On the Cosmogony of Moses. 431 
jack) be substituted, which by revolving continually in one di- 
rection would attain the desired object, with no more waste of 
power than what would arise from the additional machinery ne- 
cessary to obtain a rotatory motion from the steam-engine. 
Weil knowing that the further advancement of this interest- 
ing subject must depend on the wnited exertions of the friends 
to science, I shall with pleasure enroll my name in the list of 
subscribers for the completion of so desirable an object. 
I am, sir, 
Yours respectfully, 
Pullin’s Row, Islington, Joun Evans Jun. 
June 11, 1816. 
LXXXIX. On the Cosmogony of Moses. ae Dr. PRICHARD; 
in Reply to F. E 
To Mr. Tilloch. 
Sm, — I AM sorry to find myself under the necessity-of tres- 
passing upon your patience, by once more directing your atten- 
tion to the Cosmogony of Moses. 
I shall make but a few remarks on the last letter of your cor- 
respondent F. E s. It contains nothing new except a tirade 
about torches and a chateau en Espagne, from which I can un- 
derstand nothing except that the writer intends to be facetious. 
I wish that his method of treating the points in controversy were 
‘equally novel and ingenious, and that he had not contented him- 
‘self with repeating the same objections to which I have before, 
as I trust, sufficiently replied. He is still determined to find 
-contradictions between propositions which have no relation to 
each other, and quarrels even with the words in which they are 
expressed. I shall not stay to notice mere cavils, but shall con- 
tent myself with a specimen of the mode of reasoning a:lopted 
by this pertinacious critic. 
In my last paper I hinted at the instance of St. Matthew and 
St. Luke, in order to prove that inspired writers have chosen to 
avail themselves of historical documents when such sources of 
‘information were to be found. Mr. F. E. seems to allow the 
force of this example, but denies that it leads to any inference 
with respect to Moses; and the exception he takes against it is 
to the following purport. St. Matthew and St. Luke found pre- 
‘existing documents, which it only required in them human sa- 
gacity to adopt; but Moses, it seems, had nothing but the light 
-of revelation to guide him: consequently he made no use of re- 
cords, Now there is one grand objection to thts conclusion ; 
viz. 
