276 POWER AND RESISTANCE, 



essentially, and in actuality ; and finally,, re- 

 action itself with resistance. 



What analogy^ I would ask, is there be- 

 tween the actions which flow from the powers, 

 that animated beings possess, and the passi- 

 vity of the common matter on which they 

 act between the reaction of a spring, and 

 the ponderable matter it is able to support ; 

 between the expansibility of air and of fire, 

 and the resisting bodies which they are able to 

 overcome and to project to the considerable 

 distances, which they are known to do? 



So far from admitting the legitimacy of the 

 assumptions on which the third law of Sir 

 Isaac Newton's system is founded, I contend, 

 that those assumptions are absolutely false; 

 I contend, that instead of reaction, being al- 

 ways equal and contrary to action ; that it is 

 not equal, but that it is always less. I deny 

 altogether the third law, Lex, 3. " Actioni con- 

 trariam semper erit, et aequalem esse re-acti- 

 onem ; sive corporum duorum actiones in se 

 mutuo, semper esse aequales et in partes con- 

 trarias dirigi." 



It is apparent to me that, in propounding this 

 pretended law, Sir ISAAC NEWTON never had 

 in his contemplation the power which parti- 

 cular bodies essentially possess, to produce 

 action. The very term re-action, which he 



