Page:(1856) Scottish Philosophy—The Old and the New.pdf/8

8 powers as University patrons. Let the public judge for itself whether practically they have not been guilty of an unconstitutional act.

It is desirable that the consequences of this measure should be reflected on. Is the Scottish philosophy to be shut up for ever to the tenets of its bye-gone expositors, or rather of a mere section of these? Such certainly is the wish and the desire of the patrons of the University of Edinburgh. They are of opinion that no man except the thorough-going disciples of Reid, and Stewart, and Hamilton, ought to get a hearing from our Chairs, and that philosophy has reached its final close, its ultimate development in them. Alas for philosophy if this were so! But philosophy has not come, and never will come, to any such pass. Human reason is stronger than municipal restrictions, and truth will force her way, and hold her ground, in the face of municipal patronage.

Perhaps the Town Council may argue that the principle on which they grounded their decision was scarcely so strong or so patent as has been now represented—that in their attempt to judge of the conflict among philosophers, and to balance the claims of contending theories, they got bewildered, that in these circumstances they conceived their safest course would be to hold as authoritative the names best known in our philosophy, and to give their preference to the candidate who pinned himself most faithfully to these. While this plea does not in the least shake my statement, that practically they have introduced a new test, and have thus acted unconstitutionally,—it proceeds at the same time on a mistake as to the true nature and spirit of