pleasure, the animal made a dart at the first gudgeon I threw into the water, and swallowed it with avidity, as it did three others in succession immediately afterwards. Since that time the animal has been regularly fed with these fish, sometimes eating only one in the day, sometimes two, three, or four; but when it has eaten more than one, it has refused to eat any on the next or following days, so that one small fish a day may be considered the average. The blood diet has, of course, been discontinued since the animal took to a more congenial food.

The first interesting question which presents itself for solution is, whether the extraordinary power possessed by the animal of giving a severe electric shock to any creature coming in contact with it, or even within a certain distance of it, when immersed in the water, be given as a means of taking or securing its prey, or chiefly as a means of defence. I observed that when the eel is eager for food, if it see the prey distinctly, it swallows it without giving it a shock; and yet I have reason to believe, that at the moment of seizing a fish, the eel discharges its electricity through the water, since a shock has been perceived by a person at that moment having his hands immersed in the tub in which the eel is kept. If the gymnotus do not see the small fish, he appears to be aware of its presence, and seeks it; and during the motions of the two animals, if the fish happen to touch the eel, it generally receives a shock that paralyzes it, causing the victim to float belly upwards, on the surface, till it comes under the notice of the eel, which instantly swallows it.

It frequently happens that a fish, put into the tub when the eel is not inclined for food, will swim about, and even come into collision repeatedly with the eel, without sustaining any injury; but at other times, under the same circumstances, the eel has killed the fish on its accidentally touching him, and has taken no further notice of it. Again,

* I should state that the eel lost one of its eyes within a day or two after its arrival at the Gallery; but whether from a blow or constitutional debility, I have no means of ascertaining.

I have more than once seen the eel absolutely swallow a fish, and disgorge it again in a second or two, perfectly uninjured; the latter living several days afterwards.

It is curious to observe the manner in which the eel, after seizing a fish, turns it round in its mouth without letting it go, for the purpose of swallowing it head foremost; the rays of the fins impeding its progress down the animal's throat, if he attempt to swallow it in the contrary direction.

As far as I have observed, there is no particular part of the body of the eel at which the shock is received by a single contact, as happens when a fish simply swims against the eel. In one instance a large perch, eight or ten inches long, having the axis of its body in a line with that of the eel, was seized by the tail, and at the moment of seizure received a shock which stunned it, from which it did not recover for nearly twenty minutes. But for information relating to the electric action of the gymnotus, your readers must refer to Professor Faraday's paper lately read at the Royal Society.

The eel is always most lively immediately after the water is changed, when he amuses himself by swimming round his tub for half an hour together, rubbing himself in the gravel at the bottom to free his skin from the mucus deposited on its surface. The animal raises its head out of the water every minute, in order to breathe out the air inhaled from the water; and generally floats just beneath the surface, or with a small portion of the back raised above it; and I have never yet seen it manifest any inclination to bury itself in the sand.

SCRIPTURAL CONVERSATIONS:

BETWEEN GEORGE AND HIS MINISTER.

George. I AGAIN avail myself of your permission to converse with you on subjects connected with the interpretation of Scripture. I see plainly, from the information I have already received from you, that the more I engage in

SCRIPTURAL CONVERSATIONS.

the study of the Bible, the more delightful that duty becomes.

9

Minister. Yes, my young friend; and in this respect your experience is that of all who have made the experiment. The superficial reader may find his task both unprofitable and wearisome; but he who loves the law of the Lord, and who meditates therein day and night, will find increasingly fresh causes of confidence and admiration. I have sometimes thought that this may be alleged as an argument of the divine origin of the Scripture; not, perhaps, in refutation of the cavils of infidelity, or for the conviction of infidels, but in confirmation of the faith of those who already believe. At all events, it is a remarkable fact, and one which has been repeatedly noticed, that they who study the Bible most, not only understand it best, and admire it most, but that their studies never exhaust the subject, nor satiate themselves. The diligent reader of the word of God finds, at every perusal, something that never struck him before; and every thing that he discovers is an addition to his pleasure as well as to his knowledge. But to what particular subject do you wish that our attention should be directed in the present conversation?

