branch is now the largest and finest on the plant. This fact was mentioned to Dr. Chalmers by Mr. M'Nab, the late curator. The Doctor stood and looked at it for about five minutes, then bursting into tears, he said, "Mr. M'Nab, I cannot look at anything more to-day, that is quite enough for me," and immediately left the house.

Catharine. I like that very much, and I think I can tell from one of our lessons in Cowper, what was passing in the Doctor's mind. He saw God's goodness in it.

"The soul that sees him, or receives sublim'd
New faculties, or learns at least t' employ
More worthily the powers she own'd before,
Discerns in all things what, with stupid gaze
Of ignorance, till then she overlook'd,
A ray of heavenly light, gilding all forms
Terrestrial in the vast and the minute;
Th' unambiguous footsteps of the God
Who gives its lustre to an insect's wing,

And wheels his throne upon the rolling worlds."

Dr. Chalmers saw God in everything.

M. Yes, indeed, he did see God in everything. It was His infinite goodness which overcame him; it seemed to him so wonderful that that goodness should extend even to the broken branch of a plant-probably also he learned a lesson of faith from it. You remember the lesson of faith Mungo Park learned from the little moss?

Helen. Yes; we shall never forget that ;-"Can that being, thought I, who planted, watered, and brought to perfection, in this obscure part of the world, a thing which appears of so small importance, look with unconcern upon the situation and sufferings of creatures formed after His own image? surely not."

such nice bonnets, mattresses, bedd' many other things.

M. You see even in this h thinks of everything. What at the same time good for little more about the joint of your legs and arms a to be light, so that yo easily. Your legs r weight of your b

must be used v

quills of birds and strong; solid. Th

es on the beauty of. .rom it the delightful arguHe gives us to see that taste a with piety, and that the same heart cupied with all that is serious in the conions of religion, and be at the same time alive the charms and the loveliness of nature."

seen in

more

Dr.

the

F

George.

In our lesson we had at school to-day,

there is an allusion made to Buffon. He loved the works of God, and knew a great deal about them. He knew all about birds, beasts, fishes, insects, plants, the stars, the air, and a great many other things besides, and yet he was a very wicked man. How was this, when he loved to study them so much, and knew so much about them?

M. Buffon did not love them, or study them either, because they were God's works. I think it will be an excellent lesson for us to contrast Dr. Chalmers and Buffon. He knew, as you say, a very great deal. He had a thorough knowledge of Natural History, Science, and Literature; he delighted in them all. But there were two things he did not know-you can tell me what these were.

some of God's works, he wou
better. The end and aim of all his
his own glory, and to render his own name.
this was the only thing he thought worth

table kingning, you You

living

r feet

dying for. He did not acknowledge God, but he kep

nes,

up an outward form of worship, because it was the custom, while his conduct was most immoral.

Jane. I never heard of such a wicked man, I think. M. He was indeed a very wicked man; and it teaches a lesson I hope you never will forget. Learning, without the knowledge of God and our own hearts, must lead in a greater or less degree (as in the case of Buffon) to pride of intellect and great wickedness; human wisdom must be kept in subjection by the great and humbling truths of the Gospel. We shall now turn to Dr. Chalmers-his genius was equal to that of Buffon: but he possessed the true wisdom-he felt himself to be nothing he saw and acknowledged God in everything -every faculty he possessed was consecrated to His service the glory of God was the end of all he didand his greatest delight was proclaiming this glory to

M. The care God takes of all His works, even of the very least of them, ought to teach us the same lesson. I shall tell you what Dr. Chalmers himself says about that. "It is truly a most Christian exercise, to extract a sentiment of piety from the works and the appearances of nature. It has the authority of the Sacred Writers upon its side, and even our Saviour himself gives it the weight and the solemnity of his example. 'Behold the lilies of the field; they toil not, neither do they spin, yet your heavenly Father careth for them.' He expatiates on the beauty of a single flower, and draws from it the delightful argument of trust in God. He gives us to see that taste may be combined with piety, and that the same heart may be occupied with all that is serious in the contemplations of religion, and be at the same time alive to the charms and the loveliness of nature."

George. In our lesson we had at school to-day, there is an allusion made to Buffon. He loved the works of God, and knew a great deal about them. He knew all about birds, beasts, fishes, insects, plants, the stars, the air, and a great many other things besides, and yet he was a very wicked man. How was this, when he loved to study them so much, and knew so much about them?

M. Buffon did not love them, or study them either, because they were God's works. I think it will be an excellent lesson for us to contrast Dr. Chalmers and Buffon. He knew, as you say, a very great deal. He had a thorough knowledge of Natural History, Science, and Literature; he delighted in them all. But there were two things he did not know-you can tell me what these were.

Annie. He did not know God or his own heart.

M. Quite right. He was without that wisdom which alone is of any value; the wisdom of him who is resolved to know nothing but Jesus Christ, and him crucified and much learning without that is a most dangerous thing. Buffon did not see God in one of his works he made a God of himself; he only admired himself; he was constantly talking of himself— of his own genius of what he had discovered and done, and recommending his works to others. The more he learned, the more his pride increased, till at last he was so wicked as to say, that if he had made some of God's works, he would have made them better. The end and aim of all his researches was his own glory, and to render his own name immortal: this was the only thing he thought worth living and dying for. He did not acknowledge God, but he kept up an outward form of worship, because it was the custom, while his conduct was most immoral.

Jane. I never heard of such a wicked man, I think. M. He was indeed a very wicked man; and it teaches a lesson I hope you never will forget. Learning, without the knowledge of God and our own hearts, must lead in a greater or less degree (as in the case of Buffon) to pride of intellect and great wickedness; human wisdom must be kept in subjection by the great and humbling truths of the Gospel. We shall now turn to Dr. Chalmers-his genius was equal to that of Buffon; but he possessed the true wisdom-he felt himself to be nothing he saw and acknowledged God in everything -every faculty he possessed was consecrated to His service-the glory of God was the end of all he didand his greatest delight was proclaiming this glory to