human character. There, for instance, is the interesting invalid, who is bullied and browbeaten by the energetic virago who storms into the house, demands the wages which she thinks her services are worth, obtains them, and then dominates the household, reigning supreme until the master of the establishment is compelled to interfere, and dismisses her with words that savor more of strength than of righteousness. The list might go on to include the fretful, the economical, the bad-tempered, the shrewd, the equitable, the humane female heads of households that require help, but find it difficult to procure from those who offer it. Perhaps it would be well to condense and generalize the whole matter in dispute by citing an example in which the applicant for a situation was confronted by a woman who had a touch of humor in her composition. In all the dignity of second-hand finery, resplendent with Attleboro' diamonds and rubies which must have cost at the least a quarter of a dollar a gem, the towering lady sweeps into the parlor, and demands a sight of the lady of the house. The meek lady of the house appears. "I understand you want a second girl to do the housework." "Yes," is the gentle response. The high contracting parties forthwith proceed to discuss the terms of the treaty by which the claimant for the office of second-girlship will condescend to accept the place, stating her terms, her perquisites, and her right to have two or three evenings of every week at her own disposal, when her engagements will compel her

to be absent from the house. The reply is, "It seems to me, if we comply with your terms, it would be better for my husband and myself to go out to service ourselves, for we never have had such privileges as you claim." "That is nothing to me. I have lived in the most genteel families of the city, and have always insisted on my rights in this matter. By the way, have you any children?" "Yes, I have two." "Well, I object to children." "If your objections, madam, are insuperable, the children can easily be killed." "Oh! you are joking, I see. But I think I will try you for a week to see how I can get along with you." The curt response is: "You shall not try me, but the one minute which elapses between your speedy descent from those stairs, and your equally speedy exit from the door." The high contracting parties being unable, under the circumstances, to formulate a treaty agreeable to both, the applicant for the vacant place disappears in a fury of rage.

It may be said that this is a caricature of what actually occurs in such interviews and encounters; but it has an essential truth underneath its seeming exaggeration. In almost all the professions and occupations in which men are engaged, the supply is commonly more than equal to the demand. In domestic service the supply of intelligently trained servants is notoriously far short of the demand. One must notice the readiness with which clubs, of late, are formed, for advancing all imaginable causes which can arrest the attention of intelligent, patriotic, philanthropic

men. They meet weekly, fortnightly, or monthly, at some hotels noted for their excellent method of cooking the fish and flesh which are daily on the dinnertables of the members, but cooked on a different method. The Sunday newspapers report the effusions of eloquence which the Saturday meetings call forth. The clubs multiply also with a rapidity which puzzles ordinary observers to account for their popularity. Perhaps a simple reason may be timidly ventured as an explanation of this phenomenon. Men who are classed as prosperous citizens like a good dinner, which they cannot get at home, and at stated periods they throng to a hotel, where the Lord sends the meats, and at the same time prevents the devil from sending the cooks.

It will be said that this attack on the present disorganization of our domestic service is one-sided. It is. Doubtless much may be urged in reply, arraigning the conduct of employers, and defending that of the employees. Many evils of the present relations between the two might be averted by a mutual understanding of each other's motives and aims. Still the previous education of domestics, not only in the enlightenment of their minds, but in the regulation of their tempers, is the pressing need at present. If some charitable person should start a College for the Education of Female Domestics, its success in increasing human happiness would prompt others to follow in his lead. Such a college might turn out thousands on thousands of competent servants every three or four months.

The diplomas it would give would command attention at once; and the way now followed, of sending to the girl's "references" and receiving evasive replies, would be discountenanced. It would also give all classes of domestics a great lift in social estimation; the certificates, that they have graduated with honor in such colleges, would be equivalent to the B.A. or A.M. of colleges of another sort, when a young student applies for the position of schoolmaster in a country town or village. At any rate, a vast mass of unnecessary misery in families might be prevented, and a large addition made to the stock of human happiness.

RELIGION AND SCIENTIFIC THEORIES.

IN the various works written by devout, learned, and "liberal" theologians on the harmony between religion and science, there appears to be a general oversight of the "esoteric" doctrine-the inner and fundamental principle of much current scientific theorizing. Theologians are apt to consider the question as if it were simply a question of the credibility of the Bible. It goes much deeper than that. It relates to religion itself, — not merely to the Christian religion, but to all religions. Historically it is admitted, on rationalistic grounds, that what is called "the spiritual nature of man" demands a religion of some kind. The philosophic scientists question the propriety of this appeal to man's spiritual nature. The theological rationalists are, in fact, quite orthodox in comparison with many of the theorists of "advanced" and advancing science. And even among the latter there are degrees of audacity. Some of them question the possibility of a personal God, but are willing to compromise with man's "spiritual nature" by admitting the validity of a vague Pantheism. Others, shocked at the sentimentality of their speculative brethren, remind them that Pantheism is as much opposed to positive science as