Chicago Daily Tribune Newspaper, May 16, 1880, Page 9

a HOUSEKEEPING GOODS. SE caterer VOCE TCO E ICES ~-BOARI “Then, provided you are a married man or a married woman with a family to support, go at once TO HOUSEREEPING, And enjoy the comfort, indepen- dence, and economy of Legiti- mate Existence on Only Small Means By availing yourself of the TIME PAYMENT PLAN, originated and still adhered to by JOHN HL. SMYTH, 132 & 134 West Madison-st.; .Who will enable you to secure a ‘complete outfié in FURNITURE of his own make, CARPETS, ‘HITCHEN EQUIPMENTS and all, ‘for half the Weekly or Monthly sums that go for board. It was for your special accommodation ‘that my easy-paymtent system was established. Carpets! ~PARDRIDGES, 114 & 116 State-st., Are now opening, and will place on sale this week, 100 Pieces new and choice designs in ENGLISH TAPESTRY BRUSSELS. These goods are JOHN CROSSLEY & SONS? very best quality, and private pat- terns, which cannot be shown elsewhere. ALSO, A LINE OF English Tapestries Good styles and colors, at 85 CTS. PER YARD.- We guarantee the very lowest prices, and invite all close cash buyers to exam- ine our stock before purchasing. PARDRIDCES'’ Main Store, 114 & 116 State-st. “DEPROFUNDIS” Is the title of the forthcoming new poem by Tennyson. By calling on TITCOMB & PRATT, 383 W. Madison-est., They will explain its connection with their VERY LOW PRICES. Furniture, Carpets, Stoves, Crockery-- largest stock and most equitable terms. Houses furnished throughout at one day’s notice. Cash _or easy payments to suit enstomers, Eead*the following quota- tions : a Good Walnut Chamber Sets....... 25.00 Walout Murble-Top Chamber Sets $5.00 881 & 383 West Madison-st. & RANCES. Lowest Prices. P.&C.H.LOW, 10 LAK Stoves HATS, & (IR-“CUSSES.” We have had some” of the traditional own, with cap and bells, trick mules, and ali that, and a *Sgood deal” of the modern ‘*Klown,”—in the form of sen- sational advertising shopkeepers, lately. hey serve up **Cirens” in all styles, Roasted, Fried, Broiled, Raw, and *‘in le rough,” including Brass Bands, pro- cessions of tracks with empty boxes. and ic Lanterns ”? on the half shell. Well, as the dear porlle (who rather en- foy bein gulled, and never seem to realize that THEY pay for the Music) will have * Circus, we have ned negotiations With that Prince of Hum-—we mean that ce of Advertisers, P. T. Barnum, Whose success in the past in the advertising Ine will be a sufficient guarantee that, When he takes charge of our business, no an who reads will remain long in ignor- ance of the fact that{the LARGESY® and FINEST display of HATS on this Conti- nent can always be found at the Mammoth Hat House of Scott &Co., “Hatters to the Great Northwest,” 135-& 137 Madison-st., near Clark. —_—_ STOCKHOLDERS’ MEETING. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Company, ‘The A Annual Meet ‘cholders and Hond- Raiders of this Company forthe clecuion of Directors t to law, and for the transaction of such ot ‘a may cume before said meeting, will be PTtaniye! oftes yf the Company in Chicago on TaMSDAY. JUNE Sp NEX'N at 1 o'clock Bm. ih er Looks close April Suth inst. and reopen June Bondholde: ir bonds by piders arill authenticate the sgtng bona Lc SYuEs, Secretary. i SUITS, DEESS-GOODS, &c. or THE Auction Rooms, We Are Now Selling $50,000 Of the Stock of Messrs, Simpson, Craw- ford & Simpson, Saved from the late Fire in their Store, corner Sixth-ay. and Nine- teenth-st., New York. $x0,000. worth of Ladies’ Suits, Walking Jackets, Dolmans, in Silk, Satin De Lyon, Ulsters, Beaded Capes. Also, 1,000 Children’s Suits and Walking Jackets, at one-half their Original Valug.. These Goods are not dam- aged, eitlier by fire or water. ‘$0,000 worth of Dress Goods and Black Goods of all kinds und qualities, from lowest to highest cost goods, slightly damaged by water, at immense sacritice. 1,000 dozen Kid Gloves, in 2, 3, 4, 5.6, 7, 8, and 10 button, slichtly damaged by smoke, at less than half price. 3 - 50,000 yds. HAMBURG EDGINGS AND INSERTIONS, damaged by water, will be. offered Monday at half original value. Among aro some of the fin- est and highest cost goods tmported. $5,000 worth of REAL TORCHON, BRETON, LAN- GUEDOC, VALENCIENNES . BLACK SILK SPANISH Laces and Mudo-up Luco Goods and Novelties, slightly damaged by wator, at half price. 1,000 Parasols, slightly damaged by water, very high cost goods, at less than half price. 300 pieces Black and Colored Lyons Dress Silks, no damage except edges slightly burned, at half regular prices, “Immense Bargains. 10,000 worth of.4fillinery. French Flowers, REAL OSTRICH TIPS, ORNAMENTS, . and Straw Goods of all kinds, slightly damaged by water, at Joss than half price. $5,000 worth of elegant SILK and BEADED Fringes, and finest and highest cust Buttons, Trimming, and Fancy Goods. Imported at about one- quarter to one-half their original value. ‘Will offer during the coming week largo lines of Hosiery, Cotton and Bferino Underwear, Corsets, Cloths, and Woolens, sligttly damaged by water only, ‘at half their original value. SPECIAL DRIVE---1,000 DOZ. SHETLAND SHAWLS At 50c and 75c., worth $1.00 and $1.50, THESE GOODS are not damaged. War- ranted perfect, ve BOSTON STORE, 118 & 120 State-st. ~ Money refunded at all Times if Goods are not Satistastory. PIANOS AND ORGANS. PELTON, POMEROY & CROSS GENERAL AGENTS FOR CHICKERING & SONS, HAZELTON BROS, ERNEST GABLER, DECKER & SON PIANOS, AND WILCOX & WHITE, TAYLOR & FARLEY ORGANS, 150 & 152 STATE-ST., CHICAGO, Second-hand Pianos, ‘We have in stock, and offer for sale, the following Second-hand Pinnos: STEINWAY Uerebt,..f-2ctare: handsome case, about 5 years old. in every espect equal to new, and wil! be warranted as such. FISCHER Spray Zoctsse; nanarome case. about 3 yeurs old, and in excellent order, CHICKERING S2cie:, ctsvorstels amisboa case, ricbly carved consoles. Will be disposed of ata yery small price, LYON & HEALY ‘ally warrante LYON & HEALY, State and Monroe-sts. NOTICE. Upright, 6ié-octave, 2 years old, equal wo new, RUSH MEDIGAL COLLEGE. CHICAGO, May 12, 1890. sition of ‘*Clin- for the acne ts Shair of Diseases of ical Adjunct to the Children” vi eld in Rush Medical College, commencing May ba. ‘The duties of the gentleman tilling the position will be to deliver one clinical lecture per ‘week throughout the year on the Diseases of Cilll- dren. Application should bemade to the undersigned, assign subjects. : RIDGE, M. D., JAMES H. ETHE! E, M.D. TO RENT. FOR RENT, OR SALE ON EASY TERMS, ‘i Fine Four-Story and Basement Store, 18 and 20 Michlgan-a¥., 60x124, WM. C. DOW, Tribune Buildlog. SUICMER COOK STOVE. HOOKS, “THE LATE AMePiquenard, Esq, His valuable Miscellaneous and Architec- tural Library was sold yesterday to H. D: Chapin, comer Madison and Dearborn-sts. He is closing it out at half the original cost. READ THESE PRICES: 3 Published at. Gallhabaud—Monuments An- glents Et Modernes--4 vol: . Price, rocco « Revue General tecture Rt Des Travaux Pub- Hes 32 vols. 34 row morocco... Enevelopwdiit "Architect ure ensuelle vol: 200, 20. fal Bt Mecuratlg-—i0voisy boards Gutlhabaud — L'Arcnicee ture Duv Ve Au XViime Sicelo Les Arts Qui En Dependent— 4 vols. $¢ morocco Nouvelles Annates struetion—I7 vols., board: Le Fabbriche # I’ Disequi bi ‘Audrea Palladio Ktuceoitl, Ed Hustrat! D. A. Ottayio iey~ Hott! Seamozzi—5 vols., foto, 150, 50. so. 180. 