RUSKIN'S moral philosophy was in no way original. It contained the usual rhetorical jumble of moral notions in the head of any young university graduate who had fallen into line with one or more of the popular attitudes in theology, science and morals. But theology, science and morals, were, at this period, not only complicated by a variety of influences; they were hopelessly mixed up with one another. The eighteen thirties and forties saw the development of a conscious and deliberate reaction against the loose behavior of the Georgian reigns and the rational skepticism of such hard heads as Paley and Bentham in theology and ethics. While Cambridge had fallen prey to the Utilitarian principles, Pauline doctrine and Christianized interpretations of Aristotle had been kept alive in Edinburgh and Oxford.
With the ascendance to the chair of theology at Edinburgh in 1828 of the powerful Thomas Chalmers, 1 evangelicism received definite acceleration. Carlyle later described this worthy as a "man of little culture, of narrow sphere all his life." Another divine, Dr. Thomas Scott, swung violently from Unitarianism to Calvinism and exerted, through his Commentary, an influence upon the satellites of the Oxford Movement. Newman, in the Apologia, declares that he almost owed his soul to him. There were many others who, like Edward Irving, Daniel