Whatever may be thought of the value of controversy in other departments of knowledge, it has certainly proved useful in the progress of experimental science. Witness the animated and prolonged discussion which took place between Volta and Galvani, and which led to enduring results for the welfare of mankind. Wishing to prove the correctness of his theory of electrification by contact against Galvani's animal electricity, Volta devoted himself unremittingly to experimentation until, in the century year 1800, his brilliant work culminated in the invention of the "pile" or electric battery which bears his name.

A suspicion had been growing for many years in the minds of physicists, that there must be some degree of relationship, probably an intimate one, between magnetism and electricity, between magnetic and electric forces. In the year 1785, van Swinden, a celebrated Dutch physicist, published a work on electricity in which he described and commented upon a number of analogies which he had observed between the two orders of phenomena; but, voluminous as was the work, it threw no light on the nature of the suspected relationship.

It was well known, in the case of houses and ships struck by lightning, that knives, forks and other articles made of steel were often found to be permanently magnetized. Following up this pregnant observation, experimenters often sought to impart magnetic properties to steel needles by Leyden-jar discharges, but with indifferent success. Sometimes there would be a trace of magnetism left and sometimes none. In no case was it possible to say beforehand which end of the knitting-needle would have north polarity and which south.

Though we are better equipped to-day for research work than were our predecessors in the electrical field fifty years ago, we are still unable to predict the polarity that will result in a bar of iron from a given condenser discharge. The uncertainty arises from the fact disclosed by Joseph Henry in 1842 and well known to-day that, under ordinary circumstances, all such discharges consist of a rush of electricity to and fro, that is, they give rise to an oscillatory current of exceedingly short duration. Were it otherwise, that is, were the discharge unidirectional, the needle would always be magnetized to a degree of intensity proportional to the energy released; and it would be possible in every case to foretell with certainty the resulting polarity which the needle would acquire.

With the advent of the voltaic battery, a generator which supplies a steady flow of current in one direction, the interesting problem of relationship between electric and magnetic forces was again attacked; and this time with considerable success.

Probably the earliest investigator afield was Romagnosi, an Italian physician residing in Trent (Tyrol), who, in the year 1802, published in the "Gazetta" of his town an account of an experiment which he had made, and which showed that he was working on promising lines. What he did was this: having connected one end of a silver chain to a voltaic pile, and having carried the chain through a glass tube for the purpose of insulation, he presented the free end, terminating in a knob, to a compass-needle, also insulated. At first, the needle was attracted; and, after contact, repelled. Whatever Romagnosi thought of his experiment and its theoretical bearing, the attraction and subsequent repulsion of the compass-needle which he said he observed were electrostatic and not electromagnetic effects. The Italian physician was indeed on the verge of a great discovery; but he halted in his course and lost his opportunity.

Mojon, Professor of chemistry in Genoa, was a little more fortunate, though he, too, failed to improve his opportunities. In 1804, he sought to magnetize steel needles by placing them for a period of twenty days in circuit with a battery of one hundred elements of the crown-of-cups type, and had the satisfaction of finding them permanently magnetized when withdrawn from the circuit. Unlike the electrostatic effect of his fellow-countryman Romagnosi, this was unquestionably an electromagnetic effect, the first link in the long chain connecting electricity with magnetism.

That this result attracted wide attention at the time, as it well deserved, is evident from the notice given by Izarn in his "Manuel du Galvanisme," and by Aldini in his "Essai ThÉorique et expÉrimental sur le Galvanisme," both of which were published in Paris in the same year, 1804.

Though the manuals of Izarn and Aldini served to give a fresh impetus to the quest of the relationship between electricity and magnetism, it was not, however, until the year 1820 that the cardinal discovery was made by one philosopher and the intimate relationship revealed by another. Then all Europe rang with the names of Oersted, the fortunate discoverer of the "magnetic effect" of the electric current, and AmpÈre, whose masterly analysis disclosed the nature of the long-sought-for connection. In the delight of the hour, men called Oersted the Columbus, and AmpÈre the Newton, of electricity.

