song tone; but it was fresh and living truth, as old indeed as the human soulas all truth must be--but as new as it always ought to be, and is, when each heart brings it out for the first time for itself. It is characterized by no whining sentimentalism, the most offensive of all affectation, the affecting of the holiest emotions; but it is as earnest as the avowal of one who expects to die for the truth which he possesses. Last, not least, it is not bigoted. It is neither acrid nor malignant. Plato does not denounce, nor does he sneer. He is ironical, roguish even, self-satisfied too, and conscious of his advantages over the miserable sophists that annoy him, and the wretched slaves of vice whom he despises. Yet is he good natured, patient, dogged even, in his perseverance to teach them something better, and as gentle as a nurse, that, the more she is teased,is the more solicitous to charm down her ignorant but perverse darling. In this respect, he is a fine pattern to all sorts of people-not excepting some that call themselves very great admirers of his, and who are very wroth with those who do not agree with them, calling them by all sorts of hard and contemptuous names. 3. The scientific spirit of Plato is another high and peculiar excellence. It is impossible to study the Platonic dialogues, without falling into the habit of looking at every thing philosophically. The Socratic way, with all subjects, is to look at them in their principles, and to search their foundations to the very bottom. Whatever the matter proposed may be, whether it be the constitution of the universe, the ordering of a state, the regulation of a household, the criticism of a poem, or the determining a question of private interest or duty, it is discussed by à reference to principles. It is resolved into its elements, and the analysis is carried as far as the wit of man can trace it. Often, indeed, the discussion is broken off with no formal conclusion; yet, even then, there is a weight of argument on the right side, and sophistry is confuted and shown to have the worst of the argument, even if truth is not entirely triumphant. The great subjects of the soul's immortality, its destiny and its well-being, and the kindred themes of highest interest to man, are treated ever as the greatest of all subjects. If there were, in Plato's Dialogues, no positive results to reward the student, and nothing genial and elevating in the conclusions in which he confirms him, this spirit of science-this belief in and practice of a philosophic method, would of itself stamp them as of the highest value, in the judgments of all the wise. It is true, there are those who would be thought very wise, who have a small opinion of all philosophizing, and dispose of every attempt of the kind by raising the cry of " metaphysics." Metaphysics! thou convenient and omnipotent word! thy ill savor in the nostrils of the multitude, makes thee of sweetest perfume to him who uses thee for his purpose. The dolt utters thee, to hide his ignorance; the indolent, to save himself the labor of inquiry; the charlatan to prevent the exposure of his trickeries; the sophist to elude the scrutiny that shall unmask him; the magniloquent, for fear lest the wind shall be released from his turgid sentences, through some lithe hole, made by a metaphysical needle; the dishonest and deceitful, to steer off detection and exposure. Oh, metaphysics! "whence and what art thou, execrable shape?" We know not; hut we do know what men mean by it, when they raise the cry to lay the ghost, awful to them, of true philosophy; what is it, then? Simply this, good sir. " Allinquiries carried beyond the capacity or will of any one to follow you, are metaphysics' to him." Every analysis that is too nice conveniently to be followed, every distinction too refined readily to be comprehended, is "metaphysics." Every principle that is an inch above the common level of familiar and received notions, is metaphysics. To the boor at the plough, the spelling book is essentially metaphysical. To the hind that can hardly spell out the primer, English grammar is, par eminence, metaphysics, over which he beats his head in vain. To the intelligent and well read man, whatever is analytic and abstract beyond his usual habits, is metaphysics. To the physician, the jurist and the clergyman, whatever in their respective departments, contradicts or goes beyond the principles which they received at the schools, or whatever summons them to view again the foundations of their belief, is metaphysics and stuff. Especially is the attempt to test the soundness of received opinions, in law, government or religion, scouted as useless, or repelled as profane intermeddling with doctrines sacred and venerable. It is vain philosophy, all of it. Better rest in the wise traditions of the ancients, or the current notions that time has tested, or the venerable dogmas that Churchmen or Puritans have handed down from the hoary past. A neighbor of ours told us, a few days since, of a singular piece of ground, an alluvial deposit, which, notwithstanding its unfitness, had been occupied for building; much difficulty had been encountered in preparing secure foundations, and many methods devised to fix them firmly. Not long ago, in opening a new portion of it, for a foundation wall, the workmen struck upon what seemed to be a firm stratum of indurated clay, or hard-pan, as it is called. It seemed to be firm and strong enough to build upon, and forthwith they began to lay a heavy wall; till an unlucky wight, striking an iron bar into a thinner spot than common, felt the shell break through, and the bar slide from his hands plump down into the