the animals are linked to man by their organised structure. But their "psychological individuality" is totally destitute of the moral element, which is the predominating characteristic of the "psychological individuality" of man. So far, then, is it from being true that this is "the connecting link between them and man," that it is precisely in their psychological characters that the animals are most distinctly and broadly separated from man.

From this point of view we are enabled to appreciate other statements of our author, in which he anticipates a new paradise for us in our future life, as follows: "Most of the arguments of philosophy in favour of the immortality of man, apply equally to the permanency of this principle in other living beings." How little of truth there is in this we have seen in the fact that the moral and religious endowments, the grand reason for immortality, apart from which all other reasons together have little or no force, are confined to man alone of all the creatures of earth. But Professor Agassiz continues : "May I not add that a future life, in which man should be deprived of that great source of enjoyment, and intellectual and moral improvement, which result from the contemplation of the harmonies of an organic world, would involve a lamentable loss; and may we not look to a spiritual concert of the combined worlds, and all their inhabitants, in presence of their Creator, as the highest conception of paradise?" Many will admit the possibility of this; but most of those who do will exclaim, Is this the paradise of God? Has this world stood so long, and displayed such a multitude of wonderful operations for thousands of years, to have the same "harmonies of an organic world" repeated on a grander scale? Is it not more probable that these earthly wonders will have answered their object and come to an end, and that they will be followed by higher wonders of knowledge, more glorious displays of moral excellence, and more transcendent works of the infinite Creator? But are such speculations scientific? And if philosophy must indulge in them, how much does she need for her guidance, to hear that voice behind the veil which assures us that all things there will be light, and peace, and love-not painful research and seeking, but full and eternal enjoyment.

Before closing this article, it is necessary to recur, for a moment, to a statement by Professor Agassiz, which has been already noticed, "of the close connection there is between the facts ascertained by scientific investigations, and the discussions now carried on respecting the origin of organised beings." To this he adds: " According to some they originated spontaneously by the immediate agency of physical forces,

and have become successively more and more diversified by changes produced gradually upon them by these same forces. Others believe that there exist laws in nature which were established by the Deity in the beginning, to the action of which the origin of organised beings may be ascribed; while, according to others, they owe their existence to the immediate intervention of an intelligent Creator." Of these different views, the first two, as already explained, our author shews to be insupportable, and philosophically absurd, from the evidence of thought and design, and from the fitness of organised beings for relations to, and benevolent association with, each other, which cannot be found in unthinking forces, nor in laws ever inoperative apart from mind; and he adopts the third view, that they must be derived from an intelligent and infinite Creator. How these organised beings began to be, there are no facts in nature to shew; from this source, only possible and more or less probable hypotheses are, or ever can be, accessible to man. The common opinion is, that the vegetable kingdom, by a divine fiat, was evolved in full maturity of plant and fruit, or seed, already fitted for the wants of the animal kingdom; which was next created by a similar fiat, in all its multitude and specific diversity, and consequently surrounded with the necessary provision for the support of its life in fine, that man was the crowning work of the infinite Creator, and was formed in the perfection of his powers, with articulate language as readily flowing from his lips, and with as much facility of spontaneous action in all his members, as is the case now with a mature man. This certainly was the philosophical view of Moses, not to plead here his claims to inspiration, which have never been invalidated-a view for its rational probability, as we think, never yet paralleled. But Professor Agassiz believes that organised beings were "created as eggs;" and that the "conditions necessary for their growth must have been provided for;" also, that these "conditions must have been conformable to those in which the living representatives of the types first produced now reproduce themselves." The method here indicated is conceivable and not absurd, as we think, because infinite wisdom and power can be limited only by absolute impossibilities. But when we consider these conditions of the fertilised eggs in which the first types" now reproduce themselves," and what an amount of continued care and attention and contrivance must have been necessary, although no special good seems to result from the long and slow process, how much more simple, grand, and divine appears the other procedure, viz., that all the types were at first created in the full maturity of their frame and

powers! But in either mode of creation, as well observed by Agassiz, "the transmutation theory furnishes no explanation of their existence," viz., in reference to causation, because organisation must have existed before transmutation could have begun.

Finally, it should be observed that the four distinct plans of organisation in the zoological system of Cuvier, adopted by Agassiz, break up that "unity of composition," for which St Hilaire, the father, contended, which has since been sustained by the son, and which we might expect to be prominent in any arrangement which claims to be an expression of the divine thought. For it is not enough, as clearly shewn in this Essay, that a system should present the facts of nature in their relations, and thus exhibit the harmony that reigns in the works of the Creator. All this is done by the system of Cuvier in the plastic hand of our author. But any system which is truly the expression of the divine mind must assign to every creature its true rank, according to the characteristics and powers of its nature. Especially is it necessary that to the noblest creature should be assigned a distinct and the highest place in the classification. Thus, if Agassiz had followed St Hilaire, or Ehrenburg, or even Aristotle, instead of Cuvier, he would have ranked man in an independent and separate division, and placing all the mere animals as consistently, he would have presented the divine plan in that true unity of composition" by which the works of infinite wisdom are ever characterised. For, whether we consider articulate language, the power of apprehending and reasoning upon abstract and necessary truth, and upon the relations and affinities of the organic kingdoms-or the moral power, the sense of right and wrong and of religious obligation, in virtue of which man alone is made in the image of Godwhether we consider any one, or all of these together, as characteristic of man, he is thereby dissevered from, and immeasurably exalted above the mere animals, (in the highest of which not one of these traits appears), and by the thought and mind of God he is appointed to stand at the head of the creation in a division and a rank by himself. Zoology is thus brought into harmony with the divine plan. Science is perfected. God is honoured.