Though a philosopher of a high order and lecturer of interest and brilliancy, Oersted was, nevertheless, a poor experimentalist. He was fine in the abstract, awkward in the concrete. Often did he call for the assistance of a student to perform an experiment for the class under his direction. Hansteen, who is celebrated for his very fine work in terrestrial magnetism, often had this privilege, for he was clear of mind and deft of hand. Writing to Faraday, he said: "Oersted was a man of genious, but very unsuccessful as a demonstrator, for he could not manipulate instruments."

In seeking for some evidence of a physical interaction between electricity and magnetism, Oersted on one occasion, placed a wire conveying a current vertically across a compass-needle; and, on obtaining no result, seemed greatly disappointed. He evidently expected the needle to respond in some way to the energy of the current; and so it would have responded had he placed the wire in any other position than the particular one which he selected. The Danish philosopher now hesitates; and for lack of coolness, patience and resourcefulness, runs the risk of losing the crowning glory of his life. He is disappointed at his failure; and for the nonce, contents himself with brooding over it.

On another occasion, having a stronger battery at his disposal, he determined to try the experiment again, in the hope that the greater energy at his command would provoke the magnet to respond. This time, he stretched the wire over and parallel to the compass needle, when, to his intense delight, the magnet turned aside as soon as the circuit was closed. The result was pronounced and instantaneous. The Professor, an enthusiast by nature, waxed warm over his good fortune, and well might he do so, as the discovery which he had just made was destined to revolutionize existing modes of transmitting intelligence to distant parts and bring remotest countries into direct, and immediate relation with one another.

That Oersted fell into ecstasy over his success was but natural, though it is not stated that he exhibited his enthusiasm by the performance of any unusual feat. When Lavoisier made a discovery, he was wont to take hold of his assistant and go dancing around with him for sheer joy. After making a certain successful experiment in his laboratory, Gay-Lussac gave vent to his feelings by dancing round the room, and clapping his hands the while. It is related that, when Davy saw the first globules of potassium burst through the crust of potash and take fire, his delight knew no bounds. He also took to dancing, and some time had to elapse before he was sufficiently composed to continue his work. Even the cool and self-possessed Faraday occasionally waxed warm on seeing his efforts crowned with success. It is said that, when he got a wire conveying a current to revolve round the pole of a magnet, he rubbed his hands vigorously and danced around the table, his face beaming with delight: "There they go, there they go; we have succeeded at last," he said. He then gleefully proposed to cease work for the day and spend the evening at Astley's seeing the feats of well-trained horses!

Having realized that his experiment was one of fundamental importance in physical theory, our philosopher proceeds to repeat it under varying conditions. He places the wire conveying the current in front of the needle, behind it, under it, across it; he reverses the current in each case, and notices the direction in which the needle turns. Though he states results very clearly, he gives no general rule whereby the direction of the deflection may be foretold from that of the current. A memoria technica to meet all cases that may occur was needed, and was promptly supplied by AmpÈre, who, with a flash of genius, devised the rule of the little swimmer. Others have been added since, such as the cork-screw rule and the rule involving the outspread right hand; but the swimmer appeals in a manner quite its own to the fancy of the youthful student. It pleases while it instructs; it is ingenious while yet remarkably simple.

It has been said that the Philosopher of Copenhagen was led by mere accident to the experiment which will hand his name down the ages; but inasmuch as he was looking, during thirteen years, for a result analogous to the one which he obtained, it is only right to give him full credit for the success which he achieved. It has been well remarked, that the seeds of great discoveries are constantly floating around us, but take root only in minds well prepared to receive them. Accidents of the Oersted type happen only to men who deserve them, as was the case with Musschenbroek and Galvani in the eighteenth century, and with Roentgen in the nineteenth. The electrification of a flask of water, the twitching of frogs' legs in response to electric sparks, and the blackening of a sensitive screen by a distant, shielded Crookes's tube, led to the electrostatic condenser in the first case, to "galvanism" in the second, and to the photography of the invisible in the third.

