30 PLURALITY OF WORLDS. 



of suggestions as to that unity of creation which em- 

 braces in itself the argument we have in hand. 



These proofs then are strong in presumption, though 

 less cogent than the argument as applied to the planets 

 of the solar system. It would be going back to the 

 very infancy of human intelligence to suppose these 

 innumerable stars, thus far known to us, to be mere 

 barren masses of unorganised matter, with no higher 

 destiny belonging to them. Can our conceptions of 

 the Deity, based upon what we see in our own little 

 world, justify any such conclusion? Theology may 

 be silent on the subject, but such silence need not 

 enthral those higher conceptions which astronomy 

 furnishes of the unity as well as grandeur of the 

 creation. 



The only author who with any ability seeks to 

 impugn the opinion I am defending, is my excellent 

 friend the late Master of Trinity. In his volume, 

 whimsically entitled the ' Plurality of Worlds,' he ably 

 urges all that can be said against it, dwelling especially 

 on the fact that the earth itself was left during in- 

 calculable ages as a lifeless globe, or maintaining only 

 those lowest conditions of life which, though members 

 of the series, and even agents in forming many of the 

 strata on which man has his abode, do yet feebly re- 

 present that higher vitality which now exists on our 

 globe. The argument thence drawn is simply this : If 

 the earth did thus exist through ages, why may not 

 the other planets remain in the same state to per- 

 petuity? The question is best answered by another. 

 If the earth, passing through these preliminary stages, 



