part of our nature. As the latter turns the lips of the new born infant to the breast of its mother, the former exhibits itself in its love of the beautiful. Before it is capable of thought or reason, its eyes will sparkle with intense delight at the presentation of a beautiful bouquet, while it would look upon a nugget of gold richer than the mines of California ever produced, with utter indifference. As the growth, strength and development of the body depend upon the food demanded by its natural appetites, so must the growth and development of the soul, and its capacity for enjoyment, depend upon the spiritual food demanded by those tastes peculiar to and a part of its nature. The soul is as necessarily dwarfed by withholding from it its proper nourishment, as is the body from a like cause. The natural wants of both should be constantly supplied, that the child as it grows in stature may also wax strong in spirit. If we regard that as useless which meets the demands of the esthetic tastes of our nature, then we must regard God as exhibiting no wisdom in decorating nature in so lavish a manner with the grand, the sublime, and beautiful. In giving us the fruit he might have omitted the beautiful bloom which heralds its coming. In giving us the rain which moistens our fields and makes our rivers, he might have withheld the accompanying arch which spans the heavens and exhibits to our delighted gaze its perfect symmetry in form and unequaled glory in color. He might have spread over land and sea and sky a dull and monotonous hue, instead of enriching them with that infinitude of the beautiful, which they ceaselessly unveil to the eye of man. All this display of the grand and the beautitul seems to be a divine recognition of the wants of our spiritual nature and a benevolent purpose to supply them. The absence of Art in any nation will ever be a mark of its ignorance and degradation. While the highest Art will be the chaplet which crowns the highest civilization, its uses extend far beyond the gratification of our inherent love of the beautiful. As a language, its expressions are clearer than any which can be embodied in alphabetical forms, or that proceeds from articulate sounds. It also has the advantage of being everywhere understood by all nations, whether savage or civilized. Much that is of great importance in the history of the world would be lost if it were not for Art. Great empires which have arisen, flourished and disappeared, are now chiefly known by their imperishable records of Art. It is indeed the chief agent in securing national immortality. In the remote and prehistoric periods of the past, there have doubtless been nations who gave no encouragement to Art, but like the baseless fabrics of vision they have disappeared and left not a wreck behind. And this glorious Republic of ours, stretching its liberal sway over a vast continent, will perhaps be best known in the distant ages of the future by the imperishable monuments of Art which we may have the taste and the genius to erect. METAPHYSICS. A LECTURE BY SAMUEL S. LAWS, PROFESSOR OF METAPHYSICS IN THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI, MAY 10, 1879. There is only too much reason to apprehend that the bare mention of metaphysics, as the subject of this lecture, suggests to some minds the question whether anything really serious or intelligible is intended. The prejudice against this subject is not unfrequently veiled under the following burlesque definition, credited to the blacksmith of Glamis: "Twa folk disputin thegither; he that's listenin disna ken what he that's speakin means, and he that's speakin disna ken what he means himsel-that's metaphysics!" The irrepressible wit of Sydney Smith was indulged in ridicule of it. It is related that, when lecturing on one of its topics, he exclaimed, in his deep, sonorous and warning voice, "Ladies and gentlemen, there is a word of dire sound and horrible import, which I fain would have kept concealed if I possibly could, but as this is not feasible I shall meet the danger at once and get out of it as well as I can. The word to which I allude is that very tremendous one of Metaphysics, which in a lecture on moral philosophy, seems likely to produce as much alarm as the cry of fire in a crowded playhouse; when Belvidera is left to cry by herself, and every one saves himself in the best manner he can. I must beg of my audience, however, to sit quiet, and in the mean time make use of the language which the manager would probably adopt on such an occasion: I am sure, ladies and gentlemen, there is not the smallest degree of danger." This prejudice against metaphysics has not been confined to the rude and vulgar, either of the present or of the past. By placing the fool's cap on the head of Socrates, the ignorant derision of the Athenian populace culminated in his unrighteous death sentence by their judges. The spirit of this scene still lives. Once, metaphysics was named and esteemed the queen of the sciences; but what has been the fate of this princess? Our most distinguished modern scientists have been reenacting the part of Aristophanes, with this dif ference, that he employed ridicule against Socrates, avowedly in the interest of conservatism, whilst these votaries of nature have made a mistaken use of it in the supposed interest of progress. Were Shaftbury's criterion valid, that ridicule is the test of truth, it might legitimate this style of warfare; but more than once have other than groundlings with bloody hands joined in driving from the world's stage the brightest impersonations of the true, the beautiful and the good. Scientific, no less than religious truth, has had its martyrs; but through the ages, the two, properly understood, have never been in conflict with each other, whilst both have been in antagonism with ignorance, their common and implacable foe. Metaphysics is their common and faithful friend. With united voice the lovers of truth might peal forth the words of Tennyson, as the anthem of the centuries "Ring out the old, Ring in the new; But it must not be forgotten that the old is not → always the false, nor the new always the true, as was illustrated in a notice once given of a book-perhaps one of the popular contributions to modern science-in which notice it was remarked, by way of commendation, that the book in question had in it much that was new and also much that was true; and by way of criticism, that what was true in it was old and what was new in it was false. The only rational rule of mental procedure is to "prove all things," whether new or old, and "hold fast to that which is good." By the faithful assertion of this catholic principle of judgment, we loyally venture to believe that our queen is destined to recover the crown and royal state of which she has been deprived, and to hold again her position in the universities of the world, less exclusively and pretentiously, no doubt, and yet with an empire subject to her restored sceptre, embracing whole kingdoms which, under the old regime, were not yet discovered. The science of the present reveals, daily, that it is not self-sufficient, and that, just as a building of large and imposing dimensions requires beneath its super-structure a foundation that sinks out of the view of the senses, so science rests on the transcendental and unseen realities of the world of metaphysics. Faith is more profound than reason. As a corrective of the misconceptions and ignorance which generate the prejudice to which reference has been made, and as a means of enlisting an intelligent interest in our subject, it will be my aim to present it in as elementary and complete a manner as the limits of the hour and the surrounding circumstances will permit. It is due to the body of students of this University, that the one in charge of this disparaged department, which has been dropped or omitted from the curriculum of some of the |