CCCCXX.

The chief thing in order to married happiness, seems to be—mutual appreciation, the having something to dwell upon as being of value in the other party. Even perfection, when not appreciated, could yield no happiness; while only a pair of bright eyes, intensely appreciated on one side, while the admiration of them is appreciated highly by their possessor, would not be without some yield of satisfaction, as constituting a bond of union. If love is not really required to be blind to demerits, it cannot be too quick-sighted in discovering, or constant in dwelling upon, qualities of real value.

CCCCXXI.

To enjoy the happiness of having a wise and strong-minded conjugial partner, who multiplies joys by kindness, and turns aside occasions of discord by prudence, is good; but to have one who is able kindly to bear with, and help the hereditary infirmities of the other party, is still better; for to the receiver of the benefit, the former is a temporary good; the latter, eternal.

CCCCXXII.

To possess a true-hearted friend, is good, but to be able to endure without resentment, the conduct of a false-hearted friend, is still better; the former is a temporary good; the latter, eternal.

CCCCXXIII.

To pass through life without sorrow, would, naturally speaking, be good; but patiently to bear sorrow, and profit by it, is still better; the former is a temporary good; the latter, eternal.

CCCCXXIV.

Man can have communion with God through the truth, but he cannot attain conjunction with God until he can appreciate the Divine Goodness, which it is the office of truth to reveal; and he is unable to do this until he acquires the only medium through which Divine Goodness can be appreciated, namely, good from the Lord, given in the place of evil rejected from the life.

CCCCXXV.

In estimating the character of servants and neighbours, it is well to balance their defects against their good qualities, bearing with the former for the sake of the latter. This is the judgment of good, and also of good policy. But to do as some do, who, when they discover a fault, dwell exclusively upon it, suffering it to fill their whole mental vision, so as to exclude the view of all better qualities, until they are altogether

repelled and alienated on account of that fault, is to judge from truth separate from good, and the fruits of such judgment are strife and inquietude.

CCCCXXVI.

Lord Bacon remarks, that "A man would do well to carry his pencil in his pocket, and write down the thoughts of the moment. Those that come unsought for are commonly the most profitable, and should be secured because they seldom return."

(To be continued.)

REMARKS ON THE SCIENCE OF CORRESPONDENCES, AS APPLIED TO MUSIC.

SIR,

To the Editor of the INTELLECTUAL REPOSITORY.

WERE it not that, according to New Church theology, science, as being the ultimate of divine order, must needs be well worthy our attention, and even admiration, I should hesitate to reply to your correspondent W. W.'s remarks, in the numbers for March and April. But since it is of divine appointment that the rational faculty in man should be fed, and, as it were, nourished and regaled with the truths of science, as with its own proper food, it cannot, surely, be a matter of indifference whether the food thus offered be within or without that ultimate sphere of divine order;-whether, in short, the materiel offered for its acceptance be truths or falses; or whether it be pure and unadulterated, or impure and corrupt. And is not the presence of the latent poison emanating from a fallen and corrupt church to be suspected in matters of science as well as in theology? Is there no enmity existing between her and divine order as seen in ultimates? And has she never once been detected clothed in the garb of "self-derived intelligence?" But, if there be truth in these remarks, then ought we (the members of the New Church) to pause, before we suffer ourselves to be misled by unmeaning words and artificial systems. Does the light of the science of music shine in a manner at all correspondently with the sublimity and loveliness of its heavenly influences? Where the end, as perceived in its effects, is so irresistibly powerful, and so exquisitely touching, surely the means to that end cannot in itself be the dry, nauseous, and indigestible stuff that passes for such. But, passing by these reflections, my object here is to reply to W. W. in reference to one point only; namely, to that which relates to the question as to whether there be eight, or only seven, sounds in what

is familiarly called the diatonic scale. In regard to correspondences, in connection with those points in which I have ventured to differ from Mrs. Child, it is my intention to let that part of the subject rest in statu quo; I freely confess my inability to decide, conclusively, upon such matters, and am still of opinion that Mrs. Child is no better qualified than myself for such an undertaking; and that in so doing she has (though perhaps inadvertently and unadvisedly) stepped out of that sphere of usefulness in which she has hitherto so honourably distinguished herself. It does, indeed, appear to me that the extracts made from Mrs. Child's writings in the number for November, 1846, are not calculated to do justice to that lady's general views and tone of feeling. Previously to my remarks in the number for January, I had read these extracts only, but since that I have read other portions with pleasure and satisfaction. With respect to W. W.'s observations in defence of Mrs. Child, as they consist, generally speaking, in an attempt to establish particular points, in reference to correspondences, by the introduction of a number of others, which have either no bearing upon those immediately under consideration, or stand opposed to his views respecting them; and as it would be endless to attempt to follow him through a course, the obvious tendency of which is to widen as we proceed; I shall, therefore, not attempt it. Respecting my example of what is called the diatonic scale, with the fundamentals below; namely, in ascending, CDEFGA B C and in descending, CGF G G C G C, CBAGfED C W. W.

