what should they expect under the ordinary laws of God's realm, but that in after years they shall have tears to shed over the wayward youth, the lost manhood, the frivolous womanhood of those who were committed to their care?

There may be also irreparable injury done simply from wrong convictions upon the part of parents.

If they assume that it is incredible that they should find their infant children already brought by the power of the Holy Spirit into a gracious state, and therefore urge unceasingly the futility of all attempts to live a Christian life until some new, sudden and mysterious change has been experienced, they may lay a burden upon the young Christian life from which it will never be entirely relieved. A sudden and surprising illumination may perhaps be expected in the case of one who, like Saul, has been an open scoffer at the claims of Jesus, and then, like him, suddenly stricken down before the power of the cross; but far otherwise are the natural manifestations of religious life in one who, "born within the pale of the Church," has been "brought up in the nurture and the admonition of the Lord."

We have known little children who could not remember the time when they did not love their Saviour pray earnestly, almost agonizingly, for some mysterious revelation, and then pause and wait in breathless expectancy for something to happen.

We have known men and women who professed to trust in Christ as a Saviour, and who gave every evidence of desiring to walk with him, pass on for years unwilling publicly to avow themselves Christians and take their place at the Lord's table, because they could not escape from the bondage of the conviction of the necessity of some new and violent revolution in feeling that they had long despaired of ever experiencing.

On the other hand, let Christian parents recognize with gratitude the high honor accorded them, and receive their little ones as God's children given to be trained within his kingdom; let them, while they pray with confidence for the signs of the Holy Spirit's presence, and teach their children that the vows of God are on them, still study their peculiarities of temper and disposition that they may counsel and guide them aright, and they will not find their prayers in vain or their faith unrewarded.

In all ordinary cases they will see even their imperfect work owned of God, cheered by the quick blossoming of gracious

affections implanted by the Holy Spirit, and early crowned by the voluntary consecration of their loved ones to the service of the blessed Master.

In this way, as truly as by direct conquest from the world, God provides for the growth of his Church.

He, with whom is all power, does not disclaim in his spiritual kingdom the same natural laws of parental influence by which from generation to generation nations are enlarged and arts, sciences and civilization made more and more to cover the face of the globe.

Because the Church has a glorious aggressive work to accomplish, attacking, in the name of the Lord, the strongholds of sin and Satan and conquering the world for her King, she must not forget that her strength, her vigor, her triumph, depend still more upon her holy care of those whom God commits to her charge to be cherished in her arms and nourished at her breast.

We believe that the time has come when our Presbyterian Church, in her practice, should plant herself firmly upon the position always maintained by her standards.

Many signs indicate a growing interest in this subject of the relation of baptized children to the church, and we welcome as a happy augury the judicious and acceptable report to the last General Assembly of the "Committee on the Formula for admission to the Lord's Supper."

Let some such form, containing as distinct a recognition of the position in the Church of baptized children, as does the tender and beautiful address proposed by the Committee,* be generally adopted, and it will do much towards bringing the mind of the Church back to the position distinctly enunciated in our directory.

"Children born within the pale of the visible Church, and dedicated to God in Baptism, are under the inspection and government of the Church; and are to be taught to read and repeat the Catechism, the Apostle's Creed, and the Lord's Prayer. They are to be taught to pray, to abhor sin, to fear God, and to obey the Lord Jesus Christ. And when they come to years of discretion, if they be free from scandal, appear sober and steady, and to have sufficient knowledge to discern the Lord's body, they are to be informed, that it is their duty and privilege to come to the Lord's Supper."

* You now come to confirm, by your voluntary act, that membership in the visi le Church which was begun in your behalf through parental faith."

ART. VII.-LIFE AND ITS ORIGIN.*

BY PROF. H. ALLEYNE NICHOLSON, of the University of Toronto.

It may safely be said that there is no question at present agitated in the scientific world which has more interest for humanity at large than that of the Nature of Life and the manner in which living beings originate. Upon the decision of this question, it may without exaggeration be said, depends to a large extent the future of the Christian religion. It touches upon beliefs which are at the very foundation of all religion; and now that inquiry has once commenced, all thoughtful men must wish that it should be carried out to the end, as quickly, but as thoroughly, as the circumstances of the case admit of. From this point of view, if from no other, we can cordially thank Dr. Bastian for his work on "The Beginnings of Life." He has, at least, done good service in assembling into a concrete and manageable form the doctrines of the school to which he belongs, and he further deserves our gratitude for the perfect candor with which his conclusions are always stated. These conclusions may be attacked from two sides, and from both, as it seems to us, with perfect fairness. In so far as his conclusions are purely scientific, they are open to scientific criticism, both as to the accuracy of the facts alleged to be observed and also as to the justness of the deductions drawn therefrom. In so far, again, as his conclusions are at variance with primitive human beliefs as to the existence or immortality of the soul, or as to the existence of a Supreme Being, arguments derived from the domains of Theology or Moral Philosophy may legitimately be employed to confute them.

