THE DEATH OF JOHN STUART MILL.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 118, 19 July 1873, Page 2

THE DEATH OF JOHN STUART MILL.

The announcement of the death of Mr John Stuart Mill has elicited very general expressions of regret. Mr Mill died at Avingnon on the Bth instant, in the sixty seventh year of his age, having been born in 1806. Dr Gurney, of Nice, who was in attendance upon the deceased, says that Mr Mill was in fair health and good spirits up to the time of his attack of erysipelas, which rapidly ran its fatal course in the short space of four days. He learned the fatal nature of the attack with calmness and resignation. “ His expressed desire (Dr Gurney says) that he might not outlive his mental faculties, or suffer from long wasting disease was gratified, for his great intellect remained clear to the last moment. His wish that his funeral should be quiet and simple, as, indeed, his every wish, was attended to by his loving step-daughter with devoted solicitude. The funeral took place in the simplest fashion, the French dector, the Protestant pastor, and myself alone being present, with the family. Prayer was offered up at the grave, and a most touching address was given by the pastor. Then the beautiful tomb of his wife was opened, and he was placed by the side of “ her he loved so well.” Mr Mill has, it is stated, left several completed works ready for the press, including an autobiographical memoir brought up to a late date. A meeting is to be held at Willis’s Rooms next Tuesday, to consider in what manner the national respect for his memory may be most fittingly testified. Among others, Lord Derby has written to say that he will with pleasure join in any mark of respect to Mr Mill which does not take such a form as to imply on the part of the contributors or promoters an agreement in Mr Mill’s political opinions. M. Michel Chevalier has written an article in the “ Press,” in which he compares the position of Mr Mill in England with that of Plato in Athens. M. Chevalier predicts that the memory of Mr Mill will be perpetuated as that of a man of exalted intelligence, who was one of the greatest lovers of his fellowcreatures that ever existed, besides being a devoted reformer and model of fairness and toleration towards his adversaries. That such a man, some of whose opinions, he says, were “ equally shopking to the Established Church and Dissenters,” should have been held in undiminished respect and consideration in England is a proof, M. Chevalier thinks, of the tolerance of English society, which should afford a lesson to France, where M. Littre’s election to the Academy created a tumult.