for the existence of a Creator as a fact which, perhaps, has been very little 

 thought of in this connection, namely, that, as astronomy teaches us, the 

 earth is constantly subject to two distinct motions, the first being that by 

 which it spins round on its own axis with tremendous velocity ; and the 

 second that by which it performs its enormous orbit round the sun, a circuit 

 which is also made at a marvellous rate of speed. Now, when we come to 

 think of it, the world could not be inhabited unless it were so arranged 

 that these tremendous movements should be imperceptible to the creatures 

 upon its surface and, as a matter of fact, so imperceptible are both 

 these movements that a very long time elapsed before the people liviHg 

 upon the planet became aware of them. This imperceptibility of the move- 

 ments of the earth I regard as a strong argument in favour of the probability 

 that the world was prepared for habitation before man appeared upon it. 

 The arrangements, whatever they are, by which this result is attained, 

 such, for instance as the existence of the atmosphere, must be the effect 

 of various complex causes, which certainly seem very plainly to indicate 

 that the earth was intended for the habitation of beings for whom 

 it was essential that they should not be conscious of its motions through 

 space, and who must be sheltered against what might % otherwise be 

 the effect of those motions during every moment of their lives. On page 5 

 of the paper there is a most able exposure of a very common fallacy as 

 to the word " homogeneous." A great many people who read the works of 

 Herbert Spencer are much misled by the use of this word, and there can be 

 no doubt that ifc is used in a very vague way. It is one of those con- 

 venient words which, much more than the expression '' anthropomorphic," 

 conceal great confusion of thought. As far as the Greek word 

 " homogeneous " goes, it simply means " of the same kind," and I fancy 

 this gets so fixed in people's heads, that when they talk of the original 

 nebula being homogeneous they suppose it was all of one kind. I 

 think, however, -when we come to reflect upon it, we shall find there is no 

 reason to suppose that matter at the beginning was all of one kind. If by 

 homogeneous is simply meant a nebula of uniform consistence which is 

 probably what Herbert Spencer means then, as Mr. Blencowe shows, 

 it is not really homogeneous, for the nebula consists of atoms of the 

 elements of which we at present know sixty-three ; therefore, it is not 

 homogeneous, but on the contrary, very heterogeneous. I should like 

 to know how an atom of hydrogen could be changed into one of 

 carbon, or sulphur, or iron, or bismuth, or gold, or any other metal ; 

 and yet this is what would be meant by evolution in a physical 

 sense, As a matter of fact, no one has ever known an atom of hydrogen 

 become anything but an atom of hydrogen. As regards the note on 

 page 8, the evolution theory is that certain animals placed in the depths 

 of the. ocean were once without eyes, as, indeed, is the case now. These 

 creatures do not appear to require them, and manage to get on very well 

 without them; and, this being so, one cannot see why they should not 

 remain satisfied with their condition in this respect. But, according to the 



