their flocks and herds to find cool herbage and unwonted shade among the castles and shrines and palaces of Rabbah, we are reminded of one of the most striking anticipations of Scripture, "I will make Rabbah a stable for camels, and the Ammonites a couching-place for flocks; and ye shall know that I am the Lord."

In my next letter I hope to give you an account of Gerasa, the remains of which are, I think, more striking than those of Rabbah.-Believe me, &c., EX DE CHRISTI.

THE BRITISH ASSOCIATION AT BATH.

JUST thirty-three years ago, about a hundred lovers of science, including Sir R. Murchison, Dean Conybeare, Dalton, Brisbane, &c., met at York to carry out the idea which Babbage had started in 1826, in his "Decline of Science in England," and which Sir David Brewster had borrowed from him. It was understood that in Germany scientific associations had been established for some years, but the plan did not win much favour in England. The Times sneered at the "peripatetic philosophers going round to be looked at and admired;" Mr. Dickens laughed at them in the now forgotten "Mudfog Society's Reports;" and the Universities were so far from sympathizing with them, that Cambridge sent no one to the York meeting, and Oxford was only represented by Dr. Daubeny. Things, however, changed rapidly. The next year, the meeting was held at Oxford, with seven hundred members, and Dr. Buckland as President. Then Professor Sedgwick took the chair at Cambridge; and in 1834, Edinburgh being the place of meeting, the Association rose per saltum to the position of a "recognized power in the country." Lord Brougham was President; Arago, Agassiz, and other eminent men were there, and the members numbered 1270. Since then, every year has seen an increase in the number of Members and Associates, and in the sums subscribed. More and more have run to and fro whether knowledge is proportionally increased, may be questioned. One thing, at any rate, is certain; such societies give a great impetus to the manufacture of philosophical instruments; and if this were all, it would not be a despicable result. It is by practical men, constantly employed in making the apparatus, that improvements are generally made. We see, then, the importance of giving such men freer scope, by increasing the demand for

costly and highly-finished microscopes, and the like. A microscopical soirée, like that which we had the other evening, is perhaps the most unfit place in the world for studying microscopical objects; the heat, the glare, the cross lights from the hundreds of lamps, the crowd which will form into groups despite all recommendations to move on, render anything like accurate observation impossible. But the whole is a splendid advertisement for our best manufacturers; and real good to science, as we said, follows. In the same direction tends the yearly expenditure of the Association itself at Kew. If you ask anybody, "What do they do with all their money?" you are told that "they support the Kew Observatory, where all the chronometers are sent to be tested;" this is their claim to be a national body. Mr. Tite, the Bath M.P., speaking at his grand banquet at Guildhall the other night, could find little more to say in their favour. To us the matter of "funds" seems the weak point of the Association. Surely the testing of chronometers ought to be an Admiralty affair; and surely if the members merely contributed enough to print reports and meet needful expenses, the interests of science would be just as well served as they now are by a subscription which (small as it is) no doubt excludes some really useful people. As for the "Sections," we cannot think that there is much in most of them to profit a mixed audience. You hear, in the Physiological Section for instance, Dr. Hughes Bennett, of Edinburgh, assert that smells are not only innocuous per se, but that they cannot even be called a nuisance, seeing how soon men get used to them; and that, so far from sewage destroying fish, the salmon and trout in the Eden were found to have improved immensely since the drains of Carlisle. were turned into the river. In fact, we are, says Dr. Bennett, entirely ignorant of the causes of epidemic disease; and the men whose efforts brought about the "Health of Towns Bill" were literally, as well as figuratively, led by the nose. Then up got Dr. Budd and Dr. Cobbold, and, differing in other things, agreed in going diametrically against most of Dr. Bennett's statements; so that the "laity," many of them ladies, must have gone away in an unpleasantly Pyrrhonic state of mind, and with the conviction that it does not much matter whether you live in a well or ill drained place. Dr. Bennett had the courage to assert that Naples, notorious for its high death-rate, perhaps the filthiest city in the world-where sewers, open at intervals, throw all the drainage into the Bay, and where the richer people live in the upper stories to avoid the smell-is not in any way made less healthy by this polluting system. The experimenter is generally positive as to his own results; he forgets that living creatures are not like algebraic symbols; the dogs or birds whom he subjects to certain conditions may

(though seemingly in their normal state) be already pre.disposed in some direction. He forgets, too, when arguing upon others' experiments, that the sanguine observer is sometimes as unreliable as a "spiritualist;" he fancies he sees what he wishes to see, and so unintentionally gives false data for future reasoners. When we hear that the excess of carbonic acid, and deficiency of oxygen, in the air of a crowded assembly, are almost inappreciable, we rejoice to reflect that God has provided us all with what one sensible speaker called a "bodyometer;" by which he meant, that though chemistry could detect no difference, we know instinctively what suits our bodies, and what is prejudicial to them.

