logic deserving of notice, in fact, ever appeared in Scotland; and for Scottish logical writers of any merit, we must travel back for more than two centuries, to three contemporary authors, whose abilities, like those, indeed, of almost all the more illustrious scholars of their nation, were developed under foreign influence,—to Robert Balfour, Mark Duncan,† and William Chal(1608, p. 125)-one of the squibs against Scioppius in the Scaligeran controversy.]

*

* ["We find in La Logique, ou art de discourir et raisonner of Scipio Dupleix, Royal Counsellor, &c., a handsome eulogy of Balfour. The author declares that he draws his doctrine from Aristotle, and his most celebrated interpreters. 'Sur tous lesquels je prise M. Robert Balfor, gentil-homme Escossois, tant pour sa rare et profonde doctrine aux sciences et aux langues, que pour l'integrité de ses mœurs. Aussi luy doys-je le peu de sçauoir que j'ay acquis, ayant eu l'honneur de jouir familierement de sa douce et vrayement philosophique conversation.' (Preface, f. 5.) Farther on, and in the body of the work, (f. 25,) he calls M. Robert Balfor, le premier Philosophe de nostre memoire,' &c. This Logic of Dupleix is, with L'Organe of Philip Canaye, and the Dialectique of Ramus, one of the oldest treatises on this science written in French. It is a very competent analysis of the Organon. The third edition is of 1607; the first probably published at the close of the sixteenth century."-M. PEISSE.-My copy of Scipio Dupleix's Logic is of the second edition, "enlarged by the author," and in 1604. From the "Privilege," at the end, it appears that the first edition was of 1600. As M. Peisse remarks, it is an excellent work.-Balfour's learned countryman and contemporary, Thomas Dempster, in his Historia Ecclesiastica (§ 209) speaks of him, as "sui seculi phonix, Græce et Latine doctissimus, philosophus et mathematicus priscis conferendus," &c. &c.; and writing in Italy, he notices that Balfour was then (1627) living, having been for thirty years Principal of the College of Bourdeaux. Balfour's Cleomedes, edition and commentary are eulogised to the highest by Barthius and Bake; whilst his Council of Nice, and the notes, have gained him a distinguished reputation among theologians. His series of Commentaries on the Logic, Physics, and Ethics of Aristotle, were published at Bourdeaux, in 4°, and are all of the highest value. The second edition of that on the Organon appeared in 1620, and extends to 1055 pages. It is, however, a comparatively rare book, which may excuse subsequent editors and logicians for their ignorance of its existence.]

✦ [It is impossible to speak too highly of the five books of the Institutio Logica by Mark Duncan, "Doctor of Philosophy and Medicine." The work, which extends only to about 280 octavo pages, was at least five times printed; the first edition appearing, in 1612, at Saumur, for the use of that University, was republished at Paris, in the following year. It forms the basis of Burgersdyk's Institu tiones Logicæ (Leyden, 1626), who had been Duncan's colleague in Saumur; and that celebrated logician declares, that from it, (speaking only of the first or unim. proved edition), he had received more assistance than from all other systems of the science put together. In fact, Duncan's Institutions are, in many respects, better even than his own; and were there now any intelligent enthusiasm for such studies, that rare and little book would incontinently be republished.—I have not seen the author's Synopsis Ethica.-Duncan, as physician, figures in the celebrated process of Urban Grandier and the Nuns of Laudun (1634.) Medical practice seems indeed to have withdrawn him from philosophical speculation. James VI. nominated Duncan Physician Royal, and he would have transferred himself to

mers,* Professors in the Universities of Bourdeaux, Saumur, and Anjou. In Cambridge the fortune of the study is indicated by the fact, that while its statutory teaching has been actually defunct for ages, the "Elements of Logic" of William Duncan of Aberdeen, have long collegially dispensed a muddy scantling of metaphysic psychology, and dialectic, in the University where Downam taught; whilst Murray's Compendium Logicæ, the Trinity ColLondon, but his wife and her family were averse from migrating "to a ferocious nation and an inclement sky."-His elder brother, William, as Dempster assures us, "bonis artibus supra hoc seculum, et maxime Græcis literis ad miraculum imbutus," was distinguished also as Professor of Philosophy and Physic in the schools of Tholouse and Montauban.-Mark's son, Mark also, but better known under the name of M. des Cerisantes, was a kind of Admirable Crichton; his life is more romantic than a romance. He obtained high celebrity as a Latin poet; for, though his pieces be few, they comprise what are not unjustly lauded, as the best imitations extant of Catullus. By him there is an elegiac address to his father, on the republication of the Logical Institution, in 1627. It is found also in the third, but not in the fourth, edition of that work; and it establishes, once and again, that the logician, then alive, was a native of Scotland, and not merely born of a Scottish grandfather in England :

