Stoics admitted the general truth that self-murder was wrong; but they erred in the application of the general principle to particular matter. They cannot be censured for maintaining that there can be cases of duly authorized self-killing; their error consisted in holding that self-killing was legitimate, even when unduly authorized, v. g., when miseries oppress one.

The course of reasoning by which they endeavored to make evident the lawfulness of taking one's own life in adverse circumstances only serves to show that they recognized a superior law, whose prohibition they were attempting to prove inapplicable to the matter in question. They knew that their theory was an exception to the general opinion," hinc illæ lachrymæ." An example from history will serve to explain the foregoing. Cleopatra, according to Rollin, "not doubting that Cæsar intended to make her serve as an ornament to his triumph, . . . had no other thoughts than to avoid that shame by dying." Her death is thus narrated by the historian: She" asked for a basket of figs, which a peasant had lately brought. She placed it by her, and a moment after lay down, as if she had fallen asleep; but that was the effect of the aspic, which was concealed among the fruit, and had stung her in the arm which she held to it. The poison immediately communicated itself to the heart, and killed her without pain, or being perceived by anybody." The motive which prompted this action is described thus:

"That princess was too haughty and too much above the vulgar to suffer herself to be led in triumph at the wheels of the victor's chariot. Determined to die, and thence having become capable of the fiercest resolutions, she saw with firmness and indifference the mortal venom of the aspic glide into her veins.”—History of Egypt.

This is an example of self-killing on account of motives which render it difficult to see any reason why guilt should not attach to the deed. To avoid shame and ignominy is a good motive to inspire an action; but even a good end may not be subserved by unlawful means,-" non sunt facienda mala ut eveniant bona,"-and directly to take life to escape ignominjous exposure is a means that is not duly proportioned to its end, and is, in the present order of providence, always wrong. It surely does not accord 'with right reason to avoid one evil by choosing another which is the greatest that can befall us. Cicero, for reasons which seem to have no foundation in the actual facts, vindicates the conduct of Cato in terminating his own existence, for "he says that the occasion was. such as to constitute a divine call to leave life." "Cæsar, Ovid,"

1 Lecky, Hist. of Europ. Morals. These words show that Cicero entertained a just conception of suicide, since he has recourse to the only plea which in the nature of things could justify this act.

2 .. Rebus in adversis facile est contemnere vitam

Fortiler ille facit qui miser esse potest.”—Ovid.

and others," according to Mr. Lecky in his History of European Morals, "urged that in extreme distress it is easy to despise life, and that true courage is shown in enduring it." The following passage from the same careful writer contains much historical information respecting the view taken of suicide by some of the Greeks and Romans:

"It is indeed true that the ancients were by no means unanimous in their approval of the act. Pythagoras, to whom so many of the wisest sayings of antiquity are ascribed, is stated to have forbidden men to depart from their guard or station in life without the order of their Commander, that is, of God.' Plato adopted similar language, though he permitted suicide where the law required it, and also when men had been struck down by intolerabe calamity, or had sunk to the lowest depths of poverty. Aristotle condemned it on civic grounds as being an injury to the state. The roll of Greek suicides is not long, though it contains some illustrious names, among others those of Zeno and Cleanthes. In Rome, too, where suicide acquired a greater prominence, its lawfulness was by no means accepted as an axiom. The story of Regulus, whether it be a history or a legend, shows that the patient endurance of suffering was once the Roman ideal. Virgil painted in the darkest colors the condition of suicides in the future world. Cicero strongly asserted the doctrine of Pythagoras, though he praised the suicide of Cato. Apuleius, expounding the philosophy of Plato, taught that the wise man never throws off his body except by the will of God.”—Ibid.

The main feature noticeable in the aphorisms current among the ancients, and in the classical extracts which fall oftenest under observation, is the truth that self-murder is a crime against nature. The ancients, as has been remarked, were not in error as to the general principle that self-murder was wrong; their mistake lay in the application of the universal truth to particular matter. The exact statement of the attitude of antiquity in regard to criminal self-destruction may, we think, be adequately summed up in the following propositions:

(1.) The universal judgment of mankind has declared suicide or self-murder to be wrong.

(2.) Coextensive with this judgment is another to the effect that self-killing was not then an evil action when it was duly authorized.

(3.) The error into which some of the ancient philosophers fell in regard to suicide was not owing to ignorance of its criminal nature in general, but to indeterminateness of thought respecting those cases in which one is authorized to take his own life.

These propositions, it appears to us, place the position of the ancients respecting suicide in a true light; and if this statement be correct, it becomes manifest that the view taken by the ancients of this crime against nature does not differ essentially from that taken by Christian nations. The same arguments now used by the Christian teacher to make manifest the illicit nature of self-murder were employed centuries ago by the pagan philosopher to demonstrate the same truth; and the reason why such is the case is manifest,

since the truth that self-murder is wrong is one of those evident dictates of natural law which affirms itself to the upright reason of every man. Such truths do not change, and the voice of mankind is unanimous in their recognition. There may be different views taken in different ages concerning the more remote conclusions from these truths, and the definitive settlement of matter that is more concrete and particular in its character; but unless we wish to suppose gratuitously that there is a flaw in the nature of things, that the supreme and wisest of lawgivers has enacted for his creatures' observance a law the due promulgation of which He has failed to effect, we shall be compelled to acknowledge that the principles of natural law are engraven upon the human heart.

