with nothing servile. He may be truly described as a man "without dissimulation," which is more than can be said of some of his opponents, -as a man of his integrity and candour. His intellectual honesty showed itself in his love of all that could be verified, and in his hatred of what seemed to him to be unrealities. If he had no Celtic enthusiasm, he had in compensation the sunny Saxon temperament, and if never radiant, he was usually serene and cheerful. He had an almost equal appreciation of the Stoic and the Epicurean view of life; but it was towards the latter that his sympathies practically tended. Unaffected, easyminded, bright, and sociable, but also eminently secular, we find no trace in him of introspection, or of the seriousness and moral thoughtfulness that attend it. He had a clear head, and a generous heartadd to this the absence of jealousy, that common failing of literary circles and coteries; but he lacked the elevation and the nobleness that are usually associated with the philosophy of idealism. He had a singularly keen intellect; but his intellectual vision was singularly limited.KNIGHT, WILLIAM, 1886, Hume (Philosophical Classics), p. 97.

Dr. Adam Smith relates how Hume diverted himself, a short time before his death, by inventing jocular excuses he might make to Charon, and Charon's surly answers in return. "I thought I might say to him, 'Good Charon, I have been correcting my works for a new edition; allow me a little time to see how the public receive the alterations.' But Charon would answer, 'Get into the boat this instant, you lazy, loitering rogue!'"-MORRILL, JUSTIN S., 1887, Self-Consciousness of Noted Persons, p. 109.

His thorough good nature, as well as his indifference, prevented him from obtruding his opinions upon any who did not. sympathise; while no man was a heartier friend or more warmly appreciative of merit especially in Scotsmen.-STEPHEN, LESLIE, 1891, Dictionary of National Biography, vol. XXVIII, p. 220.

He is with the full ardour of his being a man of society. He delights in the companionship of his fellows, works surely into the intimacy of close friendship, and is ever ready for rippling, glancing humour, giving and receiving electric

impulse from casual acquaintance. These features are not commonly associated, but they were united in him. There are two natures in the man, two lives within this one life; the inner, that of the abstract thinker living within a charmed circle where he does not meet friends, save one or two, and where he cultivates an independence that owns no authority; and the outer life of the man who is free of spirit, ready for all occurrences, and given to a playfulness of disposition, and even joviality, which to most onlookers must seem inconsistent with the high philosophic gift. Yet these two natures are indissolubly united-they are constantly appearing in parallel relations as if they were distinct. Together they constitute a nature rarely met with. It were easy, looking now at the one feature, now at the other, to bring home a charge of inconsistency. In a sense, he is inconsistently a thinker who scorns the ordinary levels of thought; a humorist who revels in the pleasures of the passing hour as if life were a play. These apparently contradictory features are as prominent as they have ever appeared in any human life-together they constitute the actual David Hume-philosopher and man of the world.-CALDERWOOD, HENRY, 1898, David Hume (Famous Scots Series), p. 18.

No man could have sought for a companion more delightful or entertaining than Hume. With wide experience, with the dignity of an independent thinker, with the concentration and abundant stores of the student, he united a simplicity which thought no evil, and an almost childlike pleasure in the happiness of social intercourse. He fenced himself in with no artificial barrier of haughtiness or reserve. He had an easy flow of humour, which was in his case accompanied, as it not always is, by that social tact which is rooted in good-nature and benevolence. "His conversation," says one of his friends, "was irresistible, for while it was enlightened, it was naïve almost to puerility." He excelled above all in that perfect form of raillery which Swift has described-the art of making apparent sarcasm suggest the best qualities of those against whom the sarcasm appears to be directed. No man could attract more successfully all characters and all ages. He could soothe the aged or the

unfortunate as happily as he could please the young and frolicsome. With all his calmness of temper, and all his boldness of speculation, he was like a child in his discernment of character, and partook in no degree of that useful but not altogether pleasant faculty of reading character with a judicial eye. If he was an object of suspicion to those whose peace might be disturbed by rumors of his atheism, they were quickly disarmed by his irresistible personality.-CRAIK, SIR HENRY, 1901, A Century of Scottish History, vol. I, p. 411.

A TREATISE OF HUMAN NATURE 1739-40

Never literary attempt was more unfortunate than my "Treatise of Human Nature." It fell dead-born from the press, without reaching such distinction, as even to excite a murmur among the zealots. HUME, DAVID, 1776, My Own Life, p. 7.

The philosophy of Hume, as a whole, originated and fell with himself. A more partial and less daring scepticism might probably have gained many followers; but it is the inevitable result of every system, professing universal unbelief, to destroy itself. The man who by any process of reasoning involves every portion of human knowledge in doubt, instead of persuading any one to follow his conclusions, does little more than controvert his own principles by a "reductio ad absurdum."-MoRELL, J. D., 1846-7, An Historical and Critical View of the Speculative Philosophy of Europe in the Nineteenth Century.

