London, on Thursday, April 27, at 12, the Colosseum, in the Regent's Park. Fortunately this Cyclopean structure has acquired a fame that relieves the individual who is honoured by the direction of the sale from the necessity to exert his inventive faculties, or to give a lengthened description of its prominent features. It may suffice for the present to say, the Colosseum is the most classical building throughout Europe; where description fails to portray

'Its eloquent proportions,
Its mighty graduations,'

which even when seen,

'Thou seest not all, but piecemeal thou must break,
To separate contemplation, the great whole.'

The dome, it is believed, is of larger dimensions than any other of a similar nature, being

'To art a model-

Simple, erect, severe, austere, sublime,
It looks tranquillity.'

The most celebrated construction of antiquity does not surpass the gigantic elegance of this building. The solidity of this enormous mass of classic architecture is equal to its colossal dimensions, and is calculated to stand the rigid test of time.

'Glorious dome,

Shalt thou not last ?'

This mighty labour, the modern Babylon, has secured for many years an income varying from £3,000 to £5,000 a-year, without the slightest artificial aid, and it is placed beyond doubt that in the hands of a talented and ingenious possessor this income will be in due time greatly increased. The picture of London has been its great feature, and 2,800 persons have paid for their admission in one day. There are magnificent conservatories, fountains, and jets d'eau, a Swiss cottage with its lakes and woods, a hall of mirrors, and an extensive theatre, together with a large frontage in Albany-street. It needs only the magic influence of Stanfield's pencil to place it high above all contemporaries. The tenure may be assimilated to freehold, inasmuch as the ground rent is a mere bagatelle, and the lease from the Crown hath 70 years still unexpired. Descriptive particulars will be ready a month antecedent to the sale; in the meantime principals may obtain information from Messrs. Fladgate, Young, and Jackson, solicitors, Essex-street, Strand; and at Mr. George Robins's offices, Covent-garden. It is open as usual, or it can be seen by tickets, to be procured at Mr. George Robins's offices, at 1s. each, or cards for four persons at 2s. 6d."—Times.

IV. The following are practical applications of descriptive reasoning.

In tracing the effects of any measure that we wish to have altered or abandoned, the effects are sometimes described very minutely:

"The reasons against extracting a revenue out of soap are obvious and unanswerable. In the first place, it is a tax upon a necessary of life. Moreover, it presses on the poor in a disproportionate degree as compared with the rich, since, the duty being uniform on all descriptions of the article, the commoner qualities pay of course a much larger per centage to the Exchequer than those of higher price. But the particular mode in which this duty affects the humbler classes, makes it especially injurious to their interests. It operates as a discouragement to cleanliness— a premium pro tanto upon dirt and disease. To enhance, by fiscal regulations, the price of a commodity which is indispensable to the purification of the dwellings, the apparel, and the persons of the poor, is, to say the least, a glaring contravention of the policy which has but lately taken the health of the people under legislative protection, and which regards baths and washhouses, drainage and ventilation, as fit objects of public care and official supervision."

"But we have not yet done with the evils of the soap tax. Another well-founded objection against it is, that it operates, like all Excise duties on articles of manufacture, injuriously upon production-exposing us to a disadvantageous rivalry with the foreign maker, and depressing what might otherwise be a flourishing branch of trade. The same arguments, in fact, which induced Sir R. Peel to take off the glass duties, might be urged with almost the same force for repealing the duty upon soap. Lastly, to complete the case of inexpediency, the tax to which we refer does not extend to Ireland; a preference not only indefensible on grounds of justice, but furthermore conducive, as is well known, to a great amount of evasion and fraud. It has been a common practice to export English soap, with the benefit of the drawback, to the sister country, and afterwards to smuggle the same back again to England, thus defrauding at once the revenue and the manufacturer who honestly pays the duty."-Morning Chronicle.

In describing acts of injustice or oppression, it is seldom necessary to have recourse to any forms of reasoning. The description itself will usually in this country produce all the impression that could be obtained by the most profound argumentation. So also, in regard to the abuses of the law,