quicksand. This hard-pan not unaptly represents the received opinions of men, when made a basis for science. It is at unequal depths; here it rises, there it sinks. To the boy who is mortally afraid of the metaphysics of grammar, it is near the surface; to the fopling literateur, it lies somewhat deeper; to the mere popular preacher, or brawling demagogue, an inch or two lower, perhaps. But they are all afraid to have it disturbed, lest it shall cost them the labor of finding a foundation that is deeper or better; or lest they shall tumble buildings, inhabitants and all, into the bottomless gulf beneath; or, most of all, lest they shall lose their tools of trade. And yet there are men who will use metaphysics for evil, if philosophers will not for good. There are those who will dig through your hard-pans for you, if you will not for yourself. What is a French Revolution, but an awful caving in of bad foundations, through the busy pickaxes of sundry not very deep diggers, either? What your Socialist schemes of society, but the setting up of imposing shingle palaces, on the thinnest possible crust, over the most liquid of all quicksands? What are your abolition ethics of legal slavery, as in all possible cases a malum per se. What your third-party principles of patriotism, that to stop a leak would cleave the ship from stem to stern ? What your church dividing philanthropy, that would fire the temple by the blaze from its own altar? What your" no union with slave holders," your "non-resisting," "no holding of office," not even of that of a justice of the peace? What are all these but bad metaphysics, that heave and break in pieces your received opinions, all because there are no good metaphysics to take their place? Whence, too, in matters more important, even things the most sacred, the power of Hume, or Strauss, or Emerson, or Parker? whence all that has been done against Revelation, in the name of philosophy, except that a superficial or false philosophy has had the field too much to itself, and sounder science has been too slow to come to the rescue, or the friends of the truth have been content to fight with that old woman's weapon of received opinions? Whence, in short, the energy and success of the destructives, in all ages, in breaking down the old foundations of good institutions, except that the conservatives have either been too negligent to examine whether their foundations were of God, or too remiss to repair the breaches, or too lazy to build when they found and felt the rock. Not so thought and acted Socrates, as Plato reports him, against the destructives of his day; and hence is it not in vain that we recommend our scholars to the scientific spirit of the divine philospher. In this country, The truth of the case is, that as long as men exist, so long will they reason, and so long will there be philosophy of some sort. As long, too, as men reason, there will be some men who will wish to reason to the bottom, some that they may wish to pull down, others that they may build securely. There will be philosophy good or bad, and metaphysics either false or true. where everything is controlled by opinion, is it especially needed that sound opinions should be ably and thoroughly defended. Especially is this the case in regard to matters pertaining to government and law. These stand or fall with opinions; or if we rest them on fashion, or good habits, or their actual workings, we may find that these, one and all, are not a match against metaphysics from the hall of the Jacobins and ethics from the moon. So long as the convictions of men are based on a sound philosophy, so long will they uphold these institutions. We need them; of all things do we most need a moral philosophy based as deeply as the most keen-sighted sophist will go, and which shall leaven and control our educated men. If we may have it, we secure a most important conservative element to our fermenting social fabric. Especially is this needed by our law-makers and Jurists. All administered law justifies itself by reasons of equity. It depends for its sacredness and force on the soul of justice as seen and recognized. Hardly can a decision be uttered from the bench, or a charge given to a jury, in which principles of moral or political ethics are not involved and discussed; every such decision or charge is, in fact, a lecture on some point in moral science. And yet how often, and by acute and learned judges too, are they given forth in a manner immethodical, superficial and slovenly, with a conclusion that is likely to be correct, but which does not justify itself as it should; in which the statute and common law are learnedly quoted and skillfully put, but the highest law of all is not more than half methodized or mastered. And yet we are told that law yers as a class, and even learned and wise lawyers, are averse to metaphysics and moral philosophy. Surely they know not how much the dignity of their own science depends upon this scientia scien tiarum. The study of Plato by our scholars would be of no slight service in correcting these evils. It would imbue them, as by a charm, with a more truly philosophic spirit. It would lead them to honor moral science as the mother of all the sciences, who gives to them their highest dignity, and to whom the filial homage of all should cheerfully be rendered. It is the spirit of genuine philosophy that Plato imparts. It is the philosophy that inquires that she may learn -that learns that she may believe-and that believes that she may love and obey. It is not the philosophy that questions in order to doubt, and that doubts because she likes not to believe. Such a philosophy as his