Browning. The Spectator, commenting on the jubilee of the Chemical Society, last year, said it was notable for two remarkable speeches; one by Lord Salisbury, and the other by Sir Lyon Playfair. Lord Salisbury reminded his hearers that about one hundred years ago, a very celebrated tribunal had informed Lavoisier that the French Republic had no need of chemists; "but," said his Lordship, "Lavoisier, though a man of very advanced opinions, was behind this age." Lord Salisbury proceeded to exalt chemistry as an instrument of the higher educational discipline. Astronomy, he said, was hardly more than a science of things that probably are; for, at such distance in space, it was impossible to verify your inferences. Geology he regarded as a science of things as they probably were; verification being impossible after such a lapse of time. But chemistry he treated as a science of things as they actually are at the present time. The Spectator remarks:--Surely that is questionable. All hypothesis is more or less a matter of probability. No one has ever verified the existence of atoms. Sir Lyon Playfair, following Lord Salisbury, said, Boyle has been called the father of chemistry and the brother of the Earl of Cork; ironically hinting, perhaps, that Lord Salisbury was reflecting as much immediate glory on chemistry, by his interest in it, as did the relationship of the first considerable chemist to the Irish earl. Sir Lyon, acknowledging the revolutionizing progress of chemistry, remarked that within the last fifty years it had seen great changes; then, oxygen was regarded as the universal lover of other elements; and nitrogen was looked upon as a quiet, confirmed bachelor; but oxygen had turned out to be a comparatively respectable bigamist, that only marries two wives at a time; and nitrogen had turned out to be a polygamist; generally requiring three conjugates, and sometimes five, at a time. The false teachings of physicists in the past were admitted, including Sir Lyon's own errors; his old conceptions concerning carbonic acid and carbonic oxide all having broken down, under the crushing feet of progress. After all, says the Spectator, it seems that the French revolutionists should have welcomed chemistry, instead of snubbing it, for it has been the most revolutionary of sciences. At the present time, notwithstanding the experiences of the past, Science stands as calmly on the pedestal, to which she has exalted herself, as if not even an earthquake could rock its foundations. In her own opinion, she holds the key to nature's domains. Some few there are who are ready to admit that it is possible Nature still holds the key herself; and who are not unwilling to encounter another revolution, if they can extend their knowledge of Nature's laws; even though it may leave only ruins, where now all is supposed to be so solid as to defy earthquakes and other revolutionizing forces.