Historical Method
I.John Austin
I have spoken more than once of the paradox implied in the Utilitarian combination of appeals to 'experience,'with indifference to history.The importance of historical methods already recognised by Mill has become more obvious in later years.It was,as he saw,clearly desirable that the Utilitarians should annex this field of Inquiry and apply appropriate methods.
I have said something of Mill's view of the problems thus suggested;but the attitude of the Utilitarians in regard to them may be more fully indicated by the writings of some of his allies.
John Austin (1790-1859)(1)was accepted as the heir-apparent to Bentham in the special department of jurisprudence.Five years'service in the army was a unique apprenticeship for a Benthamite;and,as his widow tells us,helped to develop his chivalrous sense of honour.It may also help to explain a want of sympathy for the democratic zeal of most of his comrades.In any case,it did not suppress a delight in intellectual activity.
Austin left the army,and in 1818was called to the bar,but ill-health compelled him to retire in 1825.He was thus qualified to be a jurist by some knowledge of practice,and forced to turn his knowledge to theoretical application.Upon the foundation of the London University he became the first professor of jurisprudence.With the true scholar's instinct for thorough preparation,he went to Bonn,studied the great German writers upon jurisprudence,and made the acquaintance of eminent living professors.The insular narrowness of Bentham and James Mill was thus to be corrected by cosmopolitan culture.Austin returned amidst the highest expectations.A clear voice,a perfect delivery,and a courteous and dignified manner were suited to give effect to his teaching;and unanimous tradition tells us that his powers in conversation were unsurpassed.Why did he not acquire such an intellectual leadership in London as Dugald Stewart had enjoyed in Edinburgh?Some reasons are obvious.
English barristers and law students were serenely indifferent to the 'philosophy of law.'They had quite enough to do in acquiring familiarity with the technicalities of English practice.The University itself turned out to be chiefly a high school for boys not yet ripe for legal studies.Though J.S.Mill attended his lectures and took elaborate notes,few men had Mill's thirst for knowledge.Moreover,Austin thought it a duty to be as dry as Bentham,and discharged that duty scrupulously.The audiences dwindled,and the salary,derived from the fees,dwindled with it.Austin,a poor man,could not go on discoursing gratuitously to empty benches,and gave his last lecture in 1832.
Admiring friends did their best to find a sphere for his talents.Brougham placed him on the Criminal Law Commission,where he soon found that there was no serious chance of being employed,as he desired,in active codification A course of lectures promoted by the sound Utilitarian,Henry Bickersteth (Lord Langdale),at the Inner Temple fell as flat as the former.
Austin retired to France,saying that he was born out of time and place,and should have been a 'schoolman of the twelfth century or a German professor.'He was afterwards on a Commission at Malta,with his friend Sir G.Cornewall Lewis for a colleague.Achange of government brought this employment to an end.Austin gave up active work.He passed some years in Germany and France in the enjoyment of intellectual society.After the revolution of 1848he returned to England,and led a quiet country life at Weybridge.His sole later publication was a pamphlet against parliamentary reform in 1859.He died in the following December.
