from sin; in leading him to lean on God; and in drawing off from the world and turning his thoughts on heaven. 2. He viewed his trials in the light of eternity, as trifling and for the moment. iv. 18. 3. He felt the burden of life, and yet he desired more to be in heaven than to be rid of this burden. V. 4. v. 6. 4. He was always in a cheerful mood. dent." "We are always of goud cheere." Tyndal. "Always confi 5. He had a steady anticipation of the Great Judgment, v. 10; and yet he preferred to die. v. 8. 6. He owned the grace of God, as sovereign and supreme in his preparation. v. 5. 7. He was constantly growing in holiness. iv. 16. 8. He showed a constant and intense desire for the salvation of sinners. v. 11. 9. St. Paul was always striving to make his acceptance of God v. 9. sure. He, who has these marks of the heirship of Christ, may have the apostle's confidence of salvation. This is quite different from a willingness to die, because of suffering, or of disgust of the world, or of false views in religion, or of ignorance, or of indifference. We have great reason to fear that much of the resignation shown at death, and of the quiet expectation of heaven, lacks the Pauline accompaniments that surround our text. ARTICLE VIII. LITERARY NOTICES. 1.-Thoughts on the Future Civil Policy of America. It is hardly worth while to question that Professor Draper classes with the Bucklean school of philosophers. If his elaborate work, on the Intellectual Development of Europe, left this in any doubt, the present volume will remove it. This may subject him to an unfavorable pre-judgment by some readers, and to a more searching examination than he might otherwise encounter. To the latter he can have no objection; to the first he probably by this time is getting accustomed. Much as we differ from the main drift of the Buck lean principles and hypotheses, we find a large amount of truth in these writers, and a vigor, if not universal thoroughness, in their pages, which is stimulating. Dr. Draper is one of the most eloquent of these. He never fails to carry the reader inquisitively to his closing paragraph. He is too nervous ever to be dull. Where he touches on theological and religious points, we observe a studied caution not to give umbrage to Christian believers of the more antique kind. He is deferential to opinions which he evidently repudiates, as well he may be when he remembers who hold and have held them. But he is nevertheless very authoritative in his own way, and by a stroke of his pen establishes or effaces the gravest positions, as if an authorized autocrat in the realm of ideas. In this sense, at least, we should call him superlatively a Positivist. Taking his stand at the present triumphant emergence of our nation from civil war, the author addresses himself to the interesting task of charting out our future, on strictly scientific principles. Asserting the universality and constancy of natural law, he analyses our material conditions-topography, climate, populations, etcetera, and thence arrives at our duties and destiny; the last as brilliant as the former are weighty and urgent. We have the same fulness of information, and lavish use of illustration from historic and general sources, which marked his former inquiry. There is something almost bewitching in these rapid generalizations and free pictorial effects on such world-wide stretches of canvass. Thus: "The absence of summer is the absence of taste and genius; where there is no winter, loyalty is unknown.” The very terms, however, of this statement exclude it from the temperate zones; and if the author means the torrid and frigid zones for his contrast, that would leave little point to his antithesis, as their populations are hardly reckoned in questions of this character. This is better-that "a nation lying east and west will generally have less discordant interests than one the range of which is north and south." As ours ranges both ways, we evidently shall have need enough for all our wisdom and patience. Climate and the stationary or migratory habits of a people, are chief forces in determining their character and fate. These have given to Europe the philosophical, to Asia the religious tendency; pp. 68-72. Great mobility and much travel are eminently healthful to a nation: hence, government should encourage railway communication to the widest extent, and avoid the stagnation which was one prime evil at the South; nor allow any section to inflict a hamper on travel, by taking advantage of its geographical position. A community can not perpetrate this act (says Prof. D.), fit only for au Arab sheikh, without becoming politically debauched and demor alized. With the State of New Jersey in our eye, we are inclined to think that this deduction is correct. The writer insists on the strict action of physiological laws and facts in deciding the national status. The nation is as are its individuals; these are as their physical conditions. "The body of man can not resist external influences. It is helplessly modified by heat and cold, dryness, moisture; that is, by climate." p. 77. Physical law is inexorable, though it does not destroy human freedom. So our author. What then can save our nationality from "these climate differences which, if unchecked, must transmute us into different nations?" Two words contain the answer-Education and Inter-communication." We might challenge the application, to such a degree, of the physiological argument to associated human life. It is a favorite line of reasoning with Dr. Draper, and he presses it to its utmost limit. But the very fact of social organization introduces elements which greatly modify the individual conditions and influence of men, blending millions of diverse personalities into a common nationality which is not so much a numerical aggregation of the constituent units, as a composition of them into a new entity. The combining process really gives to the result qualities and powers which were in none of the isolated factors. Passing this, we must briefly note another aspect of these speculations. Guardedly as this inquiry is conducted, it is obvious that our author's doctrine of the fixedness of physical laws carries him to the side of naturalism as opposed to supernaturalism. So stereotyped is the necessary sequence of every thing from the beginning, that he finds no room for interference or modification ab supra, in any emergency. We