the working and relations of human nature. We may regard

this vast structure of metaphysical theology as the work of a benevolent, reasoning recluse, who has sought for happiness in the dreamy contemplation of a universe of human abstractions, while he neglects the experimental study of the universe of real facts, and the vigorous exertion of his personality amid the circumstances by which in this life we are surrounded. The influence of Spinozism upon practice must be regarded as a question which admits of various answers by those who recollect how variously the same speculative opinions affect the actions of men, how differently they are often understood by their professed adherents, and how often virtue has flourished under systems which seem to annihilate human agency, and with it the responsibility of men. The theory of Spinoza assumes that there is but one substance really existing; and that what we commonly call distinct substances—as different individual minds, are but modifications of this one substance, in the same way as, on the common hypothesis, different thoughts are but several modifications of one mind. "But it is plain, notwithstanding," as Bishop Fitzgerald remarks in his Commentary on Butler's Analogy, "that, in point of fact, the present state of things is as if they were distinct substances; that the relations between these things which we call individual agents are, for all practical purposes, real relations; that (whether men be only modifications of the same substance or not) men govern men by rewards and punishments; that what we call the senses of duty, pleasure, and pain, are real motives to govern men's conduct, whatever the true speculative idea may be. Viewed in the dry light of the pure reason, there may be an intelligible sense in which Regulus and his tormentors, the spikes which tore him, the body which they lacerated, and the mind which felt the agony and would not yield to it—nay, Rome and Carthage themselves, with all their angry feuds and contrary interests—were essentially one and the same; but if the proposition be true in any sense, it must be in one reconcilable with the known phenomena of life. It is therefore certain that, if the theory be true, it must be consistent with it in general, that certain 'modifications' of the same substance should bear to each other the matter of fact relations commonly expressed by the terms governors and governed; and that these 'modifications' should differ from one another in various degrees of wisdom, power, and goodness. It is plain, therefore, that whatever objections may be drawn from the pantheistic theory against the metaphysical proofs of religion, no such objections can consistently be drawn from it against the practical proofs. Indeed, upon the pantheistic theory, we should be obliged to consider the Supreme Governor as a modification of the same substance as his creatures. But, then, if the theory be reconcilable with the known phenomena of nature, this would not be at all inconsistent with his having absolute power over them (for all practical purposes), or with his actually exercising that power; and the whole argument, a posteriori, by which the existence and providence of a moral governor of the universe is commonly established, would stand absolutely untouched by the theory." Religion, like common life, is, in short, a practical thing. If we practically accept and act upon the fact that we are responsible to God and to one another, we may allow a wide latitude to physical and metaphysical speculation regarding the origin of man, the nature of creation, and the dependence which, in some sort, belongs to all finite things and persons.—A. C. F. SPIX, John Baptist, an eminent German zoologist and traveller, was born at Höchstadt in Bavaria, 9th February, 1781. He was educated at Bamberg and Wenzburg, being destined for the church. He turned, however, to medicine, and became M.D. in 1806. His history of zoological systems, published in 1811, procured him the office of keeper of the natural history museum of Munich. Four years later he published "Cephalogenesis," a treatise on the development of the head, from the insect up to man. In 1817 he was sent by the Bavarian government on an exploring expedition to Brazil, in which his health greatly suffered. He died 13th of May, 1826.—R. H. SPIZELIUS, Theophilus, a Lutheran divine, born in 1639, was successively deacon, priest, and elder of the church of St. James at Augsburg. He was the author of numerous works; amongst others of "Felix Literatus," "Infelix Literatus," and "Literatus Felicissimus." He died January 7, 1691.—D. W. R. SPOFFORTH, Reginald, a musician, was born in 1768 at Southwell in Nottinghamshire, a place famed for its venerable collegiate church, of which his uncle, Thomas Spofforth, was organist. At an unusually early age young Spofforth became qualified to officiate for his relation, and distinguished himself at the concerts given in different parts of the country. After officiating as deputy organist of Lincoln cathedral, he quitted that city and proceeded to London, where he became a disciple of Dr. Cocke, under whom he studied upwards of three years, with every advantage that could be desired from so admirable an instructor, seconded by the most unwearied industry. In 1793 he offered to the Catch Club a serious and a cheerful glee, as candidates for the prizes, and obtained both. "Where are those Hours?" and "See, Smiling from the Rosy East," were the successful compositions. He now formed an acquaintance with William Shield, musical manager of Covent Garden, and contributed many songs, duets, &c., to various pieces produced at that theatre. He now determined to divide his time between composition and tuition, and was soon so much occupied by the latter, while he devoted to the former hours that ought to have been surrendered to sleep, that his health was gradually undermined, and he at length fell a victim to his industry and application. In 1826 his uncle died, leaving him a large fortune: he, however, enjoyed his independence but for a short period. The year after, in the month of August, the nervousness of which he had so long been the prey, and which for many years had prevented his attempting any new work, appeared in a fatal form. He lingered for some weeks, and expired on 8th September, 1827. Many of his glees have become classics.—E. F. R. SPOHN, Friedrich August Wilhelm, a German philologist, was born at Dortmund, on the 16th of May, 1792. He completed his education at the gymnasium of Schulpforta and at the university of Wittenberg, and in 1815 began lecturing at Leipsic. In 1819 he was appointed to the chair of the classical languages, but he died prematurely on 17th January, 1824. Besides his editions of the Panegyricus of Isocrates, of Homer's Odyssey, and of the Opera et Dies, he had also begun the study of hieroglyphics. The fruits of his researches in this latter field were embodied by Seyffarth in his work, De lingua et literis veterum Ægyptiorum.—(See Seyffarth.)—K. E. SPOHR, Dr. Louis, the musician, was born at Brunswick, April 5, 1784, and died at Cassel, October 22, 1859. His father was a physician, and his mother the daughter of a Lutheran pastor. In 1786 they removed with him to the small town of Seesen, and there his early love for music showed itself so strongly, that the gift of a little fiddle, when he was four or five years old, made him happier than any other present could have done. The rector of the town school first taught him to play, and about 1791 he was allowed to take lessons of a French emigrant named Dufour, to play with whom he wrote some ducts for two violins, which were his first attempt at composition. In course of time, Dufour advised his being placed under a better teacher, and he was accordingly sent to Brunswick, and placed under Kunisch for the study of the violin, and an organist, named Hartung, for that of harmony, who was the only master in composition Spohr ever had, and who discontinued his lessons, on account of illness, after a very few months. He passed from the instruction of Kunisch to that of Maucourt, the concertmeister to the duke, with whom he remained a year. He had played in public with good effect, and his father now thought that, young as he was, he might travel and support himself by his talent. He set off, therefore, when he was only fifteen, and reached Hamburg; but he was so discouraged by the first person to whom he presented a letter of introduction, that he returned to Brunswick in despair. He placed himself one day in the path of the duke, whom he besought for an engagement, and who, amused by his confidence, made inquiry as to his ability, and being satisfied of this, gave him an appointment in his chapel. The duke discovered Spohr's rare talent; to assist the development of which, he determined to place him under the tuition of one of the first players of the day, and after failing in negotiations with other artists, made an arrangement with Franz Eck, that the young violinist should travel with him for a year. During this period Spohr practised his instrument most indefatigably, playing often as much as ten hours a day. He devoted also considerable time to composition, made himself master of the French language, and acquired some skill in drawing, for which he had much talent. They started in April, 1802, visited several towns in the north of Germany, where Eck trusted his pupil to direct the orchestra at his concerts when himself played a solo; and finally went to Petersburg, and remained there some months. Spohr returned to Brunswick