:

"Ecce Caledoniis Duncanus natus in oris ;"

and addressing the book,

'Scotia cumprimis pernice adeunda volatu,

Namque patrem tellus edidit illa tuum."

qua in

Joseph Scaliger also testifies to the nativity of his friend Duncan, in Scotland, and, apparently, in the west of Scotland. Speaking of the Gaelic, he says: Scotia occidentalibus (unde Duncanus et Buchananus sunt oriundi) utuntur.” (Prima Scaligerana, voce Britones.)—Scaliger, I may notice, had resided for some time in Scotland.-Dr Kippis (Biogr. Brit. V. 494) states, on very respectable authority, that William and Mark were born in London, their father, Alexander, in Beverley. He is, however, wrong.]

[The Disputationes Philosophicae Gulielmi Camerarii Scoti, Congregationis Oratorii Domini Jesu Presbyteri (in folio, Paris, 1630, pp. 620), is a work of much learning and of considerable acuteness. The first part is logical; but among other treatises of this author, I have not seen his Introductio ad Logicam, (in octavo, Anjou, and of the same year.)-It is a curious illustration of the "Scoti extra Scotiam agentes:" that there were five Camerarii, five Chalmerses; all flourishing in 1630; all Scotsmen by birth; all living on the Continent; and there, all Latin authors; viz., two Williams, two Davids, and one George. The preceding age shows several others.]

+ [I understand that William Duncan's Elements, and every other logical spectre, are now in Cambridge, even collegially, laid, and that mathematics are there at length left to supply the discipline which logic was of old supposed exclusively to afford. If, however, the "Philosophical Society of Cambridge" may represent the University, its Transactions are enough to show the wisdom of the old and statutory in contrast to the new and illegal, and that Coleridge (himself a Cantabrigian, and more than nominally a philosopher,) was right in declaring "Mathematics to be no substitute for Logic.”—See Appendix II. (B).]

lege text-book, may show that matters are, if possible, at a lower pass in Dublin.

In Oxford, the fate of the science has been somewhat different, but, till lately, scarcely more favourable. And here it is necessary to be more particular, as this is the only British seminary where the study of logic proper can be said to have survived; and as, with one exception, the works under review all emanate from that University,-represent its character, and are determined and modified by its circumstances. Indeed, with one or two insignificant exclusions, these works comprise the whole recent logical literature of the kingdom.

During the scholastic ages, Oxford was held inferior to no University throughout Europe; and it was celebrated, more especially, for its philosophers and dialecticians. But it was neither the recollection of old academical renown, nor any enlightened persuasion of its importance, that preserved to logic a place among the subjects of academical tuition, when the kindred branches of philosophy, with other statutory studies, were dropt from the course of instruction actually given. These were abandoned from no conviction of their inutility, nor even in favour of others of superior value: they were abandoned when the system under which they could be taught, was, for a private interest, illegally superseded by another under which they could not. When the College Fellows supplanted the University Professors, the course of statutory instruction necessarily fell with the statutory instruments by which it had been carried through. The same extensive, the same intensive, education which had once been possible when the work was distributed among a body of Professors, each chosen for his ability, and each concentrating his attention on a single study, could no longer be attempted, when the collegial corporations, a fortuitous assemblage of individuals, in so far as literary qualification is concerned, had usurped the exclusive privilege of instruction; and when each of these individuals was authorised to become sole teacher of the whole academical cyclopædia. But while the one unqualified Fellow-tutor could not perform the work of a large body of qualified Professors; it is evident that, as he could not rise and expand himself to the former system, that the present, existing only for his behoof, must be contracted and brought down to him. This was accordingly done. The mode of teaching, and the subjects taught, were reduced to the required level and

