EDITOR'S TABLE. 



109 



must Tvork the deepest and most far- 

 reaching revolution in human thought 

 of any truth to which the human mind 

 has ever attained. Therefore we have 

 taken some pains to keep our readers 

 informed about it. And this was the 

 more necessary, as the literary periodi- 

 cals of large circulation pass the sub- 

 ject by, and the larger the circulation 

 the more carefully is it ignored. They 

 value, prefer, and select that which 

 will "pay," and in so doing they cater, 

 for mercenary purposes, to the caprice 

 frivolity, prejudice, and ignorance of 

 their readers, not troubling them much 

 with the great and serious truths which 

 science is working out for the world. 

 It is gratifying to find that we are not 

 singular in our estimate of the relative 

 moment and significance of these two 

 forms of intellectual occupation. A 

 writer who gives elaborate considera- 

 tion to President "White's " Warfare of 

 Science" in the Westminster Review 

 opens with the following pungent ob- 

 servations : 



" It has always seemed to us a matter 

 for some wonder that people should take 

 such a deep interest in the peddling events 

 of poor individual human existences, and 

 so little in the dynasty of ideas ; that they 

 should be content to wear their eyes out 

 over the driveling three-volumed account 

 of the loves and hates of vapid men and 

 women, to indulge their finest emotions 

 over the fifth act of some puling melodrama, 

 and yet be altogether indifferent to the gi- 

 gantic drama of truth in which the unity 

 of place is the world, the unity of time the 

 centuries, and the actors are beneficent 

 truths or malevolent errors. Why men 

 should be indifierent to these momentous 

 events in the past which constituted the 

 history of science, the history of philoso- 

 phy, and, in the truest sense, the history 

 of religion, and yet should enter with such 

 eager zest into the gossip of the day and the 

 trivialities of personal reminiscence, it is 

 difficult to say. But, however hard it may 

 be to discover the meaning of, there is no 

 possibility of doubting, the fact. While the 

 personal histories of men who have very 

 small claims upon our better sympathies are 

 read with avidity, the impersonal narrative 

 of truths which have paramount claims upon 

 our hearts and our heads are treated with 



the passive contempt of neglect. Men are 

 much to us, while doctr-nes are little. We 

 like to have our truths in the flesh ; and we 

 are too apt, when we find a doctrine incar- 

 nated, to neglect the sacred revelation and 

 worship the man, to transfer the reverence 

 which is due to an idea to the individual 

 who is, as it were, the bearer of it. Here we 

 have, in epitome, the history of many re- 

 ligions. Men will worship the truth with 

 startled reverence, then tliey will worship 

 the ti-uth-bearer and overlook the truth in 

 the symbol, and forget that of which it is 

 the sign." 



CONCERNING ''BLUE GLASS:' 



We are asked why we do not dis- 

 course of Pleasonton and " blue glass." 

 Why should we? Is it not abundantly 

 considered by the press already ? The 

 object of our pages is to treat of sub- 

 jects that are too generally neglected ; 

 to give expression to those great re- 

 sults of discovery and scientific thought 

 which get but a meagre share of atten- 

 tion from the popular press, and we 

 cannot find half room enough to do this 

 work as it should be done. "But, 

 really, what do you think of Pleasonton, 

 and the blue-glass cure ? " is now the 

 obtrusive question. Well, we think 

 that the man is a pestilent ignoramus, 

 and his book the ghastliest rubbish that 

 has been printed in a hundred years. 

 He may be entirely honest, but that 

 is no reason why we should give atten- 

 tion to his egregious folly. Pleason- 

 ton, however, it must be confessed, 

 serves one important function : he 

 gauges for us the depth and density of 

 American stupidity. De Morgan says, 

 somewhere, that certain men appear 

 occasionally to play the part of " fool- 

 ometers" in the community, that is, to 

 measure the number and quality of the 

 fools furnished by any given state of 

 society. Pleasonton has done this for 

 us with an accuracy that leaves nothing 

 to be desired. Our showing in this re- 

 spect is on a very handsome scale, fully 

 commensurate with the length of the 

 Mississippi, the sweep of the prairies, 

 the glory of the Centennial Exhibition, 

 the grandeur of the national debt, and 



