BROKEN GLEAMS. BY B. A. others. So with a people. Francis Bacon, the Chancellor of England, only reiterated the method which his namesake, Roger Bacon, the friar, had laid down four centuries before. The soil was prepared to receive the seed in the one case, and not in the other. This is the secret of the great Chancellor's success and the greater friar's failure. 1. When philosophers make a new dis- There are occasions when an idea strikes covery, further and closer observations an individual more forcibly than at modify their first notions of it, they be come acquainted with it in all its actu ality after much laborious discussion. It is the same with truths in the ideal order. When pioneers in the world of thought perceive a new idea dawn upon their horizon, so weak is their intellectual vision—so dazzled are they by the discovery that they generally represent it in an exaggerated manner, and some 4. How do we get our best thoughts? time elapses before the exact truth is We have been dwelling on an idea long determined. . . . There are periods and profoundly-we have looked at it in the intellectual world corresponding from every point of view, and yet no to those geological transitions recorded spark proceeds from it; almost in desof our earth, when discoveries in science, pair we give it up, and with a deep sigh literature and the arts follow in rapid of relief we turn to some employment succession. And there are long periods less absorbing, when all at once the light of slow action, during which truths we sought flashes across our minds, and "settle" and take deep root in the traces out the path on which we must general intelligence. And how travel to attain our object. 2. The most extravagant errors have been built upon truth. Lamennais, not saying what it is— "There are more things in heaven and earth Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy"and ours also. 5. Philosophy seeks God; Poetry yearns for Him; Faith finds Him. 6. In nature we find matter and spirit united, and "what God hath joined together let no man put asunder." Why 3. Much depends on the timeliness of then must metaphysics be divorced from an idea or truth which is to be conveyed. physic-the study of the spiritual from We are far in the that of the natural. Until they are garment. combined one of the strongest links con- nineteenth century, and still feel the necting the sciences remains broken. effects of the infidelity of the eighteenth. . Passages abound in the works Witness the effort lately made in Paris of the most eminent physicists, in which to erect a statue to Voltaire, and do him a few sound metaphysical principles public honor.. How closely Protwould have made their ideas more exact. estant Spenser clings to the Catholic 7. The great source of errors in phi- poetry of Italy! How little there is in losophy is that philosophers do not con- Shakespeare to encourage Protestantism! sider nature as it is, but as they fancy it The Tennysons and Morrises of our own to be. day go to either Catholic or Pagan 8. To speak of the Reformation as the sources to warm their imaginations and cause of the revival of letters in the six-fire their geniuses. teenth century, is to confound cause pers wounded Catholic feelings, injured with effect. The Har Tennyson, and sinned against good 9. To point to the age of Queen taste when they introduced into their Elizabeth as a triumph of Protestantism in late edition of his works some "John literature is a betrayal of great shallow- Bull" ideas about "Popery" and "PriestThe spirit of the old religion was craft" accredited to him, but which he yet deep in men's hearts, and the new never published in his own editions. sat as loosely upon them as an ill-fitting They publish a "Journal of Civilization!" mess. THE GIFTS OF OTHER DAYS. BY WM. GEOGHEGAN (“ ALPHA.”) When those who in the morn of life, Are torn apart by Fate's fell hand, With sorrow-burdened hearts to rove And when that whispered word is spoken, Pressed to the aching heart! Small though it be 'tis valued more Than all the mine's bright glittering store, And often will the fond eye gaze Upon those gifts of happier days. REPLY TO JOHN CITYBOUND'S SKETCH No. 1. BY J. M. DE K. Were it not a well-known fact that too | fact of which historians should cermany readers of magazines are in the tainly not omit to take notice, lest at habit of digesting criticisms on any pre- some future time seven American cities viously published paper, without going might claim his nativity, as the seven to the trouble of comparing both articles Greek towns in the case of Homer; but to ascertain the truth contained in either, if he intends New York ever to be there would be little or no occasion for honored by his birth, it would be advisable these lines. An essay which I had, for him to enter upon some other career; under the title of "A Few Words on for his first attempts as