extent. The capacity of lecturing, that is, of delivering an original course of instruction, was not now to be expected in the tutor. The pupil, therefore, read to his tutor a lesson out of book; on this lesson the tutor might, at his discretion, interpose an observation, or preserve silence; and he was thus effectually guaranteed from all demands, beyond his ability or inclination to meet. This reversed process was still denominated a lecture. In like manner, all subjects which required in the tutor more than the Fellows' average of learning or acuteness, were eschewed. Many of the most important branches of education in the legal system were thus discarded; and those which it was found necessary or convenient to retain in the intrusive, were studied in easier and more superficial treatises. This, in particular, was the case with logic.

By statute, the Professor of Dialectic was bound to read and expound the Organon of Aristotle twice a-week; and, by statute, regular attendance on his lectures was required from all undergraduates for their last three years. Until the statutory system was superseded, an energetic and improving exercise of mind from the intelligent study of the most remarkable monument of philosophical genius, imposed on all, was more especially secured in those who would engage in the subsidiary business of tuition. This, and the other conditions of that system, thus determined a far higher standard of qualification in the Tutor, when the tutor was still only a subordinate instructor, than remained when he had become the exclusive organ of academical education. When, at last, the voice of the Professors was silenced in the University, and in the Colleges the Fellows had been able to exclude all other graduates from the now principal office of Tutor, the study of logic declined with the ability of those by whom the science was taught. The original treatises of Aristotle were now found to transcend the College complement of erudition and intellect. They were accordingly abandoned; and with these the various logical works previously in academical use, which supposed any reach of thought, or an original acquaintance with the Organon. The compendium of Sanderson stood its ground for a season, when the more elaborate treatises (erst in academical use) of Brerewood, Crackanthorpe, and Smiglecius, were forgotten. But this little treatise, the excellent work of an accomplished logician, was too closely relative to the books of the Organon, and demanded too frequently an incon

venient explanation, to retain its place, so soon as another textbook could be introduced, more accommodated to the fallen and falling standard of tutorial competency. Such a text-book was soon found in the Compendium of Aldrich. The dignity of its author, as Dean of Christ Church, and his reputation as an ingenious, even a learned, writer in other branches of knowledge, ensured it a favourable recommendation: it was yet shorter than Sanderson's; written in a less scholastic Latin; adopted an order wholly independent of the Organon; and made no awkward demands upon the Tutor, as comprising only what was either plain in itself, or could without difficulty be expounded. The book—which, in justice to the Dean, we ought to mention was not originally written for the public-is undoubtedly a work of no inconsiderable talent; but the talent is, perhaps, principally shown, in the author having performed so cleverly a task for which he was so indifferently prepared. Absolutely considered, it has little or no value. It is but a slight eclectic epitome of one or two logical treatises in common use (that it is exclusively abridged from Wallis is incorrect); and when the compiler wanders from, or mistakes, his authorities, he displays a want of information to be expected, perhaps, in our generation, but altogether marvellous in his. It is clear, that he knew nothing of the ancient, and very little of the modern, logicians. The treatise likewise omits a large proportion of the most important matters; and those it does not exclude are treated with a truly unedifying brevity. As a slender introduction to the after-study of logic (were there not a hundred better) it is not to be despised; as a full course of instruction,—as an independent system of the science, it is utterly contemptible. Yet, strange to say, the Compend of Aldrich, having gradually supplanted the Compend of Sanderson, has furnished, for above a century, the little all of logic doled out in these latter days by the University of Bradwardin and Scotus.*

* Some thirty years ago, indeed, there was printed, "in usum academica juventutis," certain Excerpta ex Aristotelis Organo. The execution of that work shows how inadequate its author was to the task he had undertaken. Nothing could be more conducive to the rational study of logic than a systematic condensation of the more essential parts of the different treatises of the Organon, with original illustrations, and selections from the best commentators, ancient and modern. As it is, this petty publication has exerted no influence on the logical studies of the University; we should like to know how many tutors have expounded it in their lectures, how many candidates have been examined on it in