50. C0). oe 10. oo .. Figuler Lanne Séicntitique —Linv., 6 morocco, Is yulx... BG. 1s. ‘ratte Dé La Perspecteve Pris Pai Tol Id 2. Creeuire of Non aly—¥h cture of Noi Folio, Xe MUFOCOD.-. v2.23 = 20. 20. | The Mechanics of Engineering ~Svo., eloth. 1 vol. 4. roceo..s “8 The Aniiquities “of ““Athvas Z Hart's’ Parish “Chureies“Jte. ‘ito., cloth, wee CS 5 Buildings and" “‘Sionumenis, ‘Modern and Medleval—ito, pete 10. releth's: tect 5. Recueil De bres—Folio, 4: morocco, 10. 5 Journal De" L/Architecture—i vol. 5 ss 1. e '; Paris, 177. lo & Traits ‘Theorique De L'art De I Atntales a Genie Civiizave, 20" BO naales Dir Gonie " AM vol rod murovse.. BGO. AT. Gazette Des Architecte: 34 red muroceo, folio. 100. 50. vt ie oT ol 18. / Avehitecturo—Follu, 2 Volsq Tene De ee Chaisues wan, OF oo ‘matte De jaue-8 Fis, Svu.. $f muroce: 7 26. 18.50 ‘A Morin Itesisuinee ‘Bes rhuux—2voln..Svu.sgmorocey. 10, 5. Claudel und Latoque t’ratique be L'Art De Construire—l- VOL, 8V04 }6 MOTOCED.vecvensaee Ge 8. oe Eplnnd-Giephust folio, iphund—Elephunt follu, irad morocco... 100, Le Genie Indust 3 Inventions — Francaises ot Mtrangeres Par Armenyuud— 40vols., 8ro., red morocco, 1-70, 160, so, Annales, Ges Poi “Be, Cintus: sevs—129 vols., 8 vo., }¢ ure B00, 150. Revu Vols, Svou bs ftven calf 200, 100, Architeoture ydraulique— ‘serles, 4 vols., 4t0., uld calf; Paris, 1750; scurce... eeeeee 25. Paluis ” Chuteaux, é uizonus De France Du XVe. Au XVille. Siegie Pur Ciaudo Suuvazeot—4 vols. dto., un- ah 78. pe isan bar tony Dessare | ie Lyon ir Tony Desjar- dins—1 vol, parts. -. 200. 50. Monugruphie De “iaiais “iia Commerce Eleve A Lyon Par Rene Dardel—l vol., purts. 20. as. Guzetto Des Arehitectes Butlment—1 vol. follo, 14 red morocco. woos” ADS 6. Le Moniteur Des Architectes— iglty follo, red moreca- 48. 4. ‘Art Architectural —2 vols. folio, bonds 100. 50, Editices De Rome Moderne. ou cl lols, isons, La Ville De Bu Letaroutlls. 160. 6. rt Uque—s vuls., 4t0., parts, in Dibdons..vscay3 veces 8. 22. Dix Jivres,‘DiArchitecture De : Vitruve—2 vols., bourds, itu.. 10, 8. Ornamentation Usuette, De Toutes Les Epoquos.Duns Les Arts Industriely, I vol. folio, morgceo., 7 20. 10. . Moties Constructions En Bois— a Folio,3g morocco... 10. & Cweur, ‘Daly Architecture neraire—Kollo, 4 morocco. 40. 20. Flore Ornementate, pur Ruprich — ioberts, folio Plates, In. binde: eo. 30, LjReyniud Walte : 2 vole, follo, 3§ morovc a4, Re. Rondelet L'Art De B: 10. bow 80. 40. mm eo. 80. Vigiue | beut | An Nouvelle—Folio obiouy, POCO n, sacs seoteonesscedas 10, ™ Pictor Petit—Petit’s “ki PArebitectuses follo vblong, e moreceo,.. . 4 Buy Tralte De La Chai vals, follo clot co. 30, "Bateries ke Fer les Et Fer boards... 30. 16, Journal “""Da"*"Menuiseri Speoiaiment Destine.- Aur Architectes, Aux Menuisiers t Aux Entrepreneurs—s vols., falio, @ moruce,. 15. Road feeia; 6 vase undetet architeet 6 vol Sto, boards ... srseaes 140, 70. Cour’s D'Architecture—l vol Sv0., 34 roun, 1631. 2.50 Traite” D'Arc Antoine; 4 to old calf, 1073..... 2.50 Ay acinet, 5 Lornement, olyehrome—Paris Firman, Bigot: folio, cloth.. 20. 50. apitntlons | Champcize ell; Dessinees, ctitil vols follo, demoroees. 40. 20. lise “Cnthedrale a Keims— Foliv, 34 10. 5 Sv0., 46 red muruceo. 70, 85, Histoire Natarelie, Pe un—W _vols., se, 18. Be. 15. 1 ect ers Monthiy, 10 Nos. un- bound... see Be R The ‘sechinGibeist—~deycied “to ngineering, etc., 12 Nos., un- Pound 2.40 1.50 @ Worksiio Nos, unbound, 19, 8. Van Nostrand’s Eclectic Maya- une, N. ¥..—1 Nos. in binder, Si. z Architectura: Review und Amorican Builders’ Journal, 22 ‘Nos. UNDOUNG. +255, --. 11. 4 Les Appuriments “Brive M. imperatrice au Pal des Tuileries decorés, par AL yefuel; 4 plates, follo in binder sacs. 80, 15. One lundred and “awent: ‘Photogruphs of Statuary. in France, Italy, etc, 2433 folio in binder; ‘rure $ 80, Gembexbehallo organ fur den fortschritt in allen zmeizen : dor Kuust—Industrie, et Wilhelm Baumer und J Schnorr, 6 parix, in bind 40, 20. Deukmaebler der Deutseh . Bankunst, Darges Mit von Georg Moller; 2% plates, tn binder follo.. 15. nicuzo Art Journal, scarce (183); unbound... 2 The Manufacturer ond Bi |. ¥. 42 Nos, unbound........ 4.20 Illustraions “of Greater Chi: CAO, 410. pp.; scurce. be 50 Linen Perspective, by 'N. Bartholomew, 8¥0. cloth... Le so Amerlenn Builder’ and Journal - ‘of Art, Snuinbers, unbound., 9.75 2. London’ litustruted ‘News’ Isid to 1376; a complete set, Wruls., m0! aye 160, irper’s fsa 1O 139); Suvols.; a complete set, 14 roan, + 226, 100. Diokensai ¥¢ calf; Svois: ; lea, 50. Hoxarth “(original edition); i morocco, elephant fuliv, with the suppressed plates 100. 5o. Gittrays (original edit morocco, el lephant folio, 50. Scott, Sdvols., in 25 Nus. the Househvuild Edition, (aow out of print ao. per: 2vuls.; ‘end edition) = ton, very scarce... a. Prescott’s Works, i5¥ 23, Guixot’s History 0! ‘Gvols., cloth. : 25. Popular Edycstor, bois. cloth: » Macaulay's Uistory of England, svuls., sheep. 4.50 ume’s Hlsto1 5. as. CHAPIN’S, . Corner Madison and Dearborn Streets. OIL TANK. Oil Tank [ez useful. Patent- right for the Suite and North FREUDENBERG & CO., % North Clark-st, BEMOVALS, For Summer Cooking and a Cool House, THE HESS STOVE “ECONOMY” Leads the market. It burns wood and coal. HLESS STOVE CO., 115 LAKE-ST. Sirs Tor sae or DR. A. REEVES JACKSON ‘Has removed his office and residence to #271. MICHIGAN-AY. _ Hours, 8 to 9 and 2 to 4. -RELIGIOUS, Emest Renan’s. Lecture on Marcus Aurelius, the ’ ‘Roman Emperor, An Interesting Account of the Most Pions of Pa- . ans, The Nonconformist Strength in the English ~ Parliament—Bradlaugh and _-- Queensbury. Adam's First Wife—The Predecessor and Destroyer of Mother Eve, Science and Theology—A Reply to a Re- cent Article in the “ Popular . Science Monthly.” General Notes—Peérsonals—Sun. .day Small Talk—Serv. ices To-Day. JESUS WEPT, Jesus wept! O sacred tears Glistening thro’ the mist of years; Not for those whom we call dead ‘Were those holy 'tear-drops shed; Not for those now passed away ‘To the realms of endless day, But for us who linger here, Bending o'er a pull-clad bier; For the loved who watch and wait By the hearthstone desolate; For the feet that ne'er will come ‘Tho’ the weary duy be done, Jesus wept! The Lord of Glory— He, the*undefiled, the boly— Marked our sorrows, griefs, and fears + Passing thro’ this vale of tears, Where each human heart must know All the bitterness of wo. Sacred chrism thus consecrate ‘To the lone and desolate; To the child all motherless, To the sister, brotherless; Many a grict’hath calmer slept, Since the Son of Mary wept, 0 ye tears!