Sivut kuvina

results obtained. Professor Mabery gives an account of more recent progress. Omitting his controversial remarks on some criticisms by European scientists who had attacked the new method of metallurgy, we may notice that the most remarkable products of the furnace are due especially to the enlargement of the plant, which will receive a still greater development in Lockport, N. Y., by the use of the great Brush dynamo Colossus, built expressly for the purpose. Mr. B. H. Thurston described the new dynamo as the greatest ever built, which has, perhaps, five times the capacity of Edison's famous "Jumbo," that attracted so much attention during the Electrical Exhibition at Philadelphia, in 1884. The Colossus dynamo, when worked at its full power, has a capacity of 300,000 Watts, or is equivalent to 5,000 incandescent lamps of 16 candle power each, and is capable of producing in the electrical furnace enormous heat. The efficiency of these furnaces, even with the present dynamos, may be greatly increased by coating the coarsely powdered charcoal with lime, and thus prevent its conversion into graphite. By this means we get much better products than formerly, among late ones an aluminium iron alloy, resulting from the reduction of aluminium in presence of iron.

Geology. The papers on Niagara Falls, read so near the famous spot, necessarily proved popular. By a thoughtful choice they were read before the excursion to the great cataract took place, and thus the excursionists were able to verify for themselves the arguments brought forward. Dr. Pohlman, of Buffalo, N. Y., described the district which was to be visited, and, indeed, every tourist should read in full his paper, to understand the lessons that the earth's strata teach us about this wonderful place. Messrs. Woodward and Gilbert, of the Geological Survey, the former having just finished the survey of the Horseshoe Falls, gave in very interesting papers their estimates of the age of the Falls. Professor E. W. Claypole's discourse completed the account, and after him a few others took part in the open discussion. All seemed to be of one mind, and held to the theory that during the glacial epochs Lakes Erie and Ontario formed but one body of water with a much higher level than at present. When the ice began to break and melt, the overflow must have taken a southern direction. And if a dam of twenty-five feet can even now cause an overflow of Lakes Erie, Huron and Michigan past Chicago into the Mississippi, the glaciers certainly must have been able to produce the same effect. As the ice gradually left the St. Lawrence, Lake Ontario fell to the present level, and the surplus waters of Lake Erie took the course they now hold. Comparing the results of the surveys of 1842 and 1872 with those of the last one, it was found that the Falls, at the deepest part of the curve, had retreated about 5 feet per annum, while the whole Horseshoe Falls had receded only one-half that much. It was announced that hereafter exact surveys would be made at shorter intervals of time. From the data at hand, supposing that the rate of erosion was uniform, the learned gentlemen concluded that it must have taken seven thousand years for the Falls to recede from Lewiston to the present spot.

Biology. Dr. D. E. Salmon, of Washington, D. C., read two papers on "Immunity from a Second Attack of Germ Disease." There are, said the doctor, three explanations: "First, something is deposited in the body which is unfavorable to the germ. Second, something is withdrawn from it which is necessary for the development of the germ. Third, the tissues have acquired such a tolerance for the germ, or for an accompanying poison, that they are not affected by it." Dr. Salmon. inclined towards the last hypothesis, and, indeed, it seems to agree with recent well-proved facts, among others with Pasteur's method of inoculation against hydrophobia. This brings to our mind that the committee appointed by the English Government to examine into this method has reported in favor of it, and that many prominent doctors, after much hesitation, are now pronounced followers of Pasteur. We may add, too, and in our opinion it shows the value of his discovery, that some, not daring to deny its importance, pretend that Pasteur has only revived an old method used in France during the great plague some four centuries ago, and in Italy at the end of the last century.

Anthropology.-Vice-president H. Hale, of Clinton, Ontario, Can., read a paper on "The Origin of Languages and the Antiquity of Speaking Man." After the fashion of most scientists of the present day, he made his profession of Darwinism, and like them, too, he could give no truly scientific reason for his belief. Mr. Hale has peculiar ideas on the theory of evolution, and though he tried to follow the lead of other pronounced Darwinists, he openly contradicted them, as well as himself. Take this admission of his, that man "is somewhere between six and ten thousand years old," how does he reconcile it with the doctrine of the Master Evolutionist? And the admission is stronger and more valuable when he asserts that "this man who thus appeared was not a being of feeble powers, a dull-witted savage on the mental level of the degenerate Australian or Hottentot of our day. He possessed and manifested, from the first, intellectual faculties of the highest order, such as none of his descendants have surpassed." Surely this must be the Adam of our Bible. But how did this splendid being come to exist? He says that he had precursors, whom others call men; he, however, refuses them that name. 'Tis a strange freak to admit this fact, and stickle at a mere name! But we shall no longer dwell on the examination of Mr. Hale's inconsistent views.

