must have been in its serial shape. It is an honest and thoroughly trustworthy work.

The Phainomena, or Heavenly Display of Aratos. Done nto English verse by ROBERT BROWN, JUN., F.S.A. (London: Longmans, Green, & Co. 1885.)-Yet another translation of the paurópera of Aratus! This time seemingly to support the theory of the origin of the constellations, very ably maintained in former works by the same author; in fact, the notes, which exhibit a large amount of learning and research, afford the justification for adding one more to the pretty numerous versions of Aratus which have appeared. A considerable number of reproductions of very quaint old engravings, and a map of equatorial stars for the Equinox, B.C. 2084 illustrate the text and notes of Mr. Brown's volume, which should commend itself to all for whom the earliest record of our existing constellations possesses any interest.

Singing in Schools. A Complete Course of Practical Teaching. By ALFRED B. HASKINS. (London: Bemrose & Sons. 1885.)-On the value of singing as an innocent and delightful recreation it would be merely idle to insist; and that it should form part of the school-course of every child with the slightest approach to the possession of "an ear," seems in every respect desirable. And, certainly, if music is to be taught in our public elementary schools, it would not be easy to find a better or more thoroughly sensible and practical manual than Mr. Haskins has given us. His book furnishes abundant internal evidence of the possession on the part of its author of a sound and competent knowledge of his subject, and what is by no means invariably associated with such knowledge the faculty of lucidly imparting it.

We hope that his work will meet with the success which it undoubtedly deserves.

The Studio, and What to Do In It. By H. P. ROBINSON. (London: Piper & Carter. 1885.) Primarily addressed to the professional photographer, Mr. Robinson's capital little book may be read profitably and advantageously by every amateur who has ever tried, or who ever proposes to try, to take a portrait. Few of our living writers have done as much as Mr. Robinson to forward the growth of artistic taste in photography, and to render the photograph really a thing of beauty, and not a mere hard, dry, mechanical reproduction of the object depicted. He sustains his well-earned reputation in the present small volume.

Crowded Out; or, Not Hung for Want of Space at the Royal Academy, 1885. Edited by HENRY LASSALLE. (London: Sampson Low & Co. 1885.)-Mr. Lassalle has done a real service to art in the publication of the work whose title heads this notice. By the aid of something like a hundred fac-simile sketches drawn by the artist's own hands, of pictures rejected at the Royal Academy, the reader is furnished with the means of contrasting the obvious artistic excellence of some of the paintings which failed to gain admission, with the mass of mediocrity (to say nothing of downright rubbish in places) which appears upon the walls.

The Moon's Rotation, examined by the Newtonian Theory of Gravitation. By THOS. F. TYERMAN. (Oxford: Slatter & Rose. 1885.)-Into Mr. Tyerman's teleological argument we absolutely refuse to enter. Whatever it may be worth (and we have a very definite opinion of its value), it is not Science. His hypothesis of the cause of the coincidence in time of the moon's motions of revolution round the earth and rotation on her own axis may be briefly epitomised by saying that he considers that the gravitating force of the two hemi

spheres of the earth and her satellite which are facing each other, must act as though producing temporary cohesion; and that, so to speak, the outside hemisphere of the moon being affected by no such force, must tend to go in the direction of the moon's motion of translation, and so turn her round. The proximity of the earth and moon, and the comparatively small difference in their sizes, seem to be advanced as one reason why the quasicohesion should exist; but these conditions assuredly do not obtain in the case of Jupiter and his four satellites, or in that of Saturn and Iapetus, in both of which cases we have evidence of the coincidence of their times of rotation and revolution. Nay, were Mr. Tyerman's theory true, there is nothing to prevent its application to the sun and earth. We can only regard his book as an example of misapplied ingenuity.

