thoughthereissomethingmuchmorecomplex，inthegrowthofasocietythaninthegrowthofanaturalspecies。Butasitsupposesachangeduetosomethingintheconstitutionofthemanhimself，nottomerely’externalcircumstances，’ithastoberejectedasmuchaspossible。Hencewegetouromnipotentsovereigncreatinglawsandcustomsandtobetakenasanultimatefact。
IneednotpointoutatlengththerelationoftheseviewstoUtilitarianismingeneral，andtothebeliefintheindefinitemodifiabilityofhumannatureandthetranscendentimportanceofpoliticalmachinery。ItisenoughtonotethatAustin’spositioninvolvesoneassumptionremarkableinaUtilitarian。TheempiricismoftheUtilitariansisinterpretedtomeanthateverythingmustbeexplainedbycircumstances，andconductthereforeby’external’sanctions。Austinfeelsthat，afterall，somebondmustberequiredtoholdmentogether。Thelegislativesanctionscannotbequiteultimate。Infact，wewant’morality’；
andhethereforeincludesthe’lawsofGod’amongthelawswhicharereally，notmetaphorically，laws。HethusacceptsthePaleyview，thoughwithacertainreserve。，Utility，isthesolecriterionor’index，’ashecallsit，tothemorallaw。Still，thelawrequiresasanction。Thesanctionisleftinjudiciousvagueness；butwearetoldthatGodmustbebenevolent，andmustthereforebeheldtoapprovetheconductwhichpromotesthehappinessofhiscreatures。This，itwouldseem，isessentialtoAustin’sposition。11*Whetherhewaspractisingsome’economy，’
andwhathisfellowUtilitarianswouldhavethoughtofit，andhowpreciselyhewouldhavejustifiedhispositionlogically，arequestionswhichIcannotdiscuss。
TheapplicationofAustin’sprinciplestothepurelylegalsphereliesbeyondmypurpose。Hisaimistoanalysetheprimaryconceptionsofjurisprudenceinaccordancewithhisprinciples，andtoobtainarationalclassificationoflawingeneral。
Whethertheresultwassatisfactory，orhowfarsatisfactory，I
cannotinquire。ThelectureswerereviewedintheEdinburghbothbyJ。F。Stephen12*andbyJ。S。Mill。13*BothofthemspeakwarmlyofthemeritsofSirHenryMaine，thenbeginningtobefamous，andbothregardthetwomethodsascorrelativeratherthanantagonistic。Thattheyoughttobecorrelativeisclear。A
soundtheoryoforiginsandgrowthshouldbeperfectlycompatiblewithasoundtheoryoftheactualorder。Butwhetherthetwosystemsactuallypresentthatharmonyisanotherquestion。
ThepoliticalapplicationofAustin’sprinciplesmightbeillustratedfromthewritingsofhisfriendanddisciple，SirGeorgeCornewallLewis1806-1863。14*Strongsense，unflaggingindustry，andthehighestintegritywonforLewishighauthorityinparliament。Aboundlessthirstforknowledge，supportedbyaremarkable，memory，enabledhimtodiscussmanytopicsofhistoricalcriticism。HewasintimatewithGrote，whoacceptedhissuggestionsuponGreekhistoryrespectfully。andhisintellectwasofthetrueUtilitariantype。HiswritingsareasdryasthemostthoroughgoingUtilitariancoulddesire。Hewillnotgivehisreaderscreditforunderstandingthesimplestargumenttillitissetdownatfulllengthinplainblackandwhite。Hewassceptical，andpracticalexperiencehadimpressedhim，eventoexcess，withtheworthlessnessofhumantestimony。
Inpoliticsscepticismnaturallybecomesempiricism；andasathoroughgoingempiricistherejectsaltogetherJamesMill’sabsolutemethods。HeisasconvincedasMacaulaythatpoliticaltheoriesmustbebaseduponobservation，andisentirelyfreefromtheerrorofsupposingthataconstitutioncanbedevisedwithoutreferencetotime，place，andcircumstance。Yethecouldwriteadialogueuponthebestformofgovernment，whichseemstoimplythatsomerealmeaningcanbegiventotheproblemwithoutreferencetothestageofsocialdevelopment，thatis，totheoneconditionwhichmakestheproblemintelligible。
