see me! Behold the proprietor of the Journal of Civilization." Nothing of the kind, Mr. Elliott. Mr. Harper is a modest man, not purse-proud and defiant, like George Law, as you have drawn him. That air of a parvenu, thrusting himself forward in virtue of his money, is not natural to him. And who has ever seen his gold eye-glasses so conspicuously displayed outside his coat? No, no! But still more earnestly do we beg leave to protest against those little pools of blood scattered over the "Gentleman's" countenance. The carbuncles too seem a little exaggerated-too much swollen.

Mr. Elliott has succeeded much better with his Gentleman, No. 139, which is in the possession of Mr. J. W. Harper. In this he is much more sparing of the deeper tints, especially of crimson. But even in this there is a little exaggeration-a certain something that reminds one that nature is overstepped. "C'est ne pas ainsi que parle la nature." Mr. Huntington and Mr. Elliott might well barter with each other. The former might borrow some of the superfluous animation of the latter, and give his overstock of soberness and gravity for it in exchange. Both could profit by this-one nearly as much as the other.

In turning towards the door at the head of the stairs, we are reminded that we have forgotten Saintin's Mr. C. L., No. 1, a full length portrait of the proprietor of Le Courrier des Etats-Unis. The likeness is good; no one that knows the subject can have any difficulty in recognizing him. But his position is anything but a comfortable one; the whole attitude is forced. The original has no such awkward bend of the neck; nor does M. Lassalle make so ungraceful a movement when laying his hand on a book; but, if we except these drawbacks, we must admit that the artist has a fine taste, and is well acquainted with the laws of harmony. C. L. is not his best, however. He has three other portraits on exhibition-A Child, No. 118, A Gentleman, 525, and A Child, 537, each of which, the last especially, is among the best of its kind we have seen. But the most truthful likeness in the whole gallery is Mr. William Cullen Bryant, No. 63, by Mr. Wenzler. This, indeed, is almost faultless; it does full justice to the serene, thoughtful, and classic expression of countenance of the author of Thanatopsis. If there is any exaggeration, it is in the preternatural whiteness of the hair. In Mr. Thompson's Returning from the Ride, No. 49, we have a very graceful portrait of a young lady in her riding dress. The features are well formed and full of animation, and their decided beauty is not a little enhanced by those rich, curling auburn tresses, which fall so coquettishly on her shoulders. Were it not that the left arm seems somewhat larger than the right, it would be the best specimen of youthful womanhood in the whole collection. As it is, it does great credit to the artist, whom it certainly proves to be a man of genius.

We should like to mention several other pieces, of more or less

merit, but we find that we have already transcended the bounds we had prescribed for ourselves, and without being able to say a word of the landscapes, some of which deserve a high meed of praise. But we shall not fail to return to them on an early occasion. Even now we cannot pass over such pieces as Mr. Hazletine's Amalfi, Coast of Naples, No. 21, Mr. Jewell's Children on the Sea Shore, Normandy, No. 47, Mr. Ritchie's Fitting out Moses for the Fair, and Mr. Gifford's Roman Campagna, No. 70, without, at least, commending them to those who have more time to admire them than ourselves. The northern coast

of the Bay of Salerno has ever been famous for the unrivalled beauty of its scenery. No other landscape has forined a subject for so many artists. We have seen at least fifty paintings of it, some of them by the best Italian and German artists; and we cheerfully admit that there are not more than two or three-which are by acknowledged masters-the tout ensemble of which has afforded us more pleasure than that of Mr. Hazletine.

ART. XI.-NOTICES AND CRITICISMS.

SCIENCE AND EDUCATION.

Annual of Scientific Discovery; or, Year Book of Facts in Science and Art for 1862. Exhibiting the most Important Discoveries and Improvements, &c., &c. Edited by DAVID A. WELLS, A. M., author of "Principles of Natural Philosophy," &c., &c. Boston: Gould & Lincoln. 1862.

Whatever those who publish a certain class of books, and perform a certain kind of tricks, may pretend to the contrary, it is always much more agreeable to us to commend than to condemn. But one only stultifies himself by praising everything; if indiscriminate praise has any effect, it is to do mischief. But, apart from its pernicious influence, it is downright dishonesty to pretend, to those incapable of judging themselves, that a worthless book is a good one; it is nothing less false or less reprehensible than helping the owner to impose on the public. The volume now before us is not vicious; it contains nothing injurious either to morals or religion; except so far as attempts to make giants of pigmies have that tendency. But it is certainly unworthy of the Modern Athens; and instead of improving, it grows worse from year to year. None having any faith in title-pages would say so, however. According to this, there is nothing worth noting in science or art, which may not be

found in its pages. To copy the whole would occupy too much of our space, and be too suggestive of one of Barnum's "sensation" placards. Now, in all truth and honesty, what does this "Annual of Scientific Discovery, or Year Book of Facts in Science and Art," consist of? Before attempting to answer the question, we disclaim any unkind feeling towards the editor. Personally we know nothing of Mr. Wells; we have never had any intercourse with him directly or indirectly; but, from all we can learn, he is a gentleman much esteemed in private life. We hold, however, that a man may be an exemplary citizen and still a very bad editor of an "Annual of Scientific Discovery," &c., &c.