Blackie's Elementary Text-books. Botany. By V. T. MURCHÉ. Magnetism and Electricity. By W. G. BAKER. Elementary Algebra. (London: Blackie & Son.)-These text-books, compiled to meet the requirements of the Educational Code, are really well done, and, if intelligently studied, are calculated to impart no inconsiderable amount of rudimentary information. They ought to be useful at once to the teacher and the pupil.

Algebraic Factors. By W. T. KNIGHT, F.S.Sc. (London: Blackie & Sons.)-This little book follows something on the lines of that by Mr. Easton, which we reviewed on p. 56 of our last volume. It will be found useful by the beginner.

Studies in Microscopical Science. Edited by ARTHUR C. COLE, F.R.M.S. (London: Baillière, Tindall, & Cox.)— The usual monthly issue of this excellent work worthily sustains its reputation.

The Imperial Review. April, 1885. (Melbourne.)This quarterly review, which reaches us from the Antipodes, is of a lighter and chattier character altogether than its English prototypes, containing as it does no less than thirty-eight articles within the compass of 80 pages. What we may term the local element in the essays of which it is made up is conspicuous, if not by its absolute absence, at least by its paucity; the most diverse subjects-literary, social, historical, and political-finding a place or places in its pages. It is very readable.

The Science of Sanitation. By B. SHARP & Co. (London: The Authors'.)-Those who are suffering from the evil sanitary arrangements but too frequently found in our dwelling-houses, may learn from this little pamphlet, the character and sources of the danger to which they are exposed, and the means of rendering their residences pure and healthy.

Cassell's Readable Readers. Third Reading Book for Standard III.; Fourth Reading Book for Standard IV. (London: Cassell & Co.)-If reading does not become a pleasure instead of a toil with the boys and girls who have to use the two books before us, it will not be the publishers' fault. The selections are interesting, amusing, and instructive, and the very numerous illustrations good and apropos, some of the vignettes being really beautiful. This series will surely be popular.

We have also on our table The American Naturalist, The Sanitary News, The American Druggist, Wheeling, The Tricyclist, The Journal of the Society of Arts, The Medical Press and Circular, Proceedings of the Geological Society, Report of the Association for the Oral Instruction of the Deaf and Dumb, Naturen, Ciel et Terre, C. Hutt's Catalogue of Scarce Books, Electricité, Bradstreet's.

THE MATHEMATICAL THEORY OF EVOLUTION. [1800] "Commentator," in referring to my theory of evolution, has unfortunately quoted a misprint from the brief extract given of it, under the above heading (p. 486)—proposition should have been printed proportion. The editor will therefore perhaps kindly allow me to restate the several positions, and to allow the printer to use capital letters and italics where I have used them :1.-Adaptation to Purpose, Fitness, resolves itself into Adaptation of Proportion to Purpose.

2.-Evolution, Development, into The Becoming of the Proportioned in All Things.

3.-Politics, into The Proportioned Adjustment of Material Interests, and of Social Relations.

4.-Ethics, into The Science of Proportioned Conduct. 5.-Hygiene, into The Science of Proportioned Living. 6.-Education, into The Science of Training and Developing a Proportioned or Beautiful Race.

7.-Esthetics, into The Science of Proportioned Taste. 8.-Fine Art, into Proportioned Art.

Pending the publication of my work I cannot enlarge upon the subject, but I may say that the Mathematical Theory of Evolution is convincingly optimistic. W. CAVE THOMAS.

THE NATURE OF CONSCIOUSNESS.

[1801]-C. N.'s ideas (1761) are gradually becoming clearer. Her former admission that "something exists independent of consciousness," carries with it, of course, the fact of this 66 something's" externality, and her present admission that "every valid concept must certainly be correspondent with a thing," defines exactly what that "something" is, and therefore completes her surrender. My "vulgar realism of tripe and onions" will thus have had the effect of leading her from the refined philosophic tomfooleries of Lewinsianism to a higher, a nobler, and a wider conception of the relationship that subsists between herself and her surroundings.

