those of many past events in history, say the execu-
tion of Charles I. All men attach the same mean-
ing to the words describing such events, so as to
have the same pictures in their minds when the
words are heard. But there is much even in a re-
presentation of this sort which is not fixed, namely,
the feelings of the actors in the event described. No
description can be supposed to give these with per-
fect certainty and definiteness. The cause of this is,
that neither those who have described such events
nor we who read the descriptions have had a logic
of feelings sufficiently accurate, or supplied with such
minutely appropriated terms, as to catch and fix
them in a narrative which all persons should under-
stand. Generally we may say, that, when the re-
presentation which is examined or described is a
representation of something that has been or can
be an object of presentation to the external senses,
then there may be agreement as to the meaning of
the words describing it, and the method may be
predominantly objective, the subjective aspect of it
ceasing to attract attention. But on the other hand,
where the representation is of an emotion, or pas-
sion, or desire, attaching to such external objects,
there, the immediate question being as to the par-
ticular feeling involved in them, and this being the
matter to be settled and brought to a definition, the
subjective method, that of observing the subjective
aspect of the phenomena, becomes of itself, owing to
that very circumstance, prominent and attractive of
the attention.

2. There is then no "hard and fast line" between
the methods of subjective and objective observation;
both keep the eye steadily fixed on the phenomena;

-52-