Writing of Oersted's discovery, Faraday said that "It burst open the gates of a domain in science, dark till then, and filled it with a flood of light."

The discovery of 1820 was hailed throughout Europe by an extraordinary outburst of enthusiasm. Oersted was complimented and congratulated on all sides. Honors were showered upon him: the Royal Society of London awarded him the Copley medal; the French Academy of Sciences gave him its gold medal for the physico-mathematical sciences; Prussia conferred upon him the Ordre pour le MÉrite, and his own country made him a Knight of the Daneborg.

Oersted lost no time in preparing a memoir on the subject of his work, a copy of which was sent to the learned societies and most renowned philosophers of Europe. The memoir, which was written in Latin and dated July 21st, 1820, consisted of four quarto pages with the title "Experiments on the effect of the electric conflict on the magnetic needle."

A perusal of this paper brings home the conviction that Oersted realized fairly well the forces which came into play in his experiment; for in one place, he speaks of the effect as due to a transverse force emanating from the conductor conveying the current, and again as a conflict acting in a revolving manner around the wire. A complete statement of the nature of the mechanical force exerted by a conductor conveying a current on a magnetic needle was given almost immediately by AmpÈre, a master analyst and accomplished experimentalist.

It will stand for all time in the history of science, that in less than two months after the publication of Oersted's memoir, AmpÈre succeeded in showing the mechanical effect in magnitude and direction of an element of current not only on the magnetic needle itself, but also on a similar element of an adjacent conductor conveying a current, thereby founding a new science in the department of physics, the science of electro-dynamics.

Oersted does not appear to have given thought to the practical possibilities of his discovery. While appreciating the utilitarian in science, he evidently preferred the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake. In a discourse which he delivered in 1814 before the University of Copenhagen, he put himself on record when he said that "The real laborer in the scientific field chooses knowledge as his highest aim."So said Plato ages before, and so said Archimedes, who held that it was undesirable for a philosopher to seek to apply the discoveries of science to any practical end. The screw which he invented, his catapults and burning mirrors, show, however, that when necessary the Syracusan mathematician could come down from the serene heights of investigation to the prosaic arena of application.

Before Oersted spoke of "the real laborer," Thomas Young had affirmed that "Those who possess the genuine spirit of scientific investigation are content to proceed in their researches without inquiring at every step what they gain by their newly discovered lights, and to what practical purposes they are applicable."

Young's most illustrious successor in the Royal Institution, Michael Faraday, devoted himself calmly but unflinchingly to research work, in the conviction that no discovery, however remote in its nature, from the subject of daily observation, could with reason be declared wholly inapplicable to the benefit of mankind. After discovering in 1831 that electric currents could be produced by the relative motion of magnets and coils of wire, a discovery which is the basis of all the electric engineering of our day, Faraday constructed several experimental machines embodying this principle, and then turned away abruptly from the work, saying, "I had rather been desirous of discovering new facts and new relations dependent on magneto-electric induction than of exalting the force of those already obtained, being assured that the latter would find their full development hereafter."

Our own Joseph Henry, whose sterling merit is universally recognized, beautifully said in this connection: "He who loves truth for its own sake feels that its highest claims are lowered by being continually summoned to the bar of immediate and palpable utility."

Oersted seems to have shared the opinion largely held by the scientific men of his day, that electricity is mainly a magnetic phenomenon. AmpÈre, for one, did not think so, as is evident from the beautiful theory which he devised to explain the magnetism of a bar by minute electric currents flowing round each individual molecule of the iron. To the French physicist, magnetism was purely an electrical phenomenon.

Though propounded more than eighty years ago, this theory is still in harmony with all facts and phenomena in the domain of magnetism known to-day. It is important to remember, when thinking of this physical theory, that the Amperian currents in question are confined to the molecule, and that they do not flow from one molecule to another. Critics have urged against the theory that the molecules must be heated by the circulation of these elementary currents, to which objection it has been replied that, as we know nothing of the nature of the molecule, we cannot say that it offers any resistance to the current; and, therefore, we cannot affirm that there is any development of heat due to the circulation of these elementary currents.

