model our geologic theories on the literal | some thirty years ago, used to believe interpretation of the Scripture words? that eels could be developed out of horseFor this we are not prepared. Miller, if hairs. It was once believed that the he has not made out his own theory, has crushed those of the scriptural anti-geologists like rotten fungi. Shall we, then, hold that

Anser Bernicla, or barnacle-goose, was developed out of decaying wood long submerged in sea-water; and Hector Boece has recorded some such faith in his "History of Scotland." The Epicureans

"He who made the world, and revealed his will of old held that the earth, besides herbs

to Moses,

Was mistaken in its age?"

or, with Baden Powel, that the first chapter of Genesis is a mere picturesque myth or parable? We have already stated some reasons why we can not accept this. There seems to us-who are not satisfied with either Chalmer's or Miller's view-to be but one other course, and that is, to let the subject remain in its uncertainty, to be ready to welcome the true explanation, should it come; or, if it comes not, to allow the difficulty to lie over, with so many other far greater mysteries in nature, providence, and redemption, for the discoveries of a future life. The various attempts to reconcile Scripture and Geology have been compared to efforts made to bridge across an untamable torrent from opposite sides: the bridge is never completed, and, however near the different architects may approach each other, there remains still a narrow but furious and foaming interspace, scorning constraint. And it is likely that, for a long time to come, this current of contradiction and controversy will continue to puzzle, on the one hand, all scientific skill, and, on the other, to defy all Christian intellect.

and trees, produced spontaneously a great number of mushroom-like bodies, which, when ripe, burst open, and revealed young animals (eggs and chicks without parents!) which proved the founders of all our animal races. Of the same character essentially is the theory of La Marck, nay, worse, since we can disprove it, and challenge its supporters to produce a "single genealogy of development, to press into his service one family history, though but of the smallest shell-fish." Besides, where is such a series, once begun, to stop? If the snail can develop into a singing-bird, why not into a Shakspeare? and why not a Shakspeare into the supreme God? Most justly does Miller class those who support this hypothesis with pretenders, and the hypothesis itself with the mere fictions of the imagination.

He next shows the bearing of geology upon an old question of the days of Pope and Soame Jenyn, in reference to the space occupied by man in the scale of creation. These writers looked upon man as more important from his position than from his nature or powers; they thought him of little more value, yet just as perfect in his own way, as a bird or beast. While Scripture, on the one hand, confutes this notion, and asserts at once man's In the lectures which follow, on the fall and his infinite importance, geology, "Two Theologies," Miller shows that geo- on the other, maintains that he is the logy confutes the infinite series of the "sum-total of all the animals-the end atheist, by showing a number of distinct toward which all the animal creation has beginnings, and that it disproves the tended, from the first appearance of the sophism of Hume as to creation "being a first Paleozoic fishes." Just as the archisingular effect," by opening to us the his-tect, designing to place a certain noble tory of the remote past, and introducing statue us through the present to former creations, by "giving us, what Hume truly argued his contemporaries had not, an experience in creations." On the Development theory he does not enter at large, having dealt with it in another book; but says, simply, that its hypothesis, instead of being founded, like the general principles of the geologists, upon facts, is a mere dream, unsupported by any evidence. Such dreams have often abounded. All boys,

on the top of a commanding column, bears this in mind at every stage of the work, and in all his adjustments of the proportions of the building, so did God design from the first that the majestic structure of life should be crowned with the figure of man, and was thinking of him while employed in forming fishes, reptiles, "dragons of the prime," and the monster mammalia of the pre-Adamite world. The statue of man was at length formed, and placed on the summit, when,

hark! a wild blast from some mysterious | writer in the Witness shows that even region blew it down; but God instantly such a partial deluge as Miller supposes set to work to rear it up again, and not involves nearly as great a difficulty as the only so, but to surround its brow with a common view. Sir Humphrey Davy says, crown of celestial glory, or, in Miller's in a letter to Mr. Cottle, of Bristol, dated words, the "advent of man, simply as such, 1823: "What I stated to the Royal Sowas the great event prefigured during the ciety, in awarding the medal to Professor old geologic ages; while the advent of Buckland, has not been correctly given in that Divine Man who hath abolished the journals. I merely said that the facts death, and brought life and immortality lately brought forward proved the occurto light,' was the great event prefigured rence of that great catastrophe, (the Flood,) during the historic ages ;" and, perhaps, which had been recorded in sacred and he might have added, prefigured still; for profane history, and of which traditions the crown of man, which is also the crown were current even amongst the most barof Christ, is not yet fully woven, and barous nations. I did not say they proved Miller expects, with many, the apotheosis the truth of the Mosaic account of the of man to come from above, with the new deluge-that is to say, of the history of heavens and the new earth. Here he the ark of Noah, and the preservation of cites Coleridge, in a passage full of "fancy, animal life. This is revelation: and no indeed, but of that sagacious fancy vouch- facts that I know of have been discovered safed to only the true poet." He might in science that bear upon this question, have quoted with as much propriety the and the sacred history of the race of line of another poet : Shem. My idea was, to give to Cæsar what belonged to Cæsar, and not to blend divine truths with the fancies of men." Many facts have been added to geology since Davy thus wrote; but we suspect that, after all, the reconciliation of the Noachian deluge with these is as far off as ever; and that we must just say of that catastrophe as a whole-as Davy said in reference to some of its parts-" This is revelation."

