It has seemed good to enter thus plainly into the nature of this chair, and the circumstances attending its institution, because great ignorance prevails regarding both, and I have frequently heard statements made reflecting on Dr Fleming, unwittingly no doubt, as if the professorship had been instituted for reasons personal to him, and not as something which was to hold a permanent place in the Church's theological system of education. It is to be hoped that the above extracts will set these questions at rest, in so far as the origin of the chair and Dr Fleming's connection with it are concerned. The appointment was made at the Inverness Assembly, August 1845. Dr Fleming was residing at Culloden House, whence he wrote to Mrs Fleming "The result of the conference (or private Assembly) in my case was so very flattering that I cannot give you the details. I really hope that little will be said when brought before the House. I can stand abuse, but flattery is not congenial. I feel the importance of the chair in so many respects that I wish I were quietly at home to give it the grave consideration which it demands." "I have just returned from the Assembly at half-past twelve at night; but before going to bed must tell you that the appointment was sanctioned by the Assembly with acclamation. Altogether the thing has taken place harmoniously, and in a very flattering manner." As Professor in the New College, he found himself in a position to give free scope to his great talents as a teacher of Natural Science. And, perhaps, it is not putting the matter too strongly to affirm, that, notwithstanding all the ability he had shewn as an author, he was now in circumstances to do more for the beloved pursuits of fifty years, than he ever could have done through the press alone. He could inoculate the rising mind of the Church with his own strong love for the study of nature, and thus send forth his students to do for others what he had done for them. But time brought with it trials connected even with the chair which he filled with so much ability and success. Two lay chairs had been instituted, one for Moral Philosophy, the other for Mental Science. These, which had been taught with very great ability and success by Professors Macdougall and Fraser, were not filled up when the Professors were elected to corresponding chairs in the Na tional University. Then, the abolition by Parliament of Tests for lay professorships, seemed to raise the questions, If the Church has learned to do without the other two, is there any need for the maintenance of one for Natural Science ? And, Is there any specialty to be alleged for upholding it? Dr Fleming saw that these questions had come to be entertained, especially by many in the ministry of the Free Church. He might have been saved the annoyance resulting therefrom, had the ministry been made aware of the true nature of the chair, of the views of Chalmers and Welsh concerning it, because, in the full and frank statement of these things, it would have appeared that the circumstances which came to influence the other two, had, in reality, no bearing on his. So strongly, however, did these things move him, that he resolved to appeal to the laity of the Church, as being fully aware of their high appreciation of the importance of his Chair. This he did in a letter to the Witness newspaper, and he had good cause to be satisfied with the result. Many, both in the ministry and among the laity, resolved to rally around him, and to realize his desires, touching the chair in which he was so deeply interested. To the Witness of Saturday, February 28. 1857, writes : he “When, in my communication of date 28th October 1856, I ventured, after much hesitation, to direct the attention of the friends of the Free Church to the prospects of the Chair which I have the honour to occupy, I was oppressed by very gloomy forebodings as to its permanency. Soon, however, a considerable measure of relief was afforded by the reference to the class in the Interim Report on the Training of Students of Theology,' as submitted to the last Commission in November, and by the remarks which fell from the Convener and Dr Candlish. More recently, the judicious views of Mr Fraser and his colleagues, in the Presbytery of Paisley, with the overture to the General Assembly, in which these are expressed, yielded a fresh amount of encouragement. But both these proofs of a growing interest in the subject appeared to be surpassed, when the following letter and document were put into my hand yesterday. The laymen who have subscribed the resolutions (whose designations have been added since) are qualified from their positions and attainments to give a trustworthy opinion on the interesting question, and have stated their views with distinctness. I shall merely add, that I feel grateful to all who have expressed sympathy or indicated co-operation, and desire to thank God and take "JOHN FLEMING. courage. "New College, Edinburgh, 25th Feb. 1857." Edinburgh, 23d Feb. 1857. 