91。Somewriters，especiallyG。H。Lewes，havetriedtomaintainthatthestatementoftheuniformityofNatureisan’identicalproposition。’Theattemptisunsatisfactory，andcertainlydoesnotseemtohavefoundfavourwithlaterwriters；but，thoughI
amunabletodiscussthequestion，Iwillsuggestthatitseemstoindicatetheidealresultofreasoning。Weassumethat，ifourknowledgewerecomplete，wecouldstateallthelawsofactionandreactionofanyelementasnecessaryconsequencesofitsprimitiveconstitution，aswecandeduceallthepropertiesofnumberandspacefromprimaryprinciples。Thoughwecanneverattainsuchaconsummation，wecanrejectanytheorywhichcontradictsit，and，therefore，suchdoctrinesasthe’pluralityofcauses，’whichcometosupposingthatanidenticalprocessmaybeanalysedintwoinconsistentways。
92。E。g。，byMrF。H。BradleyinhisPrinciplesofLogic1883，pp。329-42。DrVenn，whoismuchmorefavourabletoMill，discussestheminhisEmpiricalorInductiveLogic1889，pp。
400-31，showsveryclearlyhowtheyassumewhathecallsthe’popular’，asdistinguishedfromthe’rigidlyscientific’，viewofcausation。Elsewherep。58heremarksthatthepopularmightbecalledthe’Brown-Herschel-Millview，’asthosewriterspopularisedthedoctrinefirstclearlysetforthbyHume。SeealsoSigwart’sLogik1889，ii。469-500。
93。Logic，p。284bk。iii。ch。ix。section6。
94。Sigwart’sLogik1889ii。461。
95。Herschel’sDiscoursefirstappearedin1830asthefirstvolumeofLardner’sCabinetCyclopaedia。The’fourmethods’arenoticed，asMillstates，thoughwithcomparativevagueness，inchap。vioftheDiscourse。JevonsprefersthestatementtoMill’s。WhewellmakestheobviousremarkPhilosophyofDiscovery，p。284thatthefourmethodsresemblesomeofBacon’sPraerogativeInstantiarum。
96。ForWhewell，seetheWritingsodescribedastoformabiographybyI。Todhunter2vols。1876。TheLifeandCorrespondence，byMrsStairDouglas，appearedin1888。Whewell’schiefphilosophicalworksare：HistoryoftheInductiveSciences3vols。8vo，1837；sectionedition，1840；thirdedition，1857；
PhilosophyoftheInductiveSciences2vols。1840：secondedition，1857。Thisbookwasafterwardsdividedintothree：——
HistoryofScientificIdeas，2vols。1858；NovumOrganumRenovatum，1vol。1858；andPhilosophyofDiscovery，1vol。1860。
WhewellalsowroteapamphletOfInductionwithspecialreferencetoMrJ。StuartMill’s’SystemofLogic’。Thisisrepublishedaschap。xxiiofhisPhilosophyofDiscovery。
97。RepublishedinHerschel’sEssays1857，pp。142-256。
98。ScientificIdeas，i。88noteaddedtothisedition。
99。PhilosophyoftheInductiveSciences1847，ii。311。
100。PhilosophyoftheInductiveSciences，i。80。
101。Whewell’sPhilosophyofInductiveSciences，i。216-21；
Mill’sLogic，pp。160，265bk。ii。ch。v。section6，andbk。
iii。ch。viii。section7。
102。Whewell，indeed，saysthatthe’necessarylaw’isthatachangeofvelocitymusthaveacause；the’empiricallaw’tellsusthatthetimeduringwhichithasbeenmovingisnotacause——
PhilosophyoftheInductiveSciences，ii。591。Ineednotgointothis。
103。Logic，p。151bk。ii。ch。v。section3。
104。Logic，p。190，etc。bk。iii。ch。ii。section3，4；Ibid。
p。423bk。iv。ch。i。section4。
105。Logic，p。207bk。iii。ch。iv。section1。
106。Autobiography，pp。168，173。
107。Logic，p。548bk。vi。ch。ii。section2。
108。Autobiography，p。108。
109。Logic，p。557bk。vi。ch。iv。section3。
110。Seehisviewthatthedifferenceofcharacterbetweenthesexesisduetoexternalcircumstances，andthereforeremovable——
Logic，p。566bk。vi。ch。v。section3。
111。Logic，pp。567，569bk。vi。ch。v。section4，5。Artismisprinted’act’inthelastedition。
112。Ibid。p。185bk。iii。ch。i。section1。
113。Logic。p。144bk。ii。ch。iv。section5。
114。Ibid。pp。576，585bk。vi。ch。vii。section4；bk。iv。ch。
ix。section2。
115。Ibid，p。303bk。iii。ch。xi。section3。
116。Autobiography，p。159。
117。Autobiography，p。160。
118。Logic，p。583bk。vi。ch。ix。section1。
119。Ibid。p。590bk。vi。ch。i。section3。
120。Ibid。p。584bk。vi。ch。ix。section1。
121。Bk。vi。ch。x。
122。SeeespeciallythereviewsofTocqueville，Michelet，andGuizotintheDissertations。
123。Dissertations，ii。121。
124。Lettresin閐itesdeMill？Comte1899，p。xxxv。Mill’sletterstoComteuponhisviewofethologyaresignificant。