It is to AmpÈre's credit that he was also the first to propose a practical application of Oersted's discovery, an application that was nothing less than the electric telegraph itself. He suggested that the deflection of the magnetic needle could be used for the transmission of signals from one place to another by means of as many needles and circuits as there are letters in the alphabet. If AmpÈre had only recalled the optical and mechanical telegraphs in use in his day, such as the swinging of lanterns by night and wigwagging of flags and the movements of semaphores by day, he might have reduced his twenty-four circuits to one, using the two elements, viz., motion of the needle to the right and motion to the left, to make up the entire alphabet. Morse substituted the dot and the dash for these deflections, and thus rendered the reception of messages automatic and permanent.

In connection with this proposal to use a magnetic needle for the transmission of intelligence, the reader will no doubt recall the lover's telegraph, so beautifully described by Addison in the "Spectator" for December 6th, 1711; but ingeniously conceived as it was, this magnetic telegraph was purely and simply a creation of the imagination.

This canny conceit has been attributed to Cardinal Bembo, the elegant scholar and private secretary to Pope Leo X.; but it was his friend Porta, the versatile philosopher, who made it widely known by the vivid description which he gave of it in his celebrated work on "Natural Magic," published at Naples in 1558.

This sympathetic telegraph consisted, we are told, of a magnetic needle poised in the center of a dial-plate, with the letters of the alphabet written around it. The two fortunate individuals privileged to hold wireless correspondence with each other having agreed as to the day and the hour, proceed to the room in which the wonderful instrument is kept, where, as soon as one of them turns the needle of his transmitter to a letter, the distant needle turns at once in sympathy to the same letter on its dial!

Such is the power of magnetic sympathy, that the instruments will work successfully though hills, forests, lakes or mountains intervene! Porta has it: "To a friend at a distance shut up in prison, we may relate our minds; which, I do not doubt, may be done by means of compasses having the alphabet written around them."

This sympathetic magnetic telegraph figures extensively in the scientific literature of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: some believed in the figment, others condemned it. Addison described it in elegant prose, and Akenside in beautiful verse. Perhaps the most famous composition on the subject is a short Latin poem, written, after the style and vein of Lucretius, in 1617 by Famianus Strada, an Italian Jesuit. A few years after its publication in the author's "Prolusiones," a metrical translation was made by Hakewill and inserted on page 285 of his "Apologie, or Declaration of the Power and Providence of God," 1630.

Owing to the interest that attaches to this celebrated composition and the difficulty of getting Hakewill's "Apologie," we append his version of the poem.

Another translation of the poem was made by Dr. Samuel Ward and published at the end of his "Wonders of the Loadstone," 1640.

AmpÈre's suggestion, made, as we have seen, in the year 1820, was not the first proposal to use electricity for telegraphic purposes. Already, in 1753, a writer in The Scots Magazine, signing himself C. M. (Charles Morrison, of Greenock, according to Sir David Brewster, and Charles Marshall, of Paisley, according to Latimer Clark), outlined a method involving the use of frictional electricity; and Lesage, of Geneva, constructed a short experimental line, in 1774, consisting of twenty-four wires and a pith-ball electroscope. But the man who attained the greatest success in the employment of static electricity for this purpose was Ronalds, of London, who, in 1816, erected a single-wire line eight miles long in his gardens at Hammersmith, with a pair of pith-balls and a rotating disc for receiving instrument.

When well satisfied that his system was practicable and reliable, Ronalds wrote to the head of the intelligence department in London urging the adoption of his invention for the public service; but he was promptly brought to realize the scant encouragement so often extended to inventors by persons in high places, that responsible official politely informing him "that telegraphs of all kinds are wholly unnecessary," and that no other than the mechanical one in daily use would be adopted.