This treatise is by far the most important of all his philosophical works. If we except certain speculations in history

and political economy, it contains nearly all his favourite ideas. He devoted to it all the resources of his mighty intellect. He had read extensively, pondered deeply, and taken immense pains in polishing his style. He could scarcely, indeed, be called a learned man, in the technical sense of the term, but he was well informed. We could have wished that he had possessed wider sympathies with earnest seekers after truth in all ages, but this was not in the nature of the man. His knowledge of Greek was very imperfect at this time (he afterwards renewed his acquaintance with that language); what he knew of greek philosophy was chiefly through Cicero (his very pictures of the Stoics and Epicureans are Roman rather than Grecian), and he never entered into the spirit of such deep and earnest thinkers as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, -he tells us somewhere that the fame of Aristotle is utterly decayed. In respect even of modern writers, he never comprehended the profundity of such men as Cudworth and Descartes in the previous century; and he had no appreciation of the speculations of Clarke and Leibnitz, who lived in the age immediately preceding his own. He belongs to the cold, elegant, doubting, and secular eighteenth century; and, setting little value on antiquity, he builds for the present and the future on the philosophy of his own time. -MCCOSH, JAMES, 1874, The Scottish Philosophy, p. 121.

Although it is characterised by a marked simplicity of arrangement, it presents some of the most subtle thought and searching reasoning to be found in any literature.-MACKINTOSH, JOHN, 187892, The History of Civilization in Scotland, vol. IV, p. 26.

The "Treatise of Human Nature" is clear, forcible, and untechnical. Its most striking characteristics are its spontaneity and individuality. Hume owed little to academic training, and wrote his earlier works at a distance from centres of learn

ing, without access to large libraries. The literary beauties of the "Treatise," however, are marred by its structural defects. fects. It is a series of brilliant fragments rather than a well-rounded whole, and is concerned more with criticism of metaphysical opinions from the point of view of Hume's theory of knowledge than with

the construction of a complete system of philosophy.-MIKKELSEN, M. A., 1897, Library of the World's Best Literature, ed. Warner, vol. XIII, p. 7777.

Hume had taken his place in the literature of his country and of the world. He himself, however, was depressed with sense of failure, for he says, "Never was literary attempt more unfortunate than my Treatise of Human Nature.'" He felt disappointed that it did not even "excite a murmur among the zealots." His power had been concentrated to the utmost, but renown did not come to him, as he had anticipated. What he could do in philosophic thought was accomplished, and he was convinced that the writing was not of slight significance; but the reading public did not know what had been done-his contribution was not of the character to attract readers.-CALDERWOOD, HENRY, 1898, David Hume (Famous Scots Series), p. 24.

It was written when he was only twentyfive, and probably no book of the kind, destined to exercise such an extended in

fluence, was ever written by a man of that age, certainly never with greater ease or more supreme command of his own ideas —CRAIK, SIR HENRY, 1901, A Century of Scottish History, vol. II, p. 188.

ESSAYS

I am strongly tempted too to have a stroke at Hume in parting. He is the author of a little book called "Philosophical Essays," in one part of which he argues against the being of a God, and in another (very needlessly you will say) against the possibility of miracles. He has crowned the liberty of the press. And yet he has a considerable post under the Government. I have a great mind to do justice on his arguments against miracles, which I think might be done in few words. But does he deserve notice? Is he known amongst you? Pray answer me these questions. For if his own weight keeps him down, I should be sorry to contribute to his advancement to any place but the pillory.-WARBURTON, WILLIAM, 1749, Letters from a Late Eminent Prelate, Sept. 28, p. 14.

I have not yet read the last Review, but dipping into it, I accidentally fell upon their account of Hume's "Essay on Suicide." I am glad that they have liberality

enough to condemn the licentiousness of an author whom they so much admire: -I say liberality, for there is as much bigotry in the world to that man's errors as there is in the hearts of some secretaries to their peculiar modes and tenets. He is the Pope of thousands, as blind and presumptuous as himself. God certainly infatuates those who will not see. It were otherwise impossible, that a man, naturally shrewd and sensible, and whose understanding has had all the advantages of constant exercise and cultivation, could have satisfied himself, or have hoped to satisfy others with such palpable sophistry as has not even the grace of fallacy to recommend it.-COWPER, WILLIAM, 1784, Letter to Rev. William Unwin, July 12; Works, ed. Southey, vol. III, p. 122.

