answering to each other according to a definite rule or measure. That such a principle is exemplified to a large extent in the poetical parts of the Old Testament is very generally admitted. To some degree, indeed, it is founded on the very nature both of human thought and human language; ideas and words being naturally associated together on the principle of resemblance or contrast, and therefore having a tendency to range themselves in a certain parallelism either of correspondence or antithesis over against each other. We see this in the poetry and oratory of all nations. Men, under strong emotion, or moved by powerful imagination, speak, unconsciously to themselves, in a certain measure or rhythm in which word and idea are found parallel to word and idea. And what to some extent is common to all, is more especially congenial to the Hebrew language and the Eastern type of mind. There is a foundation in nature, then, for that parallelism of ideas and expressions which constitutes the characteristic feature of Hebrew poetry; and more especially in the poetical portions of the Old Testament, the skill of the writer may be expected to be employed in increasing the impression of his writings, by extending and multiplying artificially these parallelisms beyond even what the natural laws of thought and language would of themselves involve. The general principle illustrated by Bishop Lowth must, to some extent, commend itself to every scholar as a help to the interpretation of Scripture, and as calculated to throw light on many passages of the sacred volume.

The studies of Dr Forbes have led him to attach great importance to the symmetrical structure of Scripture; and he endeavours in the volume before us to extend the application of the principle much farther than the original advocates of it contended for. Since the publications of Lowth, and of his immediate disciple Bishop Jebb, little has been done by Biblical scholars in the way of adding to their researches; and the principle of Scripture parallelism has been found less fruitful in the advantages it has rendered to the interpretation of the sacred volume than it at first promised to be. We are glad, therefore, to see such a man as Dr Forbes directing his attention to the subject. His work is the production of a competent scholar, a sound theologian, and an ingenious critic. It is not at all necessary that a student adopt to the full extent the many and most ingenious applications which he has made of his favourite principle to passages of Scripture the symmetrical structure of which was not dreamt of before, in order that he may derive both instruction and edification from this volume. While none can reasonably deny, within certain limits, the general doctrine of scriptural parallelism, many will reckon as rather fanciful and artificial than real and natural some of the illustrations given of it, in the case more especially of the narrative and argumentative portions of the New Testament. Whether the laws of a sound and sober criticism sanction the extensive application which he has made of it, may admit of reasonable doubt. But whatever difference of opinion there may be as to the extent and merits of the principle he contends for, there will be few who can rise from the perusal of Dr Forbes's work without feeling a sincere respect for his scholarship, and talent, and spirit as a Biblical critic, and without being constrained to confess that new and interesting questions have been opened up as to the meaning and structure of not a few passages of the Word of God.

We may add that there is a valuable chapter towards the close of the volume on the plenary inspiration of Scripture, in which Dr Forbes deals with some of the recent heresies on that subject of Mr Maurice and Mr Alford.

Typical Forms and Special Ends in Creation. By Rev. JAMES M'COSH, LL.D., and GEORGE DICKIE, A.M., M.D. Pp. 539. Edinburgh: Thomas Constable & Co.

In opening this valuable and most suggestive volume, we almost instinctively exclaimed, "Why no preface?" Often before in the history of book-genesis has a prelude been felt to be a desideratum in order to explain an author's purpose. In regard, however, to the prevailing object, with its legitimate issues, of the work of Drs M'Cosh and Dickie, we cannot plead any sense of ambiguity, whatever may be our hesitation as to their success in proving them. These are adequately palpable. In their thorough knowledge of their own views we can have no doubt. Nevertheless, our sense of curiosity-which is supposed to be an important stimulus to all active inquiry-is entirely at fault. We anxiously regret the want of a preface, not as an auxiliary to our comprehension of the book, but as a clue to the distinct apprehension of the respective shares in the authorship.

On the title-page appear two names not unknown to the reading and studious world. The one has for several years been most legitimately associated with arduous and most influential speculation; the other is that of a painstaking and accomplished naturalist. Where and when, however, either one or other member of this instructive duality distinctly addresses us in this volume, the fruit of their conjoined efforts,-is in no small measure a mystery. To our ears, the voice that speaks throughout its pages seems to be but one, even in those details of zoological fact where we might naturally expect to hear a second. On the one hand, the minute vigilant observer of facts appears for the time to have had his reflective personality ingeniously swamped in his sympathetic translation into logical form by his cordial fellow-labourer, while, on the other, the logician seems occasionally, in an enthusiastic regard for large, strong inferences, to become in some measure either weary or ashamed of a special definition of fact. The materials of this most interesting work are arranged in Three Books, in the full course of which the authors, with great ability,-the presiding spirit of which is leavened and sanctified by the presence of an earnest, manly religion,-expound and illustrate the two leading principles of Order and Special Adaptation, which seem to them to run through the structure of the Cosmos.