When penning these words, the representative of the British government must have forgotten the experience of 1812, when the result of the battle of Salamanca was semaphored from Plymouth to London, on which occasion a fog cut off the message after the transmission of the first two words, "Wellington defeated," the remainder of the despatch, "the French at Salamanca," reaching the capital only on the following morning!

A rapid sketch of the life of our philosopher, whose discovery of the magnetic effect of the voltaic current in 1820 led to the invention of the electric telegraph, cannot be without interest.

Hans Christian Oersted was born on August 14th, 1777, in the little town of RudkjÖbing, in the island of Langeland, Denmark. Being the son of poor parents, his early years were spent in very narrow circumstances. He and his younger brother were mainly indebted to their own efforts for whatever instruction they received in the rudiments of learning. The town in which they lived being small, offered few opportunities for education, even if the family exchequer had been such as to permit the boys to take advantage of them. There was a German wigmaker in the place, however, who was a little more advanced in knowledge than the generality of the townspeople. He and his wife liked the Oersted boys, who were very frequently to be found in the wigmaker's shop. The good housewife taught them to read, while the artist himself taught them a little German. Hans Christian advanced so rapidly in his studies that he acquired a reputation for precociousness, which, with the usual prejudice against bright children, made the neighbors shake their heads prophetically and say: "The child will not live; he is too bright to last long."

Hans Christian learned the elements of arithmetic from an old school-book which he picked up by chance; and no sooner had he advanced a little, than he set about instructing his brother. Very probably, the teacher benefited quite as much by this process of instruction as the pupil. Adversity is a good school for the formation of character as well as for the acquisition of knowledge. It is evident, from the lives of such men as Oersted, Faraday, Kepler, Ohm, and others who were brought up in the lap of poverty, that it is not so much educational opportunity that is needed for the development of mind which we call education, as the earnest determination and the abiding desire to have it. Even boyhood creates its own opportunities for education despite intervening obstacles, if it has only a decided eagerness, a pronounced thirst for knowledge.

About the time that the young Oersteds entered their teens, their father secured the services of a private teacher to give them some instruction in the rudiments of Latin and Greek. This accidental preceptor was only a wandering student who happened to be in the place at the time; but the boys, in their eagerness to learn, derived more benefit from his lessons than many boys of their age often do nowadays from the help and encouragement of a carefully selected and academically equipped tutor.

At the age of twelve, Oersted senior was taken into his father's apothecary-shop in quality of assistant, a position which seemed destined to put an end to all opportunities for further advancement in the path of learning. When a boy goes into a drug-store in an official capacity, his future career is usually settled; he is a druggist to the end. His new avocation, however, proved to be the beginning of new intellectual activities for Oersted. The chemical side of his work became a source of new information to him, and also a stimulus to learn all that he could of chemistry and kindred subjects. Science became a hobby with the young apothecary, and everything relating to it appealed to him. What Hans learned, he as usual imparted to his brother, who was already becoming interested in other departments of learning, especially the law.

The desire of the boys to advance grew with their stock of knowledge. Accordingly, when, in 1794, Hans was only seventeen years of age and his brother sixteen, they both matriculated at the University of Copenhagen. Their father was able to help them but little, so that they were obliged to live quietly and sparingly, a condition distinctly favorable to consecutive and efficient study. They became so successful in their pursuits that they soon began to attract attention. Having passed creditable examinations, they were recommended for pecuniary assistance from an educational fund established by the government for the purpose. Even then, as receipts were hardly equal to expenses, they sought to increase their little revenue by giving private lessons in their leisure hours. Here we have a striking example of what may be accomplished by men who work their way through College in the teeth of adverse circumstances; in these two brothers, we have proof of the truth that it is the student's mind, his willingness and determination to work, that count in education more than the golden opportunities that may fall to his lot.