—not jewels rare Resting on a brow most fair; Not the lustrous Orient gem. In u monurch's diadem, i Cun their pristine brightness keep i When the eye hath learned to weep. Backward thro’ the ages past Many a longing look fg cast i To the spot where Lazarus slop: | ‘Where the Man of Sorrows wep’ ‘ ‘There would I submissive bend— Find a sympathizing friend. Sacred be that hallowed shrine Hoary with the touch of Time; Many a pilgrim there will rest ‘With bis cross hid on his bregst, Reverent bow, and kiss the sod Moistened by the tear of God. Many E. Gran, MARCUS AURELIUS. ERNEST RENAN'S LECTURE UPON ‘HE PIOUS EM- PEROR. London Correspondence Philadelphia Telegraph. “Iwish,” said M. Rénun, addressing his qudi- ence, “ to speak to you about, a book I hold in my hand. “It sparkles with Divine thought. It is the. manual of a life of resignation left us by the-moet pious of men, Marcus Aurelius, There have been men exerting a more lasting influence, but none were so perfect ashe: It is the-glory of sovereigns that the most blameless model of virtue should be found in their ranks, * “The hereditary descent of wisdom upon the throne js very raro, I know of but two striking examples,—the two admirable reigns of Antoni- nus and Marcus Aurelius. The goodness of An- toninus did not make him commit faults; he was untormented by the inward wound ever con- suming the heart of his adupted son, who was the victim of feverish self-examination. The finest thoughts are those left unwritten, and on this score Antoninus triumphed over M. Aurelius; but I must add that we should know: little of Antoninus but for the portrait painted by his adopted son, as if his humility urged him to por- truy one better than himself, In the “book of his ‘Thoughts’ we find the noble figures of his amily and his masters.. Thus we get an in- sight into those old Roman families who had lived under the bad Emperors, but who had sternly preserved theirrepublican virtues. They were admirers of Cato and the fine old stoics whose souls had not bent under tyranny. Domi- tian’s reign was hated in those circles. The sages who had passed through it without yield- ing were honored as heroes." M. Rénan ob- served that the wholesome principle of adoption had made the Imperial Court of the second cen- tury a nursery of virtue. Nerva, by this desire, gave mankind a hundred years of the greatest progress known to history. The working of the system was illustrated by the instance of Marcus Aurelius himself. The throne wasreached with- out appeal to birth or to any kind of “right divine.” The Empire was a civil burden, to be accepted when the hour struck, and the hour was not to be hastened. Marcus Aurelius was but 18 when the Empire was as- sured to him. ‘Che evening on which Antoninus, when he felt he was dying, caused to be carried into bls adopted son's room the golden statue ot Fortune, the proper place for which was the Emperor's ‘cabinet, the new ruler was neither surprised nor rejoiced. He had long been sur- feited with all delights without baving tasted them,—his profound philosophy had shown him their vanity, The great drawback which mukes practicul fife unbeurnble.to the man of high principles is that, it he brings to it his ideals, bis best qualities are changed Into such glaring defects that the egotist or the man of routine often succeeds better in that line. Three or four times the virtue of Marcus Aurclius was on the point of ruining him. It led him to make a first fulse step by persuading him to take as his partner in the Empire Verus, to whom he was under no obligation. Verus was a shal- jow trifler. Prodijies of kindness and address were needed to hinder him from committing acts of folly. The wise Emperor, diligent himself, used to drag with him intobis cab- inet the doltish colleague he had chosen. He always persisted in treating the man as serious; he did notonce revolt against this tormenting partnership. Like people who have been well brought up, Marcus Aurelius felt list- less; his manners were the result of a determi- nation to be polite and dignified. Souls of this kind, whether for fear of paining others or through their respect for human nature, are not willing to own they see the evil. Their life isa Perpetual act of dissimulation. “According to some, he was himself the victim of his own dis- simulation, since in his intimate converse with the gods, speaking of a spouse unworthy of him, he thanked them for having given him “a wife so affectionate and simple.’ M. Rénan believed that the weakness of Marcus Aurelius ss to Faustina had been exaggerated. The scheme ublic succor founded by Nervaand Trajan he developed. New colleges for free education were established, the alimentary procurators became functionaries of the first rank, and were chosen with care; provision was made for the education of poor women by an institution named after Faustina. The principle that the State has duties of a somewhat paternal kind toward its members was proclaimed for the first time by the Antonines. it was when encamped on the plains of Hun- gary that he wrote the fest pages of the grand ook which has revealed to us his whole soul. He seems to have kept, when young, 2 diary of his thoughts. He recorded his favorit. maxims and inscribed passages from the moralists who spoke most ty his heart, the principles which had sustained him during the day, sometimes the self-reproaches prompted by his conscience. M. Rénan quoted ‘numerous instances. One evening all the fimages of bis pious youth cane back again to his memory, and he passed some time in recounting what.he owed to each of the good beings who had environed him, “Ex- amples set by my grandfather Verus: Swect- hess of manners, ‘immnutable patience.” “Qualities found in my futher: Modesty, manly sposition.” “To imitate my mother's piety, her kindness, to refrain as she did, not only from doing evil, but even from thinking it; to lead her frugal life, which was so unlike the luxury of the rich.” Afterward ap- peared to him in turn Diognetus, who inspired him with a taste for philosophy and the Hellenic discipline; Junius Rusticus, who taught him to avoid all affectation of elegance in style; Apollonius of Chalcis, who realized the stoic ideal of firmness.and gentleness; as 2. Prince he learnt from Fronto ‘what envy, du-- licity, hypocrisy can be: found in a