OnereasonisthatLewiswasapracticalman，andheshowsveryclearlywhythepracticalmanwasinclinedtoUtilitarianism。Achancelloroftheexchequerknowsthatthefateofabudgetdependsuponhim，andrefusestoregardhimselfasameretooloffate。Ascientifictreatmentofhistorywouldlead，hethinks，tofatalism。15*Everythingisintrinsicallyuncertainwherethehumanwillisconcerned。16*SucheventsastheFrenchrevolution，therefore，mustberegardedascontrollablebystatesmanship，andnot，withsomehistorians，declaredtohavebeen’inevitable。’Whenwehavegottothestatesmanortothesovereignwehavetheultimatecause，andneednotaskwhetherhebenothimselfaproduct。Thusalllaws，constitutionalorotherwise，maybecomparedtomachinery，17*
andsupposecontrivanceordesign。Allinstitutionshavebeenmade，andheassumesthatevenpolygamyandslaverywere’dictatedbyunsoundpracticalarguments。’18*Thetendencyofsuchadoctrineisclear。Allinstitutions，fromthemostorganictothemostsuperficial，areregardedasequallyaproductofconsciousmanufacture。Theirrelationtotheprocessesofsocialgrowthistacitlydisregarded，andthewholeorganismcanbemodifiedbyasimpleshufflingofthecards。Wecanthereforeattacktheproblemofthebestformofgovernmentwithoutemphasisingthenecessaryreferencetohistoricalconditions。
Lewis’swidereadingsuppliedhimwithanynumberofjudiciousremarks，drawnfromallauthoritiesbetweenAristotleandComte。
Undoubtedlysuchremarksdeserverespect；theyareapttobecommonplace，butarenotthereforeuseless。Only，toapplythemtoanypurpose，itisnecessarytohaveamoredefiniteunderstandingoftheprocessesofsocialdevelopmentwhichlimitanddefinetheirvalueatanygivenstage。Empiricism，thusunderstood，reallymakesscientificmethod，aswellasanydefinitescientificconclusion，impossible。Eveninthepurelypracticalsphere，themostimportantofallproblemsforastatesmanistoknowwhatarethelimitsofhispowers，andtorecognisewhatisreally’inevitable’inthegreatchanges。
Otherwise，heisinthepositionofMrsPartingtonfightingtheAtlantic。LewisbecameaWhiginsteadofaUtilitarianRadical；
butitmaybedoubtfulwhetherWhig’opportunism’wasnotthemostnaturaldevelopmentoftheUtilitarianempiricism。
II。GEORGEGROTE
ThegreatrepresentativeofUtilitarianhistoryisGeorgeGrote1794-1871。19*InsomerespectshewasthemosttypicalUtilitarian。GrotehadbeenintroducedtoJamesMillbyRicardoin1817。HehadyieldedaftersomestruggletoMill’spersonalinfluence；and，thoughastudentofKant，hadbecomeanunhesitatingproselyte。HehadeditedPhilipBeauchamp，haddefendedradicalreformagainstMackintoshin1821，andhadjoinedJ。S。Millandotheryoungfriendsintheirsystematiclogicaldiscussions。HefullysympathisedwithJ。S。Mill’sphilosophy，and，asProfessorBaintellsus，20*hardlyanyman’connedandthumbed’theLogicashedid。HewasmoreofaMillitethanMill。TheirfriendshipsurvivedinspiteofMill’sseclusion，andofcertaindoubtsinGrote’smindofhisfriend’sorthodoxy。ThearticlesuponColeridgeandBentham，markingMill’ssentimentalbackslidings，alarmedthemorerigidadherentofthefaith。Duringthepoliticalcareerofthe’philosophicalRadicals’GrotewasthefaithfulAbdiel。Hedefendedtheirpetnostrum，theballot，untilthepartybecameavanishingquantity。
’YouandI，’saidCharlesBullertohimin1836，’willbeleftto“tell“Molesworth。’21*OnthefalloftheMelbourneministryhegaveupparliament，andin1843retiredfromthebankinwhichhehadbeenapartner。HiscontinuedinterestintheoldUtilitarianprincipleswasshownbyhislifelongactivityinthemanagementofUniversityCollegeandtheUniversityofLondon。Happily，hecouldoccupyhimselfinamoreproductiveenterprise。HehadbeenlonginterestedinGreekhistory，andhisgreatworkappearedatintervalsfrom1846to1856。HisstudyofPlatoappearedin1865，andhewasstilllabouringuponAristotleatthetimeofhisdeath。
