LEADING PAPERS IN THE MAGAZINES FOR OCTOBER.

THE Magazines have a certain air of fag about them this month, as though the principal contributions had been prepared before the holidays instead of since. Thus Mr. Matthew Arnold's second paper on "Literature and Dogma" has none of the brightness and elasticity of style peculiar to his writings, and is far inferior in ease and interest to his first. Nor do we see that the develop-

ment of his drift gains anything in this paper beyond the explana- tions of his preceding essay. He reiterates in several different forms of speech his theory that religion ' is nothing but morality touched with emotion,' and explains that Christ deepened such

morality touched by emotion' as he found in Israel before his time, by giving it fresh inwardness, especially by enabling men to find in " self-examination, mildness, and self-denial " the secret of a true spiritual reasonableness and success. Mr. Arnold holds that while " the Old Testament says Attend to conduct,' the New Testament says Attend to the feelings and dispositions whence conduct proceed.' " He is possessed with the strange illusion that he can vindicate the substantial truth of the Old and New Testament while giving up as non-necessary, as what he calls Extra-belief or Aberglaube, all the language which assumes God to possess in a far higher degree than man the highest cha- racteristics of man, —purity, holiness, indignation against sin, compassion, love. He attenuates to the last degree of tenuity the force of all the characteristic religious language of both Testa- ments, in the hope of reaching what he calls a scientific basis for religion, but only succeeds in cutting away the ground from under his own feet. He is very anxious to thin away the fundamental conception of God into "the enduring power not ourselves which makes for righteousness," and therefore he translates the Hebrew name of God as the Eternal ;' but what conceivable scientific basis is there for any eternal' or even 4 enduring ' power not our- selves which makes for righteousness, if there be none for a spiritual power which is righteous and loves righteousness ? Mr. Arnold deceives himself in thinking that if be attenuates indefinitely the theistic basis of thought till it is quite indistinguishable from the pantheistic basis, and hardly objectionable even to the non-theist, he shall get all opponents to waive their differences, and unite with him in praising an inward morality, rooted, not in God, but in a nameless stream of tendency' to good which you may either merge in the universe or faintly discriminate from it, at pleasure. We do not Bay that he may not succeed. But we do say that this conception, so far from being the founda- tion of the Hebrew and Christian spiritual joy, would have been to Israel and Christendom the language of blank despair. Trust in the love and power of a personal God is the key to every characteristic saying in the Old and New Testament. And if that is to be given up as Aberglaube, the whole morality of those Scriptures, both outward and inward, is Aberglaube too. That plan of Mr. Arnold's of winning disciples by generously giving up every demand on faith, has just this defect, that if he succeeds, he has gained nothing ; though, no doubt, if he fails, he loses nothing. The papers on "Literature and Dogma" bid fair to come to just this You who can't believe in the divine origin of either Hebrew prophecy or Christian teaching, are quite right in giving up the substance; but if you would only hold fast by time shadow, you might soon learn with me that, after all, the shadow wee really the substance, and the substance only the sliadow,'—a doctrine which still re- mains quite as difficult to us, as it seemed when Mr. Arnold first began those intellectual planings at the teaching of Scripture which were intended to reduce the Lord of Heaven and Earth to "the enduring power, not ourselves which makes for righteous- nem" The other papers in the October Cornhill which merit most attention are the remarkable one on " A alahometau Revival;" "'rime Notes on Flying and Flying Machines," which is written by some one who has a thorough knowledge of the subject and an acute judgment upon it ; amid the interesting paper on "The Social Condition of Spain."

The new Mack:wood is hardly an average number, even Cornelius O'Dowd contributing very little beyond a lively account of the trial of two swindlers at Vienna, including a sharp running criticism on the demeanour of the presiding judge, whom Cornelius O'Dowd sketches as ambitious of the reputation of having a good personal knowledge of fast life, The critical article on "American Books" is, as usual with Blackwood, very thoughtfully and carefully written. Eacept a few bitter paragraphs of Cornelius O'Do wd's against the Ministry, Blackwood contains no polities at all this mouth.