to show that they ought to be corrected, it is enough to describe them :—

"A. has an estate left to his wife, with remainder to her children upon her death. B., the executor, being about to sell some of the houses and lands, for the purpose of satisfying debts due from the testator, A., believing that sufficient assets were in B.'s hands to meet the demands upon the estate, files a bill in Chancery for an account. This was in 1833. B. puts in answers -the bill is amended, and amended answers follow. In 1835 A.'s wife bears a child. The Lord Chancellor insists upon the infant being brought into court. The suit is 'abated'—a supplemental bill has to be filed, making the infant a plaintiff, and all the other parties have again to put in answers. The child, however, dies a few weeks after birth. A. has then to take out letters of administration to the estate of the deceased infant, and to file another supplemental bill, demanding another edition of answers. In 1836 A.'s wife bears him a second child, which has to be presented in court. This babe also dies, and all the formalities necessary in the former case are repeated in this. In 1838 another child is born to A., and the whole process has to be gone through again; and in 1840 a fourth child, and the necessary Chancery consequences. In 1841 one of the executors dies, when another supplemental bill has to be filed, and all parties interested to put in their answers. After this occurs a bankruptcy, when there is another repetition of the whole case. It comes at last before the Lord Chancellor for a hearing, who decrees to refer it to the Master, 'to take the accounts in the usual way.' Twelve months are consumed in drawing up the decree-five years in going through the accounts, which might have been gone through in five hours-and, at last, a re-hearing of the suit is reached. The Master's report is given in, the Court confirms it, and makes a decree, that the estates shall be sold to pay the costs, the balance, IF ANY, to be paid into the Bank, 'to await the further directions of the Court. The minutes of the decree, however, have to be settled by counsel, who spend over them two years more. Meanwhile, another bankruptcy occurs-the process has again to be gone through. The case is not yet ended, and costs considerably more than half the original legacy have already been incurred."-Nonconformist.

V. A logical description will have an adaptation to the points it is designed to prove. Thus, the description of a town by a physician, an architect, a political economist, or a clergyman, will probably have a reference to its healthfulness, its buildings, its manufacture, or its spiritual destitution, and hence the descriptions, though all correct, will

be different from each other. Logical descriptions should not be too long. Dr. Young observes in his Paraphrase on the Book of Job, that the description of an object is complete, when you can add nothing but what is common to other objects. Hence we read in that poem, of the beauty of the peacock, the migration of the hawk, the swiftness of the ostrich, and the sharp-sightedness of the eagle, these being the main points by which they are respectively distinguished.

In descriptive reasoning, all the reasoning is in the mind. There may be no reasoning process manifest in the description. But though no reasoning is required to prove the truth of the description, there is still a reasoning process going on in the mind. It is admitted, for example, that the eye is correctly described. The only reasoning in the mind is whether this description is a proof of an intelligent maker. When you have finished your description, you have proved your proposition. For the other part of the argument, that "an instrument so constructed must have had an intelligent maker," is a "truth of intellect," that requires not to be proved by reasoning.

There are two cases in which descriptions may lead us to erroneous conclusions.

The first is when the description is incorrect. A friend who recommends a servant, may give an incorrect, or at least, a defective account of his character. A party who wishes to sell us an estate, may give a description that shall prepossess us too strongly in its favour. Or a traveller into a foreign country may give a description, either of the scenery or of the inhabitants, that shall lead us into false judgments either in regard to the conveniences of the country, or the character of its inhabitants.

In the second place, the description may be correct, and hence we may too readily embrace the reasoning with which it is connected. How often have we heard vivid, and probably correct descriptions of the misery of Ireland! But the accuracy of the description was no proof that the specific measure which the speaker proposed would relieve that misery. An honourable member may correctly enough describe the inconveniences of an existing law, but this is no proof that the remedy he proposes would remove

those inconveniences, or that it would not introduce more weighty evils. So we may sometimes have appeals to our charity, made on behalf of people in great distress, but the relief solicited might have the effect of increasing the misery it is intended to relieve. A talent for vivid description is a great advantage to a public speaker. we should always recollect that the description is only half the argument, and like the half of a pair of scissors, will be quite inoperative unless well united to the other half.

SECTION II.

INTERROGATIVE REASONING.

By Interrogative reasoning we mean reasoning by asking questions. Dr. Young observes, in his Paraphrase of the Book of Job, that an interrogation differs from an ordinary argument as much as telling a man to hang himself differs from a common execution. By putting an appropriate question, you compel the party to pass sentence on himself.

Sometimes interrogation is employed for the purpose of more emphatic assertion, and often gives much additional force to the expression. Thus: "King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets? I know that thou believest "—is more forcible than, 66 King Agrippa, I know that thou believest the prophets." "Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also." This is more forcible than, " He is not only the God of the Jews, but also of the Gentiles." (See also Jer. xlvii. 67.)

Interrogation is the proper language of majesty incensed. (See Job xxxviii. 1-7; Ezek. xviii. 23-25.) It is also the language of compassionate reproof. (Hosea xi. 8; vi. 4.) It is also the language of wonder and adoration. (See Job xi. 7—9; Isaiah xl. 12-14.) It is also the language of fervent importunity. (Psalms lxxvii. 7—10; lxxxviii. 10-14; lxxxix. 46-49.)

Interrogation is sometimes employed, as we have inti