tyrant, and. Bow bard Gan ‘be the heart of » patrician;” from his brother Severus, “ who made him acquainted itn ‘Thrasea, Helvidius, Cato, Brutus, who gave im the idea of what a free Stace is, whose rule is the natural equality of ‘the citizens and the equality of thelr rights, and that of which puts: beforo else’ respect for quowering above the leur was Antoninu the father why had adopted him, whose ima; rs he’ traces with gratitude and love. Ho ‘thanks the gods for these blessings and confesses bis own Shortcom:ngs. ‘This Divine candor breathes in every page. Never did any man write with more simplicity of himsclf, with the single aim of unburdening bis heart, with no other witness" Eroperly speuking, Marcus Aurelius knows no Philosophy; though he owed well-nigh every- thing to stoicism, transformed by tho Homan spirit, he is of no school. The book of Marcus Aurelius, having no do} tic base, will keep its freshness forever. It decides no controverted question. In theology he tlonts between pure leism, polytheism, interpreted physically in the stoic munuer, anda sort of cosmical pantheism. ‘He does not adhere much more to-one of these Aypotheses thin to the other, and he uvails him- self indifferently of the three appellations— deist, polytheist, pantheist, Marcus Aurelius hed no speculative philosophy; his theology was ultogether mude up of contradictions; he bad no fixed idea as.to the soul and immortality. How was it that he was. profoundly moral msn without those beliefs which are now regarded as the foundations of morality? How came !t that he was eminently religious without having pro- fessed any of the doginas known as natural re- ligion? That is the question we haye to study, ‘The doubts which, from the point of view of speculative reason, hover over the truths of natural religion, are not, as Kant has admirably shown, accidental, susceptible of removal, inci- dent, ns is sometimes imagined, to certain moods of the human mind. These doubts are inherent, in the very nature of these truths, and it might be suid without paradox that if these doubts were removed the truths themselves which they attack would vanish by the same stroke of the pen. Let us suppose, in fuct, future punishment and rewnrd to be proved directly, Positively, in @ manner evident to all; where’ would be the merit of well-doing? None but madmen would light-heartedly hurry on to their daninution. . A crowd of ignoble souls would win their suivution with the cards on the table; they would force, in & minner, the hand of the Deity. Who does not see that ‘In sueb u system there is no longer any morality or religion? In the moral and religious order of things it is indispensable to believe’ without demonstration; there {s no longer a question of certainty, but of faith. This, you see, is what deism forgets with its way of rash atirmation. It forgets that too precise be- liefs as to tao destiny of man would §weep away all moral merit, As for ourselves, the moment anybody should tell us of a per- emptory argument of this kind we should do as. SaintLouls did when somebodyspoke to him about the miraculous wafer. We should refuse to xo and see it, What necd have we for these brutish ofs, which have no application save inthe er order of facts and which would cramp our freedom? We should be afraid of becoming like those speculators in the virtues of those yulgur weighers of scruples who carry into the aifuirs of the soul the course egoism of practical life. In the first days which followed the be- ginning of fuith in’ the resurrection of Jesus this cume to: Mga in the most touching manner, His true friends at heurt, the tender souls, loved “belief without proof better than sight. Blessed are they who have not seen and yet have be- lieved” was tne watchword of tle situation, Charming watchword; eternal symbol of tender and generous idealism, which feels a horror of touching with the hand what shouldbe secon with the heart only. Our good Marcus Aurelius, in this os in all else, was in advance of the cent- urics. Never did he care to put himself in har- mony with himself 23 toGod_and the soul. As though he had read Kant's “Criticism of Practi- eal Reason,” he saw that when the Tufl rite is in question no formula fs absolute, and that in mat- ter of that kind one can only get a chance of having seen the truth once in one's life, if one is much exposed to contradiction. M: Renan suid: “I hero touch on one of the most delicate points in the biography of Marzus Aarelius, It is, unhappily, certain that death- sentences against Christians were pronounced and executed during his reign. The policy of the Antonines was uniform inthis respect. They saw in Christianity a secret anti-social sect, which dreamt of the overthrow _of the Empl like ull men attached to the old Roman prin les they believed it necessary to put it down. No doubt it would have been worthy of the wise Emperor to suppress the edicts which intlicted cruel and unrighteous penalties. But it must be remarked at the outset that the true spirit of liberty, as we understand it, was then compre- hended by nobody, and that Christianity, when it got the upper hand, did not reduce it to prac- uce better than the Pagan Emperors. In the second place, the abrogation of the law against illicit societies would have been the ruin of the Empire, which was essentiully based on the prin- ciple that the State ought not to receive into its bosom any heterogeneous suciety. The princi- pie was a bad one according to modern ideas, but it is none the less certain that it was the corner- stone of the Homan Constitution. Marcus Au- retius softened it down to the best of his ability, and one of the glories of his reign is the exten- sion which he gave to the right of association. Meanwhile he did not go down tothe root. ‘The reproack which can be brought against him is the same which might be addressed tothe sovereigns cf our day who do not suppress with a stroke of the pen all the Inwsrestrictive of the right of public meetings, of association, of the press. Atthis distance of time we see clearly that Marcus Aurelius would have been wiser had he been more Hberal. Perhaps Christianity. if left free, would have developed ina less disas- trous fashion the theocratic and absolute princi- ple inherent in it. Butone ought not to reproach a statesman for not having evoked a radical rev- olution with a view to events which were not to happen until many centuries after his time. The virtue of Mureus Aurelius, like our own, rests on reason, on nature. Saint Louis was a very virtuous man, because he was a Christian; Mar- cus Aurelius was the mcst pious of men, not cause he was a Pagan, but because he wasa per- fected man. He was the honor of human kind, and not of any determinate