110 Analysis of Scientific Books. 



Mosaical history) appeals, therefore, to the philosophy of Bacon 

 and Newton in proof of its own validity ; and since the merits 

 of the two geologies can only be tried by applying both to some 

 common and agreed test, the Mosaical consents to submit itself 

 unconditionally to the same philosophy, and to leave to its ver- 

 dict the ultimate decision, which is true, and which false — 

 for so wholly contradictory are they to each other, " that 

 whichever of them be true, the other must of necessity be ab- 

 solutely and fundamentally false." 



Before we proceed further, it is necessary to inform the 

 reader, that whenever our author asserts that such a statement 

 is made, or such a conclusion drawn by either of the con- 

 tending parties, he invariably supports his assertion by refer- 

 ence to some writer of established authority, and, in most cases, 

 quotes the passages referred to. Indeed nothing can be further 

 from chicanery or subterfuge, than the manner in which he 

 conducts his argument from beginning to end ; and the work 

 is not more remarkable for the closeness of its reasoning, and 

 the lucidus ordo that prevails throughout, than it is for the 

 spirit of upright honesty and manly candour which animates 

 every page of it. He thus proceeds : 



The mineral geolog^r concludes, from the crystalline phenomena of this 

 earth, that it was onginally a confused mass of elemental principles, suspended 

 in a vast dissolution, a chaotic ocean, or original chaotic fluid ; which, after an 

 unassignable series of ages, settled themselves at last into the order and 

 correspondence of parts which it now possesses, by a gradual process of 

 precipitation and crystallization, according to certain laws of matter, 

 which it denominates the laws of affinity of composition and aggrega- 

 tion, and that they thus formed successively, though remotely in time, 

 1. a chemical, 2. a mineral, and lastly, a geognostic, which is its present 

 structure. 



Is this conformable to Newton on the same subject ? 



It seems probable to me, (said the wise, sober, and circumspect 

 Newton,) that God in the beginning, formed matter in solid, massy, hard, 

 impenetrable, moveable particles, of such sizes and figures, and with 

 such other properties, and in such proportions to space, as most conduced 

 to the end for which he formed them. All material things seem to have 

 been composed of the hard and solid particles above-mentioned, variously 

 associated in the first creation, by the counsels of an intelligent agent. 

 For it became him who created them to set them in order, and if he did 

 so, it is unphilosophical to seek for any other origin of this world, of to pre- 

 tend that it might rise out of a chaos by the mere laws of nature ; though, 

 being once formed, it may continue by those laws for many ages *. 



So much for the first result of the application of the test. 



The mineral geology has stated further, that " during the 

 long process of crystallization and precipitation, and before it 

 attained to its present solidity, the earth acquired its peculiar 

 figure (that of an oblate spheroid) by the operation of the 

 physiceJ laws which cause it to revolve on its axis." This 

 Newton had observed to be the form of the planets ; and rea- 

 soning on the fact, he discovered that the " rule of harmony 



* Optics, L. iii. in fin. 