C G C F G F G C

is evidently much perplexed, as indeed I was well aware he would be, for in one place he not only admits the very point for which I contend, but even more than I contend for; for in recurring to the difference between the sounds F and ƒ as stated by me, he observes, "I grant that the effect on the piano-forte or organ is as here described." Now this is odd enough, since on these instruments these effects are in reality not produced, but only, as it were, suggested to the imagination of the hearer in consequence of the difference of the harmonies which accompany them, or of the fundamentals to which they are perceived to belong. In short, in this, as in numberless other instances, the elegant, delicate, and refined distinctions which nature demands, have no practical existence in the artificial system of 12 semi-tones in the octave, except by the the rude substitution of one sound instead of several. W. W. then immediately adds, "viz. that ƒ requires to be flatter than F," and hence the sentence really becomes self-contradictory; for, in the first part, the effect is represented as actually being produced by the organ or pianoforte, and, in the latter part, it is spoken of as the thing required; and if not to be thus understood, we are involved in rather an obscure idea,

of the effect of requiring an effect. But what is still more strange, in regard to W. W.'s remarks, is, that after making the above admissions, in reference to the sounds F and ƒ, he says, "For my part, I very much doubt whether, on a perfect instrument, the ascending F, and the descending ƒ, would not be found to be the same note!" Now how to reconcile this with what he has said above, I am utterly at a loss to conceive; nor can I in the least comprehend how one sound, in instruments of imperfect construction, can truly be made to answer the purpose of two distinct sounds; and then again, that in a perfect instrument, these two distinct sounds are to resolve themselves into one! It is, moreover, to be regretted, that W. W. should prefer giving the public the benefit of his doubts, in relation to matters he evidently does not understand, rather than something definite and affirmative, in reference to what he does understand. If the sounds F and ƒ are identical, will W. W. be pleased to account for the fact (for he does not and cannot deny it), that F is the fundamental to F, and G the fundamental to f? And if F f be not identical, what becomes of the conceit concerning the 7 sounds in music; and of the popular notion respecting the identity of the sounds in what is called the ascending and descending diatonic scale in the major mode?

I now proceed to explain the distinction between F and ƒ in reference to the ratio of their vibrations; and though in so doing my object is brevity, I must, in order to be understood, first premise, that in the examples under consideration the key must be understood as being C, and the fundamentals in connection with that key as being F, C, and G, and no others. Now, if we tune C a perfect 5th to F; then G a perfect 5th to C; and lastly ƒ, a perfect flat 7th to G; it will be found that ƒ is considerably too flat for any given octave to F. But in order to explain this, it must be observed that the ratio of the vibrations of the notes F C and C G, (the key being C) is as 1 to 3; and of G ƒ, as 1 to 7; whence it follows that the ratio of the vibrations of the notes F G, must be as 1 to 3 × 3, or as 1 to 9; and of the notes F f, as 1 to 9x7, or as 1 to 63. But the ratio of the vibrations of the perfect octaves to F are 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, &c., and hence we discover that f is necessarily flatter than F in the ratio 63 to 64; in other words, that Ff, is to F F, as 9 × 7 or 63, is to 8 x 8 or 64. Furthermore, in the case adduced the effect of F and its octaves, derive their quality from the numbers 1 and 2 and their products 4, 8, 16, &c., and the effect of ƒ and its octaves, derive their quality from the number 7; 7 × 2 or 14; 7 x 4 or 28, &c.; thus truly, and not fancifully, in accordance with the laws of correspondences in regard to those numbers. And this will account for the fact, that F and ƒ are, as to effect, and hence as to

quality, essentially distinct; although in reference to mere interval, the difference is not more than a quarter of a semitone. It will, of course, be understood, that what is stated above is applicable to the 4th of the key, universally; and only specifically to the note F when the key is C. Hence in the key of E flat, the variable note becomes A flat; and in the key of A flat, the variable note becomes D flat. And, since it so happens that upon the organ (owing to the bad system of tuning that instrument), the note A flat, in the key of E flat, is nearly correct when used as a flat 7th to the fundamental B flat; and also the note D flat, in the key of A flat, when used as a flat 7th to the fundamental E flat; but insufferably out of tune in the chords A flat, C, E flat; and D flat F, A flat; the truth of what has been stated above is thus verified. In the key of E flat we have, on this instrument, the note A flat; and in the key of A flat, the note D flat, answering, in its effect, to the quality corresponding to the number 7, and its octaves, 14, 28, &c.; but not to the effect answering to the quality corresponding to the number 1 and its octaves, 2, 4, 8, &c.

W. W. has been pleased to treat my remarks in the number for January last, as an attack upon Mrs. Child; but this is only true in so far as regards the subject of correspondences; which, as it appeared, and still appears to me, were not touched upon with that degree of caution, diffidence, or reverence, which their vast importance and sublimity demand.

H

[The discussion on the science of correspondences as applied to music must here close. Indeed, to carry it further would be any thing but interesting, except to such of our readers as have made acoustics and harmonics their study. Enough also has been said to enable those who feel interested in the subject to decide for themselves.-EDITOR.]

LIGHT IN THE DARKNESS.

Ir is consoling to see the light bursting forth here and there, in most unexpected quarters. Who could possibly have divined that, in The Evangelical Magazine for May last, in an article by the Rev. W. Jay, the following just sentiments could have been found? It is not impossible that had the same words been found in the writings of Swedenborg, and sent to the editor of that periodical as such, they would have been disdainfully rejected as heterodox. He that is not against

us is for us."

But

66

“In heaven you may reckon upon the most glorious employment. I should as soon