The use and abuse of authority Is a subject worthy of the young logician's serious attention. Many great writers like Bacon, through policy--Burke through position, or Shakspere through versatility of genius, have written on both sides of important questions. Such men, taken piece-meal, may be quoted by the most opposite parties in favour of the most opposite opinions. Unless there is time to make a broad induction from their writings, showing, by weighty, quantitive evidence, the side to which they leaned, better not quote them as _authorities_ at all, but give what expresses your own views on your own responsibility--indeed, in _all_ cases, the quoter ought to stand prepared, if possible, to justify all he cites from another in argument. 'There is perhaps something weak and servile in our wishing to rely on, or draw assistance from, ancient opinions. Reason ought not, like vanity, to adorn herself with old parchments, and the display of a genealogical tree; more dignified in her proceedings, she ought to derive everything from herself; she should disregard past times, and be, if I may use the phrase, the contemporary of all ages.'* Quote others as Grotius did: not as judges from whose decision there is no appeal, but as witnesses whose conspiring testimony confirms the view taken. * Necker. Analogy has frequently been confounded with induction. Analogy signifies reasoning from resemblances subsisting between phenomena--induction, reasoning from the sameness of phenomena. The phenomena affording an induction of a law of nature must be obvious, uniform, and universal. The rules to be observed in deducing general principles are, that the case be true and the facts universal.