We shall conclude with the following extract of a novel and ingenious method of getting an insight into the unconscious mechanism of authorship, which was described by Mr. Mendenhall under the title, "Characteristic Curves of Composition." The method consists in "counting the number of words of each length, from one letter to fourteen, fifteen, or as long as were found, plotting the result on a curve, in which the abscissæ represented the number of letters in a word, and the ordinates the number of words per thousand of each length. It was shown that while the curves resulting from each thousand words was not entirely regular, that resulting from five thousand was more regular, and that from ten thousand almost entirely so. The inference from this was, that

the phenomenon which the curve represented was a regular one, and that it was an expression of a peculiar vocabulary of the author. Moreover, by comparing the respective curves one would be able to judge whether two works were written by the same author, and perhaps even decide the controversy whether Bacon wrote Shakspeare . . . . Curves derived from Dickens ('Oliver Twist ') and Thackeray (Vanity Fair') were remarkably similar, thus suggesting that the subject-matter might cause the peculiarity of the curve, while those of John Stuart Mill (Political Economy' and 'Essay on Liberty') differed from them in having more long words and fewer short ones, though words of two letters (prepositions mainly) were most abundant in Mill. The average length of the novelists' words was 4.38, and that of the philosopher 4.8."

Book Notices.


This book is from the pen of an Oxford scholar, who, forty years ago, received the grace to enter the Catholic Church, from which his fathers, in an evil hour, had separated. Subsequently to his reception into the Church, and still responsive to the light and inspirations of those gratuitous aids which the mercy of God copiously offers to the human will, he received the sacrament of Holy Orders. On March 12th, 1884, he died, with the same solid and exemplary piety which had marked his previous life.

The title of his book succinctly states the leading and comprehensive proposition which he has undertaken to prove. Nor is it merely the Monotheism, which is known to the natural and unaided reason of man, that the Reverend author desires to claim as the original possession and inheritance of the city of Romulus. His purpose is more specialized, since he makes the characteristic mark of this Monotheism consist in being in the main a derivation "from the Hebrew Nation and the Law of Moses "a quite important aspect of his subject, as there may be scholars who, while prepared to admit that a belief in the one true God was the real and distinguishing religion of primordial Rome, yet do not perceive sufficient evidence to grant the conclusion that this belief was mainly of Israelitish and Scriptural derivation. These scholars would, doubtless, defend their skepticism respecting this point by an appeal to two arguments: (1) That the historical records are too meagre and imperfect to allow of ascribing to the outcast and predatory associates of Romulus, and their descendants, so elevated and magnificent a system as the revealed and super-rational doctrines possessed by the Chosen Nation; (2) That natural principles and causes suffice to explain the real nature of the primitive Roman recognition of God as the sole and

supreme object of worship. Human reason, it is argued, is competent to discover the existence and unity of God: "For, by the greatness of the beauty, and of the creature, the Creator of them may be seen, so as to be known thereby."-(Wisd. Ch. 13.) Why, then, endeavor to explain, by supernatural and extraordinary causes, that which natural ones are adequate to unfold?

"Nor let a god in person stand display'd,

Unless the laboring plot deserve his aid."

Still, the evidence in favor of a scriptural origin for the primeval Monotheism of the Eternal City becomes, under the patient elaboration of Father Formby, so distinct and undeniable that he does not think "any one will very easily commit himself to the desperate expedient of maintaining the possibility of a public religion of Monotheism having been attainable at that time of the world from any other source except solely from the Hebrew people."-(p. 230.)