If she will ponder carefully the subjoined extracts from G. H. Lewes, it will help her to overcome the misgivings she still evidently feels, as shown by her use of the terms "valid concept " and " group or synthesis of sensation"; as if a concept could be non-valid, or a group of sensations could in some way fail to fully represent the things so grouped.

In his "Problems of Life and Mind," Vol. II., pages 43-45, G. H. Lewes writes :

When 66 an insight into psychological processes teaches us that knowledge is a process of two factors, the organism and the medium, the knowing mind and the object known, we come round to the starting-point, and still say that to know a thing as it appears, is to know it as it is, under the objective and subjective conditions of its appearence.

"A thing being a group of relations, varies under varying conditions. Obviously this changing group will not be the same throughout the changes, but it is here and there precisely what it appears here and there the manifestation changes with the conditions.

"The famous distinction, therefore, between is and appears is either a logical artifice or a speculative illusion. The logical artifice points to the distinction between general relations and particular relations. The speculative illusion assumes that the knowledge of things being only of appearances, can never be a knowledge of things as they are in their inmost nature.

"Our utter inability to form a conception of the aspects which known objects would form to a new sense, ought long ago to have shown the inanity of speculating about the aspects of things in

[1802]-"Meter" (Letter 1759) almost piteously appeals to us not to seek to destroy people's reverence, not to rob the world of hope, &c., which alone affords any valid reason against a man doing just as he chooses. I would briefly console him. Men cannot do just what they choose." If there was no reverence, no hope, no fear in the world, there would still be "necessity:" the inexorable laws of cause and effect, actions, and inevitable consequences. The first law of nature is "self preservation;" from it spring all notions of right and wrong, the golden rule, Do ye unto others as ye would be done by, for what you consider it wrong for others to do to you, it must be wrong for you to do to them. F. W. H. P.S.-I would further impress on "Meter" that knowledge is superior and, in fact, supersedes "belief." Teach people that, As thou sowest, so shalt thou reap; that evil actions produce evil consequences; that "sins" cannot be forgiven; that wrong done to ourselves or to others must be suffered for; that the laws of nature cannot be transgressed with impunity; that experience proves to demonstration, that on our "actions," not on our 'beliefs," hopes, or fears, depends whether we shall be happy, contented, and prosperous in our present life, here and now.

MIND AND MATTER.

[1803]-"F. W. H." really does not seem to understand the difficulty some of us find in accepting, just as they stand, the axioms of the Haeckel philosophy. The difficulty I, for one, find is this: I grant all the premises. Every atom has a soul. Every combination of atoms has a composite soul, whether the combination is organic or inorganic. Every molecule of carbonic acid has its composite soul. When the carbonic acid is split up, each atom of carbon and oxygen can call its soul its own again. So each plant has its composite soul, and each animal too. So far, all is plain sailing; but now comes the difficulty. Man has a composite soul exactly similar to the composite soul of carbonic acid, a plant, or a dumb animal. Two of the attributes of a man's sonl are said to be consciousness and volition. Therefore, the souls of carbonic-acid, a plant, and a dumb animal possess consciousness and volition, or man is the only combination of atoms which possesses them, just as he is the only animal that can speak. There seems to me no escape from one of the horns of this dilemma. One of Darwin's main propositions to which "F. W. H." refers indirectly-namely, that the life of the individual is a type of the life of the species-is perfectly untenable on the theory of gradual evolution. Where in the life of the species, according to the theory of gradual evolution, is the jump the individual makes on his first appearance into the light. If there is a corresponding jump in the history of every species of placental mammals, what becomes of the theory of gradual evolution?