But Professor Agassiz has committed himself to the classification of Cuvier, which ranks man as an animal, and nothing more; and it is in defence of this system that he is led into that systematic disparagement of every thing distinctively human, and unto that extravagant exaltation of the faculties and powers of the brute, which we have signalised in this

paper. This is the explanation of what, in such a man, were otherwise inexplicable-the system required it at his hands. What the tendency of this system must ever be whilst it continues to be held is here revealed in the most striking manner, viz., to degrade man. But it is comforting to know that discovery and science are moving in the right direction to ensure its overthrow. If, indeed, man is nothing more than an animal, and has no traits differing in kind from those of the monkey, the elephant, the ox, the lion, the dog, then, and not otherwise, this system may stand. But if it is no less untrue than it is repulsive to common sense and to the human heart, that men and brutes have psychical faculties and powers in every respect the same in kind-yea, if man is man-the system must fall; and reason and conscience will come to fill their proper place in determining the classifications of zoology. God speed the day!

ART. IV.-Politics and the Pulpit.*

PUBLIC attention has been frequently directed of late to what is generally understood by "preaching politics." We propose to state a few principles, of permanent use, pertaining to this subject. Confused and inconsistent notions concerning it are entertained by many. Some are very jealous of any allusions from the pulpit to matters affecting the State. Others insist that the pulpit shall be out-spoken and explicit in the advocacy of their own favourite policy. So long as the ministry is a power in the world, its influence will be deprecated or invoked in aid of all objects where power is coveted. Few men have objections to the preaching of politics, so long as it is their own politics which are preached.

A clergyman preaches a discourse which he thinks is demanded by the perils of the country. The doctrine he advocates is distasteful to certain conductors of the political press, who forthwith censure him for transcending his proper vocation. He is accused of meddling with subjects which do not belong to his profession. He is distinctly informed that if he ventures to intrude into such an arena, his high and holy calling will be

This interesting article, distinguished by its talent and enlivened by its humour, appears in the American Presbyterian and Theological Review for January 1863, and is from the pen of the Rev. William Adams, D.D., New York. The latter portion, in which the author gives vent, though in the best spirit, to his political views on the present war, we omit.-ED. B. & F. E. R.

disgraced, and the white robes of his office will be sullied by the missiles with which he will certainly be pelted by excited men. Ere long the pulpit speaks again, from another quarter and in another tone. It promulgates doctrines now which happen to be agreeable to the very men who before censured the clergy for presuming to speak at all on such subjects, but who now congratulate themselves, the country, and religion itself for such wise, wholesome, and timely counsels. "Now the ministry is doing its proper work. It does not stand aloof from those practical concerns which affect the well-being of society, but as God's most beneficent agent, it is shedding the light and authority of heaven on the interests of time."

Herein is a manifest inconsistency. Silence and speech at the same time, and in regard to the same subject, cannot both be right. That is no pendulum which swings only on one side. Surely there must be some fixed principle pertaining to the subject which ought to be ascertained, otherwise the Christian pulpit is destitute of all diguity, exposed by turns to flattery or contempt.

As to the chief and distinctive object of the Christian ministry there can be no diversity of opinion. It is to announce those truths which affect man in his highest relations-to God and immortality. Unlike other teachers who, beginning with the lower ascent to the higher, the Christian ministry are. appointed to proclaim those truths which relate to the supreme interests of our race. In the act of doing this, irrespective of all earthly distinctions, ignoring all those strata and conditions of society which the Apostle intends by " knowing man after the flesh," the teachers of religion are by an insensible and indirect process contributing most to that secular prosperity which others make their direct and exclusive endeavour. Elevating man in the scale of character, by introducing him to an immediate fellowship with his Maker, you are sure to confer importance on all which concerns his relations to his fellowmen and this present life. We need not expand this thought, that intelligence, freedom, law, order, enterprise, commerce, arts, industry, wealth, follow in the train of the Christian religion. Any tyro in history and geography will admit as much. He who preaches then, as he is bidden, repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ, employing himself with those distinctive and germinant truths which are his peculiar themes, is contributing more than he knows to the welfare of states, and the true prosperity of nations. In this sense, political reforms are embosomed in the doctrine of justification by faith, and national progress is insured by Christian devotion.

True religion should pervade the whole of man's being. The