In the year 1799, Oersted prepared a thesis on "The Architectonics of Natural Metaphysics," which won for him his Doctorate in Philosophy. Though the young Doctor did not hesitate to discuss metaphysical problems and even to disagree with Kant at a time when most Teutonic minds were deeply under the influence of the philosopher of KÖnigsberg, his chief interests, however, centered in the experimental sciences, in physics and chemistry.

In spite of his devotedness to science, Oersted allowed himself, by way of distraction, an occasional excursion into the field of literature. A great literary and artistic movement was making itself felt in the northern part of Europe at the time. The Æsthetic awakening of the Teutonic nations had come after three centuries of religious and political unrest, ill adapted to intellectual development. Lessing and Winkelmann, Goethe and Schiller, the two Schlegels and Klopstock as well as the young poets, Uhland and Koerner, were either already at work or were about to enter on their distinguished careers, and the neighboring Scandinavian nations were beginning to be seriously affected by the movement which was going on among their brethren. In the third year of his university course, Oersted entered the lists as a competitor for literary honors on the question, "What are the Limits of Prose and Poetry?" and had the satisfaction of winning the gold medal offered for the contest. In spite of this episode, indicative of devotedness to the muses, Oersted passed a brilliant pharmaceutical examination; and in the following year succeeded in capturing another prize, this time for a medical essay.

After such a period of preparation, it might be expected that a brilliant career would open up for Oersted; but, unfortunately, he could not afford to wait for slow academic rewards, as it was absolutely necessary for him to set about earning his livelihood. For this purpose, shortly after graduation, he accepted the position of manager of a drug-store. As the salary attached to the office was rather slender, he increased his resources by giving lectures in the evening on the familiar subjects of chemistry, natural philosophy and metaphysics.

About this time, the wanderlust, or passion for travel, took possession of our young philosopher; and under its influence, he resolved to see for himself what men of scientific avocations were doing in France and in Germany. His own pinched circumstances would not allow him to undertake such a journey; but he was fortunate enough to win a stipendium cappelianum which allowed him to travel at the expense of the government for a period of five years, though he used it only for three. If ever pecuniary aid was productive of enduring results, it was so in this case.

In 1801, at the age of twenty-four, Oersted set out from Copenhagen on his grand tour, determined to make it a scientific as well as sentimental journey. In Germany, which he first visited, he met Klaproth, the orientalist; Werner, the mineralogist; Olbers the astronomer; the philosophers Fichte, Schelling and the two Schlegels; and above all, the young and brilliant physicist Johann Wilhelm Ritter, who discussed with him the theory of the wonderful "pile" invented by Volta in the previous year, 1800.

In Paris, Oersted spent about fifteen months, during which time he was in habitual relations with many of the savants who were just then reflecting great lustre on French science. To mention but a few: there was Cuvier, the leading naturalist of his age; AbbÉ HaÜy, crystallographer of world-wide reputation; Biot, the brilliant expounder of physics; Charles, the discoverer of the law which bears his name; Berthollet, the associate of Monge the mathematician, and Lavoisier, the chemist.

On his return to the Danish capital in 1804, Oersted delivered courses of lectures on electricity and magnetism, light and heat, before numerous and cultured audiences; and such was the success which he achieved that he was appointed, at the age of twenty-nine, to the chair of physics in the University of Copenhagen.

For nearly forty-five years he was destined to occupy this academical position, so that his connection with that seat of learning rounded out the full period of half a century.While sedulously occupied with the duties of his chair and the pursuit of his favorite scientific subjects, Oersted was not unmindful of his civic and altruistic obligations. He frequently gave popular scientific lectures, which were open to women as well as to men. He helped in the organization of a bureau through which lectures would be given in various parts of the country, and thus became a pioneer in what we call to-day the university extension movement. When democratic ideas began to be discussed in Denmark after the French Revolution of 1830, Oersted was one of those who took part in the onward movement for the betterment of the people. In 1835, he coÖperated in the foundation of the Society for the Freedom of the Press; and when Christian VIII. ascended the throne, he addressed the new monarch in a speech of liberal tendency, hailing him because of the interest which he took in the advancement of science and in the uplift of the masses.