OfthesubstantialmeritsofGrote’sHistoryIshallnotpresumetospeak。Ittookitsplaceatonce，andgivesaconclusiveproofthattheUtilitarianpositionwasnodisqualificationforwritinghistory。Itseems，indeed，toproveagooddealmore；namely，thattheUtilitarianwhowasfaithfultohismostvitalprincipleswasespeciallyqualifiedtobeahistorian。
Thetruepositionmayperhapsbesuggestedbyaremarkinarecentbook22*byMM。LangloisandSeignobos。Inlayingdowntheconceptionofhistoryasnowacceptedbythebestwriters，theyremarkthatGrote’producedthefirstmodelofahistory’intheclasstowhichitbelongs。Theprincipleillustratedissignificant。’Theaimofhistory，’wearetold，’shouldnowbenottoplease，nortogivepracticalmaximsofconduct，nortoarousetheemotions，but[togive]knowledgepureandsimple。’
Historyshouldbeadescriptivescience。Historiansmustbecontenttogivepoliticalfactsasawriteruponanaturalsciencegivestheascertainedfactsaboutphysiologyorchemistry。Nothing，itmaybesaid，couldbemoreinaccordancewithUtilitariandoctrine。Itwastheirveryfirstprincipletorelyuponfactpureandsimple，andtomakeitprecedespeculationandtominimise’sentiment，’’vaguegeneralities，’
andaprioritheories。IfGrotewroteamodelhistory，itwasbecausehethoroughlyembodiedtheUtilitarianspirit。Hestudiedtheevidencewithimmenseknowledge，unflaggingindustry，andthoroughimpartiality。Heresembledanidealjudgeinvestigatingevidenceinatrial。Thatwasthemethodwhich，upontheirownshowing，theUtilitarianswereboundtoapplytoallsubjects，andGroteappliedittoGreecewithtriumphantsuccess。
TheUtilitarianprinciple，again，wasopposedtotheerrorsmostseductivetoearlierhistorians。Theclassicalhistoriesweremeanttobeworksofart。Theartisticaimisincompatiblewithscientifichistory，sofarasitinterfereswiththeprimaryaimofgivingtheunadulteratedfacts。Togiveaclear，coherent，anddistinctnarrativeofacomplexseriesofeventsrequires，indeed，powersofliteraryexpressionevenofthehighestorder。
Theartisticpurposemustbestrictlysubordinateratherthanabsent。Awritermustnotdisguiseorembellishoromitwithaviewtoartisticeffectofthewhole；andmustoftensacrificetheimpressivetothetruthful。Sometimes，indeed，thehistorianmustbedull——butthatisaconditionagainstwhichneitherGrotenortheUtilitariansgenerallyprotested。IthadbeentheaimofadifferentschooltoavoiddulnessandtorivaltheWaverleyNovelsinmakingpasthistorylive。TheerrorsofsuchmenasThierryandMichelet，orCarlyle，MacaulayandFroude，showthedangersofthemethod。Theseverehistorianmayperhapsforgivetheminconsiderationoftheinterestwhichtheyexcitedintheirstudies。Mayhenotalsoadmitthattheaimis，insomesort，legitimate？Thepeople，afterall，wereoncealive，andthattruthhassomebearingupontheirhistory。Ifimaginationmeansafacultyofgeneratingillusions，astheUtilitariansgenerallythought，itisnodoubtmischievous。Butevenforthebarepurposeofjudgingevidenceandperceivingtruththeimaginationisessential。Theerroroftransposingmodernstandardsofthoughtintopreviousepochsistooobvioustorequireillustration；butitisreallythefaultlessofanexcessthanofadefectofimagination。Thewritermustbeable，ateveryturn，toputhimselfintheplaceofhisheroes，andoftheircontemporaries，ifhewouldunderstandthemeaningoftheiractions，orevenjudgetheweighttobeattributedtotheevidence。Thatrequiresatrainedanddulysubordinatefacultyofimagination。Evenformereannals——simplestatementsofhardfacts——imaginationisrequired，anditisrequiredthemoreasweendeavourtorisefromannalstohistory，ortomakehistorymorethanan’oldcalendar。’