which he lays to their charge. That, however, is a matter which we are not concerned here to discuss. Ipsi viderint. Again, to M. Renan's peremptory declaration, that there never has been a supernatural fact,' we may reply: Quod gratis asseritur gratis negatur.' It is a question of evidence. M. Renan does not go by the evidence in this matter. His method is à priori. His argument really is, that a supernatural fact—a miracle-is impossible, because it would be abnormal; an infraction of the order of the universe; a violation of law. But everything depends upon what is meant by norm,'' order of the universe,' 'law.' 'Le miracle c'est l'inexpliqué,' M. Renan tells us. Yes. It is that. But it is something more than that. Better is Kant's definition: Should it be asked what is to be understood by the word miracle, then-since all we are concerned to know is what miracles are for us, that is, what they are for the practical use of our understanding—we must define them as events in the world, with the laws of whose working we are, and always must be, unacquainted.'* M. Renan constantly speaks of the miraculous as 'irrational' and 'absurd.' But irrational' means contrary to reason; 'absurd' means contradictory, impossible. Do we assert that which is contrary to reason, or contradictory, or impossible, when we say that there are events with the laws of whose working we are, and ever must remain, unacquainted? As Kant well says: 'Sensible people willingly admit in theory that miracles are possible; but in the business of life they count upon none.'

But we must not further consider these great questions here. We will, in conclusion, merely observe, that in discussing them, no real help is obtainable from the persiflage of Voltaire or the badinage of M. Renan. There is profound truth in Goethe's dictum, that the mere Understanding finds matter for laughter in everything, the Reason in hardly anything. Der Verständige findet fast alles lächerlich, der Vernunftige fast Nichts.' Reason Vernunft'—is an endowment in which M. Renan, like Voltaire before him, is terribly deficient. And it is precisely the quality essential for a just view of those supreme problems of thought with which he has so much occupied himself. Hence it is that he has left them just where he found them. He has, in effect, added nothing to the doctrine which Voltaire's'esprit infini' taught a century ago. And, to quote certain words of his own, written in another connection, we may say, 'Voltaire suffit:' one Voltaire is enough.

* Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft,' book ii. apot. 2.

ART. IV.-The Journal of Sir Walter Scott, 1825-1832. From the Original Manuscript at Abbotsford. 2 vols. Edinburgh, 1890.

SIR

IR WALTER SCOTT records in his Journal that he dined with the Duchess of Kent on the 19th of May, 1828, and was then presented to the little Princess Victoria.' Thirtynine years later the little Princess' of Sir Walter's day paid a visit as Queen to Abbotsford, and was shown the most interesting of the many treasures which are fondly preserved there; this being the manuscript Journal in two volumes wherein Sir Walter entered the inmost 'thoughts of his heart during the closing and overcast years of his life. Her Majesty wrote her name on the inner side of the vellum first volume in remembrance of her visit.

cover of the

In Lockhart's Life of Scott,' a work which has but one equal in English biographical literature, it is stated that, in the autumn of 1825, the late Mr. Murray sent Lockhart a transcript of the Diary which Byron kept at Ravenna, and gave him permission to hand it to Sir Walter, who, being impressed with what he read, resolved to follow Byron's example. Accordingly, he procured a thick quarto volume, bound in vellum and fitted with a lock and key, and wrote on the title-page, 'Sir Walter Scott of Abbotsford, Bart., his Gurnal.' This was followed by the motto:

'As I walked by myself,

I talked to myself,

And thus myself said to me.'-(Old Song.)

A footnote to 'Gurnal' runs :-'A hard word, so spelt on the authority of Miss Sophia Scott, now Mrs. Lockhart.' When his elder daughter was a little girl she had kept a note-book during an expedition to the Highlands and styled it her 'Gurnal.' The first entry which Sir Walter made is dated the 20th of November, 1825, and he then wrote:-'I have all my life regretted that I did not keep a regular Journal. I have myself lost recollection of much that was interesting, and have deprived my family and the public of some curious information, by not carrying this resolution into effect.' Lockhart reproduced many passages from this Journal. Before doing so, he wrote that no chapter in it could be printed in extenso within a few years of the writer's death,' and that he had found it necessary to omit some passages altogether-to abridge others and very frequently to substitute asterisks or arbitrary initials for names.' Nearly sixty years have now elapsed since Sir Walter's

death,

death, and the reasons which rightly weighed with Lockhart are no longer valid, and Mrs. Maxwell Scott, the possessor of the Journal, has very properly decided to give it to the world. Mr. David Douglas, who has edited the Journal with great care and ability, has had at his disposal unpublished letters of Scott, the Reminiscences' in manuscript of James Skene, one of Sir Walter Scott's oldest and most intimate friends, as well as those of James Ballantyne, who was Sir Walter's school companion and partner in the printing business. Many explanatory notes, drawn from these unpublished sources, appear in the Journal; they throw a new light upon the things and persons mentioned in the text, while other notes elucidate references and quotations which might puzzle those readers whose acquaintance with literature and history is less minute and comprehensive than that of Mr. Douglas.

