tion of the general line of
discussion. By the kindness of Professor Sidgwick, I am enabled to give
some specimens of the themes supported by my brother, which may be of
interest, not merely in regard to him, but as showing what topics
occupied the minds of intelligent youths at the time. The young
gentlemen met every Saturday night in term time and read essays. They
discussed all manner of topics. Sometimes they descended to mere
commonplaces--Is a little knowledge a dangerous thing? Is it possible
_ridentem dicere verum_? (which Fitzjames is solitary in denying)--but
more frequently they expatiate upon the literary, poetical, ethical, and
philosophical problems which can be answered so conclusively in our
undergraduate days. Fitzjames self-denyingly approves of the position
assigned to mathematics at Cambridge. In literary matters I notice that
he does not think the poetry of Byron of a 'high order'; that he reads
some essays of Shelley, which are unanimously voted 'unsatisfactory';
that he denies that Tennyson's 'Princess' shows higher powers than the
early poems (a rather ambiguous phrase); that he considers Adam, not
Satan, to be the hero of 'Paradise Lost'; and, more characteristically,
that he regards the novels of the present day as 'degenerate,' and, on
his last appearance, maintains the superiority of Miss Austen's 'Emma'
to Miss Bronte's 'Jane Eyre.' 'Jane Eyre' had then, I remember, some
especially passionate admirers at Cambridge. His philosophical theories
are not very clear. He thinks, like some other people, that Locke's
chapter on 'Substance' is 'unsatisfactory'; and agrees with some
'strictures' on the early chapters of Mill's 'Political Economy.' He
writes an essay to explode the poor old social contract. He holds that
the study of metaphysics is desirable, but adds the note, 'not including
ontological inquiries under the head of metaphysics.' He denies,
however, the proposition that 'all general truths are founded on
experience.' He thinks that a meaning can be attached to the term
'freewill'; but considers it impossible 'to frame a satisfactory
hypothesis as to the origin of evil.' Even the intellect of the apostles
had its limits. His ethical doctrines seem to have inclined to
utilitarianism. The whole society (four members present) agrees that the
system of expediency, 'so far from being a derogation from the moral
dignity of man, is the only method consistent with the conditions of his
action.' He