NATURAL THEOLOGY, 155 



one of the number. This cannot be all imagina- 

 tion. 



Bishop Wilkins hath observed from Galen, that 

 there are at least ten several qualifications to be 

 attended to in each particular muscle — viz., its 

 proper figure; its just magnitude; its fulcrum; 

 its point of action, supposing the figure to be fixed ; 

 its collocation with respect to its two ends, the 

 upper and the lower ; the place ; the position of 

 the whole muscle; the introduction into it of 

 nerves, arteries, veins. How are things including 

 so many adjustments to be made? or, w^hen made, 

 how are they to be put together, w^ithout intelli- 

 gence ? 



I have sometimes wondered why we are not 

 stinick with mechanism in animal bodies as readi- 

 ly and as strongly as we are struck with it, at first 

 sio^ht, in a w^atch or a mill. One reason of the 

 difference may be, that animal bodies are, in a 

 great measure, made up of soft flabby substances, 

 such as muscles and membranes ; whereas we 

 have been accustomed to trace mechanism m 

 sharp lines, in the configuration of hard materials, 

 in the moulding, chiseling, and filing into shapes 

 of such articles as metals or wood. There is 

 something therefore of habit in the case ; but it is 

 sufficiently evident that there can be no proper 

 reason for any distinction of the sort. Mechanism 

 may be displayed in die one kind of substance as 

 well as in the other. 



Although the few instances we have selected, 



