day, and onward into the future, perpetually the same mind. Through all development of its faculties; in all its states; the mind itself neither comes nor goes, but retains its self-sameness through all changes. Its phenomenal experience varies in time, but itself perdures through time.

4. Mind is esentially self-active.

All matter is essentially inert, except as acted on by outward forces. Its inner constituting forces are balanced in exact counteraction, and hold itself in its own position, with a vis inertia that resists all action which would displace it. The movement of matter must be traced up, through all its propagations, to some first mover in a mind; and out of this mind only, could the impulsive moving energy have originated. Nature, thus, acts upon nature, in its different parts, mechanically, as its different forces balance themselves in their own action, or in unbalanced movement obtrude one upon another. One portion of matter, impinging upon another, is a percussive force; when suddenly expelling others that surround its. own center, is an explosive force; and when coming in combination with another, and giving off a third, is an effervescive force. But when we have superadded to all the forces in matter, whether gravitating, chemical, or crystalline, a proper vital force-which takes up matter, penetrates it, assimilates, and incorporates it, and thus builds. up about itself its own organized body- -we have an existence selfactive, self-developing, spiritual; which originates motion from itself, and spontaneously uses inert matter for its own ends. When this vital force rises from simple spontaneity in the plant, to that of sensation in the animal, and from this to distinct self-consciousness in man, we have the higher forms of the spiritual; and, in the human mind, attain to a manifest discrimination of it from all that is material, in its inherent self-activity.

The human mind has the consciousness of this self-energizing. Its agency is properly its own, and originates in its own causalty. As a created being, the original ground of the mind's existence is in God its Maker. It is dependent upon its Creator both, that it is, and for what it is; but as created by God, it is endowed by Him with a proper causalty. It originates its own thoughts, emotions, and purposes; and needs only the proper occasions for its activity, and this activity is spontaneously originated by it. This activity is circumscribed within given limits, and in its sphere of action it must have,

also, certain occasions for action; yet within this sphere, and supplied with these occasions, it originates its own acts, and is conscious of its own nisus as it goes out in exercise. The occasions for thought do not cause the thinking; the mind thinks from its own spontaneous casualty. Within such limits, and under such occasions, it is cause for originating thought and feeling.

5. The mind discriminates itself from Its objects.

We say nothing here of the particular facts in the process of discriminating one object from another, and all objects from the mind. itself; and nothing of the awakening in self-consciousness, which is consequential upon such discrimination; but only mark the general fact itself, that the mind separates itself from all of its objects action. All mental action is conditioned to some object or end of action. We cannot think, without some content of thought; nor feel, without some object of emotion; any more than we can see, or hear, without something to be seen or heard. There must be the agent acting, and the object as end of action; and between these, the mind discriminates, and assigns to each, its own distinct identity. The object is known as other than the agent; and thus the mind has the fact that it is, and that some other than it is, and that there is a separating line between them.

Of itself, as acting being, it affirms that it is the subject of the activity. The mind lies under the act, and is a ground for it. Of that which is the end of its action, it affirms that it is the object of the action. It lies directly in the way of the act, and meets it face to face. The act springs from the mind itself, as subject, and terminates in its end, as object.

WHAT AM I.

WHAT am I, whence produced, and for what end?
Whence drew I being, to what period tend?
Am I th' abandon'd orphan of blind chance,
Dropp'd by wild atoms in disordered dance?
Or, from an endless chain of causes wrought,
And of unthinking substance, born with thought?
Am I but what I seem, mere flesh and blood,
A branching channel with a mazy flood?
The purple stream that through my vessels glides,
Dull and unconscious flows, like common tides,

The pipes, through which the circling juices stray,
Are not that thinking I, no more than they;
This frame, compacted with transcendent skill,
Of moving joints, obedient to my will;
Nursed from the fruitful glebe, like yonder tree,
Waxes and wastes,-I call it mine, not me,
New matter still the mould'ring mass sustains;
The mansion chang'd, the tenant still remains;
And, from the fleeting stream, repair'd by food,
Distinct, as is the swimmer from the flood.

DR. ARRUTHNOT.

DARWINISM AND MAN.