If the reasoning developed in this article be true, it becomes evident that the definition which we have given of suicide is such as to include on the one hand every case of self-killing which is criminal, and to exclude on the other hand those guiltless acts the result of which, whether direct or indirect, is the loss of one's own life. To urge that this definition is vague and indeterminate, that it would, mutatis mutandis, apply to almost every crime in the decalogue, since, v. g., we might say that even blasphemy was wrong because it is an unauthorized action; to argue thus in dispute of the position herein assumed will, upon reflection, appear inconclusive. The solution of such argumentation is found in the following considerations:

(1.) There are some evil actions, and some only, the wrongfulness of which is entirely dependent upon the circumstances of authorization, and in defining such action due regard must be paid to this fact.

(2.) There are other actions which are intrinsically and absolutely wrong, and which no authorization can render legitimate; v. g., we might suppose, per impossibile, blasphemy to be authorized by the same source which permits self-killing; the peculiarity then is that the one action is still wrong while the other is not.

If we have understood aright the words of those whose opinions. are of greatest weight in this matter, the definition proposed of the crime under consideration is a logical deduction from the teaching, not only of the wisest philosophers of pagan antiquity, but also of the medieval scholastics, who are, at least upon this and kindred subjects, the writers whose thought has been most profound, and whose expression most accurate.

With truth as the object of our investigation, we cannot upon the whole conceive of any other definition which is philosophical and absolute.

IT

SOME OF THE USES OF THE MICROSCOPE IN

SCIENCE.

T is surprising to find how few there are, even of those who have received a liberal education, so called, who can afford to regard a microscope as anything more than a costly toy. Whether it is to be found in the physical cabinet of an institution of learning or in the private collections of individuals, it is equally looked upon as destined to help pass an afternoon agreeably by showing the coarseness of a hair, the rays on a diatom, or the impurities of a drop of water. Its uses, its destiny is, as it were, ignored. And why is this? Is it because the laws of optics are too difficult for men to understand? Is it because the time of study is not sufficiently long to enable students to acquire a practical knowledge of anything except languages? We are of opinion that the fundamental laws of optics are not beyond the range of comprehension of the average student, and our experience, both as pupil and as teacher, has proven beyond a doubt that the difficulty does not arise from the quantity of matter to be seen by students, but rather is it to be found in the manner in which they see it. The study of science is begun too late in most of our colleges, and, partly on this account, it is made to consist, almost wholly, in a mechanical use of a textbook, with the drill and memorizing inevitable in all elementary studies. The results of such a method are easily conjectured; not only are there no scientific studies deserving the name, but students are deterred, by this first contact, from engaging seriously in them afterwards.

Our object in the present paper is to describe briefly some of the useful results obtained from microscopical studies. For this purpose we have chosen our illustrations from two departments only; from biology, namely, and geology; and in these branches we have limited ourselves to special sections, as will be seen from what follows.

It may not be amiss to say a word here about some of the kinds of microscope in use. We will suppose our readers acquainted with the parts and working of an ordinary microscope, and will, therefore, omit its description. It is, however, necessary to call attention to the fact that the instruments used in biological and geological analyses differ somewhat from each other; the former being fitted to work with plain, ordinary light, whilst the latter is so constructed as to admit of being used with either plain or polarized light. There are other differences of detail, but they need not be described now; neither do we think it useful to give such a description of polarized light as the present limits will allow; these points can, for the present, be best understood by consulting some complete work on optics.

The illustrations from biology are taken from an interesting article published by Dr. E. Ray Lankester in Nature of March 11th, 1880, and entitled "The Destruction of Insect Pests: an Unforeseen Application of the Results of Biological Investigation." In the first place the writer shows in general terms that surgery is entirely reformed by our knowledge of the minuter fungi; that by avoiding the access of bacteria to wounds we avoid a large destruction of human life. Already we see our way to avoiding some deadly diseases caused by these same bacteria, now that we know them to be the active cause of such disease. He also points out that silk is cheaper in consequence of our knowledge of the bacteria of the silkworm disease; that already better beer is brewed and better yeast supplied to the baker in consequence of Pasteur's discovery of the bacterian diseases of the yeast-plant.

To this same knowledge of diseases produced by bacteria is due. the novel design of destroying such pests as the Colorado beetle by propagating the disease-producing bacteria which are known to be fatal to such insects. Professor Hagen, of Cambridge, Mass., advised the use of yeast for the destruction of these pests, believing that the yeast-fungus enters the body of the insect on which it is sprinkled, and there produces a growth fatal to the insect's life. Professor Metschnikoff, prompted by the labors of De Bary, Pasteur, Cohn, and others, who have shown that the most deadly ravages amongst insects are due to bacteria, cultivated some of these minute parasitic fungi by passing them from one insect to another, and has experimentally proved their very deadly character to insects exposed to infection. His next experiment was to endeavor to cultivate them apart from the insects, so as to obtain their spores in great quantity in a liquid that might be applied to places attacked by injurious insects. The experiment was successful; the cultivation is rapidly effected in beer-mash. It now only remains for us to cultivate these organisms in quantity, and we have at once the simplest, safest, and most certain means of destruction of all insect pests. This is one of the benefits due to the study of microscopic organisms.

Another branch of microscopical study, though not so beneficial directly to the human family as the one just mentioned, yet having its uses, is the microscopical study of rocks. The first use made of the microscope for the purpose of examining rock sections was in 1850, or 1851, by Henry Clifton Sorby, a wealthy citizen of Sheffield, in England, who is much devoted to the study of geology. In 1858 he published a paper in one of the scientific reviews describing the manner of preparing the sections for study, and gave the results of such analysis as he had then made. Some young students then at the University of Bonn took up the idea, applied themselves to the study of certain groups of rock, and so great was