religion. Science would come to destroy seemingly God and the immortal soul, which the book of the ‘Thoughts’ would give us back still young in. life and truth. The religion of Marcus Aurelius is the ubsoluto religion—that which results from the simple fact of «lofty moral conscience confronting the uni- verse. It is of no race, of no country. No rev- olution, no change, no discovery can alter it.” —— NONCONFORMISTS. THEIR STRENGTH IN THE ENGLISH PARLIAMENT. Moncure D. Conway in Cincinnati Commercial. ‘Tne new Parliament contains a far larger Non- | conformist force than any known in English history, and it will be difficult to keep its hands off the Established Church. It is pretty certain that Mr. Gladstone's Cabinet will contain the Quaker John Bright, the theistic Unitarians Stansfleld and Chamberlain, and possibly even such heretics as Dilke and Fawcett. The vic- tory has been won by Radicalism, and Gladstone must give them some appropriate reward. {have particularly noticed, also, that most of the young Radicals who have been elected are graduates of Trinity Hall, Cambridge. More than ascore of the .ew members were there graduated,—four timesas many as any other college has fostered. Trinity Hall is that nest of heresy wherein the agnostic Leslie, Stephens, and Prof. Fawcett plumed their wings. There have been elected also some uble authors and writers, such as Arthur Arnold and Passmore Edwards, Henry Labouchere and Assheton Dilke (brother of Sir Charles), whereas such ignorant pretenders as poor Kenealy, who went from his political to his literal grave, are not to be found in the revolutionized assembly. ‘The triumphs of heresy ere startling enough. ‘There are not only mild Quaker heretics to tho number of ten, and a goodly supply of Jews, but there are more than twenty Unitarians, twice as many as ever before sat together in Parliament. Besides this, there has been the election of Charles Bradlaugh. This event has been decid- edly tho salient episode of the election. It still occupies the religious and the country press far more than the Premiership or the Cabinet. Samuel Morley, who sent the telegram already alluded to, recommending Northampton Liberals to vote for Bradlaugh and Labouchere, lms been brought to do penance on his knees before the brethren, He says bo telegraphed in the heat of party, exoitement, and now laments the result. in truth, Morley thought the Liberals would hardly win, and did not know how casily. his part might spare Bradiaugh's seat. Other Lib- eral leaders in London had the same fear,—in- cluding Mr. Adam, the Liberal whip,—and they have atoned for favoring bis return by biackballing him in the Keform Club. feanwhile, Bradluugh had to leave Lon- don: to escape the gratulations and. visits which poured in on him. He went off tishing in the stream where Izuak Walton loyed to angle. But his Frenen friends insisted ona visit; he was féted with enthusiasm in Paris, by Deputies, ina way which might make one think we were in the old days when Thomas Paine was lonized in that Capital. Bradiaugh speaks French per- fectly. From among his. old fricuds who gathered round him, one was, I dare say, con- epicuously absent,—Prince Napoleon. However, I baye not been able to interview the member for Northampton since his election. I may say that there ure many grave thinking people, by no means favorable to Mr. Bradlaugh’s views, either religious or political, who, nevertheless, are glad that he is in Parliament. They believe that when a man has worked his way up by force of character-and mind tothe leadership of a very large number of the people, including many thousands of the working class, that man haga right to be heard asa representative in the National Legislature, and they even believe that toexclude him,and consequently his con- stitgency (spread throughout the country), might easily coustitute a source of evil, if not of re <q OW the other hand, against these remarkable triumphs of heresy, Scotch orthodoxy is able to exhibit the political head of Lord Queensberry, which was solemnly cut off last week. I have already had occasion to write you concerning some remarkable writings of this Conservative Peer. Lord Queensberry (of the Douglas fami-: ly) and Lady Queensberry (of the, Montgomery Place family) own a pew in cont ceo veality Thinking, perhaps, that there yw: there is in the old claim of Peers, that their position raises them above popular prejudices and fosters individual independence. English people have beon startled at the strange inci. dent of 2 Tory Peer undergoing murtsrdom for his ‘religious opinions. But Lora Queensberry himself knew that this was not the cuse with the representative Peers of Seotland. More than a Yeur uzo he told me that this event would prov- ably ocgur. .There wus, indeed, no precedent forit, Ever, since the Union tho Scotch’ Peers have met in what was supposed s purely formal wny to ‘cleat: representatives in new Parlia- ments; every time the sitting Peers haye been chosen again unless: they retired voluntarily from infirmity, or Involuntarily from death (that 48, physical death, for some old Scotch Lords huve been long dead otherwise); and it wits supposed here that not even Lord ’Queensberry's public repudiation of Christianity and connection with the Sonth Place’ Society could break th§prece- dent. ‘But'the Duke of Buccleuh, who had just Jost the heart of Midlothian, which he bas long owned, and even Dumtreissbire, which seemed to be in his pocket—this Duke wanted somebody to kill. Besides he represents the old Protestant Papacy of Scotiand. ‘The Marquis of Lothian represents the Roman Cutholic Papacy. These two made friends and joined hands, Herod-and- Pilate-wise, as the day approached when the list was tobe made -out. For, though there isa bullot, the Duke of Buccleugh’s slate is always chosen. Tney gave Lord Queensberry notice, however. - Meanwhile the Scotch puipits and Pious newspapers thundered against Queens- rry, and commanded the Scotch Lordsnot tures elect, bin. toes stuns some of them: thoy “didn’t wish to appear as if acting under popular dictation. So the Duke wrote to L e berry suggesting that he had better resiyn his Seat on account of. ill-health. Of course, what I am. saying .is not known over here. but -Lord Queensberry showed me the Duke's pious suggestio falsi. Lord Queens- berry replied asa man of honor should, though he knew his seat was lost, He met the assem- bled Scotch Peers and made a very powerful specch, .The Marquis of Lothian, Roman Catho- lc though he is, was spokesman. He did not seem able to distinguish between a denial of Christianity and Atheisin until Lord Queens- berry expluined to him that there were Jews in Parliament who were not Christians, and yet not Atheists. Throughont