have refrained from doing so would have been false modesty. His memory could not but dwell on that Day, and on the bond of love between himself, Christ, and his mother; and how could he refrain from speaking of it? With the gentlest hint at the beginning of his work (i. 35-41) did he allude to himself and his brother; such a hint as only attentive and sympathising readers would understand; and now at the close of Christ's earthly life, when the relation of love between them was perfected, and had been manifested by two most memorable tokens, he designates himself as "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (xiii. 23, xix. 26 f., repeated in the appendix, xxi. 7, 20), or, where he has to name himself together with Peter, as the "other disciple" (xviii. 15, xx. 2-9). Once, where his attestation had to be recorded to something quite special as having been seen by him, he does not bring forth his own witness, but the friends who were ever at his side and guided the pen for him report his attestation to the truth of what had been written (xix. 35). This is the only passage where the friend's hand who helped him plainly appears.

Ewald thinks that the Gospel was not designed for immediate publication, but only for the use of a few friends, and that the apostle rather intended it as a legacy of his love to be published after his death. His views and the grounds of them are as follow. That the book closed with c. xx. is inferred from the words xx. 31, and xix. 35. The words are plainly spoken to trusted readers whom the apostle knows, and who know him, and for whom, and not for others, he writes. A more certain proof is found in c. xxi. This appendix was clearly added some time later. For though the language rings with the voice of the aged apostle, and though the same hands which helped the apostle before appear again, yet there is a sufficient change from the earlier language to show that some time elapsed before the chapter was added; and while the same hands appear, there are signs that they move more freely than in the book itself. (The designation of the apostle in xxi. 20 betrays this. There is a perceptible difference between this and similar passages in the book.)

If we consider the aim and meaning of the appendix, we come to the same conclusion. It was evidently written to correct the false opinion which had spread among Christians on account of the unusually long life of the apostle. The right time to do this was before the apostle's death; and hence the apostle

* Have pour is twice used with a meaning which in the book itself (and where also the subject is the same) is expressed by other words, xiv. 21 f., and the whole of c. xx. This difference is more striking because c. xxi. 1 follows c. xx.; and had that passage been written immediately after, the same word would certainly have been repeated.

so far deviated from his original intention that he allowed the Gospel to be published in his own lifetime.

This Gospel won its way to universal acceptance because of its own priceless worth; and because the one mind of Christendom was sound and vigorous enough, in spite of inner controversies, to recognise it as the work of the apostle,—as the most sublime work of evangelical literature. The objections which have been raised in our time are founded on the fact that it was less often quoted in the second century than the earlier Gospels, and that some time elapsed before it took its place beside them. This fact becomes intelligible when we remember that it was at first designed rather for the apostle's friends and disciples, for the inner circle of Christian believers advanced in true Christian gnosis and culture, than for common use. Indeed, the difference between this and the earlier Gospels is not to be explained away; it is a difference which may be little felt by us who have received them together in one volume, and who have been always accustomed to read them as parts of one book; but the difference must have been felt by those who read it for the first time. And this is one cause why the Gospel was less quoted; though it would be an insufficient explanation if there were no traces of it in the literature of the second century. Happily the more carefully the writings of that period are studied, especially those which have come to light within the last twenty years, the more numerous and undeniable are the traces of this Gospel found in them.* Epiphanius took the trouble to refute the objections of those who set it aside on account of the misuse which the Montanists made of it. But there was no question of the authorship; the controversy did not in the least turn upon that issue. Antiquity never doubted that St. John the apostle wrote the work; modern writers of the Tübingen school initiated the doubt which their own able countryman and critic, after a searching inquiry, pronounces to be both unscientific and groundless.

Besides universal tradition, internal evidence proves that the Epistle is the apostle's. The language wears the same colour; here and there a word is found which was not used in the Gospel, or which has received a new shade of meaning, but not more so than the subject-matter would lead us to expect. The difference of language is not greater than that between the original Gospel and the appendix, c. xxi. The same Hebrew breath has passed over the Greek of the Epistle as over the Gospel, and indeed over all the writings of the New Testament which are of Palestinian origin. The spirit of the writer in the

* Ewald refers to the clear references to St. John in the earlier Gnostics, quoted by Hippolytus c. Hæreses.

arrangement of the whole and the subdivision of the parts, in the very words and images, in the main thoughts and intuitions of the Epistle, is the same. We recognise the handwriting, but no copy or imitation. The writer's character is the same. As in the Gospel he stands back hidden beneath the greatness of his theme, so in the Epistle he is reticent of himself; although he is no longer the calm historian, but a letter-writer, the mentor, teacher, apostle, the one surviving apostle to the Christian church, he upholds no statement by the mere weight of personal authority. There is throughout the same calmness and confidence, the same holy and elevated mind, as in the Gospel. And though he will not bend his readers to his words by command, or by the weight of his name, we never forget who he is; we feel that no other could so write; nor, when the subject requires it, does he conceal from us that he had once stood as near to Christ as possible, or refrain from telling us his own experience then, with a naturalness and sincerity which leave no room for doubting that the writer of the Epistle is the same as the writer of the Gospel,-St. John the apostle.

