second, assuming that they do not as yet know it, question nature by experiments, that the answers may give them what they seek. They proceed on that simple, yet profound and noble, aphorism of Lord Bacon: "Man, as the minister and interpreter of nature, does and understands as much as his observations on the order of nature, either with regard to things or the mind, permit him, and neither knows nor is capable of more." Alchemy laboured to establish certain suppositions: modern chemistry observes the order of nature, and, having marked the results, arranges and states them.

P. You say, observes the order of nature: of course you do not mean of nature generally?

T. No. The term which expresses these extended and different observations, is physical science, as distinguished from mental science, or the philosophy of the human mind, or from theology, the study of truth as manifesting to us the divine Being. Chemistry is one branch of physical science.

P. What part, then, of the order of nature does it observe? T. Various definitions of the science have been given, but our purpose will be better answered by describing than defining. When we see what chemistry actually does, or at least professes to do, it will not be difficult to find some general term which shall state the results, and help our memory. In astronomy you study the heavenly bodies, in their numbers, their action on each other, their motions, and the laws by which these are governed. But in all this you are studying bodies which act on each other at, what are to us, vast distances. This is what is commonly called gravitation and attraction. But when we come to bodies within our reach, and under our control, we find another kind of attraction, that of cohesion, as it is called; that by which the particles constituting a body cohere together, so that of many, only one is formed. This is so strong as for the most part to overcome the attraction of gravitation. You hold a stone by one part of it. Every particle of it gravitates to the earth; and yet, not only is that part which you actually touch prevented from falling, but so are likewise the parts which you do not touch. It is because they so strongly cohere. But this supposes that they have that particular nearness which

constitutes union. Separate them, by pulverization for instance, and cohesion ceases, and each particle, if not otherwise prevented, falls to the earth.

P. Are bodies, then, composed of a number of particles, into which they may be reduced by powdering them very finely?

T. In one sense, yes. The body, as being that kind of matter which it is, suppose a piece of chalk, is thus composed. Powder it in a mortar, grind it on a marble slab with water, use any mechanical means you can so as to get the very finest powder; every particle, however minute,-minute as far as the mind can conceive, is still a particle of chalk. This is only mechanical decomposition. To get to chemistry, we must advance another step. Chalk itself, not as a piece of a certain size, with so many particles, each of which is true chalk, all chalk, but considered as chalk, is a compound. It is called carbonate of lime; and every particle of chalk, however minute, contains carbonic acid and lime, not mechanically mixed, but united in a manner which mechanical means cannot disturb, and this is what is called chemical union. But before I explain this, let me give you another instance. Here is some of what is called Epsom salt. You may powder it as finely as you please. Every particle is Epsom salt still; and whatever Epsom salt is, that each particle is. Dissolve it in water. You seem to have lost sight of it. Evaporate a few drops of the water. You find the Epsom salt left. But Epsom salt is a compound. It is called sulphate of magnesia; and every particle, however small, is a compound of sulphuric acid and magnesia, chemically united. If you stir up some magnesia in a cup, the magnesia is suspended in the water; and dry off the water, and there is the magnesia. But drop into the mixture a proper quantity of sulphuric acid. The liquid gradually becomes clear. The acid has become chemically united to the magnesia, and you have in the cup, a solution of Epsom salt, that is, sulphate of magnesia. Thus, though particles cohere together to form masses, there is a union beyond this, that by which the particles become what they are. Such considerations, along with others, have led modern chemists

to the adoption of what is called, the atomic theory. Into this I shall have to enter more fully at another time; but I mention it now to enable us to describe chemistry itself. All bodies are supposed to be made up of simple parts, which are considered as indivisible, and therefore are called atoms, from a Greek word, signifying what cannot be divided. These are of different kinds; and their tendency, under various circumstances, to unite with each other, and to form, when they are of different kinds, substances different from what would have been formed had they been all alike, is what is called chemical affinity. Atoms compose particles, and these, masses. Masses may be reduced to particles by mechanical means: particles can only be separated into atoms by chemical means. The earth tends to the sun, a distant body, by gravitation. Particles, at a certain degree of nearness, cohere together, and form masses. But when we come to the union of different kinds of atoms, forming substances according to that union, we come then to the region of chemistry. This science, therefore, results from inquiries into the ultimate and elementary constitution of bodies. It teaches what are the original elements, the ultimate atoms of which all bodies are composed. They are simple bodies, if constituted by atoms of one kind; compound bodies, if by the union of atoms of different kinds.