the discussion it was found that the only person present who seemed to have any acquaintance with theological ques- tions and philogophical distinctions was the ker- etical Lord. Upto the time when he became interested in religious questions, the Marquis of Queensberry had‘n reputation for racing, hunt- ‘ing, and fondness for sports which even included ‘pugilism, and some described him us fast. Tho Scoteh Lords were none the less devoted to bim. But since he bas paid more attention to South Place than to the “meet,” and bas turned to books of philosophy oftener than to thosg of Tattersall: since, in short, this young nobleman. has become a really religious man, and one stu- dious of great moral and social questions, their pious old Lordships and all the parsons have poured their fury upon him. But he told them they could not hurt or harm him; and, in truth, & more cheerful martyr I never saw or read of. ADAM’S FIRST WIFE. THE HEBREW TRADITION ABOUT LILITH. St. Louis Republican. Among the mighty pictures with which the Genius of Michael Angelo bas adorned the Sis- tine Chapel at Rome, perhaps none attracts more gencral xdmiration than the “Temptation and Expulsion.” In the centre stands the fatal tree which “ brought death into the world and all our wo.”: Around its trunk is coiled the gerpent, out of whose folds—or rather, forming a part of them—rises the figure of a beautifu! woman, who hands to the reclining Eve the accursed ap- ple; while Adam, leaning over Eve, seems more fascinated by the fair temptress than the golden fruit. Onthe. right an angel is driving from Paradise. the unhappy pair, who fell before a temptation that none but angels could resist. The serpent-woman is commonly supposed to be a mere fancy of the artist, but it is something much more interesting and important; for it may be said to have originated in what Biblical critics call the Elobist and Jehovist accounts of the creation. In the firstof these (Genesis, {., 27) weread: “So God created man in His own image, In the Image of God ecreuted He him; mule and female created He them.” In the second (Genesis, 1i., 21-22) we rend: “And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall pen Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs and closed up the fiesh instead thereof. And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, mado He a woman, and brought her to the min.” This apparent con- tradiction, or difference, gave rise to a curious Hebrew myth, which we will now present—in a condensed form—as narrated by Mr. 3. D. Con- way, in. his “Demonology and. Devil-Lore.’ ‘That author draws his material from Elsen- menger’s ‘‘ Entdeckes Judenthum," where it is accompanied ‘by “ample references to rabbin- ical authorities.” The serpent-woman of: the Sistine fresco is none other than Lilith, the first wife of Adam. The name is derived from the Hebrew Lil,which means “night.” It occurs in the Bible onl: once,—Isaiab, xxxiv., 14,—where itis translate “sereech-owL” “In the V1 ite it is rendered “Lamia,” and.in Luther’ ible * kobold,” or goblin, ghost, night-spectre. ‘The legend says that Adam’s first conversution with Lilith was devoted to the question of matrimonial rights, he claiming to be ber superior and master. She denied the claim, on the ground that both were created at the same time, which forbade the idea of any superiority or mustership on his part. ‘The result was a quarrel, followed by an eternal separation. Lilith pronounced certain mugical words which brought her wings with which she flew out of Eden and out of sight. Whereupon Adam ened unto the Lord, saying, * Master of the world, the woman whom thou didst give me has flown away.” Three angels were then sent in search of the lost one. They found her floating in the air over the Red Sea, but in answer toall thoir arguments in favor of return sho said that Paradise was no Paradise to her if she was to be the servant of an autocratic spouse. The angels went back and reported, and were again sent. Aguin she refused, and they then doomed her to be the mother of many children, all of whom would die in infancy, The terrible penalty drove ber to despair, and she was about to commit suicide, when the celestial messenger promised her—by way of compensation—that sheshould have pow- er over all children from birth up to the eighth day, she promising never to disturb any babes who were under their protection. So the charm hung round the necks of Hebrew infants bore the names of the three angels,—Senoi, Sanseno!, and Sammangelof. Lilith is gapposed to exer- cise a malignant care over all children born out of wedlock. She also has espectal power on the first day of the month and on the Sabbath even- ing. In old times among the Jews it was be- lieved that when a child laughed in its sleep Lilith was with it, and the little sleeper was then struck three blows on the nose; this sentence veing thrice repented: “Away, cursed Lilith! thou hast no place here! Adam, now the first grass-widower, had Eve made for him out of the rib; and the second wife, remembering her humble origin, became that model of obedience which all of her daughters do notimitate. Meanwhile—so runs the legend—the devils were created, and their chief was a fallen angel—Samuel—who had been a tlaming serpent, leader of the Seraphim. He witnessed with envy and hatred the happiness of the young couplo in Eden, and found in Lilith a ready sympathizer and congenial companion. They were married, and celebrated their un- hallowed nuptials by a conspiracy against Adam and Eve. The temptation of the latter was said to be the work of Lilith, who persuaded tho serpent on guard at the gate of Eden to lend her bis body, and in that body she did the deadly mischief—and, it is to_be ho} fully satisfied her womanly wrath. Hence the curse upon the serpent, which may have included the keeping of Lilith forever in the shape she had assuined. This probably was the origin of the notion, men- tioned by an ancieat commentator, that while the serpent was yet ercct it had a virgin's head. It is so represented in some illustrated medieval missals, from whence we have no doubt Michael Angelo derived his idea. Other traditions de- clare that Lilith regained her original forin; was always young, marvelously beautiful and gor- geously dressed. She was, or is, what is now called ‘ta decided blonde,” and her glorious iden bair au irresistible attraction. Accord- ing to the same authority she was the mother of Leviathan, Asmodeus, and all other most cele- brated and aristocratic devils. Mephistopheles is thought to have bad Lilith In his eye when he warns Faust against the lovely witch who appears at the Walpurgis-night orgic. A more modern poet, Rosetti, says: and are her flowers; for where THe ke ot TopenO