"The diapason closing full in man ;"

although, perhaps, he may have shrunk from calling the previous creations-ichthyosauri, pterodactyles, etc.-notes of "mellow music," in Tennyson's words, and have thought rather of harsh, discordant sounds from the Master's hand, attesting the strength, and almost endangering the integrity, of the instrument, ere the swell of harmony arose, to pursue its victorious way. How cordially we reciprocate his idea that man in his present state and form is not final, is only the crude germ of a nobler being, who is to be made after "the image of the heavenly, of the second Adam, and who is, perhaps, to be as much superior to the present race of men as they are to mastodons and megatheria." But for this cheering, exciting, ecstatic thought, let us remember we are indebted to Scripture solely, and not to human science or philosophy.

In the second part of the "Two Theologies," Miller compares the revelations of Scripture with the discoveries of geology in reference to the Fall of man, the unity of the race, etc. Into this part we do not follow him. It is written with much ingenuity and power, if it is not always satisfactory. We do not like his chapter on the "Noachian Deluge" so well. In it he rather proves the folly and absurdity of the solutions attempted by others, than gives an adequate one of his own. A late

In the chapter on the "Discoverable and the Revealed," Miller shows some of the enormous blunders in science into which theologians used to be led, by pushing the literal language of Scripture too far, and imagining that the Bible was intended to reveal every thing. He preserves in the amber of immortal contempt such names as Voetius, Heideggeri, Francis Turretine, etc. In the lecture on the "Geology of the Anti-Geologists," he masses up with these dead some living flies, although he is rather severe and personal in this portion. His last two lectures, on the "Less-Known Fossil Floras of Scotland," are totally free from this fault, and form delightful descants on his favorite theme, the rocky remains and petrified flowers of his beloved native land.

In quitting this admirable volume, we can not but allude to the three great losses the science of Scotland has sustained within the last few years-Edward Forbes, Samuel Brown, and Hugh Miller; all developed to the pursuit of distinct and lofty scientific paths; all of them in or

scarcely past their prime, and from whom | plishments: to Samuel Brown, the fine the world was expecting greater things enthusiast, who, although he failed in than any they had achieved; all men of high genius, and who all set almost simultaneously-being "lovely in their lives, and in their death not long divided." Honor to the memory of all three! Of Edward Forbes, who, although born on the Isle of Man, was educated and died in Edinburgh, and might be considered an adopted Scotchmam-with his keen, comprehensive, Cuvier-like intellect, his quiet effective teaching, his genial, delightful private manners, his unbounded accom

his highest ambition, and seemed to many a belated child of the middle ages, an alchemist "born out of due time," gave an undoubted impulse to the progress of chemistry, as well as electrified all who ever heard or met him, by the elasticity and brilliance of his conversation and oratory: and to Hugh Miller, the Monarch of the Self-taught. Honor to them all! the more as they all honored each other, and warmly appreciated each other's studies, and character, and genius.

From the London Quarterly Review.

IRISH

ORATORS CURRAN.*

To many readers of the present day this new edition of an old biography will have quite a novel interest; and though written by Mr. Charles Phillips, it is certainly a readable and welcome book. On such a subject it would not be easy to write a bad one. Curran's life was so rich in varied incident, marked by such strong contrasts, passed amongst such strange scenes, and still stranger characters; he lived in such an eventful and stormy era, acted such an important part in the public history of his times, filled so large a space in the public eye, and acquired so great a fame, that we can not imagine a finer subject for a biographer equal to the occasion; nor can we understand how the life of such a man, no matter how poorly written, could fail to interest, amuse, and instruct. Mr. Phillips had a splendid opportunity of dealing with the most important period of Irish history, an unusual state of society and manners to depict, and a superabundance of the best materials at his command. He enjoyed,

