第9章 James Mill(9)

The Chronicle was an opposition paper,and day by day Black walked with Mill from the India House,discussing the topics of the time and discharging himself through the Chronicle .The Chronicle declined after 1821,owing to a change in the proprietorship.25Albany Fonblanque (1793-1872)took to journalism at an early age,succeeded Leigh Hunt as leader-writer for the Examiner in 1826,became another exponent of Utilitarian principles,and for some time in alliance with John Stuart Mill was among the most effective representatives of the new school in the press.John Ramsay M'Culloch (1789-1864)upheld the economic battle in the Scotsman at Edinburgh from 1817-1827,and edited it from 1818-1820.He afterwards devoted himself to lecturing in London,and was for many years the most ardent apostle of the 'dismal science.'He was a genial,whisky-loving Scot;the favourite object of everybody's mimicry;and was especially intimate with James Mill.Many other brilliant young men contributed their help in various ways.Henry Bickersteth (1783-1851),afterwards Lord Langdale and Master of the Rolls,had brought Bentham and Burdett into political alliance;and his rising reputation at the bar led to his being placed in 1824upon a commission for reforming the procedure of the Court of Chancery,one of the most cherished objects of the Utilitarian creed.Besides these there were the group of young men,who were soon to be known as the 'philosophical Radicals.'John Stuart Mill,upon whom the mantle of his father was to descend,was conspicuous by his extraordinary precocity,and having been carefully educated in the orthodox faith,was employed in 1825upon editing Bentham's great work upon evidence.George Grote (1794-1871),the future historian,had been introduced to Mill by Ricardo;and was in 1821defending Mill's theory of government against Mackintosh,and in 1822published the Analysis of Revealed Religion,founded upon Bentham's manuscripts and expressing most unequivocally the Utilitarian theory of religion.With them were associated the two Austins,John (1790-1859)who,in 1821,lived close to Bentham and Mill in Queen's Square,and who was regarded as the coming teacher of the Utilitarian system of jurisprudence;and Charles (1799-1874),who upheld the true faith among the young gentlemen at Cambridge with a vigour and ability which at least rivalled the powers of his contemporary,Macaulay.

Meanwhile,Mill himself was disqualified by his office from taking any direct part in political agitations.Place continued an active connection with the various Radical committees and associations;but the younger disciples had comparatively little concern in such matters,they were more interested in discussing the applications of Utilitarianism in various directions,or,so far as they had parliamentary aspirations,were aspiring to found a separate body of 'philosophical Radicals,'which looked down upon Place and his allies from the heights of superior enlightenment.

Mill could now look forward to a successful propaganda of the creed which had passed so slowly through its period of incubation.The death of Ricardo in 1823affected him to a degree which astonished his friends,accustomed only to his stern exterior.

A plentiful crop of young proselytes,however,was arising to carry on the work;and the party now became possessed of the indispensable organ.

The Westminster Review was launched at the beginning of 1824.Bentham provided the funds;Mill's official position prevented him from undertaking the editorship,which was accordingly given to Bentham's young disciple,Bowring,helped for a time by Henry Southern.The Westminster was to represent the Radicals as the two older reviews represented the Whigs and the Tories;and to show that the new party had its philosophers and its men of literary cultivation as well as its popular agitators and journalists.

It therefore naturally put forth its claims by opening fire in the first numbers against the Edinburgh and the Quarterly Reviews .

The assault upon the Edinburgh Review ,of which I shall speak presently,made an impression,and,as J.S.Mill tells us,brought success to the first number of the new venture,the gauntlet was thrown down with plenty of vigour,and reformers were expected to rally round so thoroughgoing a champion.In later numbers Mill afterwards (Jan.9,1826)fell upon Southey's Book of the Church ,and (April 1826)assailed church establishments in general.He defended toleration during the same year in a review of Samuel Bailey's Formation of Opinions ,and gave a general account of his political creed in an article (October)on the 'State of the Nation.'

This was his last contribution to the Westminster ;but in 1827he contributed to the Parliamentary History and Review ,started by James Marshall of Leeds,an article upon recent debates on reform,which ended for a time his political writings.

The Utilitarians had no great talent for cohesion.Their very principles were indeed in favour of individual independence,and they were perhaps more ready to diverge than to tolerate divergence.The Westminster Review had made a good start,and drew attention to the rising 'group'--J.S.Mill declares that it never formed a 'school.'26From the very first the Mills distrusted Bowring and disapproved of some articles;the elder Mill failed to carry his disciples with him,partly because they were already in favour of giving votes to women;and as the Review soon showed itself unable to pay its way,some new arrangement became necessary.It was finally bought by Perronet Thompson,and ceased for a time to be the official organ of Benthamism.