The immediate cause of its being written must be sought in the Epistle itself. Christendom was tried less by persecutions from without than by false teachers within. What the special errors were, and the date of the Epistle, are less easy to determine, because it contains no reference to the state of the contemporary world, and no systematic exposition of the errors themselves. "This is he that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood" (v. 6), plainly alludes to the opinions of the Baptist's disciples; but it is the single passage of the kind. The danger, therefore, was not from that quarter. It came rather from those who taught within the church those Gnostic theories which have been already mentioned, and of which the ground-thought was, that Christ was merely an apparition, and something more than an angel (a philosophically embellished theory to avoid the scandal of the cross): and the same notions concerning unrestricted Christian freedom and the consequent sinlessness of Christian men. These men the troublers of Christendom-had come into the apostle's near neighbourhood. No wonder that out of zeal to maintain Christian truth, to overthrow error, to save all who would be saved, to assert afresh the teaching of the Gospel, the voice of the aged man was raised. The language is that of a calm and elevated spirit which has experienced the highest spiritual blessing of which men are capable on earth, uttered with a simplicity and naturalness than which nothing can be more sublime. It is clear and brief without the least ornament and effort: intimating what has to be said rather than describing

it; and indicating the advanced age of the writer. It must not, however, be forgotten that there is a strict sequence of thought; that nothing is said too much or out of place.

The Epistle addresses itself to the inner wants of Christendom, and refers to no outward persecutions. In this it is like the Epistles of Jude, 2d Peter, 2d and 3d John; and it differs from the Epistles of James, 1st Peter, and Hebrews. With the destruction of Jerusalem and the complete overthrow of the Jewish nation, the heaviest persecution of Christians had passed away, and the rest which followed allowed of the freer growth of errors within the church. Hence we shall not widely err if we place the Epistle about A.D. 90, under Domitian, and ten years later than the Gospel.

The evidence that the apostle is the author of the two shorter Epistles is similar to that which proves him the author of the longer. The circumstances which called them forth have passed away, and yet do those Epistles remain of lasting interest, as explanatory of the position of the apostle towards single churches and individuals, and of his manner of addressing them. Every word, every thought, every turn of expression, point back to the apostle as their author. In one respect they have a special historical interest. They show that though Christians were enjoying comparative rest, yet that a thousand dangers were near, and that extreme caution was necessary. The language is allusive rather than direct. The Epistle to Gaius avoids the name of Christ: Christianity is called "the Truth;" Christ himself "the Name;" and in the second Epistle the church is designated by the title, only intelligible to the faithful, of the " Elect Sister."

Here we close our résumé of Ewald's valuable introduction to the Johannine writings. We have purposely omitted any comparison of his views, with those of other writers, because these last can be found in the prolegomena of late commentaries, and Ewald's will long (we fear) be inaccessible to the English reader. Whatever may be our opinions of his views, whether we consider him rash or needlessly conservative, there can be no question that he is most suggestive and helpful. And those who are indifferent to analysis of style and language, or to inquiry into the prevailing thoughts of the apostle's time which may have affected the apostle's language-who are only anxious to know the mind of their Lord, and to read the very words of Christ, written down by the beloved disciple-can be told that the critic who is most rarely gifted to appreciate every work of ancient, and especially of Hebrew, literature comes from the study of St. John with no less wonder and reverence than the simple-minded and devout.

ART. VII.-ACCLIMATIZATION AND PRESERVATION OF ANIMALS.

Catalogue of the Menagerie and Aviary at Knowsley formed by the late Earl of Derby, K.G., P.Z.S. Liverpool, August 1851.

List of Vertebrated Animals living in the Gardens of the Zoological Society of London. London, 1862.

Bulletin de la Société Impériale Zoologique d'Acclimatation. Tomes I-VIII. Paris, 1854-1861.

Jaarboekje van het Koninklijk Zoologisch Genootschap "Natura Artis Magistra." Amsterdam, 1860.

Der Zoologische Garten. Organ der Zoologischen Gesellschaft in Frankfurt am Main. Frankfurt am Main, 1860.

First, Second, and Third Annual Reports of the Society for the Acclimatisation of Animals, Birds, Fishes, Insects, and Vegetables within the United Kingdom. London, 1860-63.

First Annual Report of the Acclimatisation Society of Victoria. Melbourne, 1862.

Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England. Vol. XXIII. Article on "Destructive Insects, and the immense Utility of Birds." By Frederic de Tschudi. London, 1862.

As generally accepted, the term 'acclimatization' means the colonization of one country by the natural products-be they animal or vegetable-of another, with the view of rendering them subservient to the purposes, whether necessary or luxurious, of mankind. Acclimatization may therefore be justly considered the utilized application of the sciences of zoology and botany; and it follows almost as a natural consequence that what is to be learned from their study cannot be safely disregarded by those who wish to advance its objects and realize the expectations it holds out.

Bennet Langton tells us, that when Goldsmith announced his intention of going to Jericho, Aleppo, or some place still further in the direction from which the wise men came, Johnson exclaimed, "Sir, he would bring home a grinding-barrow, and think he had furnished a wonderful improvement." It seems to us that some of the advocates of the various schemes for acclimatization might take the hint which this anecdote conveys. Bacon, in a passage which has been often quoted, speaks of