The work before us has really no scientific character. Three-fourths of its contents are composed of extracts from newspapers, passages from "papers," the perusal of which has been listened to in courtesy by certain societies, descriptions, by pretended inventors, of their own performances, &c., &c.; and the remaining one-fourth consists of that sort of crude matter which might be expected in a scientific lecture before a country lyceum. The work which it was intended to imitate is the French Année Scientifique et Industrielle; but there are scarcely any two publications, professing to aim at the same ends, that are more different. The articles in the Année Scientifique are chiefly original contributions from the most learned men in Europe, who examine what purport to be discoveries, or inventions, before presenting them to the world as such; whereas our "Annual" takes all upon trust, making no effort to separate the wheat from the chaff. Mr. Wells rarely gives himself the trouble of giving any opinion of his own; he seems to think that his duty is performed when he has pasted together some two or three hundred pages, in which he never uses a pen further than to say, "the eminent Prof. A.," "the learned Dr. B.," "the well-known Mr. C.," &c. Each of these may be followed by several pages of closely printed matter, in which there is not a single idea that could benefit science or art, in any conceivable way. Thus, for example, in glancing over the "copious index," we fancy that we have met with an important discovery; we turn, accordingly, to the page indicated, but all we find is a rather clumsy "puff," by a would-be savant, on "my recent invention "—voilà tout!

The "Notes by the Editor" occupy some fourteen pages of leaded matter. The greater part of even this department is composed of long extracts. A large proportion of the remainder is occupied by the titles of subjects of papers presented to the "Congress for the Promotion of Social Science;" and, finally, we are presented with "appreciative notices" of certain new books, each of which is declared to surpass all others of its kind. For instance, in the notice of Mr. Baird's "Birds of North America," we are told, that "a work of this kind has long been admitted to be a great desideratum” (p.xvii.).

'The magnificent and standard ornithology of Mr. Audubon" was a very good thing in its way; but now it must be content to occupy a secondary rank. A Mr. John Warner, A. M., has got out a new book, or pamphlet, entitled, "New Theorems, Tables, and Diagrams, for the Computation of Earth-work," of which we are told that "the whole is the result of immense labor and original research on the part of the author (!)" In short, this indiscriminate puffing has been carried too far in the “Annual.” Did the work emanate from some village in New Jersey, or Indiana, then we should have no fault to find; but that such a crude mixture of platitudes should go forward to the world as a fair representation of the intelgence and enlightenment of Boston is a gross libel, and we protest against it accordingly.

1 Popular Treatise on Deafness: Its Causes and Prevention. By Drs. Lighthill. Edited by E. BUNFORD LIGHTHILL, M. D., with illustrations. New York: Carleton.

We have derived both profit and pleasure from a perusal of this volume, which is more than we could say of two-thirds of the scientific treatises which fall into our hands, and which it is our duty to examine, with more or less attention. The great defect of works of this kind, in general, is that, although they may be designed for the benefit of all, they are so overloaded with technicalities, that they can only be understood by the favored few-those who can afford to obtain information from other sources, wherever it is to be obtained. The matured experience of the authors of the present volume, in the treatment of all varieties of diseases of the ear, has enabled them to obviate this difficulty; and, accordingly, such is the lucid, popular style in which it is written, that "he who rans may read." On the principle, that prevention is better than cure, the means of the former are treated at considerable length; and those who expect nothing in the remarks and suggestions of the authors, but vague speculations, will find themselves agreeably disappointed. Drs. Lighthill tell us in their preface-and the fact is sufficiently obvious that they "have endeavored to treat the subject as comprehensively as is practicable in a work of this character, by explaining the anatomy and physiology of the ear, and describing those of the diseases of that organ which are most destructive to hearing." The illustrations which they use in doing so will greatly assist the reader, but the authors tell us that, "They have abstained from giving directions for treatment (except in a few cases), as, by furnishing receipts and formulas for treatment, in a popular treatise, persons are apt to be induced to constitute themselves their own physicians, a practice always productive of more injury than benefit, especially when applied to an organ so complicated and delicate as the ear, which requires a most thorough examina

tion, before suitable treatment of any kind can be instituted, even by competent medical men." To this judicious observation, the truth of which will be readily assented to by every intelligent mind, we need only add, that the book should be read by every mother, in short, by all who value the sense of hearing, whether it is already impaired or not.

An Historical Survey of the Astronomy of the Ancients. By the Right Honorable Sir GEORGE CORNEWALL LEWIS. London: Parker & Son. 1862.

The title of this work is rather ambitious; it leads us to expect too much-at least more than we shall find it to contain on the closest examination. Still it is far from being an inanity. Even where we have nothing else but conjectures, we feel that they are the conjectures of a scholar and a thinker; and, as such, they are valuable by themselves. The part of the essay which relates to the astronomy of the Greeks and Romans claims most attention, although it may be doubted whether either of those nations, as the author tells us, ever regarded the sun and moon as "celestial beings, driving their chariots across the vault of heaven." We ought rather to remember that, even at the present day, both the sun and moon are addressed as persons in certain kinds of prose, as well as in poetry. Our author makes an ingenious, if not successful, attempt to trace the progress of astronomy from the time of Thales to that of Democritus. This he would have us regard as its philosophic period; the scientific period being that in which the science attained its highest perfection, under the auspices of Plato and Aristotle.

Thus far the author confines himself to facts, which are pretty well attested; but when he comes to pass sentence on the Egyptians and Assyrians he disposes of each in a summary manner. Neither, he thinks, possessed any astronomical knowledge worthy of the name. For the pyramids he has not much respect. He admits that they are very large buildings; but he intimates that their size is almost their only claim to distinction. As for the inscriptions on them, he has little doubt that most of them are erroneous, though he could not read one! It is much easier to condemn them than to take time to understand what they say. The learned Bunsen and other Egyptologists have freely interpreted many of them; but, far from commending them for this, our author is rather of the opinion that they have done mischief.

In short, he does not think that any good can arise from theories which ascribe a higher antiquity to the world than that assigned to it by the Bible; though it is not altogether on religious grounds that he objects to them; but he thinks it is very absurd to suppose, for one moment, that the Egyptians and Assyrians-neither of whom had a printing press, an electric telegraph, a railroad, a British Constitution—knew as much of

3