Chemistry includes, however, not merely this elementary composition of bodies, but their decomposition. When you reduce a mass to its particles, you are only doing a mechanical work. When you separate its original elements, so that they exist in their former simplicity, you have performed an act of chemical decomposition.

Chemistry, then, is the science which teaches the elementary constitution of bodies. It seeks to ascertain what these atoms, these ultimate elements, are, and what affinities exist between them, in reference to their power of combination. It inquires what forces operate in uniting or disuniting them; and also, what are the laws according to which these affinities and forces act in the composition and decomposition of bodies.

CHRONICLES OF THE KINGS OF NORWAY.

AMONG the works which have issued from the London press in the course of the last year, one of the most curious is a translation, by Mr. Samuel Laing, author of "A Residence in Norway,' ""A Tour in Sweden," &c., of "The Heimskringla; or, Chronicles of the Kings of Norway," written early in the thirteenth century, by Snorro Sturleson, an Icelander, who was born in the year 1178. The general nature of the work will easily be gathered from what the author himself says in his preface.

"In this book I have had old stories written down, as I have heard them told by intelligent people, concerning Chiefs who have held dominion in the northern countries, and who spoke the Danish tongue; and also concerning some of their family branches, according to what has been told me. Some of this is found in ancient family registers, in which the pedigrees of Kings and other personages of high birth are reckoned up; and part is written down after old songs and ballads which our forefathers had for their amusement. Now, although we cannot just say what truth there may be in these, yet we have the certainty that old and wise men held them to be true.

"Iceland was occupied in the time that Harald Haarfager was the King of Norway. There were scalds in Harald's court, whose poems the people know by heart, even at the present day, together with all the songs about the Kings who have ruled in Norway since his time; and we rest the foundations of our story principally upon the songs which were sung in the presence of the Chiefs themselves, or of their sons, and take all to be true that is found in such poems about their feats and battles: for although it be the fashion with scalds to praise most those in whose presence they are standing, yet no one would dare to relate to a Chief what he, and all those who heard it, knew to be a false and imaginary, not a true, account of his deeds; because that would be mockery, not praise."

The volumes thus contain the early history of the Northmen, from the time of Odin, downwards, as delivered in their

Sagas," by the historical scalds, or bards, and strikingly illustrate the character of a very influential portion of the ancestors of the present English family. The value of such illustrations is well described by the translator, in the first part of his preface, which we here quote.

"It is of importance to English history to have, in the English language, the means of judging of the social and intellectual state of the institutions and literature of a people who during three hundred years bore an important, and for a great portion of that time a predominant, part, not merely in the wars, but in the legislation of England; who occupied a very large proportion of the country, and were settled in its best lands in such numbers as to be governed by their own, not by Anglo-Saxon, laws; and who, undoubtedly, must be the forefathers of as large a proportion of the present English nation as the Anglo-Saxons themselves, and of a much larger proportion than the Normans. These Northmen have not merely been the forefathers of the people, but of the institutions and character of the nation, to an extent not sufficiently considered by our historians. Civilized or not, in comparison with the Anglo-Saxons, the Northmen must have left the influences of their character, institutions, barbarism, or culture, among their own posterity. They occupied onethird of all England for many generations, under their own Danish laws; and for half a century nearly, immediately previous to the Norman conquerors, they held the supreme government of the country. It is doing good service in the fields of literature, to place the English reader in a position to judge for himself of the influence which the social arrangements, and spirit, of these Northmen may have had on the national character, and free institutions, which have grown up among us, from elements planted by them, or by the AngloSaxons. This translation of Snorro Sturleson's Chronicle of the Kings of Norway, will place the English reader in this position. He will see what sort of people these Northmen were who conquered and colonised the kingdoms of Northumberland, East Anglia, and other districts, equal to one-third of all England at that time, and who lived under their own laws in that portion of England; and he will see