who was a Yorkshireman by birth, followed the calling of a smith. His early education was very elementary. At the age of fourteen he was apprenticed in London to the business of a bookseller, bookbinder, and stationer. He took great interest in reading such scientific books as came into his hands; and amongst them he delighted especially in Mrs. Marcet's Conversations in Chemistry and the treatise on Electricity in the Encyclopædia Britannica. He was in the habit of making some simple experiments in chemistry. As may be imagined, both the chemicals and the apparatus were of the least costly kind, for he had to defray their expense by the few pence per week which he could spare from his earnings. He constructed an electrical machine, first with a glass phial, and afterwards with a real cylinder, as well as other simple electrical apparatus of a corresponding kind.

2. During his apprenticeship he had the good fortune to hear four of the last course of lectures delivered in 1812, by Sir Humphry Davy, as professor in the Royal Institution. He took notes of these lectures, and afterwards wrote them out in fuller form, interspersing them with such drawings as he could make. The desire to be engaged in scientific occupation, even though of the humblest kind, induced him, in his ignorance of the world and the simplicity of his mind, to write to Sir Joseph Banks, who was then president of the Royal Society. Naturally enough, "no answer" was the reply left with the porter. At a later period, in the month of December, 1812, he wrote to Sir Humphry Davy, and sent in proof of his earnestness the notes which he had taken of the lectures referred to. In a letter published in the life of Davy, Faraday refers to his introduction to Sir Humphry. He says:-"My desire to escape from trade, which I thought vicious and selfish, and to enter into the service of science, which, I imagined, made its pursuers amiable and liberal, induced me at last to take the bold and simple step of writing to Sir Humphry Davy, expressing my wishes, and a hope that if any opportunity came in his way he would favour my views.' Davy's

reply was immediate, kind, and favourable:-"Sir, I am far from displeased with the proof you have given me of your confidence, and which displays great zeal, power of memory, and attention. I am obliged to go out of town, and shall not be settled in town till the end of January. I will then see you at any time you wish. It would gratify me to be of service to you. I wish it may be in my power.

3. After this, Faraday continued to work as bookbinder, with the exception of some days during which he was writing as an amanuensis for Sir H. Davy, at the time when the latter was wounded in the eye by an explosion of a chemical compound. Early in March, 1813, Sir Humphry Davy offered him the situation of chemical assistant in the laboratory of the Royal Institution, under himself as honorary professor, and Mr. Brande as professor of chemistry. Faraday now left the bookbinding trade and devoted himself heartily to his new duties. In the autumn of that year he accompanied his patron on a tour through France, Italy, Switzerland, and the Tyrol. In 1821 Faraday was appointed superintendent of the house and laboratory of the Royal Institution. In 1823 he was elected corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences, Paris; and on the 9th January, 1825, he was chosen fellow of the Royal Society of London.

4. He was released the next year from attendance on lectures as chemical assistant at the institution, being occupied in scientific research; and in the month of April, 1827, he first took his place as lecturer. Faraday made many important discoveries in light, magnetism, and electricity, which raised him to the highest rank among European philosophers. His experiments demonstrated that electricity, galvanism, and magnetism. are but modifications of the same force under different circumstances. He was a deep and patient investigator, and a profound and cautious theorist. His researches had few parallels in the history of science, as regards the magnitude and interest of the results obtained. He has been an eminent example to others, of genius submitting

real terrors by imaginary ones, and made the frighted multitude falsely believe that Misenum was actually in flames. At length a glimmering light appeared, which we imagined to be rather the forerunner of an approaching burst of flames (as in fact it was) than the return of day; however, the fire fell at a distance from us: then again we were immersed in thick darkness, and a heavy shower of ashes rained upon us, which we were obliged every now and then to shake off, otherwise we should have been overwhelmed and buried in the heap.

10. I might boast, that during all this scene of horror, not a sigh, or expression of fear, escaped from me, had not my support been founded on that miserable, though strong consolation, that all mankind were involved in the same calamity, and that I imagined I was perishing with the world itself.