ChapterIII
PoliticalEconomy1*
I。Mill’sStarting-PointMill’sdecisiontoabandon’ethology’infavourofpoliticaleconomy，hadoneclearadvantage。Thefunctionofaphilosophicalpioneerinthevastandvagueregionindicatedbythenewsciencewasbesetwithdifficulty。Itwasdoubtfulwhethertheproposedsciencecouldbeconstructedatall；andanyconclusionsattainablewouldcertainlyhavebelongedtoaregionremotefromspecificapplicationtothequestionsoftheday。Politicaleconomyofferedafieldforinquirywithanarroweraimofeasierachievement。Thegreatestproblemsofthetimewereeithereconomicalorcloselyconnectedwitheconomicalprinciples。Millhadfollowedthepoliticalstruggleswiththekeenestinterest：
hesawclearlytheirconnectionwithunderlyingsocialmovements；
andhehadthoroughlystudiedthescienceorwhathetooktobethescience——whichmustaffordguidanceforasatisfactoryworkingoutofthegreatproblems。ThephilosophicalRadicalsweredesertingtheoldcauseandbecominginsignificantasaparty。ButMillhadnotlosthisfaithinthesubstantialsoundnessoftheireconomicdoctrines。Hethought，therefore，thataclearandfullexpositionoftheirviewsmightbeofthehighestuseinthecomingstruggles。Hencearisesonebroadcharacteristicofhisposition。MillwassteepedfromchildhoodintheprinciplesofMalthusandRicardo。InthatcapacityhehadbeenachampionoftheirviewsagainstthefollowersofOwen。Buthehadcometosympathisewiththeaims，thoughhecouldnotacceptthetheories，oftheOwenites。Hencehewasvirtuallyaskinghow，givenRicardo’spremises，arewetorealiseOwen’saspirations？Thegroundworkofargument，however，remainedthroughout。ThoughamorefavourableestimateofSocialismwasintroducedinonechapterofhisbook，asIhavealreadynoticed，nocorrespondingchangesweremadeintheremainder。
ThePoliticalEconomyspeedilyacquiredanauthorityunapproachedbyanyworkpublishedsincetheWealthofNations。
Inspiteofmanyattacks，itstillholdsapositionamongstandardtextbooks；andinthecaseoftextbooks，fiftyyearsmaybecountedasremarkablelongevity。Duringthefirsthalfofthatperiod，alargeschoollookeduptoMillasanalmostinfallibleoracle。Ifinthelaterhalfthatbeliefhasvanished，weoughttorecognisemerits，sometimesoverlookedbyhisassailants。Themostundeniableisthesingularskillofexposition。Millhadanadmirablesenseofproportion；eachtopicistakenupinintelligibleorderandtreatedwithsufficientfulness；generalprinciplesarebroadlylaiddownandclearlyillustrated；andapplicationstoactualcasesaresufficientlyindicated，withoutthosesuperfluousdigressionsintominuterdetailswhichoftenentangleorbreakthemainthreadofanargument。Thestyleisinvariablylucid，andMill，whilefreefromarroganceandsingularlycourteoustoopponents，wearshismagisterialrobeswiththedignityofacknowledgedauthority。Whateverfallaciesliebeneaththeequableflowofdidacticwisdom，wecanunderstandwhatwasthecharmwhichconcealedthemfromearlyreaders。Thebookseemedtobeauniquecombinationofscientificreasoningandpracticalknowledge，whilethelogicalapparatus，soharshlycreakinginthehandsofRicardo，notonlyworkedsmoothlybutwasinthehandsofonewhoseoppositionto’sentimentalism’wasplainlynocynicalmaskforcoldnessofheart。
Millstateshisaiminthepreface。HewishedtoexpoundthedoctrineofAdamSmithwiththe’latestimprovements。’ButhewouldtakeSmithforhismodelincombiningeconomicswith’otherbranchesofsocialphilosophy。’Smith，hesays，byneverlosingsightofthisaim，succeededinattractingboththegeneralreaderandthestatesman。Millcertainlyachievedasimilarresult。IfhedidnotemulateSmith’swideresearchesintoeconomichistory，andhadnotSmith’scuriousfelicityofillustration，hetookacomprehensiveviewofthegreatissuesofthetime，andsparednopainsinfillinghismindwiththenecessarymaterials。Hissurprisingpowerofassimilatingknowledgehadbeenstrengthenedbyofficialexperience。Noonehadamorevigorousdigestionforblue-books，or——whatisperhapsrarer——lessdesiretomakeadisplaybypouringouttherawmaterial。