for a few days. Among other things, I have twice read rough the life of Sir J. Mackintosh; and it has suggested so much to me, that I am very sorry I did not talk it over with you. It is quite gratifying, after my late chagrin, to find Sir James, with all his metaphysical turn, and ardent desire to penetrate it, puzzling so over the German philosophy, and particularly what I was myself troubled about, at Cambridge, — Jacobi’s letters to Fichte.
‘Few things have ever been written more discriminating or more beautiful than his strictures upon the Hindoo character, his portrait of Fox, and his second letter to Robert Hall, after his recovery from derangement. Do you remember what he says of the want of brilliancy in Priestley’s moral sentiments? Those remarks, though slight, seem to me to show the quality of his mind more decidedly than anything in the book. That so much learning, benevolence, and almost unparalleled fairness of mind, should be in a great measure lost to the world, for want of earnestness of purpose, might impel us to attach to the latter attribute as much importance as does the wise uncle in Wilhelm Meister.’
‘As to what you say of Shelley, it is true that the
unhappy influences of early education prevented his ever
attaining clear views of God, life, and the soul. At
thirty, he was still a seeker, — an experimentalist. But
then his should not be compared with such a mind as
——'s, which, having no such exuberant fancy to
tame, nor various faculties to develop, naturally comes
to maturity sooner. Had Shelley lived twenty years
longer, I have no doubt he would have become a fervent