* Curran and his Contemporaries. By Charles Phillips, Esq., A.B. Fifth Edition. Edinburgh:

Blackwood & Sons. 1857.

for a number of years, the intimate friendship of the great man whose life he has written. He not only witnessed Curran's magnificent displays in the Senate and at the Bar, but had a full knowledge of his powers as a social companion, and the charms of his conversation in private life. He learned from Curran's own lips the leading events of his life; heard him sketch as only Curran could do the characters, genius, and peculiarities of Grattan, Flood, Burgh, and the rest of his contemporaries; was a listener to the treasures of genius, of wisdom, and of wit, which Curran delighted to pour forth at the social board. And yet, with all these advantages, where so much might have been reasonably expected, we can not say that the result is satisfactory. Our praise of this production must be sadly qualified. It is readable, but only in spite of its defects; and welcome because of the material it so indif ferently displays. It is only a critic so famous as Lord Brougham who could venture to call it an "inimitable piece of biography."

It must not be forgotten-though the readers of this volume may fail to be re

great original mind like Curran's during a life-time, so few have been preserved!" Had Mr. Phillips taken away the cause for this reflection, we should most willingly dispense with all his labored panegyrics, and forgive him even greater offenses against good taste than are to be found in this volume.

minded—that in an age of the most extraordinary intellectual splendor, Curran was admitted on all hands to be, not only a clever lawyer, a great debater, and a grand orator, but also a profound thinker, an unrivaled wit, and the most brilliant conversationalist of his time; and this not merely by his own countrymen, but by the highest literary circles of London and It was especially incumbent on Mr PhilParis. Lord Erskine, Madame De Staël, lips to perform this service, for by no one R. B. Sheridan, and Dr. Birkbeck, amongst has Curran's fame been more seriously inothers, bear witness to his wonderful jured than by his present biographer. We powers; while Byron, who was the most suppose our readers are aware that Mr. fastidious of men, and chary of his praise, Phillips, now a Commissioner of the Insolvpays the following tribute to him in his ent Court, was for a number of years at Journal: "I have met Curran at Holland the Irish, and subsequently at the English House. He beats every body. His im- Bar; that he practiced with great success agination is beyond human, and his humor as a criminal lawyer, won a high reputa(it is difficult to define what is wit) per- tion for eloquence of a certain kind, thought fect. He has fifty faces, and twice as himself an orator, and, in an evil hour, many voices, when he mimics. I never published his speeches. Although dismet his equal." Again: "Curran! Cur-playing a good deal of talent, they were ran the man who struck me most. Such so disfigured by mannerism and extravaimagination! There never was any thing gance, and so full of incongruous metaphor like it. He was wonderful even to me, and bombast, so inaccurate in thought and who had seen many remarkable men of the defective in style, that while young oratime. The riches of his Irish imagination tors of the spasmodic school recited them were exhaustless. I have heard that man before the looking-glass, the reading pubspeak more poetry than I have ever seen lic laughed, and the Edinburgh Review written, though I saw him seldom, and but swooped down upon Mr. Phillips with such occasionally." effect, that his style of eloquence at once fell in the market. But, unfortunately, Mr. Phillips was continually talking of the Irish orators-of Curran in particular, whom he professed to imitate and admire. But the people who knew nothing of the Irish orators except their names, naturally concluded that Mr. Phillips resembled the men he so rapturously praised. They could not have fallen into a greater mistake. The resemblance to Curran was ridiculously small. Our author succeeded only in catching certain of the orator's defects. Some of the splendida vitia of Curran's style were instinct with genius -sparks leaping from his anvil, or smoke mingling with the fierce white flame of his exasperated furnace; and these were entirely beyond the reach of Mr. Charles Phillips. But his pretensions were known and too far credited; and thus he brought the oratory of his great countrymen, at least in some degree, into disrepute.