George. I have been thinking, Sir, of the personal ministry of Christ; and especially of that part of it which consisted of the parables which he spoke.

Minister. The subject is every way most important. Even the officers who were sent to apprehend him were so impressed by his teaching, that they said, "Never man spake like this man." Let us remember who and what he was;-"the Son of God;"" the Saviour of the world;" the Word that was with God, and that was God; Light and Life; Truth and Love ;-and we shall not wonder at the gracious words that proceeded from his lips. His whole ministry would open before us a field rich as it is extensive but because it is extensive as well as rich, we shall do well to limit ourselves, for a few conversations, to one particular department; and that, it seems, is to be the PARABLES OF CHRIST.

George. If you please: and, in the very first instance, I wish to have a general notion of a parable.

Minister. The word itself denotes a species of comparison; putting two things together, and thus, by one of them, illustrating the other. Generally speaking, in Scripture, a parable is a figurative (I had almost said, a material) representation of some spiritual doctrine or fact; sometimes even of some future event. But the easiest way will be to select an example at once. Turn to the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew, and read the thirty-second and thirtythird verses.

George. "Now learn a parable of the fig-tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: so likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors." Minister. Very well. See first, here are two classes of objects present to the mind of our Lord. There are those relating to the fig-tree, and its vegetative relations to the seasons of the year; and there are those relating to the events of which he had been speaking, and the signs by which their immediate approach should be declared. These two classes he places in such juxta-position and comparison, as that the former illustrates the latter: as if he had said, "You see the fig-tree, and you know, when you perceive the buds and leaves, that the summer is at hand; these appearances in the fig-tree being signs of the approaching summer just so, when you behold certain occurrences, take them as signs of those other events which I have predicted." The fig-tree thus furnished to the disciples a parable,- instruction as to some future event. For the most part, however, the parables of our Lord are to be taken in a somewhat more restricted signification of the term, as including so much of narrative as to give to the whole what may be called an historical form. I need only mention to you the parable—I might almost say the history-of the prodigal son, to make my meaning clear.

George. I scarcely need ask you what our Lord's object was his parables were intended to be instructive.

Minister. Yes: they are all vehicles for the conveyance

of truth: Still, there are some important distinctions to be noticed, both in regard to the nature of the instruction intended to be given, and to the design of our Lord in choosing this particular mode of communication.

George. I shall be glad to have these distinctions pointed out. The more I read the Gospels, the more I wish to understand the various discourses of our Lord.

Minister, Be like Mary. Sit at Jesus's feet, and hear his word. But as to the distinctions which I wish you to notice: it has been remarked by learned men,* who have carefully examined the subject, that the parables which are recorded by the Evangelists may be divided into two classes; those which directly relate to the illustration of moral truth; and those which relate (in some instances prophetically relate) to the nature and progress of that religion so often indicated by the significant phrase, “the kingdom of heaven," or " the kingdom of God." George. Give me an example of each. Minister. I will do more. You shall read for yourself the classification of Mr. Gresswell, the last writer who has written expressly on the subject, and whose copious explanations have left little to be done by subsequent authors. To the first class (that which illustrates moral truth) he gives seven parables. Read their titles.

George. "These seven parables are respectively those of the King who took account of his debtors; of the good Samaritan; of the rich man's ground; of the unjust steward; of the rich man and Lazarus; of the importunate widow; and of the Pharisee and publican." +

Minister. To the second class which I have mentioned, as relating to the nature and progress of the religion of the Gospel, Mr. Gresswell gives twenty parables.

George. Yes; here is the enumeration. "The parable of the sower; the tares; the seed growing secretly; the grain of mustard-seed; the leaven; the hidden treasure; the pearl; the draw-net; the good shepherd; the servants

* Vide Rosenmüller, Schol. in Matth. xiii. 3. † Gresswell on the Parables, vol. i., p. 23.