Again, admitting all Haeckel's premises about matter having a soul, what is there to prevent the composite soul of the solar system having the same control over the matter of the system that a man's has over his body? Suppose the sun uses the force of gravity towards the planets because he likes them, and so cannot help using it towards comets (just as when a man beckons to three people he attracts them all when he only wants one), nevertheless, lets the comets know he does not want them by blowing them all to pieces. What a delightful solution to the much-contested problem of the cause of comets' tails! On the other hand, why should man, if Haeckel's doctrine of universal law be correct, be the only combination of matter which is able to change its mind? Of course, it is more satisfactory to explain phenomena in a simple natural way than to have recourse to a supernatural miraculous way. But, when Sir Charles Lyell wrote his "Principles of Geology," the book that made Darwinism possible, it was the custom to explain every geological phenomenon by a cataclysm, or an earthquake, or a flood; nevertheless, Sir Charles himself pointed out that when the crust of the earth was thinner, earthquakes and volcanic eruptions produced very different effects to what they do Each philosopher in turn calls his the simple natural way. None ever dreams there is more in heaven and earth than in his philosophy. Jos. W. ALEXANDER.

now.

INFINITE DIVISIBILITY.

[1804]-Does not the difficulty concerning infinite divisibility arise from the confounding of two separate questions, of which the one is concerned with natural history or physics, and the other with either formal logic or metaphysics?

The question whether or not there is a limit to the divisibility of matter is surely a question of physics. Matter may be composed of small portions capable of resisting the disintegrating action of any natural process whatever. These portions will then be, physically speaking, indivisible; and we must then say that there is a limit to the divisibility of matter.

. Whether or not this is the characteristic of matter is a question of science, and must be settled, if settled at all, not by any intuitive intellectual effort, but by actual experiment.

The other question is not a physical but a metaphysical question. In this sense, "infinite divisibility" is no longer concerned with the divisibility of any substance by any force, but is concerned with the divisibility of a mental abstraction, and, therefore, has no more to do with the divisibility of an atom of matter than the triangles and circles of the geometer have to do with those of the brassfounder.

If these considerations are applied to the example given by "Hallyards" (1747) of the disk and its centre, it will be clear, I think, that the difficulty does arise from the confusion to which I have referred.

The disk of which he speaks and thinks is a piece of metal, cardboard, or other substance; but the centre of which he speaks and thinks is the geometrical centre of a geometrical circle, and not a material atom.

Descartes rightly taught that one of the requisite precautions for the discovery of truth is to divide a complex question into its components. Let us, therefore, begin by separating the empirical question as to the structure of matter from the metempirical questions of ideal geometry.

I believe this problem has been discussed by Mr. G. H. Lewes in "Problems of Life and Mind," and also by Prof. Clifford in one of his published “Lectures and Essays"; but I have not the books to refer to. M. B.

[1806]-I agree with your correspondent, Mr. E. A. Phipson, in disliking the use of the article "an" before an aspirated "h.” But will he permit me to remind him that it is hardly correct to describe the practice as "the present fashionable affectation"? If he will take the trouble to look at Browne's "Vulgar Errors," Book v., chapter 21, he will find the following sentence:-"If an hare cross the highway, there are few above threescore that are not perplexed thereat." So in Proverbs, chap. xi., v. 9, we readAn hypocrite with his mouth destroyeth his neighbour." Again, in St. Matthew," chap. xvii., v. 1, we find the expression-" an high mountain apart"; and I am sure that thousands of instances might be culled from the best sources of "English undefiled," to show that the usage which Mr. Phipson stigmatises as modern is, if the hyperbole may be pardoned, as old as the hills." PHILIP KENT.

EYEBROWS.

[1807]-I should be glad if any reader of KNOWLEDGE would give me information on the following points:-Are eyebrows supposed to have developed as a protection for the eye-those subjects who had the more hairs having had their eyes better protected, and therefore (other things being equal) survived as the fittest; or are they the result of natural selection for beauty's sake? If the latter, how is it that the Northern Chinese are almost wholly without them? I have it on a Chinaman's authority that eyebrows are considered by the natives to add beauty to the face (and, for all I can find to the contrary, their ancestors must have thought likewise), and yet nine out of every ten one meets in the streets have hardly any whatever. Or, lastly, supposing eyebrows to be the remains of hair which once covered the whole forehead, are we to consider the Chinaman as in a more advanced state of evolution

than we "foreign barbarians," and to believe that the inexorable law of Progress will compel us to follow in his "celestial" footsteps? One feels inclined to say, "God forbid." E. T. C. W. Peking.

