132 SCIENCE AND MORALS in 



Leibnitz or of Newton. 1 To me the &quot; chimaera, 

 bombinans in vacuo quia comedit secundas inten- 

 tiones&quot; of the schoolmen is a familiar and 

 domestic creature compared with such &quot; forces.&quot; 

 Besides, by the hypothesis, the forces are not 

 matter ; and thus all that is of any particular con 

 sequence in the world turns out to be not matter 

 on the Materialist s own showing. Let it not be 

 supposed that I am casting a doubt upon the 

 propriety of the employment of the terms &quot; atom &quot; 

 and &quot; force,&quot; as they stand among the working 

 hypotheses of physical science. As formulae which 

 can be applied, with perfect precision and great con 

 venience, in the interpretation of nature, their value 

 is incalculable ; but, as real entities, having an ob 

 jective existence, an indivisible particle which never 

 theless occupies space is surely inconceivable ; and 

 with respect to the operation of that atom, where 

 it is not, by the aid of a &quot; force &quot; resident in 

 nothingness, I am as little able to imagine it as I 

 fancy any one else is. 



Unless and until anybody will resolve all these 

 doubts and difficulties for me, I think I have a 

 right to hold aloof from Materialism. As to 

 Spiritualism, it lands me in even greater difficul- 



1 See the famous Collection of Papers, published by Clarke in 

 1717. Leibnitz says : &quot; Tis also a supernatural thing that 

 bodies should attract one another at a distance without any 

 intermediate means.&quot; And Clarke, on behalf of Xewton, caps 

 this as follows : &quot; That one body should attract another without 

 any intermediate means is, indeed, not a miracle, but a contra 

 diction ; for tis supposing something to act where it is not.&quot; 