Let us first briefly consider the general conclusions announced by Dr. Bastian as the results of the investigations which he has carried out, evidently with much conscientious labor. Foremost amongst these conclusions must be placed the alleged establishment of the occurrence of "Spontaneous Generation" (or, as the author prefers to call it, "Archebiosis") as an actual and common natural process. It is hardly necessary to remark that this doctrine implies the originization and development of living be* The Beginnings of Life. By H. C. Bastian, M. D., F. R. S. London: Macmillan & Co. New York: D. Appleton & Co.

ings from dead matter, independently of the influence of any pre-existing living being. Thus, Dr. Bastian thinks that he can prove that" synthetic processes occurring amongst the molecules of colloidal and allied substances" have the power to "engender or give origin to a kind of matter possessing that subtle combination of properties to which we are accustomed to apply the epithet 'living.'" He thinks he can show that "both crystalline and living aggregates appear to be constantly separating de novo from different fluids, and both kinds of matter now seem to be naturally formable from their elements." He thinks that "a majority of scienti£c men and a large section of the educated public" believe that Spontaneous Generation took place once, namely, when living beings first appeared upon the globe; and that if it occurred once, there is no reason why it should not have occurred again, and should not occur now. We should hardly have imagined that so prevalent an opinion existed as to the former occurrence of "Abiogenesis," but we are willing to take Dr. Bastian's word for it. We may remark, however, that the known facts of Geology afford no support to the view that the primitive population of the globe was introduced upon the scene in any such fashion. Omitting the Eozon of the Laurentian Rocks-which many excellent observers do not regard as being the remains of an animal at all-the earliest known forms of life were such as could not by any possibility have been produced by any conceivable process of Archebiosis. The only living beings which could ever be imagined to arise de novo, are such as never could leave any record of their existence in the rocks; so that if "a majority of scientific men" hold that animals and plants were originally introduced upon the globe by Spontaneous Generation, they merely hold a view which, from the nature of the case, can never be supported by any tangible. evidence.

Dr. Bastian admits that it is "invisible colloidal particles' which" are supposed to combine and undergo re-arrangement in order to produce specks of new born living matter." He does not seem to see that this admission is absolutely and altogether fatal to his argument, that is, as against the alternative belief. If the supposed "colloidal particles" are invisible, how do we know that they are "colloidal," or how, indeed, can we know anything whatever as to their nature? Dr. Bas

tian chooses to believe that the said particles are dead; we choose to believe that they are alive, and what is more, that they have proceeded from pre-existent living matter. By an appeal to what authority is it proposed to settle the question ?

That such specks of living matter, after their production from the above-mentioned invisible particles, may actually be seen to develop into Fungus germs, Amoebæ, Monads, and Ciliated Infusorians, we can well believe; but we fail to see what possible bearing this can have on the question as to the occurrence of spontaneous generation. Seeing that the most experienced microscopist in the world would find it impossible to determine by his instrument, whether a given ovum were that of a dog or a worm, we need not wonder that we can not detect the differences which may exist in the immensely more minute "living specks" which constitute the youngest visible stages of Fungi, Monads, and the like. That these living specks are, upon this evidence, to be regarded as identical, and to have been formed. de novo out of dead matter, is simply an assertion, which can not be proved, and has not even probability in its favor.

When again, we are told that "living units of an Algoid nature, can actually be seen to be "converted into the embryos of large and complex Rotifers," we find it necessary to ask a question of a kind of which every careful reader of this work would feel inclined to ask many. We are expected to believe, in effect, that some of the lowest plants can be seen to develop bodily into animals, and indeed, into animals of a comparatively high grade of organization. Now, seeing that these "units of an Algoid nature" are microscopic, it is only fair that Dr. Bastian should tell us how he knows that they were Algoid, or that they belonged to the vegetable kingdom at all. Of course, if he has any evidence in petto, by which he can prove this point, we will succumb-when it is produced. In the meanwhile, no evidence of the kind is brought forward, and we prefer to believe what most naturalists would believe, that any such dogmatic reference of a microscopic cell to the animal or vegetable kingdom, is simply preposterous. Suppose we elect to believe-as we do -that the young forms of certain of the Rotifers are very like Algae in appearance, and that this is the explanation of the facts observed by Dr. Bastian, how does he propose to alter our unfortunate prejudices? The only possible proof as to the ani