Macmillan has a very useful paper on the waste of time in Parliament, leading up to the doctrine that the Standing Orders of the House of Commons should be so amended that the House should be able when it chooses to vote the closing of the debate,— la cloture. By way of showing how much time a very few in- dividuals have absorbed, the writer tnakes the following table ;— Speeches matte by

On the Bctllot, On other eubjects. Tutal,

Mr. G. Bentinok 33 42 75 Mr. 0. Bontinok 31 42 76

Mr. Newdogate

23 67 90 Mr. Beroeford-liope 62 51- 116

Would the vote for the closing of the debate meet this grievance ? We can easily conceive that if the principle of /a e16ture had been enforced last session, the above table would yet not have been very different. The rule would have stopped other mouths, but not the mouths that most needed stopping,—not the irrepressibles of de- bate. Still, whether by closing mouths which may have earned by silence a fair right to speak, or by closing those which have already wearied the House by their abundance of discourse, the end must be attained, and we agree, we confess, in the conclusion of the writer :— " I This is an age of dieoussion,' says Sir Erskine May ; he might have said, ' of overflowing discussion,' and no remedy will ho found efficacious for our present complaints until we put our insular pride in our pockets, and condescend to imitate those restrictions upon unlimited talk which have, in some shape or other, been adopted by every other constituent assembly. Little by little this conviction is growing upon those who fairly consider the subject. What sane man would entrust the manage- ment of his private affairs to 658 individuals, however exalted their capacity ? But., if compelled to do so, he would probably evince his sanity in the firet instance, by either limiting their talking power, or dividing tho business among them. This is the alternative scheme to the adoption of a system of clGture. It is treated of by Sir Erskine May in the shape of a suggestion to refer to large committees of the House a certain portion of its business. But although every suggestion from such a quarter is worthy of serious consideration, the entire delegation by the House of any material part of its functions to a smaller body is a change which should be avoided, if possible, and which would be liable to much abuse. The real remedy may be secured without having re- course to such an alteration. It is to be found in the assumption by the House, collectively, of a power over its own proceedings in debate, which it now permits to be practically exercised—but only in the direction of prolongation—by its individual members. Should the principle of the cloture be adopted, modifleations and restrictions in its application may be considered ; but so long as the sanction of Parliament is withheld from that principle—that is to Bey, so long as the House of Commons, which trusts so much in the working of its rules to the forbearance and discretion of its members, hesitates to trust its own collective forbear- ance and discretion with the power of remedying the evil results of the want of such qualities in individuals—so long will the ears of the House be wearied by dreary platitudes, legislation be impeded by obstructive egotists, and the boasted Parliamentary system of England rapidly degenerate into a scandal to her own people and to the other civilized nations of the world."

A very valuable and interesting paper is also the second of the two, by "A Victim of Paris and Versailles,"—on the writer's sufferings at Versailles. This is hie final and apparently very impartial judg- ment on the Commune oonolusion let me say, as one who ought to be able to form an opinion, having lived so long among them, that, far from speaking hardly of the miserable creatures-who have been led astray and suffered so much, one ought rather to pity them. The greater part of those who served the Commune (for all, with but few exceptions, did serve) wore 'pressed men' liko myself ; but those who had wives or children to sup- port, and were without work—nay, without means of obtaining even a crust of broad (for the first siege had exhausted all their little savings) —were forced by necoseity to enrol themselves in the National Guard for the sake of their daily pay. In the regular army of the Commune, if I may so style the National Guard, there were but few volunteers, and those were in general orderly and respectable men ; but the irregular regiments, such as the Enfants Perdue, Chasseurs Relei es, Delenseutw de In Wynne de Juillet, were nothing but troops of blackguards and ruffians, who made their uniform an excuse for pillaging and robbing all they could lay their hands on. Such men deserved the vengeance which over- took the majority of them. All I can say in conclusion is, that the crimes and excesses laid to the charge of the Commune seem to we to have been greatly exaggerated : that they were greatly to blame is in- disputable, but the old proverb is a true one, 'The Devil is never so blaek as he is painted,' and it certainly holds good in this case."

