Wordsworth，inshort，sawtheuglysideoftheindustrialrevolution，theinjurydonetodomesticlifebythefactorysystem，orthesubstitutionofaproletariateforapeasantry，andthereplacementofthelowestsocialorderbyavastinorganicmob，Thecontemporaryprocess，whichwasleadingtopauperismandtotheevilsofthefactorysystem，profoundlyaffectedWordsworth，aswellastheimpulsiveSouthey；andtheirfrequentdenunciationsgavecolourtotheimputationsthattheywereopposedtoallprogress，CertainlytheywereevenmorbidlyalivetotheevilaspectsofthepoliticaleconomyofMalthusandRicardo，whichtothemseemedtoprescribeinsensibilityandindifferencetomostseriousandrapidlyaccumulatingevils。
　　Meanwhile，Wordsworthwasalsoimpressedbytheunderlyingphilosophicaldifficulties。Theeffectoftherevolutionaryprincipleswastodestroythereligioussentiment，notsimplybydisprovingthisorthathistoricalstatement，butbymakingthewholeworldprosaicandmatter-of-fact。Hisoccasionaloutburstsagainstthemanofscience——the’fingeringslave’whowould’peepandbotaniseuponhismother’sgrave’——areoneversionofhisfeeling。Thewholescientificmethodtendedtomaterialismandatomism；toabreakingupoftheworldintodisconnectedatoms，andlosingthelifeindissectingthemachinery。
　　HisprotestisembodiedinthepantheismofthenoblelinesonTinternAbbey，andhismethodofansweringmightbedivinedfromtheodeonthe’IntimationsofImmortality。’Somehoworothertheworldrepresentsaspiritualandrationalunity，notamerechaosofdisconnectedatomsandfragments。
　　We’seeintotheheartofthings’whenwetrusttoouremotionsandholdbytheinstincts，clearlymanifestedinchildhood，butcloudedandoverwhelmedinourlaterstruggleswiththeworld。Theessentialthingisthecultivationofour’moralbeing，’thecarefulpreservationandassimilationofthesternsenseofduty，whichalonemakeslifebearableandgivesameaningtotheuniverse。
　　Wordsworth，itisplain，wasattheveryoppositepolefromtheUtilitarians。Hecametoconsiderthattheirwholemethodmeantthedissolutionofallthatwasmostvitallysacred，andtoholdthattherevolutionhadattractedhissympathiesonfalsepretences。Yetitisobviousthat，howevergreatthestimuluswhichheexerted，andhoweverloftyhishighestflightsofpoetry，hehadnodistincttheorytooffer。Hisdoctrineundoubtedlywascongenialtocertainphilosophicalviews，butwasnotitselfanarticulatephilosophy。Heappealstoinstinctsandemotions，nottoanydefinitetheory。Inaremarkableletter，ColeridgetoldWordsworthwhyhewasdisappointedwiththeExcursion。25Hehadhopedthatitwouldbethe’firstandonlytruephilosophicalpoeminexistence。’Wordsworthwastohavestartedbyexposingthe’sandysophismsofLocke，’andafterexplodingPope’sEssayonMan，andshowingthevanityofErasmusDarwin’sbeliefinan’ourang-outangstate，’andexplainingthefallofmanandthe’schemeofredemption，’tohaveconcludedby’agranddidacticswellontheidentityofatruephilosophywithtruereligion。’Hewouldshowhowlifeandintelligenceweretobesubstitutedforthe’philosophyofmechanism。’Factswouldbeelevatedintotheory，theoryintolaws，andlawsintolivingandintelligentpowers——trueidealismnecessarilyperfectingitselfinrealism，andrealismrefiningitselfintoidealism。’
　　Theprogrammewasalargeone。IfitrepresentswhatColeridgeseriouslyexpectedfromWordsworth，italsosuggeststhathewasunconsciouslywanderingintoanexpositionofoneofthegiganticbutconstantlyshiftingschemesofacomprehensivephilosophy，whichhewasalwaysproposingtoexecute。TotrytospeakofColeridgeadequatelywouldbehopelessandoutofplace。Imustbrieflymentionhim，becausehewasundoubtedlythemostconspicuousrepresentativeofthetendenciesopposedtoUtilitarianism。TheyoungmenwhofoundBenthamexasperatingimbibeddraughtsofmingledpoetryandphilosophyfromColeridge’smonologuesatHampstead。Carlylehastoldus，inafamouschapterofhisLifeofSterling，whattheywentouttosee：atonceareedshakenbythewindandagreatexpounderoftranscendentaltruth。ThefactthatColeridgeexertedaverygreatinfluenceisundeniable。Todefinepreciselywhatthatinfluencewasisimpossible。Hiswritingsareaheapoffragments。
