EVIDENCE PROVING THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE 23 



sugar might be carried on indefinitely. We now know 

 that it is not the case. We know there is a certain 

 portion so small that it cannot be again divided. I do 

 not mean that this particle is not in itself composed of 

 separate objects, but what I do mean is, that if, when 

 we have an ultimate particle of sugar, it were divided 

 into two parts, as it might be by chemical processes, 

 neither of those two parts would be sugar or anything 

 like sugar. They would each be something which 

 possessed neither the hardness, nor the colour, nor the 

 sweetness, nor, indeed, any of the attributes charac- 

 teristic of the original material. 



This same argument may be applied to every other 

 substance besides that which I have taken as a first 

 illustration." 1 



The words u every other substance " are very impor- 

 tant to keep in mind. The ultimate particles of sugar, 

 as illustrated by Sir Robert Ball, are called " molecules." 

 Now by the aid of what is called " chemical reaction," 

 which is always a natural force, these molecules can be 

 resolved into the elementary objects called " atoms," of 

 which they are composed. These objects are absolutely 

 indestructible, they are neither capable of being created 

 nor destroyed. Atoms are eternal. There is no death for 

 the atom. 2 Molecules are built up of atoms, but chemists 



1 "In the High Heavens," Sir Robert S. Ball, D.Sc., LL.D.. 

 F.E.S., 1894, p. 358. 



2 One of the most remarkable properties of matter. " What has 

 been called Conservation of Matter, is the experimentally ascertained 

 fact that no process at the command of man can destroy even a 

 single particle of matter. Still less can it create a new one."- 

 (Article " Matter," Chambers's Encyclopedia, 1891.) 



" Natural science teaches that matter is eternal and imperish- 

 able, for experience has never shown us that even the smallest 