In the First of these, containing two chapters, their attention is given in five sections to the general character of that Order and Special Adaptation. They announce the structural principles of creation, giving also an analysis of its order; they state the need of such special adjustments as shall promote the kindly action of natural forces, showing, at the same time, that no such element as chance or the casual in act can have any place in such adjustments, and also expounding the obvious and complete character of the special fitness of things.

In the thirteen chapters of Book II. (which, with the exception of the ninth and tenth, are subdivided, so as to present twenty-two sections), their facts, in a co-ordinated series, are explained as indicating, throughout the whole of visible nature, unmistakeable marks of combined order and adaptation.

Starting from the cell-the aboriginal form of life-in plants and animals, the authors speak of its general structure and special modifications; explaining, as next in natural sequence, the traces of Order and Special Fitnesses which are developed in the organs of the plant, with the relation of form and colour in the flower, and the suitableness of vegetable colours to gratify man's natural tastes.

In chapter fourth they enter on that ample domain of safe, yet in some respects perilous, speculation which is embraced by the homologies and homotypes of the vertebrate skeleton, with its special adaptations; and having given, in chapter fifth, their views of the teeth of Vertebrates, under the categories of number, form, and structure, they proceed in the three following chapters to the Mollusca, Articulata, and Radiata, as embodying typical forms, and presenting many interesting special harmonies.

Having thereafter expounded their views of the place and function of nerve, vessel, and muscle in the animal system, and also of the development of organic bodies, as exemplifying a community of plan, with special modifications, their attention is given, in the last three chapters of Book II., to geological organisms, crystals, numerical proportions, and the heavenly bodies, as affording tokens of order and special adjustment.

In the Third Book they interpret their facts, giving, in three chapters, the argument from combined order and adaptation, an explanation of the correspondence between the laws of the material world and the faculties of the human mind, and also a view of the typical systems of nature and revelation.

The reader will thus be made aware of the large store of interesting points and questions, in relation to many most important facts in natural science and vital theological doctrine, which has been amassed and elaborated for his benefit by Drs M'Cosh and Dickie.

Different opinions there will doubtless be among such naturalists as specially delight in hard facts, as to the certainty of some of their instances, while the metaphysician and divine will be tempted to dwell on the want of caution and clearness that occasionally invests the interpretation of the facts with an air and feeling of exaggeration. Of the work as a whole, however, there can be but one candid estimate. Rich in solid fact, shrewd in inference, weighty in cumulative application, and of a healthy and happy spirit, it is deserving of wide circulation and earnest regard.

At the same time, we earnestly trust that in proceeding, in one or two sentences, to indicate one or two difficulties of which we are conscious, both in regard to some of the facts and the manner in which they are scientifically decyphered, we shall not be regarded as captious in spirit, or arrogantly questioning their authors' just privilege and prerogative as public teachers.

With their conviction of creation as the development in fact of a divine plan, we entirely and without hesitation concur. No man with

his eyes open, unless bewildered by the prejudices of unhallowed passion, can believe otherwise. In the testimony of Mr Swainson we earnestly acquiesce, when he remarks, "No one who believes in the existence of an omnipotent Creator can suppose for a moment that the innumerable beings which he has created were formed without a plan,” -a plan in regard to the details of which, as exemplified in all animal species, we also entirely concur in using this great naturalist's words: "An animal is beautiful in itself; but it is only when we attain some glimpse of the station it occupies with its fellows, and of the manner in which it is combined with others into one great whole, that we see this beauty in its true light."

From the authors of this work, however, we differ, not as to the fact of a plan in the Cosmos, but as to the true method of approaching and discovering that plan.

Shall we avoid the reproach of inaptitude for metaphysics, or of ignorance of structure and collocation, if we modestly suggest to Drs M'Cosh and Dickie that their valid position as witnesses to the final cause of unity in creation is when verifying an attained belief, not in translating a supposition into a proof?

