248 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



which the superstructure of modern civilization is built ; and the man 

 who would take part in it should study science, and, if he can, ad- 

 vance it for its own sake and not for its applications. Ignorance may 

 walk in the path lighted by advancing knowledge, but she is unable 

 to follow when science passes her, for, like the foolish virgin, she has 

 no oil in her lamp. 



An established truth in science is like the constitution of an atom 

 in matter — something so fixed in the order of things that it has be- 

 come independent of further dangers in the struggle for existence. 

 The sum of such truths forms the intellectual treasure which descends 

 to each generation in hereditary succession. Though the discoverer 

 of a new truth is a benefactor to humanity, he can give little to fu- 

 turity in comparison with the wealth of knowledge which he inherited 

 from the past. We, in our generation, should appreciate and use our 

 great possessions : 



" For me your tributary stores combine, 

 Creation's heir; the world, the world is mine." 



[Concluded.^ 



THE UNIFOEMITY OF NATUEE. 



By the bishop OF CARLISLE. 



THE chief interest felt by readers of the reminiscence of a meeting 

 of the Metaphysical Society, contained in the August number of 

 this review, will probably be found in the striking and really remark- 

 able record of the discussion of a difficult subject by such men as we 

 there find, and under such conditions as are there described. What- 

 ever the subject of discussion, such a symposium so felicitously saved 

 from oblivion could not fail to secure attention and much gratitude 

 to the able chiel who took notes and printed it. But in truth the 

 subject discussed is as interesting as the company who discussed it ; 

 and to the writer of the present paper has so proved itself, not only 

 on general grounds, but also because the view which seems to him to 

 be chiefly worthy of consideration, as being the most true and the 

 most luminous, does not appear to have presented itself to the mind 

 of any one of the speakers, or at all events not to have been expressed 

 clearly. 



The discussion, as reported, labors under the great defect that 

 there was no preliminary attempt to define the meaning of the phrase 

 which formed the subject of the argument. Yet the " unformity of 

 Nature " is an expression which does not carry upon its front one clear 

 meaning, and one clear meaning only, and therefore needs definition if 

 the truth of any proposition supposed to be implied by it is either to 



