to be drawn from the circumstance is, that it was beyond the reach or knowledge of the mighty and far-ruling king, who had taken such particular pains to secure Peter’s death. The probabilities as to the real place of his retirement will, however, be given, as soon as the sequel of events in Jerusalem has been narrated, as far as concerns the discovery of his escape. _Bright light._――Some commentators have attempted to make out an explanation of this phenomenon, by referring the whole affair to the effects of a sudden flash and stroke of lightning, falling on the castle, and striking all the keepers senseless, ――_melting_ Peter’s chains, and illuminating the place, so that Peter, unhurt amid the general crash, saw this opportunity for escaping, and stepping over their prostrate bodies, made his way out of the prison, and was out of sight before they _came to_. The most important objection to this ingenious speculation is, that it directly contradicts every verse in Luke’s account of the escape, as well as the general spirit of the narrative. Another weighty reason is, that the whole series of natural causes and effects, proposed as a substitute for the simple meaning, is brought together in such forced and uncommon coincidences, as to require a much greater effort of faith and credulity for its belief, than the miraculous view, which it quite transcends in incredibility. The introduction of explanations of miracles by natural phenomena, is justifiable only so far as these may illustrate the _accompaniments_ of the event, by showing the mode in which those things which are actually mentioned as physical results, operated in producing the impressions described. Thus, when thunder and lightning are mentioned in connection with miraculous events, they are to be considered as _real_ electrical discharges, made to accompany and manifest the presence of God; and where lambent flames are described as appearing in a storm, they, like the _corpos santos_, are plainly also results of electrical discharges. So too, when mighty winds are mentioned, they are most honestly taken to be _real_ winds, and not deceptive sounds or impressions; and when a cloud is mentioned, it is but fair to consider it a real cloud, made up, like all other clouds, of vapor, and not a mere non-entity, or a delusion existing only in the minds of those who are mentioned as beholding it. But where nothing of this kind is spoken of, and where a distinct personal presence is plainly declared, the attempt to substitute a physical accident for such an apparition, is a direct attack on the _honesty_ of the statement. Such attempts, too, are devoid of the benefits of such illustrations as I have alluded to as desirable; they bring in a new set of difficulties with them, without removing any of those previously obstructing the interpretation of the facts. In this case, the only circumstance