On the one hand, that there is throughout creation a divine oneness of purpose, we freely admit; on the other, we as fully accept the evidence of our consciousness in attestation of our necessary expectation and assumption of an universal unity. One in our instinctive selfrecognition, we are prepared to meet with unity everywhere. In the active exercise of the unifying tendency of our minds, we look out upon creation as, however characterised by manifold differences, being essentially one in method and end.

In like manner, accordingly, having realised a phenomenon once,— for example, the solemn, sweet rising of the new moon,—we have an expectation of its appearance for ever, an expectation in harmony with which, as it needs no proof, but simply correction and verification, we are, in obedience to our mental frame, impelled to seek and wait for the instances of one plan and method of fact everywhere.

We cannot, with all deference to the riper intelligence of our authors, regard unity in creation as an effect of design. We, on the contrary, gratefully welcome it as the natural expression of the divine unity. There is everywhere in creation the stamp of what Coleridge, coining a new word, terms unicity; and that, in our view, is but the spontaneous result of the unity of God in all his special adaptations of means to ends; so that as regards the divine ground-plan of the Cosmos, we do not require so much to educe proofs, as to verify, chasten, and limit our own expectations and beliefs.

And thus, while shrinking from any thing like a dogmatical assertion of our estimate of the scientific judgment of final causes, we cannot but feel that, in verifying an instinctive belief, which is not the same as the inductive confirmation of an inference, we are more likely to exercise due vigilance and restraint of our natural love of theory when called upon to interpret individual facts.

For example, in recalling our own impressions of the different colours in the expanded corolla and long stamens of the Echium vulgare, or of the red and blue to be met with occasionally in the Veronica chamadrys, we would, in some degree, hesitate before all at once homologating

the following statement, which occurs at the bottom of page 20:"Seldom or never, for example, are the two primary colours, blue and red, found in the same organ, or in contact with the same plant."

Nor could we all at once find any special adjustment of animal safety in the fact of the young turbot resembling the same colour as the sand on which it lies," when recalling the other fact, that the common trout (Salmo fario), amidst the curves and wimples of the darkbrown streamlet that runs through the moss, assumes a corresponding hue; while, on the contrary, in the more translucent reaches of the same water, its sides become tinged with the most brilliant orange and gold.

Nor, moreover, when remembering the prevailing colours in the genera, Vulpes, Mustela, and Martes, are we prepared all at once to conclude, that, in the similar hues of the red grouse, there is a provision made for its protection against such foes as have, in order to their own livelihood, an instinctive thirst for the flesh of game birds.

Not without considerable hesitation have we made these remarks. Having no difficulties whatever about the general principle of final causes, we at the same time feel a considerable recoil from a too hasty assertion of them. We have, nevertheless, the utmost pleasure in commending this volume to our readers, as entitled, by reason both of its own merits and the high standing of its authors, to their most earnest perusal.

Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistle to the Colossians. By JOHN EADIe, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Biblical Literature to the United Presbyterian Church. Griffin: 1856. 8vo. Pp. 308. We can scarcely say more in commendation of this commentary of Dr Eadie, than that it is superior to his former one on the Epistle to the Ephesians. There is the same fulness of grammatical investigation, which is rightly regarded as the only satisfactory basis of a sound exegesis; the same attention not only to the leading ideas, but to the fibres of thought in each statement of the text; the same range of scholarship, and the same manly independence of judgment; the same soundness in the faith, and the same glowing diction; the same love of evangelical and experimental Christianity. Mr Ellicott, in his recent valuable philological commentaries on Galatians and Ephesians, while commending the exegetical department of Dr Eadie's" Ephe sians," throws out something like an indirect reflection on his grammatical scholarship. We regretted this at the time it appeared. The manipulation of men bred in the cloisters of Cambridge may possibly show an artistic finish which the sad want of academic endowments renders difficult to Scottish students. But in the substantials of grammatical scholarship, and thorough appreciation of the most recent investigations, Dr Eadie's attainments are abundantly manifest in both his commentaries. Our only regret is, that he has to "bespeak indulgence on account of the continuous and absorbing duties of a numerous city charge." That a body which, though far from wealthy, contains members whose wealth would, we had almost said, build and endow a theological college twice over, should, in the present state of