Lest it should be supposed that the extracts given in Lockhart's 'Life' represent the greater part of what was worth reproducing from Sir Walter's Journal, it may be stated that nearly half of the matter in the two printed volumes is now made public for the first time, while much that is familiar to the readers of the 'Life' had passed through the editorial alembic and undergone a change in the process. Lockhart's task was very delicate and trying. He had to choose between suppressing interesting matter which might give offence to living persons, and producing passages which would excite controversy as well as cause annoyance. Though acting on the whole with singular skill and discretion, yet he may have been too rigid at times in his editorial supervision. The reader of the extracts given by him would naturally ask:- Would Sir Walter approve of any part of the Journal being published?' This question remains unanswered, though the answer was easy. The second sentence in the Journal puts Sir Walter's view beyond doubt, as he says he regrets not having kept a regular Journal on the twofold ground, that he had lost recollection of much that was interesting, and had deprived his family and the public' of some curious information. Lockhart struck out the words and the public,' and by so doing he left a doubt as to his father-in-law's expectation concerning the fate of his Journal. Yet he had no doubt in his own mind, as is shown by the following words in a letter which he wrote to Croker on the 26th of May, 1853: Scott clearly, and indeed avowedly, considered himself as writing [in his Journal] what would one day be published.'

On the 18th of December, 1825, when Sir Walter's fears as to impending bankruptcy had been momentarily dispelled, he writes: An odd thought strikes me when I die will the

Journal

Journal of these days be taken out of the ebony cabinet at Abbotsford, and read as the transient pout of a man worth 60,0007., with wonder that the well-seeming Baronet should ever have experienced such a hitch? It is obvious from the foregoing references, that Sir Walter looked forward to the words, which he committed to paper in the privacy of his study, being printed and circulated. He may also have foreseen with indifference or equanimity the editing which his distinguished son-in-law thought fit to exercise. Indeed, Sir Walter's own words can be cited to show how ready he was to submit to editorial supervision in his own case, and others are on record showing that he was rigidly opposed to suppressing or attenuating anything from the pen of a classical writer. When forwarding the manuscript of a review of 'Pepys's Diary,' Sir Walter wrote to Lockhart: 'Perhaps I have made it too long, or introduced too many extracts—if so, use the pruning-knife, hedge-bill, or axe, ad libitum. You know I don't care a curse about what I write, or what becomes of it.' While, then, Lockhart may have considered himself fully authorized to edit the Journal with unswerving strictness, it is open to question whether he was uniformly discreet. Though some of the omissions and alterations may be justifiable, others scarcely admit of defence, and the following is one of them. When Sir Walter was preparing a new edition of 'St. Ronan's Well,' he commented upon the work, and said among other things:-'I must allow the fashionable portraits are not the true thing. I am too much out of the way to see and remark the ridiculous in Society.' The last sentence as quoted by Lockhart runs :- 'I am too much out of the way,' those words not conveying a clear notion of what Sir Walter meant. It is unnecessary to multiply instances in which the passages which are given in the 'Life' differ from those in the Journal, and which now appear in the volumes before us as they were originally penned. Moreover, the Journal in its present form is a chronological record, whereas many passages were transposed by Lockhart, and others were separated, to make room for the insertion of letters and remarks. In short, with the exception of a few details of purely family and domestic interest,' the reader has now before him a faithful transcript of Sir Walter Scott's Journal, and the work in its present shape has all the flavour and interest of novelty.

While reading it we share Sir Walter's regret that he had not kept a Journal all his life; at the same time, the part of his life whereof it gives a faithful and vivid picture is the most chequered and also the most creditable in his whole career, and we rise from perusing the narrative of Sir Walter's feelings and

his struggles with heightened admiration for him as a man. He was great in his prosperity; but he was almost sublime in the dark days of adversity. Few among the sons of men had a nobler and finer spirit than Sir Walter Scott, and no man has ever lived whose life abounds in brighter illustrations of the virtues which ennoble humanity.

Lockhart's Life of Scott' is so popular a work, and its interesting contents are so familiar to the public, that it is only necessary to allude to the most striking events in Scott's career, in order to render the Journal more intelligible, and enable the reader to sympathize more fully with its writer.

Sir Walter had ancestors of whom he was proud and half ashamed: they were of gentle birth and doubtful character. Not remembering the Spanish proverb, 'There is little curiosity about the pedigree of a good man,' Sir Walter wrote:Every Scottishman has a pedigree,' and he was pleased to trace his descent from men who had been notorious in their day, and whose achievements largely consisted in cutting their neighbours' throats and carrying off their cattle. When Sydney Smith was pestered by a lady as to who his grandfather was, he silenced her by remarking that his grandfather 'disappeared about the time of the assizes, and we asked no questions.' Sir Walter would have thought it no cause for shame if one of his ancestors had been hanged, provided it was for rebellion in 1715 or 1745.

Born on the 15th of August, 1771, he was smitten at the age of eighteen months with a malady which crippled him for life, his right leg becoming powerless in a night. Everything that medical art could accomplish proved ineffectual, and, though the boy regained strength and was able to walk, his right leg never served him so well as the other. Among other experiments, a course of waters at Bath was prescribed, and he spent a year there. Little Walter was taken to Bath when he was four, and he left it no better in physical health, yet mentally advanced, having acquired his first elements of reading at a day-school, kept by an old dame.

He was in danger of being murdered by a lunatic nurse to whom he was entrusted when an infant; happily, the nurse confessed to the housekeeper that the devil had tempted her to cut the child's throat with a pair of scissors, and the child was at once taken out of her hands. At the age of twenty-one Scott had a narrow escape when on a visit to Rosslyn, his foot slipping as he was scrambling towards a cave and, as Mr. Gillies says, 'had there been no trees in the way, he must have been killed, but midway he was stopped by a large root

of