the Oriental languages. The accuracy of his collection is not always to be depended on, nor can his critical judgment be everywhere trusted. But he did a great work, and gave an impetus to the study of biblical criticism which has not yet subsided. His edition was reprinted by Kuster at Amsterdam. Mill's Testament, with its thirty thousand various readings, was attacked by Whitby in his Examen, and Anthony Collins made an unfair use of it in his Discourse on Sacred History. Suffice it to say, that Bentley destroyed for ever the sceptic's refuge by demonstrating the plain and intelligible facts of the history and character of the text of scripture.—J. E.
MILL, John Stuart, son of Mr. James Mill, the historian of British India, was born in 1806. He was long employed in the India house, and wrote an aide defence of the company on occasion of the abolition of the double government in 1858. His chief celebrity, however, was gained as a writer on mental science and politics. He was for some time editor of the Westminster Review, in which appeared most of the essays republished in 1859, under the title of "Dissertations and Discussions." His "System of Logic" and "Essays on some Unsettled Questions in Political Economy" came out in 1843 and in 1844 respectively. His larger work on the "Principles of Political Economy" appeared in 1848. In 1858 he published an "Essay on Liberty," and in 1861 he gathered up sundry scattered essays in a general work on "Representative Government." Alike as a metaphysician, a logician, a moralist, and a politician, Mr. Mill has exercised a deep influence on the thought of the present day. Of his metaphysical views he did not give to the world any detailed statement, but notices of them appear incidentally in his "Logic." He was opposed alike to the German and the Scotch philosophy. On the one hand he rejected the distinction between formal and material truth, and did not admit that any ideas are potentially given in thought. Experience, according to him, is not merely the occasion, but the sole and simple source, of all knowledge. From it the axioms of geometry, the law of causation, the ideas of God and immortality, must, if valid, be alike derived. On the other hand, he was equally hostile to the "natural realism" of Reid and Hamilton. The existence of external objects, distinct from our sensations, he recognized merely as a form of speech, not as a fact. The question as to the mode in which our higher ideas are derived from experience he leaves undecided, merely giving an opinion that the sufficiency of the received laws of association to account for them in all cases has not been fully established. His rejection of the distinction between the form and matter of thought, enabled him to class induction along with those formal processes which modern logicians have generally regarded as alone within their province. This constitutes the main characteristic of his logic, which covers the whole domain of inference. There being no à priori formal truths, all inference, he held, must be from particulars to particulars. The major premiss of the syllogism is merely a record of particular inferences, and the syllogistic process is merely useful as unfolding the contents of such record. All reasoning is primarily inductive, though at a certain stage, i.e., when certain sequences have been established as holding universally, it may become also deductive. The possibility of deductive reasoning is derived from the law of universal causation—"the law that every consequent has an invariable antecedent." The validity of this law, itself obtained "per enumerationem simplicem," being granted, we are enabled by the application of the four inductive methods to establish the sequence of certain phenomena on certain other phenomena, as obtaining not merely within the limits of our own experience, but within the limits of all possible experience. On the question whether or no this law, merely as derived from experience, will bear the strain thus put upon it, the value of Mr. Mill's logical system depends. From Mr. Mill's essays on Coleridge and Bentham, it appears that he early discovered the inadequacy of the Benthamite philosophy, in which he was educated by his father, for the expression of the higher truths of morality and politics. He still, however (see Fraser's Magazine for October and November, 1861), regarded the principle of "the greatest happiness of the greatest number," if properly understood, as the true standard of morality. It is a principle, he shows, which may and must be purified from every taint of selfishness. Every man must learn in the fullest sense to love his neighbour as himself—must make no separation between his own happiness and that of others. If the existing condition of things necessitates the separation he must sacrifice his own; but such condition cannot be regarded as a proper or permanent one. What, then, is the sanction by which the observance of this standard is to become binding? The conscience of the good man, says Mr. Mill, the subjective sanction which lies in the feeling that this standard is the true one. Society Mr. Mill treated as the sphere of education for the individual; but this education cannot be fully carried out unless liberty is allowed for the development of individual tastes and capacities. He differed from Plato and Aristotle, not because they made the state an educational institution, but because they sought to establish a uniform type of character. Like them he makes "virtue" the qualification for political power, but it is a qualification in which all may partake up to a certain point, and in which they will partake more fully as they are more largely trusted with the power for which it is the qualification. His work on political economy is more remarkable for power of statement than for novelty of view. It is on the questions of peasant proprietorship, of graduation of income-tax, and of the currency act of 1844, that his opinions differ most widely from those of other economists. For judicial calmness and elevation of tone, he was unrivalled among the writers of his time. In 1865, Mr. Mill was chosen M.P. for Westminster. He died in May, 1873. His "Autobiography" has been published since.—G.
* MILLAIS, John Everett, A.R.A., was born at Southampton in June, 1829. After a preparatory training at Sass' art-school, he became at an unusually early age a student in the Royal Academy. There he concluded a very successful career in 1847, by carrying off the gold medal for a historical composition, "The Benjamites seizing for Wives the Daughters of Shiloh." His first picture, "Pizarro seizing the Inca of Peru," had the year before found a place in the Academy exhibition. In 1847 he sent to the government competitive exhibition in Westminster hall a huge picture, some 14 feet by 10, the "Widow's Mite," showing, like his previous works, abundant ambition and industry, but little in style or conception to distinguish it from the mass of youthful academic compositions. But about this time, or shortly after, was formed the solemn league and covenant of the pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, which has called forth so wearisome an amount of foolish talk during the past dozen years. Mr. Millais was one of the most prominent of the original brotherhood. The origin and avowed purpose of the association have been explained under Hunt, William Holman. At the first public appearance of the brethren as painters—they made their debut as authors in "the Germ"—at the Exhibition of 1849 Mr. Millais contributed his "Isabella;" and in the following year "Ferdinand lured by Ariel;" and a representation of the child Jesus in the house of the Carpenter, in which the true pre-Raphaelite type of religio-pictorial symbolism was carried to its fullest extent. But though next year he exhibited another scriptural subject, "The Return of the Dove to the Ark," it was painted after a much more modern manner; and whilst he has ever since chosen secular subjects, and only employed symbolism in a secondary and subservient manner, he has departed more and more from the minute method of handling which was announced by the partisans of the brotherhood, and received by the public, as one of the main distinctions of their system. Mr. Millais' later pictures may be broadly divided into two classes—one illustrative of passages from the poets; the other of original themes, usually the embodiment of an incident that sets forth, or distinctly suggests, some simple story or train of events, the sequence of which the spectator can without difficulty evolve for himself. Of the former class the most marked examples are "Mariana," 1851; "Ophelia," 1852; "Sir Isumbras," 1857. To the latter belong his most pleasing and his most powerful pictures—those which, like "The Order of Release," 1853, by appealing to the better feelings of every one, have secured a wide sympathy and popularity; and those which, like "Autumn Leaves," 1856, "The Vale of Rest" and "Spring," 1859, by a daring disregard of ordinary principles, intensity of expression, and a presumed subtlety of purpose or symbolism, have won the vehement admiration of the narrower band of partisans. Mr. Millais' other important works, all belonging to the second class, are "The Huguenot," 1852; "The Proscribed Royalist," 1853; "The Rescue," 1855; "Peace Concluded," 1856; "News from Home" and "Escape of a Heretic," 1857; "The Black Brunswicker," 1860; and "The Ransom," just completed, 1862. He has of late made a large number of drawings on wood for periodicals. Mr. Millais was elected A.R.A. in 1853.—J. T—e.