DISINTEGRATION OF THE WEALDEN SANDSTONE.

[1808]-A correspondent (letter 1779), in alluding to certain markings on rocks at Tunbridge Wells, uses these words: "They must have been abraded in almost historic times." This sandstone formation, like all the Wealden strata, is a fresh-water deposit, composed of quartz, more or less comminuted, and fine clay (loam) in varying proportions, held together by a solution of iron. It is not affected by frost, but the solvent power of rain-water in time finds out its softer parts, and washes them away, leaving the harder or insoluble parts standing up in relief as irregular ridges, hence the honeycomb markings, or pits, to which your correspondent alludes.

The time required to produce this honeycombing under the ordinary condition of the rock is, I think, far longer than the three thousand years or so constituting the historic period. I have formed this opinion on the following grounds, made from personal observation.

Trinity Church, Tunbridge Wells, was built about sixty years ago of this stone, dug from quarries within a mile of it; the church is unprotected from the south and west, yet the tool-markings upon the stones are as sharp and well-defined as if made yesterday. The oldest squared-stone erections that I know built of it date from about 1350; take Bodiam Castle and Etchingham Church as examples; they show little or no sign of weather wearing, and the scanty tool-marks of the workmen, made more than 500 years, are still visible. The present appearance of this stratum, exposed as rocks and cliffs at Tunbridge Wells and in East Sussex generally, is due to two causes, the primary one being the enormous denudation which followed in comparatively recent geological times its up. heaval from great depths, the second and chief cause being subaërial denudation. The cracks and crevices, from the fraction of an inch in width to any number of feet, are due entirely to its elevations with all the Tertiary deposits upon it. These have all been denuded, except a bit or two on the south coast. The town of Seaford is built on one of the remnants of the Tertiaries; the horizontal sandstone-floor could not stand the pressure upwards without breaking, hence these fractures. JOHN SHARP.

FORM OF THE HEADS OF PROJECTILES. [1809]-Captain Martin, (late) R.N., sends the following for solution :

B

Let A, B, B' be an ogive or solid of least resistance in a resisting medium, described by the revolution of the arc AB about its semichord A P. It is required to find what the length of the radius OR should be in order that a solid whose volume should be the greatest possible, whilst its surface should be the least possible, should be described.

My solution makes R=4·426, B'P B
=d

The value to satisfy these two conditions.

FECUNDITY OF NATURE.

[1810]-Miss C. F. Gordon Cumming relates (in the Pall Mall) that in 1883 there were killed in Cyprus no less than two hundred thousand millions of locusts. Immense efforts, and about £60,000, (in four years) were necessary. Am I not justified in suspecting that on our planet survival is easier than extinction ?

When I was a child, I set myself to clear a garden of slugs. I

killed from two to three hundred every evening of the season, during three years; the fourth summer there was hardly a slug to to be found. HALLYARDS.

PRINTERS' DEVILRY.

[1811]-KNOWLEDGE has always had, I think, an excessive amount of errata and mistakes; but I must confess that the Saturday runs you hard sometimes. Thus, May 30, the S. R. has "whether Bacon's soul went to Arthur's bosom (where it would in some of its moods have got on excellently with another inmate)" and below-"during his sojourn in Arthur's bosom." Now, I cannot imagine how any being able enough to have developed type as his "protective peculiarity" could fail to see by the allusion to Lazarus-whom he must have heard of at church, if nowhere else-that, if even his copy had had but "A-," there could be no hesitation in filling up. 66 Brehon" laws of course appears as "Breton" in the same journal; and I suppose no one ever got "patristic" in a first revise. However, it is not always subordinates who are preternaturally obtuse. As to this I confess I am tomdidemus" (in an old letter). Can there be a doubt as to what this means? Yet the reviewer declared it insoluble. A confrère flashed the levin of scorn on a hapless novelist for having a "Bp. of shire;" declaring no district ever to give title to a see; in face of Man, Galloway, Argyll, the Isles, Meath, Ossory, &c.

