where Herschel's methods seemed to fail they afford excellent promise of success. His first method, for example, had to be abandoned so far as his original purpose was concerned, because he found reason to believe that the great rich regions of the Milky Way are situated like great clouds of stars in space, and are not mere ranges of stars extending continuously from our own neighbourhood. But it was the method itself which taught this,-which, in fact, effected this capital discovery. The second method, again, cannot be interpreted as Herschel hoped. It cannot tell us how far off, relatively, are different stargroups. But this application of the method has to be abandoned simply because the use of the method itself has taught us that the architecture of the heavens is far too complex to be interpreted in so simple a manner. Here then is another great discovery effected by a method of star-gauging which, so far as its original purpose was concerned, has had to be rejected. We have learned, from the seeming failure of the two methods, two important and interesting facts-first, that the stars are gathered into certain regions of space, and segregated from others; and, secondly, that where stars are so gathered they exist in many orders of real magnitude, and are spread in different parts of such aggregations with very different degrees of profusion. Furthermore, over and above these valuable deductions, we have the observations themselves still available for use in other ways, still ready to reward whoever shall devote close and attentive scrutiny to them.

But it appears to me that so soon as we recognize the

success of both methods in one sense, and their failure in another, a method of research suggests itself which promises to combine all those qualities of each method which can really be trusted, and to be open to no objections. It was a grand idea of Herschel's to determine the varying richness of the heavens in different directions under the scrutiny of one powerful telescope. It was an equally noble occupation to watch the heavens "widening on man's view" with the widening pupil of the telescopic eye. Each method of research proved effective as used separately. But only by combining the two can the secret of the star-depths be mastered. We must not limit ourselves, however, to the study of a starfield here and a star-field there. With each telescopic power employed, the whole heavens must be surveyed. The results obtained with each power must be compared together, after being carefully indicated in suitable charts (since the most powerful intellect cannot grasp those results presented merely as statistics). Differential charts, shewing by how much each increase of power increases in each region of the heavens the number of stars brought into view, must also be constructed. No preconceived opinions must be suffered to mar the teaching thus obtained; but the architecture of the heavens so disclosed must be viewed precisely as it is presented to us by these results: because then, though it may be far too complex for our comprehension, we shall be less likely to be deceived than if we were prepared beforehand to recognize in it certain characteristic features.

This is a work in which almost every student of astronomy can help. Gaugings with small telescopes should by no means be neglected. Indeed, when we remember that the structure of the stellar universe is so complex and varied that some of the nearer parts cannot be analysed to their inmost recesses, even by the most powerful telescopes yet constructed, we see that our information about these parts can alone be brought near to completeness, and it is precisely about these parts that the smaller telescopes can give the most useful information.

I believe there is a great future for that noble domain of astronomy which Sir W. Herschel made the chief object of his study. By such methods of star-gauging as I have indicated by the application of spectroscopy to distinguish the stars into their various orders as respects physical structure-by the careful analysis of stellar motions, in order to recognize the laws of association-and by other methods of research, the stupendous problem presented by the stellar heavens may be hopefully attacked; and even should the observations directed to its solution fail, so far as their main purpose is concerned, there can yet be no manner of doubt that the collected results will be full of value and interest.

T

SATURN AND THE SABBATH OF THE JEWS.

IN one of the most striking passages of his "Study of Sociology," Herbert Spencer considers what might be said of our age "by an independent observer living in the far future, supposing his statements translated into our cumbrous language."

6

"In some respects,' says the future observer, 'their code of conduct seems not to have advanced beyond, but to have gone back from the code of a still more ancient people from whom their creed was derived . . . The relations of their creed to the creed of this ancient people are indeed difficult to understand. . . Not only did they, in the law of retaliation, outdo the Jews, instead of obeying the quite opposite principle of the teacher they worshipped as divine, but they obeyed the Jewish law, and disobeyed their divine teacher in other ways, as in the rigid observance of every seventh day, which he had deliberately discountenanced . . . Their substantial adhesion to the creed they professedly repudiated, was clearly demonstrated by this, that in each of their temples they fixed up in some conspicuous place the Ten Commandments of the Jewish religion, while they rarely, if ever, fixed up the two Christian Commandments given instead of them. And yet,' says the reporter, after dilating on these strange facts, though the English were greatly given to missionary enterprises of all kinds, and though I sought diligently among the records of these, I could find no trace of a society for converting the English people from Judaism to Christianity.""

It is, indeed, a strange circumstance that Christian teachings in our time respecting the observance of each

seventh day, should be at variance, not only with what is known of the origin of the observance of Sunday, as distinguished from the Sabbath of the Jews, but even more emphatically with the teachings of Christ, both as to the purpose of a day of rest, and as to the manner in which the poor should be considered. Our Sunday is in fact, if not in origin, the Sabbath of the Jews, not the Lord's Day of the Apostles; it is regarded, not as a day set apart to refresh those who toil, but as though man were made for its observance; while the soul-wearying gloom of the day is so ordered as to affect chiefly the poorer classes, who want rest from work and anxiety, not rest from the routine of social amusements, which are unknown to them. But although the thoroughly nonChristian nature of our seventh day is remarkable in a country professedly Christian, and although it is a serious misfortune for us that an arrangement which might be most beneficial to the working classes is rendered mischievous by the way in which it is carried out, I certainly have no purpose here to discuss the vexed question of Sunday observance. There are some points, however, suggested by Spencer's reference to the origin of our weekly resting day, which are even more curious than those on which he touches. We take our law of weekly rest from Moses; we practically follow Jewish observances in this matter: but in this, except in so far as the contrast between Judaism and Christianity is concerned, there is nothing incongruous. For the Jewish nation was of old the sole Eastern nation whose priesthood taught the