50 Queen Street. "My Dear Sir,--I have much pleasure in enclosing a copy of the resolutions which have been adopted by some laymen of the Free Church, who take a deep interest in the Chair of Natural Science in the New College; and remain always, with much respect, yours most sincerely, "Dr Fleming, New College." "JAS. CUNNINGHAM. "We, the Subscribers, Elders and others, Members of the Free Church of Scotland, having carefully considered the facts stated in a letter issued by Dr Fleming in October 1856, entitled, 'On the State and Prospects of the Chair of Natural Science in the New College, Edinburgh' (appended hereto), and being also otherwise deeply impressed with the importance, especially in the present day, of the permanent maintenance of the Professorship of Natural Science in the New College, Edinburgh, and cordially concurring in the views publicly urged to that effect by Dr Chalmers, Dr Duff, Dr Candlish, and others, "RESOLVE,-1. That we form ourselves into a Committee for the purpose of using our best endeavours to secure that the Chair of Natural Science shall be made part of the curriculum in the New College. “2. That in the event of any movement being made to endow the existing Professorships in the New College, we shall use special exertion to secure the maintenance of the Chair of Natural Science. "3. That Mr James Cunningham be requested to act as chairman, and to convene the Committee thus formed, whenever it may seem necessary. "4. That it is proper that Dr Fleming should be apprized of the movement, and that with that view, a copy of these resolutions be forwarded to him, whenever they are subscribed by twenty individuals. February, 1857. (Signed) "Sir THO. MAKDOUGALL BRISBANE, Bart., G.C.B, &c., &c., Pre sident of the Royal Society, Edinburgh; P. DALMAhoy, W.S., 69 Queen Street; JAMES TOD, W.S., F.R.S.E, 55 Great King Street; Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR, Bart., of Ulbster, 42 Charlotte Square; JOHN M. M'CANDLISH, C.A., 18 Moray Place; JAMES R. DYMOCK (Councillor), 30 Buccleuch Place; CHAS. JAS. KERR, Banker; J. G. WOOD, W.S., 52 Melville Street; JAMES RUSSELL, M.D., F.R.S.E., 15 Lynedoch Place; JOHN MELVILLE, W.S., F.R.S.E. (the Right Hon. the Lord Provost), 15 Heriot Row; ALEXANder BrySON, Prince's Street: THOMAS CONSTABLE, Printer to her Majesty; A. KEITH JOHNSTONE, F.R.S.E., and Geographer to the Queen; ROBERT ALLAN, F.R.S.E., York Place; After the tidings of Hugh Miller's death reached India, Dr Duff wrote a most earnest appeal to the admirers of Mr Miller, and to the friends of science in Scotland, suggesting that Dr Fleming's chair should be endowed as the Miller Chair of Natural Science. Such a monument to this great man would have been a becoming one. But were the friends named above desirous to do honour to two of the greatest sons of the Free Church, they have the opportunity offered them by raising an endowment for a "Miller and Fleming Chair of Natural Science." The monument would be one of the noblest that could be raised to their memory. Greatly cheered by the memorial from the laymen, Dr Fleming ceased to think of his own feelings in connection with the chair, and set about, in great earnestness, to have the Natural Science Professorship endowed. He had too much shrewdness, and too correct an estimate of the prevailing ignorance of the value of the chair, not to see that its continuance might come to depend upon its endowment. You well know," writes his friend, James Bonar, Esq., "how intensely interested Dr Fleming was, not only in getting the chair instituted, but in having it placed on a permanent basis. Often he regretted the apathy which he feared was beginning of late years to pervade the Church in regard to it; and he laboured earnestly to prevent the possibility of its being suppressed in the event of his removal." Dr Fleming's death put a stop to this movement, which promised to be of so much advantage to the Church and to Christian science. CHAPTER VII. 1843 to 1857. Correspondents-Edward Forbes-Dr Buckland-Sir Roderick Impey Murchison-Sir Charles Lyell-Lord Cockburn-Dr Welsh-North British Review-Contributions-British Association-Royal Physical Society Conclusion. DR FLEMING'S appointment to the New College Chair of Natural Science, put him in circumstances both to throw all his strength into its proper work, and also to help on the progress of science by corresponding with others, who, like himself, were working enthusiastically in favourite departments of Natural History. In this latter aspect of work many cordial testimonies were paid to him by the greatest of his contemporaries. Of these, that rendered to him by Professor Edward Forbes is, for many reasons, full of interest. Seldom could two men be found who, while they had so many points in common, differed so widely in regard to many more. Both from early youth pursued the study of nature as with the force of a ruling instinct. I once heard Forbes say, "it would not be believed if I told how soon I began to collect fossils ;" and among Fleming's papers there are boyhood jottings on birds and beasts, fossils and flowers, which bear evidence of shrewd observation, and of discrimination beyond his years. Both were true field naturalists—men who told what they saw as they waited on nature in the forest, by the shore, far out on the "open sea," or amidst the solitudes of the everlasting hills, and won from her secrets which she tells to none but single-hearted devotees. Both held that an acquaintance with the literature of science is second only to attainments in science itself; and both were profoundly conversant with the workers that had gone before them in kindred fields of research and discovery. But the contrast stands out in bolder relief than the comparison. For |