thorough-going, fearless, and scholariike-the product of an intellect that is acute and well-disciplined, and of a heart that beats warm and true, would be at once the strength and ornament of our literature, and the surest and cheapest defence of our republic. All institutions would feel its strength. It would give principles and method to all the sciences, and lend dignity and authority to all the professions. "Prevailing studies are of no small consequence to a state-the religion, manners, and civil government of a country ever taking some bias from its philosophy, which affects not only the minds of its professors and students, but also the opinions of the better sort and the practice of the whole people, remotely and consequentially indeed, though not inconsiderably." But how great is the value to be attached to the opinions of Plato, as opinions? What is the worth of his teachings as scientific truth? How high authority is to be conceded to his dicta, in respect to points that in this age come up in new shapes, and to doctrines that have grown ou of the new phases of modern science. Neither our limits nor our design will allow us to give an extended answer to these inquiries. To do it would be to write a commentary on the Platonic Philosophy. This much, however, we would say. There have in all ages been two schools in philosophy-the school of truth and Plato was in the the school of error. school of truth. There have ever been two sorts of philosophers--sceptics who are also sophists and seekers after truth. To sophists and sceptics Plato was a sworn and inveterate foe. Then, too, it is impossible that a man should earnestly seek for the truth, especially in morals and theology, and not find the truth, at Plato was greatleast in some measure. great with a giant's proportions--in intellect and heart-and he sought the truth with the earnestness of a devotee; and he found it--found it in a measure that may excite our wonder at his almost inspired wisdom-and held it with a faith and fervor that may put us to shame. First of all, in regard to moral truththe truth which concerns man's duty and his highest well-being. This he found with surprising correctness, and uttered in words of divine eloquence. The primal truths of man's moral nature, as also of the duties which grow out of this nature, are warmly and truly seen, and declared with warmth and force. But surely it is no dishonor to Plato, to believe that this same moral nature may, and ought to be, subjected to a more searching analysis, and the ethics to which it points us may, and ought to be, enforced with a more exact discrimination. To insist on retaining his nomenclature, or to be content with reaffirming his analysis, or to feel bound to defend his opinions, is surely not to act the most in the spirit of his philosophy. So too in respect to the divine nature and administration, Plato sought for and asserted much that is wondrous, as coming from a man like him. But to suppose that he exhausted the entire field of ar gument, or that his eye saw so deeply as to anticipate all the advantages of recent science, or to believe that his arguments are necessarily all logical, or the most convincing in their method, is to do him the worst of all injuries, by asserting for him claims which cannot be made good, and thus to subject him to loss in the good opinion which otherwise we might have secured. In intellectual science, and the science of being, the prima philosophia, Plato gives us views of comprehensive truth, and establishes principles that will never be shaken, because the intellect and heart both demand them. But his views are many of them at best but very general; often are they asserted in language in the highest degree figurative, which it would be wild and idle to consider strictly scientific; often, too, are they propounded as opinions of the wise and good, rather than triumphantly fought out on the field of argument. To be satisfied with his terminology as of course the best, to quote his dicta as of decisive authority, and to seek to find too much in the sayings or the mythi which he uttered as mystic parables, because he could not seize the scientific statement, is to rob his name and his system of their highest honor and usefulness. Now it has happened that no philosopher has suffered so much from his admirers as Plato. No man has so much reason to pray, "Save me from my friends." These, in the intensity of their zeal, have asserted claims for him which the truth could not sustain. They have called to the study of his writings by promises which he could not fulfil, and hence have such been disappointed and repelled. Had there been fewer Platonizers, there would have been more Platonists. Had Plato had fewer extravagant admiters, he would have found more genuine disciples and heartier friends. If Prof. Lewis had kept in mind these facts, we think that he would have made a more perfect book. He is not unaware of them, it is true, as is evident from sundry passages in his dissertations. Had he asserted them oftener, and subjected his author to a sterner criticism, he would in our view have rendered him a higher honor, as well as given a more valuable offering to the cause of true science. We commenced the design of contrasting the Theism of Plato with the Atheism, or whatever may be called the godless philosophy, of so many of the votaries of natural science. The contrast is striking and the rebuke which it speaks is terrible. If anything could penetrate the polished mail of their sleek self-complacency, and call up the voice of their better nature, it would be the thought of what Plato was in his age, and of what they are in theirs-he, the cheerful