　　Hecontemplatedinnumerableschemesforgreatworks，andnevergotwithinmeasurabledistanceofwritingany。Hepouredhimselfoutindefinitelyuponthemarginsofothermen’sbooks；andthepietyofdiscipleshascollectedamassofthesescatteredandincoherentjottings，whichannounceconclusionswithoutgivingthepremises，orsuggestdifficultieswithoutattemptingtosolvethem。HeseemstohavebeenalmostasindustriousasBenthaminwriting；butwhereasBentham’sfragmentscouldbeputtogetheraswholes，Coleridge’sareessentiallydistractedhintsofviewsneverreallyelaborated。
　　Hewasalwaysthinking，butseemsalwaystobemakingafreshstartatanypointthatstrikeshimforthemoment。Besidesallthis，thereisthepainfulquestionofplagiarism，HismostcoherentexpositionintheBiographiaLiterariaissimplyappropriatedfromSchelling，thoughheascribestheidentitytoa’genialcoincidence’ofthought，IneedmakenoattempttomakeoutwhatColeridgereallythoughtforhimself，andthentotrytoputhisthoughtstogether，——andindeedholdtheattempttobeimpossible，ThemostremarkablethingistheapparentdisproportionbetweenColeridge’sdefiniteservicestophilosophyandtheeffectwhichhecertainlyproduceduponsomeofhisablestcontemporaries。Thatseemstoprovethathewasreallyaimingatsomeimportantaspectoftruth，incapableashemayhavebeenofdefinitivelyreachingit。Icanonlytrytogiveahintortwoastoitsgeneralnature。Coleridge，inthefirstplace，wasessentiallyapoet，and，moreover，hispoetrywasofthetypemostcompletelydivorcedfromphilosophy。Nobodycouldsaymoreemphaticallythatpoetryshouldnotberhymedlogic；andhismostimpressivepoemsaresimplywakingdreams，theyarespontaneousincarnationsofsensuousimagery，whichhasnoneedofmoralsordefinitelogicalschemes。AlthoughheexpectedWordsworthtotransmutephilosophyintopoetry，headmittedthattheachievementwouldbeunprecedented。EveninLucretius，hesaid，whatwaspoetrywasnotphilosophy，andwhatwasphilosophywasnotpoetry。YetColeridge’sphilosophywasessentiallythephilosophyofapoet，Hehad，indeed，greatdialecticalingenuity——afacultywhichmaycertainlybealliedwiththehighestimagination，thoughitmayinvolvecertaintemptations。Apoetwhohasalsoamasteryofdialecticsbecomesamysticinphilosophy。Coleridgehad，itseems，beenattractedbyPlotinusinhisschooldays。AtalaterperiodhehadbeenattractedbyHartley，Berkeley，andPriestley。Toabrilliantyouth，anxioustobeinthevanofintellectualprogress，theyrepresentedthemostadvancedtheories，ButtherecouldneverbeafullsympathybetweenColeridgeandtheforefathersofEnglishempiricism；andhewenttoGermanypartlytostudythenewphilosophywhichwasbeginningtoshine——thoughveryfeeblyandintermittingly——inEngland，WhenhehadreturnedhebegantoreadKantandSchelling，orrathertomixexcursionsintotheirbookswiththemiscellaneousinquiriestowhichhisversatileintellectattractedhim。
　　Now，itisabundantlyclearthatColeridgeneverstudiedanyphilosophysystematically，Heneveracquiredapreciseacquaintancewiththetechnicallanguageofvariousschemes，orcaredfortheirpreciselogicalrelationstoeachother。The’genialcoincidence’withSchelling，thoughanunluckyphrase，representsarealfact，HedippedintoPlotinusorBehmenorKantorSchelling，oranyonewhointerestedhim，anddidnotknowwhethertheyweresimplyembodyingideasalreadyinhisownmind，orsuggestingnewideas；or，whatwasprobablymoreaccurate，expressingopinionswhich，inageneralway，werecongenialtohisownwayofcontemplatingtheworld。Hispowerofstimulatingothermindsprovessufficientlythathefrequentlyhituponimpressiveandsuggestivethoughts。Hestruckoutilluminatingsparks，butheneverdiffusedanydistinctorsteadydaylight。Hisfavouriteposition，forexample，ofthedistinctionbetweentheReasonandtheUnderstandingisalwayscomingupandbeingenforcedwiththestrongestasseverationsofitsimportance。
