John Stuart Mill: A Criticism with Personal Recollections

68 INCONSISTENCIES OF EXPRESSION IN LOGIC. 1841-1848.
dissents in regard to all the main points. Yet I could not
pretend to say that criticism has been exhausted, or that imper
fections and even inconsistencies may not even yet be pointed
out. It is long since I was struck with the seeming incompati
bility between the definition of Logic in the Introduction the
Science of Proof or Evidence and the double designation in
the title Principles of Evidence and the Methods of Scientific
Investigation. Previous writers laid little stress on Proof, and
Mill took the other extreme and made Proof everything.
Bacon, Herschel, and Whewell seemed to think that if we
could only make discoveries, the proof would be readily forth
coming ; a very natural supposition with men educated mainly
in mathematics and physics. Mill, from his familiarity with
the Moral and Political Sciences, saw that Proof was more
important than Discovery. But the title, although larger than
{
the definition, is not larger than the work ; he did discuss the
methods of Investigation, as^ aids to Discovery, as well as
means of Proof; only, he never explained the mutual bearings
of the two. Any one that tries, will find this not an matter.
easy
The Sixth Book was the outcome of his long study of Politics,
both Practical and Theoretical, to which the finishing stroke
was given by the help of Auguste Comte. I will return to
this presently.
In five months he carried the work through the press, and
brought it out in March, 1843. One ma y form some estimate
of the united labour of correcting proof sheets, often one a day,
of re-considering the new examples that had been suggested,
of reading Liebig s two books, and Comte s sixth volume
(nearly a thousand pages), and of re-casting the concluding
chapters.
From the moment of publication, the omens were auspicious.
Parker s trade-sale was beyond his anticipations, and the book
was asked for by unexpected persons, and appeared in shopwindows
where he never thought to see it. Whately spoke