An idea of the position accorded to Oersted by his colleagues in the world of science may be gathered from an address made by Sir John Herschel at the closing session of the Southampton meeting of the British Association in 1836, in which the distinguished astronomer said: "In science, there is but one direction which the needle will take when pointed towards the European continent, and that is towards my esteemed friend, Professor Oersted. To look at his cool manner, who would think that he wielded such an intense power, capable of altering the whole state of science, and almost the knowledge of the world? He has at this meeting developed some of those recondite and remarkable forces of nature which he was the first to discover, and which went almost to the extent of obliging us to alter our views on the most ordinary laws of energy and motion. He elaborated his ideas with slowness and certainty, bringing them forward only after a long lapse of time. How often did I wish to Heaven that we could trample down, and strike forever to earth, the hasty generalizations which mark the present age, and bring up another and safer system of investigation, such as that which marked the inquiries of our friend? It was in deep recesses, as it were, of a cell, that a faint idea first occurred to Oersted. He waited long and calmly for the dawn which at length broke upon him, altering the whole relations of science and life. The electric telegraph and other wonders of modern science were but mere effervescences from the surface of this deep, recondite discovery of his. If we were to characterize, by any figure, the usefulness of Oersted to science, we would regard him as a fertilizing shower descending from heaven, which brought forth a new crop, delightful to the eye and pleasing to the heart."

It may be noticed that in Oersted's day early specialization was fortunately unknown. His education was broad and his intellectual activities broader still. Quite as interesting as many of his scientific researches are some of his contributions to philosophy and some of his views on the significance of the material universe. Oersted, a man of the world with a wide range of interests and a philosopher who lived at high intellectual altitudes, was one of the all-round men in the history of thought who took active part in science, in literature, in politics and in social problems. He had the opportunity of meeting many of the renowned scientists and philosophers of the century, and had been very closely in touch with some of them. He was a regular attendant at scientific congresses, in which he distinguished himself by the leading part which he took in their deliberations. His opinions, therefore, on the great problems of life, religious, moral, social and political, challenge our respect even where they do not compel our approval. Our Danish philosopher deserves, then, to stand as the spokesman of his generation of savants on the great questions that concern man's relations to his fellow-men, to an all-wise Providence and to an enduring hereafter. His opinions on these matters are all the more interesting because they are in open contradiction with what is sometimes thought to be the views of scientists on such subjects.

One of the passages of his paper on "All Existence, a Dominion of Reason," contains some surprising anticipations of ideas that created a great stir in the intellectual world some fifty years ago. In 1846, that is, thirteen years before the publication of Darwin's "Origin of Species," Oersted discussed evolution and suggested explanations that are generally considered to have been forced from apologists when compelled to take up the work of reconciling Christian doctrines with scientific conclusions.

Writing in the middle 'forties, he said: "If we are now thoroughly convinced that everything in the material world is produced from similar particles of matter, by the same forces and in obedience to the same laws, we must allow that the planets have been formed according to the same laws as our own earth. They have been in process of development during immeasurable periods of time, and have undergone numerous transformations which have also influenced the vegetable and animal kingdoms of those remote periods. The lower forms of life advanced by gradual stages to higher and more complex states of organization, till at length (in a comparatively recent period) a self-conscious being was evolved, the crowning work of this long-continued process of development. Accordingly, we must allow a similar order of organic development to take place on the other planets of our solar family. There may be some which have not as yet attained the same degree of development that we have reached; but everywhere throughout the universe, creatures endowed with reason appear in due time, just as man appeared on our own globe. Their understanding is intimately connected with the organs of sense which they possess; therefore, the nature of their mental faculties cannot be essentially different from our own. That I may avoid even the appearance of materialism, I must direct attention to the conciliatory principle, that the natural environment from which man springs must be recognized as the work of the eternal, creative Spirit. In other words, our conception of the universe is incomplete, if not comprehended as a constant and continuous work of the eternally creating Spirit."