Lilith: wots shod scene And sofi-shed kisses und soft sleep shull snare? ‘Lo! as that youth's eyes burned at thine, so went ‘Thy spell throuch him, und left bis straight neck bent, ‘And round his heart one strungling golden hale. The “Lamia” of John Keats is based on the story of a serpent-maiden in Crete, whose earth-born husband withered and dicd in her embrace. The name of Lumia was long used to rrfghten Italian children, ns that of Lilith was by Hebrew nurses. Singularly enough, in one of the Egyptian scutpturus in the British mu- seum, representing the: Osirian on his road to heaven, bis soul iu the form of a human-headed bird is seen drinking the water of life poured out from a jar by the serpent-goddess who colls around the saeréd sycamore; ‘her woman's face und bust appearing ‘amid the branches very much like Lilith fn the old pictures. The strunge mytb of Adam's first wife probably dates back to the earlist Egyptian civilization, and from thence passed into the Hebrew my- thology. SCIENCE AND THEOLOGY. IS SCIENCE ATHEISTIC OR ATHEOUS? ‘To the Editor of The Chicago Tribune, -. . CnicaGo, May-12.—An article in the Pomdar Sctence Monthly which appeared on May 2 in THE ‘Tripune complains bitterly of the “denuncia- tions" which theologians expend upon “modern physical science.” “They have no excuse,” it says, “for gettang into a passion with science, and striving to array religious prejudices against. it! We have beenamazedat the fatuity of many thoughtless theologians, who think they are do- Ing God service by arraying modern physical science against Him, charging that itis atheistic. ‘Their predecessors have been more wise, and have generally recognized that ‘the study of Nature led-up to Nature's God; but now, on the contrary, weare assured that the study of Nature Jeads to the denial of God.” Now, if our language must be not less truth- ful and plain than charitable,’ that article b= trays adeplorable want of logic. One logical fallacy, which runs through the whole, is that of the “ irrelevant conclusion,” technically known, as the “ignoratio elenchi,” or ignoring the ques- tion at. issue and arguing to the wrong polat, ‘This fallacy is but too often the great resource of those who have to support a weak case. The article in question ignores the point where the quarrel between scientists, and theologians, ang Philosophers arises; it ignores in what that quarrel ‘consists, and ‘continually confounds “ modern physical science” with the science and study of Nature in general. No philosopher, no theologian ever did or ever does object to scientific investigation in the proper field of observation and induction; nor toany science which really is science. In all the cases in which scientists complain of having been or of being persecuted by philosophers and theologians. or'in which they do reully en counter opposition from them or the Church, it ig never .for their science or their scientific dis- coveries, but for publishing us “science” mere .theories and hypotheses opposed to the belief of mankind, and demanding, while they'are yet unproved or unverified, and are only con- jectures moze.or less plausible, that they shall be received ns certuin, and philosophy, theology, religion, politics, and social order, ull that bas hitherto been held us settled as true and sucred, shall be altered and moditied so as to conform to them. Let their authors pursue their investi- gations in quiet, and not disturb the public with their hypotheses till they have poved them, con~ verted them into exact science, and nobody will oppose them; and both the Church and society, theologians and philosophers, will accept with gratitude and generously reward their potient labors and unwearied investigations. But this is precisely what the Huxleys, the Bilchners, the ‘Taines, tho Darwins, the Spencers, the Tyndalls refuse to do; and hence they ate opposed by all sensible men, not, as they would have the world believe, for their science, but for their lack of science, and their attempt to impose on society: as science whut is not science, what has no sclentitic validity, and springs only from their own delusions or_distempered "brains. When thus the other day Prof. Hurley made tha assertion “that the doctrine of evolution was no longer a matter of speculation, but an abso- lute fact,” we may sup) that he had in mind the facts which the cvolution theory claims us its firm basis, and that he referred to the truths which the theory no doubt does contain; but it was-his duty as a philosopher to know that facta do not warrant all the couciusions, or rather suppositions, which that theory puts forth; it wus his duty to know that tho’ “Nebular, Dar- winian, and Spencerian" theories have nothing like the exactness and certainty of science: and asa logiciun it was his duty to distinguish in the doctrine of evolution the elements of truth from the elements of error. But Prof. Huxley and many of the modern scientists do not pretend to be logicians, philosophers, and thevlozinns; yet they would leave the field of observation and experiment, and as philosophers and theologians render an account of the or igin, the principles, znd meaning of the cosmic facts they observe and classify. Habituated to the study of sensible, physical facta, they over- Jook or deny an order of facts as real, a3 evi- dent, as certain as any of the physical facts which they have lafd open to the eye. Their theories are too low and too narrow for the and exclude the more elevated and univel convictions of tho race. Let these scientists view Nature as it is and in its entirety; let them bear in mind the caution of Mr. Mill, “to dis- criminateaccurately between what they realty do observe and what they only infer from the fucts observed"; let them cautiously guard against confusing facts observed with inferences from those facts; let them cease to be unduly intlu- enced by any prejudices or theories in record- ing the facts observed and allowing them their roper weight (for who will not be able to obtain ucts in support of his opinion, however er roneous?); let them admit no conclusions which. are bronder than their premises; and when thus they shall have opened to themselves some glimpses of the real order of the universe, they will be appalled at their former materialistic narrowmindedness. It is against this narrow- mindedness of scientists that theologians and philosophers expend their denunciations; to ac- cuse them of opposing. science or the cultivation: of the sciences is a gross mistake and an un- merited culumny. Again, if theologians denounce * ical science” as atheistic, is it loge: off the charge by denying that “Nuture”* or the spudy of Nature is atheistic? Atall times have the Holy Scriptures, the Church, and all