Many papers were read in this Section on the Dietary question. The Times has given us several extracts from Dr. Edw. Smith's report on the food of the poor. We had the whole question over again, illustrated with elaborate tables of the number of ounces of cheese, and tea, and sugar, &c., consumed in various districts. We attach very little importance to such investigations. In the first place, the induction is singularly imperfect, the number of cases examined being often wholly inadequate. Then, again, no one needs to be told that in several parts of the United Kingdom the peasantry are not sufficiently fed, and that the race is degenerating in consequence. Every West-country clergyman who has friends in the North knows that, at their worst, the Lancashire operatives fared better than do his own people, except perhaps at harvest time. Those who have lived in the Midlands know how badly highly-paid workmen, who will only work three or four days a week, use their abundant means. Many must have seen the reckless waste-high-priced meats thrown away because not well cooked, and the poverty which almost surely follows illness or "a bad state of trade." These savans will not see that the question is a moral one. Train people up to live as Christians, and if their wages are high, they will not selfishly squander them; if they are low, they will therewith be content. We have so often preached to these people in language which they have sadly misunderstood-language which has led them to ignore their vocation as baptised Christians; aye, which has led them to look upon themselves as heathens, and not (the great majority of them) churchmen (though very bad churchmen) bound to act according to their profession-that they have at last got to be often more unimpressible, more hard to deal with, than the very heathen themselves. As to farmlabourers, we have certainly not bettered their status by all our "improvements." Rents have risen; the farmer, despite the high price of meat, is not making money. He cannot afford high wages; while, owing to competition for land, &c., the "sidings," on which the cottager used to feed his cow, are

enclosed; commons' rights are done away with; and the peasant is becoming more and more of a mere machine. The scarcity of milk was of course discussed in connexion with the diet of the poor. Farmers have grown to be thorough-going political economists, buying in the cheapest and selling in the dearest markets; and they find it more profitable to turn skim milk into pork and veal than to sell it in "ha'porths" to labourers' children. A plan was spoken of for increasing the milk supply by bringing waste lands (asserted to amount to one-third of the acreage of the country) under culture; and we were told how well the dairy farm in connexion with the Dartmoor convict prison has succeeded, pecuniarily and otherwise. Individuals will not, in general, undertake such operations; the draining, &c., requires a locking-up of capital for some years; but we do hope to see a great many of our moors made useful, when "companies limited" are better understood and more developed among us. Even brother Ignatius might advantageously do something in this direction; that is, supposing him an honest lover of monasticism, and not merely a reckless seeker after popularity! If men will be monks, why should they not do as the monks of old did? why must they offensively parade their monkery up and down our cities to the scandal of peaceable Christians? Let them go to places like Dartmoor, or Holme Moss, or many a fell side on our "Pennine Range;" and, gathering to them their kindred spirits, set to work to improve the face of the earth, to make the desert smile, even as their forerunners the monks of old did in early days.

We did not intend to give anything like a detailed account of what went on in the "Sections." "" This may be seen in any daily newspaper-one of which, by the way, with true newspaper flippancy, accused the geographers of slighting poor Captain Speke's memory, because, when the news of his sad and sudden death was telegraphed, they did not at once walk in and deliver, one after another, glowing eulogiums on their deceased comrade. "That is what would have been done in France; but in England we lose our opportunities of uttering words which give a zest to life." The Committee took the much more English plan of framing a "Resolution" expressing their deep regret. This was read by Sir R. Murchison, who, when, two days after, he noticed the newspaper calumny, said that he for one was so moved that he could hardly trust himself to speak at all. Captain Burton, indeed, did break down in the attempt to express his sorrow. He was one of the eminent men whose appearance interested all alike; so was Bates of the Amazons, and Dr. Livingstone, whose lecture was one of the great events of the week. The Geographical Room was much the most popular with "outsiders." The ladies came in

long before the commencement of the proceedings, and filled Archdeacon Brymer's noble ward to overflowing. Lord Milton (son of Earl Fitzwilliam) was generally on the platform, as well as Sir J. Bowring, Mr. Lubbock, and others more or less famous. There was, too, a great deal of sportive wit always going forward in the discussions. Mr. John Crawford spoke constantly; and those who know the "terse and nervous' style of that privileged octogenarian, and the racy way in which he contradicts those who differ from him, can understand how amusing must have been the talk on "the Fixity of the Human Type," and such like subjects. "You've heard a deal about the good conduct of my friend's friends, the Dutch: I don't like them." "He says there are negroes in the interior of Formosa:-not one." But the voice and the manner are wanting to complete the picture. Mr. Crawford believes in several Adams; maintains the absolute impossibility of different kinds of men ever varying, except by being "crossed;" and talks in an off-hand style about the Jews as being "the best of Eastern people, as is shown by their having written the Bible." We are sure he does a great deal of mischief. Scientific men know the little value of his crude assertions; mixed audiences do not; and, with a great many, strong assertion will always to some extent do instead of proof. What he said about the Maories was simply the view enunciated the other day by the Daily Telegraph,-"We want elbow room, and we must move our elbows to get it." He represented the Maories as a set of ungrateful obstructives, a sort of insular Chinese, who do not love their land, but love to keep us out of it. "One party must give way: we don't mean to give way; and if they don't give way, so much the worse for them. . . . . We took possession of the island in the Queen's name, and we mean to keep it in the Queen's name; and every Maori who comes in our path must be treated as a rival." Here is a lesson in popular Christianity. A Missionary rose next, and showed the wonderful way in which the Maori race had improved; and how, when Captain Peel was shipwrecked, they helped him to repair his brig, and gave him six weeks' provisions, and were indignant at the idea of receiving any pay for their kindness. He gave many more instances of their practical Christianity; and attributed the war to the greed of settlers, and to the inexcusable neglect of Government, which, accepting the su premacy of these tribes, and undermining the influence of their own chiefs, had given them neither law nor order in return. To him turned Mr. Crawford: "Pray in whose name did these missionaries you talk of go to the island?" "We went," was the reply, "in the name of the King of kings." Even Mr. Crawford was quieted for the time, by an answer at once so simple and so irresistible. We are sure, as we said, that