But after allowing that the Monotheism of ancient Rome was influenced by the inspired and Mosaic law, scholars might differ widely in their estimate of the degree to which the early Roman religion and its public belief and profession were affected by this cause. Some might ascribe very little influence to it, while others might be disposed to exaggerate its importance. Again, there may be not a few strongly inclined to the opinion that the primitive religion of Rome was not Monotheism at all, but Polytheism, derived from the Trojans in the manner described by Virgil when he makes the ghost of Hector address Æneas thus:

"Now Troy to thee commends her future state,
And gives her gods companions of thy fate;
From their assistance happier walls expect,

Which, wand'ring long, at last thou shalt erect." 1

In the chain of evidence, which connects primeval Rome's belief in the true and supreme Numen Cœleste with the inspired truths delivered to the Chosen People by the Hebrew prophets, an indispensable link is the precise and circumstantial testimony of St. Clement of Alexandria, "a convert,at an advanced age, from the philosophical school of Greece." St. Clement says, in his "Stromata" (1-xv): “Numa, the King of the Romans, was a Pythagorean, and, assisted by the doctrines derived from Moses, he prohibited the Romans from making an image of God in the likeness of either a man or a beast. The Romans, for the first hundred and seventy years, during which they built temples, did not make a single sculptured or painted image, for Numa had instructed them, after the manner of a secret doctrine, in the truth that it is impossible to attain to the worship of the Most High in any other way than by the mind alone."

In the presence of this distinct and unqualified avouchment by one of such incontestable authority as St. Clement for information and veracity, it would be a clear irrelevancy, if nothing worse, to attempt the employment of any skeptical and pseudo-critical methods of historical investigation, for the purpose of diminishing either the force and fulness, or the accuracy, of his testimony.

It may, however, be observed, in passing, that the motive of " con

1 "Sacra suosque tibi commendat Troja penates;
Hos cape fatorum comites, his moenia quære
Magna, pererrato statues quæ denique ponto."

-Eneid, lib. ii.

VOL. XI.-48

scious bad faith," imputed by our Reverend author to the historian, Tacitus, for his silence respecting the Mosaic origin of the primitive Latin cult, is purely supposititious.

Father Formby, it will be observed, considers the Monotheistic creeds of the Ancient World, in whatever country and race existing, to be a derivation from the tradition and accurate ethical knowledge of Noah, when they are not directly taken from the Jewish people and the Scriptures. "The religion of Monotheism," he insists, "must ever be essentially one and the same, whether it is Hebrew or Roman Monotheism. And though the city of the Gentiles, which can only be in possession of a borrowed light, must stand at a very great disadvantage, as compared with the city and people who have been the object of a special election," etc.

The substance of his sentences, in this connection, may, we take it, be expressed in the thesis that, radically and primitively, the Monotheistic beliefs of the Ancient World originated from the one general source of God's revelation to man. We are not quite sure that we can under all respects agree with the doctrine here proposed by the erudite author, and it will, doubtless, occur to the reflecting reader that a distinction should be drawn between Natural and Revealed Religion, indicating their distinct origin, respective scope, and legitimate meaning. To assert that the systems of worship in which supreme homage is paid to the one true God are all of revealed origin, does not seem to be entirely consistent with the facts of profane history, nor in sufficient accord with the exact and descriptive narration which St. Paul publishes to the Romans. This great Apostle declares that "when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those things that are of the law, these having not the law are a law to themselves."

It was thus to the peculiar credit of the Gentiles that they by nature performed the works which are "of the law," following the light of the supreme and authoritative rule of action impressed upon their rational natures. The Apostle here contrasts the law, i.e., the written and Mosaic law, with nature, and clearly discriminates between those who are in possession of the law and those who are guided solely by the natural light of reason. It is true, the Apostle distinctly attributes, in this connection, a saving and supernatural character to the light and operations of nature; a character clearly such as can belong only to nature influenced and quickened by vital and infused grace, which is never denied to sincere and inquiring souls.1

The power ascribed by St. Paul to the Gentile religion, of being efficacious in respect to man's real and ultimate destiny, should not, however, be confused with the religious knowledge and works which proceed from, and are totally included in, nature as their principle, reason and the divinely-revealed truths being two simply distinct sources of certainty and operation.

But side-issues apart, it is quite sure that the present work is a scholarly and sober contribution to the religious history of ancient Rome. It contains, at the same time, an antidote for those popular and skeptical delusions, agreeably to which a major portion of all historical events recorded of the early Latin city and people are reduced to the order of myths and spurious marvels; or else it is deemed, in respect to the reality of their occurrence, that they must be classed as merely inter

1 "Facienti quod in se est Deus non denegat gratiam."-Theologi passim. "God does not deny grace to any one who diligently employs the natural means in his power to rectitude and justice."

« EdellinenJatka »