lark that scents the morning sun not yet arisen, and soars away to meet him as he comes from the gate of heaven, and they the owl at mid-day, that "Closes his blue-fringed lids, and cries"Where is it.' " The arguments, too, which Plato uses against the knowing Epicureans of his day, are none of them amiss as urged against the very knowing ones of these times. Would that the growth of the genuine followers of Plato were at all in proportion to the ranker growth of the disciples of Lucretius! The contrast, however, would have lost nothing in its force, and the rebuke none of its power, if Dr. Lewis had acknowledged all that is noble in the wonders of modern science, rather than appeared to denounce and despise it altogether. So, too, if he had been less contemptuous in his air, less peremptory in his judgments, and less ferocious in his attacks on those whom he could influence-he would have made a stronger and more useful book. We think that he has not sufficiently heeded the very excellent advice given in pp. 10 and 11 of the book he has so ably edited λαιμαργίας ἡδονῆς, ἡμῶν, τους δ' ὑπὸ τοῦ θυ“ Οὐ γὰρ ἅμα γε δεῖ μανῆναι, τοὺς μὲν, ὑπο μοῦσθαι τοῖς τοιούτοις.ἴτω δὴ πρόῤῥησις τοιάδε τις άθυμος τοῖς ὄντω τὴν διάνοιαν διεφθαρμέ νοις· καὶ λέγωμεν πράως σβέσαντες τον θύμον, K. T. 2." With these critical suggestions, we give our testimony to the ardor, and enthusiasm even, with which Dr. Lewis has edited the volume. He has read his author abundantly and read him out of love, and brought together in his notes many of the most striking passages that illustrate themes and thoughts of this Tenth Dialogue. His suggestions are many of them striking, his references to the Scriptures numerous, many of them happy, some of them powerful--and the book is altogether worthy to be commended to those for whom it was intended. There are few scholars in this country who could have prepared such a volume. We trust that there will be found more than a few who will read it. METAPHYSICS OF BEAR HUNTING; AN ADVENTURE IN THE SAN SABA HILLS. A BEAR Hunt forsooth! and what interest have the readers of the American Review in the roars and growls of brute slaughtering? We look into some Spirit of the Times' for the annals of savage sports-but here we expect to find something more of the ambrosial, seasoning pabulum catered for our coyer gustation! Bravo, good voluptuary! But if there be sermons in stones, and the minnowrippled, silvery, gabbling brooks be all oracular, and the mute trees yet pantomime of homilies-not to speak of the obstreperous tongue-nimble-stroked of "cross-quick lightning," which, "in the dead vast and middle of the night," doth fright us with its ethics. If, I say, these have, every one, high teachings of their own-why may there not be more in the metaphysics of Bear Hunting than has been dreamt of in your fireside philosophy? We are human enough to be Pantheistic in our tastes. We love this linking of the invisible with forms this association with the material gives it to the palpable. Every thought of mirth, or vision of delight, is ours forever, when, clothed in fit habiliments, we have given it a local habitation and a name." And the fierce fire is yet a friendly home To its peculiar sprite, the Salamander!" Now, though at this present writing, we shall have no special dealing with Sylph, Naiad, Gnome, or Salamander, we would submit whether the century-lived glory of that antique Faith, be not referable to this "bodying forth" of rare ideals with all the circumstance of an earthly house," a name-of the chisel and the pencil! So in these latter times, when a truth comes to us out from the Infinite-that is to abide with us-it is sent, not with the destroying splendors of its source, but through the Some portions of these adventures were some time since deceased.-THE AUTHOR. gross types of sense, wearing the shapes of most familiar creatures, or acting through the common elements of things. "Miracles Are so impounded now by the stern laws Yielding the divination up to Faith, Miracles are above us, around us, and beneath us-it is only when the higher sense bends its deep inner vision upon them, that we recognize them so. The very triteness of the incidents and imagery through which they appeal to our eyes, "ever staring, wide propped at marvels, or lazily glouting on the moon," prevents the recognition of their import. But are they the less miraculous, that our own stultification will not permit us to see them thus? There are times though, when they come to us right solemnly, in sternness, in strangeness, through chastenings; when the veil is torn aside, and we are made to look in awe on holy hidden things-to tremble and believe. At such times, our stolidity is no refuge, "we know that we do see." And when that time is passed, what are the symbols and the images through which that truth dwells forever after with the soul? The accidents through which the Godhead came-the material forms through which he was made visible! Be they pigmy or huge in man's esteem-they ever, henceforth, in one certain collocation, must stand linked, the eternal, moveless, silent witnesses of that revelation, and of God against the soul. When we would reproduce for other wayfarers, the lessons vouchsafed to us-how, in what better way can it be done, than by dragging from under the broken seals of the past that deep-lined imagery, in the array God stamped it on our life, that brother souls may regard it. Perhaps they, too, may see the miracle and be moved, as we were. Though a thousand eyes might look on the same facts, and sneer that you talked of God! Yet there are those with the "gift and fa originally printed in an obscure newspaper, |