Now, if Mr. Phillips (who had more frequent opportunities of hearing him than Byron) had only kept a partial record of the outflowings of Curran's prodigally gifted mind, on which nature had lavished, with boundless profusion, the choicest treasures of philosophy, poetry, eloquence, and wit-if he had preserved some of those poetic gems of thought, which Curran was continually scattering around him, what an essential service he would have rendered to literature and the world! But, instead of doing this, Mr. Phillips has recorded, in glowing language, his feelings of joy on being introduced to Mr. Curran; filled his book with anecdote and gossip about every thing and every body; and, having omitted to tell us of Curran all that would have been truly valuable, and which we should have most liked to know, he reminds us of a savage, walking in a mine of gold and precious stones, utterly unconscious of the value of the treasures at his feet. "What a saddening reflection," said John Foster, in one of his critical essays, it is, that of all the grand thoughts, sublime images, and brilliant fancies, that must have passed through a

This was a result greatly to be regretted: for, unquestionably, the two greatest achievements of the Irish are, their eloquence and their music. By this we do not mean that they have not contributed largely to other departments of science, literature,

and art. We are pleased to remember, | features of resemblance, we think it may and proud to acknowledge, how deeply be said that of the Irish orators, Flood, indebted British literature is to Irish ge- Duquerry, and O'Connell may be classed nius. Many of the greatest names in the together. They seldom rose into flights glorious muster-roll of fame are those of of imagination, but aimed at producing Irishmen. In legislation and philosophy, effect by plain, logical, and conclusive reain poetry and science, in patriotism and soning, and strong masculine common learning, in general literature, the fine arts, sense alone. Grattan and Plunkett are and war, they can boast the illustrious distinguished for their unequaled powers names of Duns Scotus, Ussher, O'Neill, of invective, brilliant epigrammatic force, Sarsfield, Swift, Berkeley, Hutcheson, glittering antithesis, and overwhelming Goldsmith, Sterne, Burke, Barry, Welling- energy and fire. Burgh, Lord Avonmore, ton, Moore, and a host of others. But in Bushe, and Holmes, were remarkable for their oratory and music they stand pre- their learning, clearness of arrangement, eminent that music at once so wild and felicity of allusion, chasteness of conception, mournful, so joyous and pathetic, so mer-power of narration, and faultless purity ry and sad; whose gladdest note is so near akin to tears, which in its melancholy notes so faithfully reflects the history of Ireland, and the unearthly, passionate tones of which are but an echo to the wailings of her griefs.

But her oratory is her greatest glory. No country in Europe can boast a greater number of illustrious speakers. And here we are reminded of a striking circumstance attending the Avatar of genius in the world. The phenomena of its appearance seem to follow some mysterious laws. The Divine afflatus comes rushing on a generation, and gives to the human soul an onward impulse in one particular path, which is a permanent advance. This may help to explain the fact, that almost within the limits of a single life-time all these great men appeared and passed away. They did not come at long intervals from each other, and alone, but blazed out suddenly in the intellectual heavens in brilliant constellations. So came the great artists of the Middle Ages. The great Dramatists of English literature all belong to the era of Elizabeth. The great Musicians came together in one age. All the great Poets of this century appeared in a glorious galaxy at its commencement; and their successors have not yet arrived; we greet only at broad intervals some "bright particular star."

But in every constellation some members stand nearer to each other; and the great orators of Ireland may be conveniently grouped. We are fully aware of the difficulty of forming general classes under which you can reckon poets or orators, knowing that each one is distinguished by an idiosyncrasy which does not perfectly agree with any other; but, joining those together who exhibit the more numerous

of style: on account of their earnestness, elegance, and grace, they may be said to form the classical school. As widely dif fering from them, Dean Kirwan, Richard Brinsley Sheridan, Richard Lalor Sheil, and Thomas Francis Meagher, compose what, for want of a better and more appropriate name, we must call the rhetorical and artificial school. They seek to dazzle by the captivating and luxuriant beauty of fancy, metaphor, and trope. But Curran, for varied pathos, drollery, and wit, may be said to stand alone; he forms a school in himself; and the same is true, in some degree, of Edmund Burke.

Of all these great men, we have long considered Curran to have been the most highly gifted with all the endowments necessary to form a first-class orator. We think he had more natural oratorical genius than any of his contemporaries, perhaps than any speaker of modern times. Burke may have been more copious, learned, philosophical, and profound. Flood may have been more statesmanlike in his views, more subtle in his reasoning, and dexterous in debate. Grattan excelled him, as well as all other men, in epigram, antithesis, and point-in that terrible, condensed, resistless energy which overwhelmed all opposition like a flood; while in that dignified abstemiousness for which he is renowned, and in withering powers of invective, he had no equal. Sheridan's declamation was more rhetorical and ornate. Plunkett was more rapid, fiery, and terse; his crushing and inexorable logic, from which there was no escape, was more continuously sustained. Kirwan, without much imagination, excelled him in sheer force of enthusiasm. Bushe may have been more fastidious in his taste, and more chaste and faultless in the perfect purity