NO ONE, in my opinion, who does not maintain that Hebrew chronology enables us to fix the date of the appearance of man in the world is compelled to admit the irreconcilability of Darwin's new volumes with Revelation. In point of fact, there are large sections of his argument which seem to lend strength to these positions: First, that man is a fallen creature; second, that without positive Divine aid, given by inspiration or otherwise, man could never become what he is. If Darwin makes out anything, he makes out that savage man is a more selfish, more cruel, more licentious, and more miserable being than the highest tribes of the animal kingdom. On my mind, also, the statements of Mr. Darwin have very deeply impressed the idea that our species could not have passed the bridge between animalism and humanism without the interposition of a Divine hand. So far as we know, all savage races are dying out. To the best of my information, Whately, if he were alive to-day, could challenge Darwin to point, in the history of the past, to any one savage race which had risen by its unaided energies to civilization. If, then, all known savage races are dying out, and no historical race can be shown to have risen direct from savagery, is it not mere hypothisis and imagination to say that a beast, admitted to have stood lower in intellect than the lowest known savage, improved itself into man. Mr. Darwin's book does not seem to me to prove that man has become what he is without Divine impulse (Goethe called it steigerung; and this steigerung, or impulse of progress, he held to be an indispensable factor in solving the problem of universal existence).

PETER BAYNE.

PROF. HUXLEY'S ONE-SIDED VIEW.

LL vital action may be said to be the result of the molecular forces of the protoplasm which displays it. And if so, it must be true, in the same sense and to the same extent, the thoughts to which I am now giving utterance, and your thoughts regarding them, are the expression of the molecular changes in that matter of life which is the source of our other vital phenomena..... After all, what do we know of that "spirit" over whose threatened extinction by matter a great lamentation is arising,....except that it is a name for an unknown and hypothetical cause or condition, of states of consciousness? In other words, matter and spirit are but names for the imaginary substrata of groups of natural phenomena." And again: "In itself it is of little moment whether we express the phenomena of matter in terms of spirit, or the phenomena of spirit in terms of matter; matter may be regarded as a form of thought; thought may be regarded as a property of matter; each statement has a certain relative truth. But with a view to the progress of science the materialistic terminology is in every way to be preferred.

PROF. HUXLEY.

MIND PRESERVES ITS INTEGRITY AMID THE DECAY OF THE BODY.

NOTHING can be more certain than this, that however dependent mind may be for its manifestations upon a material organ, it is essentially different in nature. Were there no presumptive evidence of this from the phenomena of memory, imagination, &c., it would be supplied abundantly by the frequent instances of persistent integrity of the mind amid the utter decay of the bodily organs. "My friends," said Anquetil, when his approaching end was announced to him by his physicians, "you behold a man dying full of life!" On this expression M. Lordat remarks: "It is indeed an evidence of the duplicity of the dynamism in one and the same individual; a proof of the union of two active causes simultaneously created, hitherto inseparable, and the survivor of which is the biographer of the other. CHARLES ELAM, M. D.

MAN ON THE DARWINIAN THEORY.

BISHOP RANDOLPH FOSTER, D. D.

HE Darwinian theory is, that life in its most primitive forms appeared in minute particles of matter, cells, or germs; and thence expanded into an indefinite number of organisms, the highest of which is man; that each quickened seed contains potentially all possible existences; that the order of evolution is as follows-first, lichens and fungi; second, mosses, liverworts, and alga; third, ferns, and other cryptogamia; fourth, flowers, plants, and trees; that animal life appears in the rudimental cell, and is developed, first, in the protozoa, foraminifera, etc.; next, in the radi ata; third, in the mollusca; fourth, in the articulated dwellers in seas, and on the borders of lakes and rivers; and lastly, in the vertebrata -mammals, from the mouse to man. The doctrine that our immediate ancestors are the simia, and our remote progenitors the protozoa, is not particularly flattering to human pride. It surrenders the differentiated spiritual nature. It positively affirms that our grandfathers were pollywogs, and our fathers, are apes, and assign as reasons for the dictum, the variability of species, the struggle for existence among animated forms, and the survival of the fittest together with the fact that nature reveals a constantly ascending scale of being.

Some of these reasons are formed in truth; others are manifestly fallacious. If all the alleged facts of Darwinism be true, its conclusions are inevitable. But there is a fatal fallacy in the fourth predicate, which breaks the Darwinian chain of logic in the middle; where ascending divergence from the parent stock is perpetual, it only needs time to reach man from moss. So Darwin claims. But he affirms that while the variations of species are perpetual, those variations run on longitudinally. This is not true to observed facts. Variation runs in a circle, and not along a right line. This simple fact shatters all systems founded on the contrary proposition.

Geology demonstrates the truth of this principle. Darwin may have varied the pigeon species by careful labor, as others have varied, the species, horse, dog, man. But in all their variations, the species is the same,-horse, dog, pigeon, man. pigeon has never been changed into the dog, nor the horse into man.

The

Darwin confesses the