Thus far Oersted; let us here recall what Lord Kelvin, the representative scientist of his day, quoted with approval on a memorable occasion from the Danish scientist with regard to the basic truths of science, philosophy and religion. "It will not be foreign to our purpose if, called upon by the solemnities of this day, we endeavor to establish our conviction of the harmony that subsists between religion and science, by showing how the man of science must look upon his pursuits, if he understands them rightly, as an exercise of religion.

"If my purpose here was merely to show that science necessarily engenders piety, I should appeal to the great truth everywhere recognized, that the essence of all religion consists in love toward God. The conclusion would then be easy, that love of Him from whom all truth proceeds must create the desire to acknowledge truth in all her paths; but as we desire here to recognize science herself as a religious duty, it will be requisite for us to penetrate deeper into its nature. It is obvious, therefore, that the searching eye of man, whether he regards his own inward being or the creation surrounding him, is always led to the Eternal Source of all things. In all inquiry, the ultimate aim is to discover that which really exists and to contemplate it in its pure light apart from all that deceives the careless observer by only a seeming existence. The philosopher will then comprehend what, amidst ceaseless change, is the Constant and Uncreated, which is hidden behind unnumbered creations, the bond of union which keeps things together in spite of their manifold divisions and separations. He must soon acknowledge that the independent can only be the constant and the constant the independent, and that true unity is inseparable from either of these. And thus it is in the nature of thought that it finds no quiet resting place, no pause, except in the invariable, eternal, uncaused, all-causing, all-comprehensive Omniscience.

"But, if this one-sided view does not satisfy him, if he seeks to examine the world with the eye of experience, he perceives that all those things of whose reality the multitude feels most assured never have an enduring existence, but are always on the road between birth and death. If he now properly comprehends the whole array of nature, he perceives that it is not merely an idea or an abstract notion, as it is called; but that reason and the power to which everything is indebted for its essential nature are only the revelation of a self-sustained Being. How can he, when he sees this, be otherwise animated than by the deepest feeling of humility, of devotion and of love? If anyone has learned a different lesson from his observation of nature, it could only be because he lost his way amidst the dispersion and variety of creation and had not looked upwards to the eternal unity of truth."

As already said, Oersted lived to celebrate the fiftieth year of his connection with his university. This was in November, 1850, on which occasion his friends, pupils and the public generally united together in honoring him as a professor whose warm and animated lectures enraptured audiences; as a leader in the scientific advance of the times; and as a Christian to whom nature was but a manifestation of the Deity's combined wisdom and creative power.

The aged scientist, much touched by this popular demonstration as well as by the tokens of esteem given him by the King, spoke of this jubilee celebration as the happiest day of his life. The reader will recall another great man, great in the world of politics and great on the field of battle, who said that the happiest day of his life was that of his first communion.

A few months after celebrating his golden jubilee, Oersted passed away, after a short illness, on March 9th, 1851, deeply mourned by all.

Oersted was eminent as a scholar and equally eminent as a man; lenient in his judgment of others, he was strict with regard to himself; simple in his ways and frugal in living, he was benevolent to others, being always ready to give a helping hand wherever needed. To such a man may well be applied these beautiful words with which Priestley begins his "History of Electricity": "A life spent in the contemplation of the productions of divine power, wisdom and goodness, would be a life of devotion. The more we see of the wonderful structure of the world and of the laws of nature, the more clearly do we comprehend their admirable uses to make all percipient creation happy, a sentiment which cannot but fill the heart with unbounded love, gratitude and joy."

A statue to the memory of Oersted was unveiled in Copenhagen on September 25th, 1876, in presence of the King of Denmark, the King of Greece, the Danish Crown Prince and members of the Royal family, as well as numerous high officials, representatives of learned societies and a vast body of students and people assembled together to do honor to a man who was distinguished alike by his scientific attainments and philosophical acumen, and who, during his long life, never faltered in his devotedness to the welfare of his country as he never weakened in his defense of the great truths of religion.

Brother Potamian.