The Dark Blue for October he some interesting papers ; one by Mr. F. H. O'Donnell on "Spain since the September Revolution," written with plenty of knowledge, but in a somewhat pessimist spirit, and auguring for the new King's chance of keeping his seat and preserving order—at least under any species of Liberal minis- try—less favourably than the degree of popularity which ho seems already to have achieved in the provinces would warrant. But no doubt in Spain all auguries are of the most untrustworthy kind. "Browning as a Preacher' is a really thoughtful critical paper by Mr. Dickinson West. Professor Blackie contributes "Sketches of Travel in Germany," interspersed with fragments of his own poetry, the whole very one-aided, spirited, undiscriminating, Bis- marck-worshipping, power-idolizing, browbeating, and readable. We quote what the Professor says of Berlin :— " No doubt its situation as a dead flat is bad ; the liver which waters it or rather tinctures with some humidity its immense sand-beds, is neither largo, nor beautiful, nor salubrious ; and the horizontal linos of Its streets draw themselves out, notwithstanding the stateliness of their edifices, into a wearisome and oppressive monotony. Nevertheless there is something of a grand imperial conception about it ; the groat soul of the great Frederick seems to be typed in its plan ; and'in impressing the idea of vastness it is second only to St. Petersburg.- To me, how- ever, it seems to possess a certain moral significance that dominates over all teethetioal considerations ; I think of Plato and Pythagoras, and look upon it as the stone-impersonation of the principle of law and order,

"Look'here, and ponder well, and know the land That by the sword of crosvntid °apt tine grew ; In rank and file the streets well ordered stand, And like a serried host stretch forth to view, Here Order, primal Demiurge supreme, Sways with firm will and uncontrolled command, Nor fears, to lame the action of his scheme, The lagging foot, or the rebellious band. Come hero who love mad liberty, the dance Of wanton wills divorced from sacred awe, Come from your fiery matilstroui in hot France, . And learn how groat, how strong a thing is Law. Ye would be free,—poor fools I be tigers, then, Or monkeys, and forget that ye are men!"

The Professor can hardly know Berlin. We doubt if there be more licence proportionately to the magnitude of the city even in Paris. Nor was Berlin, only twenty-three years ago, in 1848, even politically more self-governed than Paris itself. Professor Blackie's sketch of Prince Bismarck is also characteristic There stands he now, amid the flock the ram,

A visible king by natural right to reign, Whose high pommiseion, from the great I AM Direct, makes other seals and sanctions vain.

He stands as one who bath a steadfast will, He looks as one whose survey lords the field, At whose sure-darted glance of practised skill The doubtful waver and the feeble yield.

Even such I knew from Homer's regal song, Jove-born, broad-breasted, lofty-fronted kings, Who like Jove's bird careered both swift and strong, And boldly soared with venture on their wings

But he who boldly ventures grandly wins,

And earns a brilliant pardon for all sins."

We are glad, at all events, that the Professor is not so blind to tho sins of his idol but what be thinks they need at least his own bril- liant" 'absolvo to.' The Hon. Roden Noel contributes a criticism of Walt Whitman, which has at least the merit of discriminating the nobler and picturesque qualities in that very chaotic original. We should be inclined to admit that what Mr. Noel points to, is real genius, but to deny that Walt Whitman has ever written or is com- petent to writes poem. He knows too little how to discriminate the trash in himself from what is of real worth, nay the evil in himself from the good, to attempt the task of intellectual or spiritual inter-

pretation. His poems seem to us composed on the theory that what- ever comes out of his mind should then and there come out of his

mouth, whether it is silly and incoherent and grandiloquent and disgusting, or wise and reasonable and simple and pure. Now out of that supremely absurd assumption you can get no continuous poem or any other work of real imagination, except the poet happen to be one of the natural improvisatores of the world, who speak as the instrument of something higher than themselves, and certainly Walt Whitman is not that. 'We agree with most of Mr. Noel's critical principles, and we agree with him in discerning a wonder- ful truth in Walt Whitman descriptions of natural scenery, when- ever he is not, as he often is, straining with might and main to be more natural than nature ; but the man is too often upon tip- toe to say something grand, and when he is, he very naturally not unfrequently falls headlong into bathos. We cannot admire in the least, for instance, one of Mr. Noel's illustrations, taken from soma lines written after battle (during the Civil War) :— "Who are you, elderly man, so gaunt and grim, with well-grayed hair,

