ld of inquiry enlarged, he was led
to perceive the essential weakness and inadequacy of the Inductive
Method, and the probable certainty that, at some future period, the
progress of our Knowledge would lead to the establishment of positive
bases for all departments of investigation, and thus furnish an
opportunity for the harmonious and reciprocal activity of the two
hitherto antagonistic Methods. That he had any definite idea of the
precise nature of the bases on which this union would take place, that
he perceived the exact character of the Science of Universology which it
would create, or contemplated the subordination of the Inductive Process
to the Deductive, there is no indication.

But whatever may have been Mr. Buckle's understanding or expectation in
reference to the future, it is certain that between the publication of
the first and second volumes of his History, the hope which he had
formed and announced of being able to create a Science of History had
vanished, and his efforts were confined to a less extensive programme.
The pages in which this change of purpose is made known display, in
touching outlines, tinged with a noble sadness, that the soul of the
great Englishman was, in all the attributes of magnanimity, at least, a
fitting mate for his intellect.

A storm of obloquy had assailed him at the outset of his labor.
Beginning with the time when the first instalment of 'Civilization in
England' was given to the public, passion, prejudice, and pride had
strained their powers to vilify his character and heap abuse upon his
name. The Press, the Pulpit, and the Lyceum, with rare and brave
exceptions, met the formidable array of Facts with which the work
bristled, by sciolistic criticisms, bigoted denunciations, or timid,
faint praise. Conservatives in Politics and Religion exhibited him as a
dangerous innovator, a social iconoclast, the would-be destroyer of all
that was sacred in Institutions and in Religion. Theologians branded him
as immoral and atheistic, and poured upon him a torrent of vituperation
and hatred.

The only public reply which the English writer condescended to make, is
contained in the closing pages of the fourth chapter of the last volume
which he published. Every line of this answer, which is transcribed
below, breathes the spirit of Him who, when he was reviled, reviled not
again--the spirit of forbearance, of generous forgiveness, of
magnanimity, of unruffled dignity. Buckle had lea