accept the general statement of the uniformity of nature. Dr. Draper concedes that this does not infringe human liberty. He holds that men shonld intelligently control and adapt natural forces, by a continually advancing knowledge. Why may not God have done this, miraculously as it seems to us, but, as he sees it, only on a scale of higher and perfectly normal harmony? This, however, savors of fetichisın, we are reminded. Astronomy, chemistry, meteorology, and other natural sciences have at length worked themselves free of the supernatural, that is, mystic nimbus which ignorance had shed around them: all science, spiritual included, must do the same this is the plain demand of the argument. Consistently with its demand, a disparaging criticism is passed upon the Hebrew Scriptures, which is brief and not profound. The magianism of the East would appear to have supplied the Jews with most of their religious ideas, true and false alike; p. 201. Moses and his successors did not believe in the resurrection of the dead until the Babylonian captivity, when this dogma was imported from Persia; p. 202. More remarkable still, the expectation of a Messiah had the same origin. "It was in the uncertainties and sufferings of these events, when they hung their harps on the willows and wept when they remembered Zion, that the hope of a Deliverer first arose; and in the greater calamities of after ages, this, which in the first instance was no more than a wished-for political event, became a fixed religious expectation." p. 207. Here, of course, is an entire ignoring of the authority of the Old Testament testimony on these topics. To screen himself, the author would revive the apocryphal tale, in Esdras, of the burning of the sacred Jewish books, and their recomposition with editorial embellishments, by the scribe, Ezra, B. C. 458, or near the time of the Greek Themistocles. But, not to open here the general question of the inspiration of the Bible, how does this Persian theory of the origin of the Messianic hope agree with Christ's own saying to the Jews: "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day, and he saw it and was glad." John xviii. 56. Another outcrop of the same philosophy is on page 224, where we are told that the fact of sufficient water on the globe to cover the tops of its mountains, is impossible, because "the quantity of material substance on the globe has never diminished: it is the same now as it was in the beginning"- -no more, no less. So disappear the Deluge and its consequents. We find no fault with the Professor for maintaining his own views on these important subjects; we thank him for the uniform courtesy of his discussion. But he is by no means so much at home in biblicism as he is in physics. He also states altogether too strongly the aversion of theologians to the scientific investigations of the age. We unhesitatingly assert that this aversion amounts to almost nothing. The last twenty years have well nigh dispelled the unworthy, most needless feeling of apprehension and dislike. What there ever was of it resulted mostly from the arrogance and crudity of superficial advances into the unknown realms of nature. Now that science has become intelligent and self-governed enough generally to avoid mistaking the rising new moon for a house afire, the clergy and Christian laity heartily rejoice in its progressive illuminations. It is a flat anachronism to repeat these charges of hostility to sound science on the part of our religious teachers. Dr. Draper should correct his reckoning here. It were a most peurile and unchristian fear. It is an every day common-place of our pulpits, that, as God is equally the author of the books of Nature and Revelation, they can not conflict, when rightly interpreted. But when a Colenso or a Darwin is put forward as a competent interpreter of either, some of us beg leave to decline the referee. We will even venture to say to Dr. Draper, that his own undoubted scientific authority would be much stronger, if his books were not marred by so much of at least apparent self-contradiction. One might possibly wonder how all this breadth of discussion should naturally fall within the limits of the title of this volume. The author likes to travel on a broad gauge; sometimes he would seem to be ploughing along where there is no track at all for his locomotive. We do not however object to the discursiveness of an active and well endowed mind. It shows us thus how various questions are correlated with its system of thought. Some will be posed at his undisguised admiration of the Mohammedan development (we do not mean domestically,) and the yet more novel satisfaction expressed in the Chinese organization of society. Yet each might teach us something, without doubt. Dr. Draper is sanguine that the alienation of feeling between the Southern and Northern States will soon pass by. He sees the solution of the Negro question in the fact that, at the close of the present century, there will probably be ninety millions of white inhabitants in our country to about nine millions of colored; p. 163: that is, in the relative diminution of the African, like the Indian, from our land. His book, if not satisfactory on many points, is worth perusal at this juncture of our affairs. It is the forecasting of a philosopher of nature upon the problem of our great future. To us, its chief defect lies in its lack of recognition of the work which a supernatural Christianity must do for this national salvation. If our hope was nearly or mainly a naturalistic and scientific one, if the masses of our population are to be saved for this life only, by being reasoned into truth and righteousness through the medium of common-sense, by which supreme tribunal all moral and spiritual as well as material questions, we are here assured, must be adjudicated; p. 309: with all proper deference to these high functionaries which have thus far promised immensely more than they have ever performed, we should have small faith in the coming fortunes of our Republic. Prof. Draper's philosophy affirms "that Reason is the only, and must be the final judge: that supernatural testimony must wait upon her decisions, and that faith is only sure as it is founded on common sense." p. 310. He thinks that the populace can be brought to yield to the laws of truth and virtue by dint of intellectual training, as they accept the solution of a geomet |