THE PLEASURE OF THE FANCY. 5 



simply the fortuitous production of the laws of 

 nature ? 



Take the Flowers also. Are they not in- 

 comparably beautiful, as they tessellate the earth 

 with a wealth of colour and cunning diversity of 

 design ? A plainer vesture might have answered 

 every material purpose of the flower's creation. 

 There was no necessity for that blaze of colour 

 if its only office was to feed the cattle or manure 

 the soil. A common garment would have done 

 for these common purposes. But because it 

 was an ordained minister of God to appeal to 

 the higher faculties of man, and bear its royal 

 witness to the King of human hearts and lives, 

 therefore was it clothed with a courtier's robes, 

 and decked with the honours of heaven's am- 

 bassador. 



Is a Bird lower in the scale of creation than 

 a flower — or is its beauty less eloquent ? Those 

 Pigeons that I look upon every day — are their 

 magnificent markings wasted beauty, or the 

 pencillings of a Divine Artist ? I believe there 

 is a religious side to Nature as well as a material 

 one. Besides existing to give us bread to eat 

 and water to drink and raiment to put on, she 

 gives us food for thought and fuel for worship 

 and beauty for admiration. If you want a revela- 