theo- logians taught that Nature is a revelation of God, ns truc as the aupernataral revelation, and that “the invisible things of Him from thee: ton of the world are clearly seen, being under- stood by the things that arc made.” But when,” under ‘the guise of science and free thought, men of the highest intcliectual, literary, and social standing, like Ralph Waldo Emerson and his disciples, like Charles Darwin, Sir John Lub- bock, Profs. Huxley and Tyndall, Herbert Spen-. cer, Emile Littré, to say nothing of a host of other leaders of the scientific mob, and a great number of the medical profession, ure daily and hourly propuguting atheism, open or di Ht in our bigher lNterary and cultivated classea, howean the Popular Science Monthly be justi- fied in denying that modern: pBydical scl- ence represented’ by “Such men athelst- fc? | We- do not escape atheism by relegating God and his creative act to the unknowable,-for it is as much athelsm to declare God to be unknowable us it is to deny that He is. He is an atheist who is not atheist, and no one is. a theist who docs not ussert and hold that God is, and is Creator of the heavens and the earth, and all things visible and invisible; which no oue can do if God and His creative act are ab- solutely unknowable or even unknown. . He de- nies God who identitics Him with the cosmos or nature, and makes Him the being, substance, or underlying reality of the cosmic phenomena, as do undeniably the cosnists, if we may take Prof. John Fiske of Harvard College, or Mr. Spencer himself, as authority, And if the great majority of our modern scien- tists are decidedly atheistic, will they find a refuge with the Lord Bishop of Carlisle, as quoted by the Popular Science Monthly? Is it jogical to finda subterfuge in his distinction that science is athegus, but not atheistic? The Lord Bishop says: “All physical science, prop- erly so called, is compelled by its very nature to take no account of the being of God; as soon as- it does this it trenches upon theology and ceases to be physical science. If I might. coin a new word, 1 should say that ecience was athcous, and therefore could not be atheistic,—that is to say, its investigations and reasonings are A agree- ment conversant simply with observed facts and conclusions drawn from them, and in this senso it is atheous, or without recognition of God.” Is this “ the progress of # liberal and rational the- ology,” to whith the pular Science Monthly would call attention? i¢ distinction that science is utheous, but not atheistic, is cer- tainly subtle; yet it recalls to our minds the old truth of Aristotle, that physical science, properly so-called, is uot directly conversant with God. Tho scholastics, follow- ing in the footsteps of Plato and Aristotle, divided tho scientitic knowledge to which man cun naturally uttain into five sciences, namely: Logic and ethics; physical science, which in- Yestigutes the sensible facts and phenomena of Nature and their laws; mathematics, which Studies the quantities of ies; and meta~ physics or philosophy, which, resting on the truths of physics and mathematics, demon- strates the Nature of th the cause of the phenomena, the supersensibie, and the ultimate cause of nature itse:f. If now we take physical science in this restricted sense, can It be sald to De atheous, or without recognition of God? By no meuns.’ Physical science, in this restricted sense, deals directly only with the phenomenal,— that is to say, with sensible facts and their laws; in abservution it studies the events and changes that are produced, and in experiment forces Nature to betray her secrets, Butwhy learn the secrets that lie concealed in air and in forest and ficld, in rock and pebbic and shell, in the starry vuultabove our beads and in the prolific bowels of the carth under our feet? Simply for the sake of knowledge, or toenablo man to gain the greatest possible amount of material advantage from this encwwiedpe? Far from it. Pysical science has a higheraim. The principal and the only: necessary and essential object and design of physical science in study- ing the phenomenal or sensible effects of Nat- ure ig to establish premises ond facts, from which, Nature itself, the suustance and cause of the phenomenal may be demonstrited and brought to light. Physical science is no science unless it bave this for its avowed object. and design; for science Is the knowledge | of ings by their causes, Tet fs metaphysics or philosophy which draws from the facts established by physical science the knowledge ot the nature of things, and, from the knowledge of Nature, the science ot the ultimate cause of Nature itself. Physical sclonce, therefore, to be science and to be true to itself, must avow and profess itself snbordi- nate and subservient to metapbysics or philoso- phy, and metaphysics or philosophy {ncludes hutural theology; for the science of Nature is the knowledge of Nature by {ts ultimate cause. Physienl science, therefore, is the handmaid of natural theology, and her only aim and ambition must be to serve and codpcrate with theology, her mistress and queen. The facts of Naturearoe the words of God to intelligent beings; in every observation and in every experiment which physical science institutes for their fuller under- standing it must have for its openly dec! object to lead to the knowledge of Nature, in or- der to arrive at the knowledge of God. How, then, can science be atheousor-without recogni- tion of God? How can it be truu that physical science {3 by its very nature compelled to take no account of the being of God? True, God ia not the direct object of purscat ‘science fn its restricted sense, but who will deny thut God is essentially its indirect and mediate object? Will it be replied that ‘As soon as physical science takes account of the being of God it trenches upon theology and ceases’ to be physical science”? But, in the name of Logic, if we dis- Unguish the sciences at all, we are not allowed to, separate ‘them as independent, selence isthe expression of .Nuturo, and Nature is one, and everything in Nature points avowedly to the centre and ultimate cause of all, God; the sciences therefore must be one in living union and subordination and have for their avowed and professed object to lead to the fuller knowledge and service of God. - But if we take physical science, as is now com= monly done, in a wider sense, as the study and science of Nature or of God’s creation, its pria- cipal, and essential, and direct object {s unde- niably the knowledge of God, the first causeand uit. ead of au ator selene) Js tho knowledge thi 1¢ last and uitimat ase.” frathful ten and how coherent is the following Statement of the Popular Science Monthly: “There is no doubt that the growth of physion