　　ThathehadadopteditmoreorlessfromKantisobvious，thoughIimagineittobealsoobviousthathedidnotclearlyunderstandhisauthority。26Towhat，precisely，itamountsisalsounintelligibletome。Somehoworother，itimpliesthatthemindcanriseintotranscendentalregions，and，leavinggrovellingUtilitariansandtheliketotheconductoftheunderstandinginmattersofpracticalexpediency，canperceivethattheuniverseisinsomewayevolvedfromthepurereason，andthemindcapableofideaswhichcorrespondtostagesoftheevolution。HowthisleadstotheconclusionsthattheChristiandoctrinesoftheLogosandtheTrinityareembodimentsofpurephilosophyisaproblemuponwhichIneednottouch。WhenwehavecalledColeridgeamystic，withflashesofkeeninsightintotheweaknessoftheoppositetheory，Idonotseehowwearetogetmuchfurther，orattributetohimanyarticulateanddefinitescheme。
　　HopelesslyunsystematicasColeridgemayhavebeen，hissignificanceinregardtotheUtilitariansisnoteworthy。ItisindicatedinafamousarticlewhichJ。S。MillcontributedtotheWestminsterReviewinMarch1840，27Mill’sconcessionstoColeridgeratherscandalisedthefaithful；anditisenoughtoobserveherethatitmarkstheapogeeofMill’sBenthamism。Influences，ofwhichIshallhavetospeak，hadledhimtoregardhisoldcreedasimperfect，andtoassenttogreatpartofColeridge’sdoctrine。Milldoesnotdiscussthemetaphysicalortheologicalviewsoftheoppositeschool，thoughhebrieflyintimateshisdissent。ButitisinterestingtoobservehowColeridgeimpressedadiscipleofBentham。The’Germano-Coleridgiandoctrine，’saysMill，wasareactionagainstthephilosophyoftheeighteenthcentury：’ontological，’’conservative，’’religious，’’concreteandhistorical，’
　　andfinally’poetical，’becausetheotherwas’experimental，’’innovative，’
　　’infidel，’’abstractandmetaphysical，’and’matter-of-factandprosaic。’
　　Yetthetwoapproximate，andeachhelpstorestorethebalanceandcomesalittlenearertoafinalequilibrium。TheerroroftheFrenchphilosophershadbeentheirnegativeandpurelycriticaltendency。Theyhadthoughtthatitwasenoughtosweepawaysuperstition，priestcraft，anddespotism，andthatnoconstructiveprocesswasnecessary。Theyhadnotperceivedthenecessityofsocialdiscipline，ofloyaltytorulers，orofpatrioticfeelingamongthesubjects。Theyhad，therefore，entirelyfailedtorecognisethehistoricalvalueofoldcreedsandinstitutions，andhadtriedtoremodelsociety’withoutthebindingforceswhichholdsocietytogether。’28Hence，too，thephilosophescametodespisehistory；andD’Alembertissaidtohavewishedthatallrecordofpasteventscouldbeblottedout。
　　Theirtheory，initspopularversionatleast，cametobethatstatesandchurcheshadbeengotup’forthesolepurposeofpickingpeople’spockets。’29Thishadbecomeincredibletoanyintelligentreasoner，andanyTorycouldprovethattherewassomethinggoodinthepast，thepeculiarityofthe’Germano-Coleridgian’schoolwasthattheysawbeyondtheimmediatecontroversy。
　　Theywerethefirsttoinquirewithanypowerinto’theinductivelawsoftheexistenceandgrowthofhumansociety’；thefirsttorecognisetheimportanceofthegreatconstructiveprinciples；andthefirsttoproducenotapieceofpartyadvocacy，but’aphilosophyofsocietyintheonlyforminwhichitisyetpossible，thatofaphilosophyofhistory。’Hencearosethat’seriesofgreatwritersandthinkers，fromHerdertoMichelet，’
　　whohavegiventopasthistoryanintelligibleplaceinthegradualevolutionofhumanity。30ThisveryforciblepassageisinterestinginregardtoMill，andshowsaveryclearperceptionofsomedefectsinhisownphilosophy。Italsoraisesanimportantquestion。