THE "VICTORIAN REVIEW."

New Zealand Herald, Volume XVII, Issue 5722, 20 March 1880, Page 6

THE "VICTORIAN REVIEW."

Fourteen contributions on subjects of vatiei interest constitute the March number of thi extremely crcditable periodica). The mos ambiiioua of the papers is that of Henr Gu3tave Duvugier (Tours, France), wlrcl supports the doctrine of metempsychosis and signally fails. It lacks the lucidity o arrangement and expression of the bev French school, of which Taine is so splendid an example. Ingenious it undoubtedly is, and tho result of much thought and reading, but it suggests that between the capacity t-i the writer and the subtle nature of his subject there is "a great gulf fixed." A writer, : or instance, who in support of his theme •efers to it as "based upon a strong latural instinct," and so offers a hazy as a potential fact, at once xeates distrust of his capacity. "Iu ,tinct" has not yet been defined, and vhat is "natural instinct and there can >e no unnatural instinct—as applied to the loctrine of the metempsychosis ? The paper bounds with strained interpretations of 'capture, aud gratuitous assumptions which lave long been contested. Here i 3 an iatance of the utmost wilfulness of illuatraion. Referring to the question put to our _,ord by His disciples with regard to a nun i ß htle3S from his birth, "Master, who did in, this man or his parents, that he was jorn blind?" and His reply, "Neither hath this man sinned nor his parents," the vriter goes on to say "He (our Lord) iccepted his previous existence or existences & 311 ordinary matter of fact." The audi•ity of thia assumption is only exceeded by he irreverent assumption of a knowledge uf he iniud of "our Lord." This is but a ample of the illustrations given in support if the argument. Mr. James Smith, u his "Two Civilisations," makes lis subject, the civilisation of the Peru nans previous to the conquest by Pizarro, he vehicle of a comparison with the civilianion of the present day, and doe 3 his work nost effectively, but with a spice of bittericss which seems always to tinge the mind if the writer. Like all his contributions, it s very capable, and confers great pleasure in the reader. The wisdom of the wisest is lot yet that of this able writer ; he does not tiiow how to be tolerant. Let it be said, lowever, that he sins in excellent company. Jr. Wiusor, in "The Decay of Indifictualitj," traverses the opiuions of Mill, Jarlyle, or De Tocqueville, and others, hat the spirit of association suppresses individuality. It must be said at the outset hat the contribution displays much ibility, but the writer seems to fail u his reasoning, in this way. He idvances as an answer to Mill, et iu lenus, that the existence of abuudance of ndividuality disproves the repressiveness of issociation, which apparently he sometimes :onstrues as coercive, which Mill does not lay. But he in no way rebuts the impliesion of uniformity o£ mind which Mill jonnects with the associative influence. It nas never been contended that there could jot be individuality, the individuality of the itroDgest and most independent mind, surely Mill's reference was to the mass ol ninds, and their uniformity and servility jannot be denied. The force of association s not contested ; it caußes men to speak gooc English who could not give a single gramma ;ical reason for it. Well, association foi oolitical purposes, say, is equally opera live, merging the entity in the ditto. Taki ;he Liberal party ia Victoria, for instance [t, for the last three years, has des iroyed individuality. Mr. Winsor wouli iay that the dissentient euergy of Mr Munro proves the contrary, but what is Mr Slunro, who was a personal force, to thi thousands who had no other force than asso :iation—the force of party ? That indi riduality exists is no proof that association s not repressive of individuality. The ques ;ion is whether the expression of individua orce bears any proportion to its existence :hat must be taken to be Mr. Mills's point ind the writer of the paper Beems io no waj ;o have controverted it. " The Tendency o Popular Taste in Mnsic, and How to Creati [t," by Mr. Henry Kiley, deals with a sub ect on which he is most competent to write lud he treats it most felicitously. Mr. Ivilo; leplores the want of musical taste; thi nerely mechanical nature of much of thi nttruction imparted; reviews with grea liscrimination the public musical entertain nents available, and looks to the wealth; md the State for the protection and cultiva ;ion of music. Mr. Wybert Reeve gives ; valuable contribution on "The Greek aui Soman Period of Dramatic Art," and thi .3 said with the more satisfaction that in ; lotice of a previous contribution of his ad /erse comments had to be made. Thi )ther papers all possess much merit Chey are: "The Future of North Eastern Australia," by Carl A. Feilberc Brisbane); "The Actor's Art," by Augusta j. Dargon; " Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi,' >y Rev. E. Blaubaum ; "Land Monopoly, Ancient and Modern,"' by Urquhart Mac)herson; "An Eirenicon," by Rev. fenry J. Poole, M.A.; "A Proposal for he Extension of the Franchse," by Edward s ercy Field (Sydney); "The Fresh Water \quarium of the Trocadero Palace, at 'aria," by the late Comte de Castelnau ; 'The Australian Abroad," "Through the Forest," by James Hingston; and ' The Commercial Future of Australia," by he editor.