147 



cept potatoes, all of which are more or less poisonous — though they devour readily 

 the grasses, none of which, save one, have any unwholesome properties in a natu- 

 ral and healthy state. Other animals as decidedly avoid one tribe of plants and 

 prefer others, as these just mentioned. In what way, then, is man to be placed in 

 a condition equal, at least, if not superior to the animals over which he rules, in 

 judging of the properties of plants, in respect to their safety or danger ? Here, 

 as in other cases, by exerting the intellectual faculties with which he is endowed — 

 those inward senses, the possession and right application of which raise him to an 

 immeasurable height above the beasts of the field. The astronomer foretells with 

 the most unerring certainty, the return of every comet — those bodies which, till 

 later times, were conceived to move through space in such eccentric orbits, as to 

 have the appearance of random or chance visitants to our planetary system. This 

 he effects by observations and calculations which have attained such a degree of 

 accuracy, that it would seem as if the comet appeared in obedience to his will ; 

 whereas it only returns to a given point of the heavens in obedience to laws which 

 emanate from the Creator of all things. Now, should any one undertake to fore- 

 tell or determine what qualities or properties any newly discovered plant would be 

 found to possess, it would seem to many to be presumptuous or paradoxical, and 

 to some, impossible. Yet it is perfectly practicable by an application of the same 

 principles of induction which guide the astronomer. Plants are not constructed 

 at random, or independently of fixed and ascertainable principles. These furnish 

 to the scientific botanist indications of the properties of a plant, not less trustwor- 

 thy than those which conduct the observer of the heavens to conclusions which, 

 on their first announcement are much more improbable — conclusions referring to 

 masses of matter millions of miles distant from us, while the others relate to ob- 

 jects at our feet or in our hands. If this globe and all which it inherit be the pro- 

 duction of the same Creative Being who formed the other planetary orbs, is it 

 likely that different laws would be framed to influence the structure of its organ- 

 ized inhabitants from those which influence the whole? Certainly not. The 

 chemist tells us that the most minute particles — atoms, as he terms them — of un- 

 organized matter, enter into combinations with the particles of other substances 

 in regular and uniform proportion. Aware of this law, he makes all his arrange- 

 ments in accordance with it, and so accomplishes his objects at a vast saving of 

 materials, and often of time, since he rarely encounters failure or disappointment 

 requiring him to repeat his experiments or renew his operations. He has, 

 besides, a certain index to errors or mistakes in every instance where he perceives 

 a departure from the definite and ascertained proportions. Thus the chemist who 

 investigates the separate particles of matter, and the astronomer who investigates 

 the largest masses of unorganized matter, are alike guided by the power of num- 

 bers. 



And is it probable that organized matter should be constructed with less re- 



u2 