11. At last this terrible darkness was dissipated by degrees like a cloud or smoke; the real day returned, and even the sun appeared, though very faintly, and as when an eclipse is coming on. Every object that presented itself to our eyes (which were extremely weakened) seemed changed, being covered with white ashes as with a deep snow.

12. We returned to Misenum, where we refreshed ourselves as well as we could, and passed an anxious night between hope and fear; though, indeed, with a much larger share of the latter: for the earth still continued to shake, while several enthusiastic persons ran wildly among the people, throwing out terrifying predictions, and making a kind of frantic sport of their own and their friends' wretched situation. However, my mother and I, notwithstanding the danger we had passed, and that which still threatened us, had no intention of leaving Misenum, till we should receive some account of my uncle.-Letters of Pliny.

LETTER TO THE EDITOR OF THE STAR BY ROBERT BURNS, Nov. 8TH, 1788.

1. SIR,-Notwithstanding the opprobrious epithets with which some of our philosophers and gloomy sectarians have branded our nature-the principle of universal selfishness, the proneness to all evil, they have given us-still, the detestation in which inhumanity to the distressed, or insolence to the fallen, are held by all mankind, shows that they are not natives of the human heart.

2. I went last Wednesday to my parish church, most cordially to join in grateful acknowledgment to the Author of all Good for the consequent blessings of the glorious revolution. To that auspicious event we owe no less than our liberties civil and religious; to it we are likewise indebted for the present royal family, the ruling features of whose administration have ever been mildness to the subject, and tenderness of his rights. Bred and educated in revolution principles, the principles of reason and common sense, it could not be any silly political prejudice which made my heart revolt at the harsh, abusive manner in which the reverend gentleman1 mentioned the house of Stuart, and which, I am afraid, was too much the language of the day.

3. We may rejoice sufficiently in our deliverance from past evils, without cruelly raking up the ashes of those whose misfortune it was, perhaps, as much as their crime, to be the authors of those evils; and we may bless God for all His goodness to us as a nation, without at the same time cursing a few ruined, powerless exiles, who only harboured ideas and made attempts that most of us would have done, had we been in their situation.

4. "The tyrannical house of Stuart" may be said with propriety and justice, when compared with the present royal family and the sentiments of our days; but is there no allowance to be made for the manners of the times?

'Mr. Kirkpatrick, minister of the parish of Dunscore.

Were the royal contemporaries of the Stuarts more attentive to their subjects' rights? Might not the epithet of "tyrannical" be, with at least equal justice, applied to the house of Tudor, of York, or any other of their predecessors?

5. The simple state of the case, sir, seems to be this:At that period the science of government, the knowledge of the true relation between king and subject, was, like other sciences and other knowledge, just in its infancy, emerging from dark ages of ignorance and barbarity. The Stuarts only contended for prerogatives which they knew their predecessors enjoyed, and which they saw their contemporaries enjoying; but these prerogatives were inimical to the happiness of a nation and the rights of subjects.

6. In this contest between prince and people, the consequence of that light of science which had lately dawned. over Europe, the monarch of France, for example, was victorious over the struggling liberties of his people; with us, luckily, the monarch failed, and his unwarrantable pretensions fell a sacrifice to our rights and happiness. Whether it was owing to the wisdom of leading individuals, or to the jostling of parties, I cannot pretend to determine; but likewise, happily for us, the kingly power was shifted into another branch of the family, who, as they owed the throne solely to the call of a free people, could claim nothing inconsistent with the covenanted terms which placed them there.

7. The Stuarts have been condemned and laughed at for the folly and impracticability of their attempts in 1715 and 1745. That they failed, I bless God, but cannot join in the ridicule against them. Who does not know that the abilities or defects of leaders and commanders are often hidden until put to the touchstone of exigency; and that there is a caprice of fortune, an omnipotence in particular accidents and conjunctures of circumstances, which exalt us as heroes, or brand us as madmen, just as they are for or against us?

8. Man, Mr. Publisher, is a strange, weak, inconsistent