons, no doubt, sincerely think that
human beings thus cramped and dwarfed, are as their
Maker designed them to be ; just as many have thought
that trees are a much finer thing when clipped into
pollards, or cut out into figures of animals, than as
nature made them. But if it be any part of religion
to believe that man was made by a good being, it is
more consistent with that faith to believe that this
being gave all human faculties that they might be culti-
vated and unfolded, not rooted out and consumed, and that
he takes delight in every nearer approach made by his
creatures to the ideal conception embodied in them, every
increase in any of their capabilities ef compkehension, of
action, or of enjoyment. There is a different typed human
excellence from the Calvinistic ; a conception of humanity
as having it nature bestowed on it for other purposes
than merely to be abnegated. " Pagan self-assertion"
is one of the elements of human worth, as well as " Chris
t ion self-denial." There is a Greek ideal of self-development,
which the Platonic and Christian ideal of self-government,
blends with, but does not supersede. It may be better to
be a John Knox than an Alcibiades, but it is better to be a
Pericles than either • nor would a Pericles, if we had one
in these days, be without anything good which belonged to
John Knox.
Again, in speaking of the same subject, he says :
Inainso'ber truth, whatever homage may be professed, or
even paid, to real or supposed mental superiority, the gene-
ral tendency of things throughout the world is to render
mediocrity the ascendant power among mankind. In
ancient history, in the middle ages, and in a diminishing
degree through the long transition from feudality to the
_
present time, the individual was a power in himself; and i
he had either great talents or a high social position, he wftsf
a considerable power. At present individuals are lost in
In politics it is almost a triviality to say that
de-
serving opinion now rules the world. The only power
is thatof overn-
f the
ments while they make themselves the organ 0
stherebrincgwdt.lie name of masses, and g