I like his "Essays" better than anything I have read these many days. He has prejudices, he does maintain errors, but he defends his positions with so much ingenuity, that one would be almost sorry to see him dislodged. His essays on "Superstition and Enthusiasm," on "The Dignity and Meanness of Human Nature," and several others, are in my opinion admirable both in matter and manner, particularly the first, where his conclusions might be verified by instances with which we are all acquainted. The manner, indeed, of all is excellent; the highest and most difficult effect of art—the appearance of its absence-appears throughout.CARLYLE, THOMAS, 1815, Early Letters, ed., by Charles Eliot Norton, p. 20.

Of the "Political Discourses" it would be difficult to speak in terms of too great commendation. They combine almost every excellence which can belong to such a performance. The great merit, however, of these discourses, is their originality, and the new system of politics and political economy which they unfold. Mr. Hume is, beyond all doubt, the author of the modern doctrines which now rule the world of science, which are to a great extent the guide to practical statesmen, and are only prevented from being applied in their fullest extent to the affairs of nations, by clashing interests and the ignorant prejudices of certain powerful classes; for no one deserving the name of legislator pretends to doubt the soundness of the theory, although many held that the errors of our predecessors require a

slow recourse to right principle in conducting the practical business of the world. . . . It is certain that Dr. Smith's celebrated work, with all its great merits, is less of a regular system than the detached essays of Mr. Hume. The originality of the latter's opinions is wholly undeniable: they were published full fourteen years before the "Wealth of Nations." -BROUGHAM, HENRY LORD, 1845-6, Lives of Men of Letters of the Time of George III.

66

'Essays on Commerce, Interest, Balance of Trade, Money, Jealousy of Trade, and Public Credit," display the same felicity of style and illustration that distinguish the other works of their celebrated author. His views of the commercial intercourse that should subsist among nations are alike enlightened and liberal: and he has admirably exposed the groundlessness of the prejudices then entertained against a free intercourse with France, and the fear of being deprived, were commercial restraints abolished, of a sufficient supply of bullion. Hume and

Smith saw and pointed out the injurious operation of the Methuen treaty, and exposed the absurdity of our sacrificing the trade with France to that of so beggarly a country as Portugal.-McCULLOCH, JOHN RAMSAY, 1845, Literature of Political Economy.

Of all the English deistical works of the eighteenth century, the influence of two and only two survived the controversy. Hume's "Essay on Miracles," though certainly not unquestioned and unassailed, cannot be looked upon as obsolete or uninfluential.-LECKY, W. E. H., 1865, History of the Rise and Influence of the Spirit of Rationalism in Europe.

No writer on miracles omits to notice Hume. To refute him has been the ambition of every Christian apologist for the last hundred years; but what could really be said in reply was said in his lifetime. It is recorded of a professor in the University of Edinburgh that he annually refuted the great sceptic, and with as much complacency as regularity. A portion of his lectures was always introduced with the words "Having considered these different systems, I will now, gentlemen, proceed to refute the ingenious theories of our late respected townsman, Mr. David Hume." As there really was but one answer, that answer has been repeated

with variations and amplifications by all who have undertaken to meet his objections.-HUNT, JOHN, 1869, David Hume, Contemporary Review, vol. 11, p. 89.

"I flatter myself," says Hume, in the "Essay upon Miracles," "that I have discovered an argument of a like nature" (the reference is to Tillotson's argument on transubstantiation), "which, if just, will, with the wise and learned, be an everlasting check to all kinds of superstitious delusion, and, consequently, will be useful as long as the world endures." This preliminary trumpet-flourish, intended probably to startle the drowsy champions of the faith into some consciousness of the philosopher's claims, has been as nearly fulfilled as could have been expected. Hume's argument, neglected for the moment, soon attracted the assaults of theologians. Since his day eager apologists have denounced it, reasoned against it, passed it under the most rigid examination, and loudly and frequently proclaimed the discovery of some fatal flaw. The fact that the argument is being answered to this day proves that its efficacy is not exhausted. Every new assault is a tacit admission that previous assaults have not demolished the hostile works. It is needless to enquire how far this particular logical crux has contributed to the decay amongst rational thinkers of a belief in the miraculous. That belief forms part of a system of thought, and grows faint as the general system loses its hold upon the intellect. The prominence given to the essay, except as an admirable specimen of the dialectical art, may, therefore, be easily exaggerated. No single essay has sapped the bases of belief. other hand, the essay is but a small part of Hume's attack upon the fundamental dogmas of theology. His popular reputation, indeed, is almost exclusively based upon it; he is known as the author of this particular dilemma; all else that he wrote is ignored; and so exclusively has attention been fixed upon these particular pages, that few of his assailants take any notice even of the immediately succeeding essay, which forms with it a complete and connected argument.-STEPHEN, LESLIE, 1876, History of English Thought in the Eighteenth Century, vol. I, p. 309.

On the

The germs of several of Adam Smith's economic doctrines, and some of Bentham's,