Considering how many broken-down scholars there are "around" living on their wits, (which must be good, or else they would starve) it seems strange they cannot be casés as press-correctors, where they would be "the right men in the right places."

HALLYARDS,

LETTERS RECEIVED AND SHORT ANSWERS.

J. WEBB. I do not know who the London agent for the Sidereal Messenger is. Try Grevel, Trübner, or Wesley & Son. No one but Mr. Nasmyth has, so far as I am aware, ever seen "" willow-leaves" on the sun, but the "rice-grains," "granules," or "leaves" of other observers may be seen with apertures of 6 in. and upwards. -A KREOPHAGIST. Assuredly not; it is utterly baseless.-J. L. P. Shall be handed to "Five of Clubs" on his return to London.DR. LEWINS. You compel me to speak plainly. Briefly, then, I cannot convert the columns of KNOWLEDGE into a propaganda of your doctrines for two simple reasons. The first is that this journal was established for the purpose of affording efficient and trustworthy instruction in what is proved and known in Natural and Physical Science, and by no means for the setting forth of the subtilizations of Metaphysics. The second you will regard doubtless as a merely sordid one; but this will scarcely affect its validity. If I were to favour my readers weekly with columns of declamation in favour of Atheism pure and simple, I should speedily have so very limited a number of such readers as to render the paper a ruinous loss to its proprietors, which I could assuredly plead no justification for doing. This is why I suggested to you to start an organ of your own. Surely, as sporting men say, you ought to back your own opinions."-W. CAVE THOMAS. He lives in Italy. If I can ascertain his address accurately, I will forward it.-D. WALKINSHAW sends a new system of spelling, which surpasses all the systems of phonetics that I have, so far, seen in simplicity. It contains no new characters nor letters. Try the Philological Society.-J. FOULERTON. Received with thanks.-H. A. BULLEY. The discussion is a very barren one. You only meet your opponent's dogmatic assertions with others equally dogmatic, and, let me add, equally unprovable.-COMMENTATOR. Please send your exact address, as there is a letter lying here for you.-W. SOUTHWICK ROGERS. In its existing stage it is simply a commercial speculation which I certainly do not feel called upon to advertise gratis. HAMPDEN. Don't talk nonsense! The gnomonic projection of the circles of the sphere upon the plane of the terrestrial equator was employed ages before either you or I were born or thought of. The Bouthern (outside) part of your map is wildly wrong!-COMMEN TATOR. Requiescat in pace. Observe what factitious importance such a discussion confers on the subject of it.-JAS. S. GREIG. I shall be happy to accept it as a voluntary contribution. Should you not agree to this, I will return your MS. on receipt of a properly addressed and sufficiently stamped envelope. The conductor is in the United States. - HALLYARDS. All safe to hand, and will appear in instalments. The précis was not set up after what you said, your remonstrance reaching me in time for me to stop it.-M. B. The actual superior

- JOHN

[How many of these have their origin in the detestably bad writing of people to whom it is impossible to send proofs ?-ED.]

