1875,.| Notices of Books. 355 
have frequently been mistaken for gold. Metallic copper is of 
an orange-red, but assumes various shades of green and blue 
when oxidised and dissolved in acids, which again clashes with 
the doctrines of this new philosophy. The compound of 
chromium containing the largest proportion of oxygen, per- 
chromic acid, is of a deep blue. Here, therefore, Messrs. Fraser 
and Dewar are again at fault. It will not avail for them to say, 
‘Of course there appear to be exceptions.” Facts are not to be 
set aside so easily, and it is with facts, as we see, not with 
theories, that the views of the authors refuse to agree. 
As might be expected, the authors indulge in an attack on 
Mr. Darwin’s ‘“ Origin of Species,” and fancy that they have re- 
futed it. By way of compensation they believe in Abiogenesis, 
and take M. Pasteur to task for the imperfection of his experi- 
ments undertaken to refute the notion of spontaneous generation. 
On p. 163 we read :—‘‘It may account for the Scotch, as a 
people, being so little troubled with indigestion, that the food, 
especially of the poorer classes, is mainly composed of oatmeal, 
salt fish, and cheese.” Is this said in earnest or by way of a 
joke? Most people find by experience that salt fish and cheese 
are decidedly indigestible, 
The Authors promulgate, also, a system of medicine. Turning 
to Chapter xxix., inthe hope of meeting with some new light 
thrown upon diseases and their remedies, we find merely a 
recommendation of hot water, purgatives, and “ in urgent cases, 
an emetic.” Without at all questioning the value of these 
agencies, we submit that they are nowise novel. Morison, the 
‘«« Hygienist,” long ago proclaimed ‘“ proper vegetable purgation” 
to be the remedy for every disease. ‘The ‘‘life-pills,’ one and 
all, which, with such touching faith, the British public has bolted 
for the last half century, are purgatives likewise. What prospect 
of success remains, then, for Dr. Fraser and Mr. Dewar ? 
The Authors seem to believe that they have the misfortune to 
be ‘“‘too far in advance of their day and generation.” We 
should rather consider them as altogether off the right track— 
hopelessly and helplessly astray: they seem to us loose, hasty, 
careless observers, and random theorists. We do not deny that, 
owing to the imperfection of language, many of the statements 
here laid down might be long defended on paper; but verbal dis- 
cussion is not the ordeal which scientific theories have in these 
days to undergo: they must legitimatise themselves by co- 
ordinating facts hitherto unexplained and anomalous, and by 
pointing the way to phenomena as yet undetected. If we may 
venture to suggest anything to authors who are on such excellent 
terms with themselves, we would advise them to take up some 
one subject out of the many broached in their work, and try what 
they can do with it. Let them prove, for instance, that colour is 
inherent in objects themselves, and does not depend on the light 
by which they happen to be illuminated. Or, turning from the 
