NATURAL THEOLOGY. 77 



order is the word ; but what is meant by a princi- 

 ple of order as different from an intelligent Creator, 

 has not been explained either by definition or exam- 

 ple ; and, without such explanation, it should seem 

 to be a mere substitution of words for reasons, 

 names for causes. Order itself is only the adap- 

 tation of means to an end : a principle of order, 

 therefore, can only signify the mind and intention 

 which so adapts them. Or, were it capable of 

 being explained in any other sense, is there any 

 experince, any analogy, to sustain it ? Was a watch 

 ever produced by a principle of order? and why 

 might not a watch be so produced as well as an 

 eye? 



Furthermore, a principle of order, acting blind- 

 ly and without choice, is negatived by the obser- 

 vation that order is not universal ; which it would 

 be if it issued from a constant and necessary prin- 

 ciple : nor indiscriminate, which it would be if it 

 issued from an unintelligent principle. Where 

 order is wanted, there we find it : where order is 

 not wanted, i. e, where, if it prevailed, it would be 

 useless, there we do not find it. In the structure 

 of the eye (for we adhere to our example,) in the 

 figure and position of its several parts, the most 

 exact order is maintained. In the forms of rocks 

 and mountains, in the lines which bound the coasts 

 of continents and islands, in the shape of bays and 

 promontories, no order whatever is perceived, be- 

 cause it would have been superfluous. No useful 



purpose would have arisen from moulding rocks 



7* 