limit of the atmosphere is supposed to be about 200 miles above the earth's surface. This estimate is derived from the observations of twilight by M. Liais, in Rio Janeiro. I know nothing of Faraday's experiments establishing the limit of diffusibility of mercury. Your concluding problem is insoluble without more data than we possess at present.-J. H. COBBETT. The image of any given star-Sirius, Aldebaran, or what not-formed by the object-glass of the telescope, is thrown on to the slit of the spectroscope, so that we of course know what object it is that we are examining spectroscopically. Light travels in straight lines, so that no other rays can reach the eye than those from the object under observation. Light passing across the field of view is absolutely invisible (see Vol. V., p. 306). Do you not see that if the light of the different stars traversed the immaterial population you postulate, it would render the stellar spectra all alike—or at all events they would have a vast amount in common. But for the kind of discussion it would provoke, I should print your very amusing letter in extenso.-R.A.H. Shall be submitted to the Conductor immediately on his return from America. -ARCTURUS.-Rather a question for a crammer or private tutor than for a scientific journal. I do not possess Todhunter's "Euclid." You may always describe a right-angled triangle by making the sides 3, 4, and 5. You have the length of the hypothenuse given; calling this 5, the sum of the two other sides 7. Take the sides

=

in the proportions given. I am very much of your opinion as to the most advantageous types of communication for the Correspondence Columns. The Mind-and-Matter question has been utterly thrashed out.-STACKYARD. The courtesy and pleasant tone of your criticism is only equalled by its candour. I trust that you will find future numbers altered in precise compliance with your requests.-W. M. K. With a preliminary request that you will study section 3 of the concluding paragraph on p. 505 of Vol. VII., I would ask you seriously whether you expect me to insert eighteen sheets of the most dogmatic possible assertion, unsupported by one atom of proof? There is intemperance in language and argument as well as in drink. Alcohol does mischief. Granted.but so does water. Because a woman uses it to drown herself in, am I never to have a bath? When you reiterate that favourite phrase from Mr. Tweedie's tracts, "Our drink bill," does it not strike you by how many millions the population of these islands increases in every decade, as shown by the census? Surely you do not expect the consumption of alcohol to diminish! That "the road of moderation leads to drunkenness" is, you must really pardon me for saying, merely offensive cant. Again, your allegation as to what "every sensible person believes" is very arrogant, inasmuch as it brands with stupidity everyone who dares to think differently from the comparatively small clique to which you belong. Your ideas of the operation of the law with reference The law does not to fire are vague, to say the least of it. prevent a man having gas-burners, &c., in all sorts of dangerous positions; while it does prohibit a publican from serving an intoxicated man. Furthermore, your assertion that it would be for the good of a temperate man to deny himself any stimulant whatever is simply the expression of your opinion. Thousands of the best and wisest men who have ever lived have thought differently. Yes, I can say that, living artificially as we do, strong drink is a very necessary article of consumption for proper nourishment of a man in ordinary health.” When gentlemen wore nothing but a few dabs of woad on their persons, and ate acorns, spring water was obviously the most fitting beverage for so pig-like a diet. And here, again, you are guilty of making an assertion without a fragment of proof when you assert that "the leading men of the medical faculty" think total abstinence reasonable or wholesome. Why, I could fill this column with the names of the very greatest physicians and surgeons, all of whom not only recommend alcohol, (in strict moderation), but take it themselves. Your two questions are modest demands for me to prove a negative-which no one is called upon to do. The question as to the superior "vitality and endurance" of water-drinkers was tried out in the hayfield in an English county only last year, with the result that the beer-drinkers beat the brethren of the pump off their heads. As for your evidence of longevity, it is worthless. A vast proportion of the oldest men whose deaths have been recorded have been both moderate drinkers and smokers. And can you give me the name of one single insurance office which takes teetotalers' lives at a lower premium? To be brief, your tremendous letter consists of assertion from beginning to end. My first impulse was to print it in extenso, and let the reviewer of the book which evoked it reply to you. In mercy to you, though, I have done so myself. From the days of Noah downwards men have taken wine, and will continue to take it, the United Kingdom Alliance notwithstanding.-M. HUMM. Lectures will be duly announced.-GEOLOGISTS' ASSOCIATION. Received.

66