and flesh all sunken about the eyes? Who aro you, my dear comrade ? Then to the second I stop—and who are you, my child and darling ? Who are you, sweet boy with cheeks yet blooming ? Then to the third—a face nor child nor old, very calm, as of beautiful yellow-white ivory, Young man, I think I know you. I think this face of yours is the faeo of the Christ himself ;

Dead and divine and brother of all, and hero again he lies."

That strikes us as strained and affected, and as yielding a blank when it is done. The unanswered Who are you?' accompanied by the very laborious endearments of the questions, is, surely, most artificial naturalism. And what shall we say of thia• criticism of Mr. Noel's ?-

"Ho is a desperate and shameless assortor of the sacredness of

flesh, the the body, beauty of form and colour, and the fleshly instincts. This ho is (let us freely admit and regret) wantonly, inartistically coarse in asserting ; unutterably ehoeltieg of course to those who aro unutterably shocked with nature for making us of flesh at all, and who hold that the only way to remedy her immodest mistake is to hush the fact up altogether."

As far as that is an apology for Walt Whitman, it is an apology for every indecent exposure, intellectual or otherwise, of that which the highest and truest nature teaches man to veil. Is not all modesty, whether in relation to the body or the mind, a hushing up in some sense of something that is really part of us ? and yet is modesty unnatural or natural ? We have no sort of patience with such an implied apology as this, unless the critic is prepared to go further, and say that all modesty or delicacy is a sort of insincerity, and the sooner shame and reserve of all sorts are branded as theatrical and false, the better. Mr. Noel's paper, however, shows true discrimination of the larger and finer elements in Walt Whitman, if they show also, as it seems to UN a marvellous blindness to his incredible self-esteem, inflation, and ignorance of what it becomes every man to know,—the rubbishy element in himself.

By the side of Mr. Noel's criticism on Walt Whitman should be read Mr. Thomas Maitland' s sharp attack on The Fleshly School of Poetry " and Mr. D. G. Rossetti, iu the Contemporary. The article is too narrow and too smartly written, takes no pains to distinguish between the elements of passion suitable to poetry and those which are not, under-estimates Mr. Rossetti's real genius, and is altogether conceited, though clever ; but it says a good many true and one or two subtle things none the loss, and if there had been less of the air of doing grand critical justice at last in the name of an offended world, the paper might have had very considerable value. As it is, it is only a smart, but not undeserved attack. Mr. Wright (" The Journeyman Engineer ") contributes a paper of interest to which we have referred elsewhere on " The People in Relation to Political Power and Opinions ;" Mr, C. E. Maurice, isviewing Mr. Brentano's German book on the English trades' anions brings out well the distinction between the national spirits of the foreign and English associations ; Mr. Roden Noel gives us a very subtle essay on "What is Matter ? " in which he at least succeeds in refuting Mr. Mill's doctrine, if not in establishing his own ; and Mr. Capes publishes a paper on the" Old Catholics," which estimates their prospects very much as we did in our last cumber.

The Fortnightly, latest corner of the Magazines, which we have no space to treat at length, is fresher in interest than almost any of them. The editor, Mr. John Morley, writes one of his brilliant papers on "Voltaire at Berlin," in which, we need hardly say, he appears too much as apologist for Voltaire, and is a little prosy about Frederick's political aims. Mr. Sidney Colvin has a very ,excellent criticism of Mr. Browning's version of the Alcestis ; and Mr. Fawcett advocates the complete extinction of the hereditary principle for the Second 'Chamber, which he would not be dish], +alined to abolish altogether, if only the democracy would so elect the House of Commons as to make it a representation of the whole nation (minorities as well as majorities), instead of only the local majorities of the nation. While this practice continues, Mr. Fawcett thinks we need a Second Chamber selected for distin- guished personal qualities rather than for mere popularity.