a critic scem Stimulants," inserted in this MONTHLY, positively to endanger his future fame. was bitterly condemned and denounced As he very wisely concealed his name, to the public as containing teachings let him show the same good sense, by most pernicious to those inclined to fol- never attempting to lift up the veil of a low them. nom de plume which so favorably covers him now. To refute this criticism (?) it might suffice to say that not one of the Whoever my opponent may be, and statements which I have made were whatever may have been his motive in denied; consequently, the would-be assailing me, I intend to show, by comcritic admits their truth. I noticed paring sentence to sentence, that he has physiological facts, without drawing wilfully wronged me, by mirepresenting any conclusion from them; but this, and distorting phrases to make them scrve it seems, did not suit the gentleman his own purpose. I will not adhere to in quest of a subject for gaining fame as a critic. He wanted to have something to say, and therefore drew some lame and false conclusions from my arguments, which he then entered upon to refute, forgetting, perhaps, that he was refuting and ridiculing none but his own. This I say would be sufficient; but for his own benefit and to teach him a lesson, I" will enter into the details of a more complete refutation. Who is our learned (?) critic? What is his name? It does not appear; but he says himself: the maxim par pari refertur: I will not treat my antagonist as he has treated me, for it would evince weakness where none could be found: the truth defends itself without having recourse to such fallacious means as those used by my adversary. In the first sentence he says that I approve of the moderate use of stimulants." Whether I do or not, I emphatically deny having made the statement, and I appeal to Mr. John himself, to quote from my essay the words which could justify his assertion. I stated and "I am city-born and city-bred, and the city that proved that the moderate use of stimuis thus honored is the great centre of the United lants is not injurious to the human States and the destined metropolis of the world-system; from this he concludes that I approve of their moderate use. SupJohn is born in New York! This is a posing I had, instead of this, maintained I mean New York" that the eating of tallow candles is not injurious to the human system, as Esquimaux and the inhabitants of Northern Russia would efficaciously show, John would have concluded that my statement implied that I am fond of the article, aud approve of the delicacy being intro duced into our families. The paper, which I entitled "A Few Words on Stimulants," was to all intents and purposes essentially scientific, and the critic, who does not presume to have any scientific knowledge upon the subject, as he confesses himself, might have better defended the cause of abstinence from stimulants, without endeavoring to contradict me; nay, he might have availed himself of several of my arguments to promote, with great advantage, his own views. That our friend was fully aware of this I purpose to prove to the readers in the course of this refutation. ter cause, he attempted to disarm the objections of a large class of people by including in his detence of stimulants such comparatively harmless comforts of civilization as tea and coffee." Let me tell him that to state a naked, scientific truth, no strategic movement was needed, and consequently none was made, except in his own imagination. Tea and coffee are among our favorite stimulants; they contain poisons as well as the others, and for what reason should they not be classified with them? That they are less dangerous, I fully acknowledged when I remarked, p. 229, "Wine, liquor and tobacco are most abused.” Moreover," says our friend: "Ee presented he truly peculiar argument that, as some of these things which all men eat and drink, contain a certain amount of adulteration or poison, therfore no one should ban the noxious weed or the brain-weakening fluid. He stated that there are people who, as a habit, use poison, which has become a necessity of their existence, and the fact that the doses are so regulated as not to kill them at once, is offered as a reason why others should not be blamed for following their example." This "truly peculiar argument" and To any person reading my essay it will be obvious that, not for a moment, I entertained the intention of condemning or encouraging the use of stimulants. "this logic" again have sprung up in Moreover, if after stating the naked John's brain, not in mine. These are truths which science reveals us, I forgot my words: that I was trampling neutral grounds, it was to make some kind of an apology for not deterring people from the use of stimulants, when I said: "Although very little has been said in this paper to deter people from indulging in the use of stimulants, we should never forget that they are strongly irritant and more or less poisonous. In weak and nervous persons, liquors, tea, coffee and tobacco, may be the source of many troubles, such as insomnia, palpitation of the heart, and from such persons they should entirely be with drawn. Bearing in mind their physiological action on the tissues-namely, to interfere with their metamorphoses-they should never be al lowed to children who are growing rapidly and need all the changes that are naturally taking place in the system." The critic continues: "The experience of ages has taught that the system may easily be habituated to the use of poisons, even as violent as arsenic, without any prejudicial symptoms arising therefrom." I This is another well-established fact, and my opponent does not even attempt to deny it; but once more his unscrupu lous "strategy" comes to the rescue. make a statement, he manipulates it and derives from it a conclusion which by no means naturally follows, and then he triumphantly lifts up his head, as if to ask, Bisum teneatis amici? Friends, can you refrain from laughing? But, my dear fellow, remember that these ridiculous conclusions are your own, and that you are the only one to be laughed. "With a strategic moveme: t worthy of a bet at. Deny, if you can, the statements which I have made, but stop there; for your silly conclusions only prove that you never heard of Barbara Celarent, etc., and they very much suggest the "sum" that it would be advisable for your guardians to send you back to school, until it could be figured out "that you have become a wiser boy." But let us patiently listen to one more of his "peculiar arguments:" "It is all very well to assert that tobacco and I quor can be used in moderation, but whether from the nature of these stimulants or some other cause, their moderate use has been too often proved impossible." I don't think the writer could mean this; but as he has unscrupulously at tributed to my words a meaning which no man of sense could give them, I shall not incur his displeasure for refuting what he does express, whether he meant it or not. pos It never before came to my knowledge that the moderate use of tobacco and liquor "has been proved impossible," and although he says it has "often been proved," I am prepared to maintain that abundant proofs would testify to the sibility of a moderate use, whereas, not a single proof testifying to its impossibility could be adduced. Our German population is generally known as freely indulging in the use of tobacco, and who will prove that they are immoderate, or that the practice of smoking causes them to die prematurely or to change their homes into hovels of misery. There is, perhaps, no city in the world where, at an average, more liquor and tobacco are consumed than in our own metropolis; and yet, "thou croaker," not only are there temperate men in New York, but many good husbands, good fathers, and good sons. Do you still maintain that the moderate use of liquor and tobacco is impos sible? In that case you place yourself in a position from which there is no escaping, except as a heretic, to the teachings of the Catholic Church, or as a convert to my conviction upon the subject. Every soul has been endowed by itsCreator with the faculty of selecting between diverse things, or deciding on one or the other; without this faculty, generally called the "free will," man's actions could be neither moral nor immoral. Now, our divine Church compels all her children to believe that when man is tempted it solely rests with him to fall into or resist the temptation, and that no one's tempta tions are greater than the resisting power which God has given him. Drinking to excess is a sin, and if he yields to his temptations and becomes intoxicated, he sins through his own fault, because, he abuses the faculty of the free-will, and because he declines to avail himself of that resisting force which always attends him, and which, as the Church teaches, is always strong enough, to overwhelm the evil temptations of the malicious spirits of the deep. Thus we see that if man sins it is not because resistance is impossible, as my adversary, most erroneously and heretically declares. But man is weak, caro autem infirma est, and on this plea, if I had intended to give my opinion on the advisability of indulging in the use of stimulants, I would have entreated all young men to abstain from their use altogether, or as well as they could: for, in order to avoid sinning, we must shun the occasion leading to sin, qui amat periculum perebit in illo. It is ridiculous to say that a man who has ever tasted liquor must, ipso facto, become a drunkard, for no resisting is impossible to him who cooperates with the Grace of God; and if I am ever unfortunate enough to sin through excess, in the use of any stimulants, I will not say, as probably my critic |