132 SCIENCE AND MORALS m 



Leibnitz or of Newton> To me the " chimsera, 

 bombinans in vacuo quia comedit secundas inten- 

 tiones" of the schoohnen is a familiar and 

 domestic creature compared with such " forces." 

 Besides, by the h}^othesis, the forces are not 

 matter ; and thus all that is of any particular con- 

 sequence in the world turns out to be not matter 

 on the Materialist's own showing. Let it not be 

 supposed that I am casting a doubt upon the 

 propriety of the employment of the terms " atom " 

 and " force," as they stand among the working 

 hypotheses of physical science. As formula3 which 

 can be applied, with perfect precision and great con- 

 venience, in the interpretation of nature, their value 

 is incalculable ; but, as real entities, having an ob- 

 jective existence, an indivisible particle which never- 

 theless occupies space is surely inconceivable ; and 

 with respect to the operation of that atom, where 

 it is not, by the aid of a " force " resident in 

 nothingness, I am as little able to imagine it as I 

 fancy any one else is. 



Unless and until anybody will resolve all these 

 doubts and difficulties for me, I think I have a 

 right to hold aloof from Materialism. As to 

 Spiritualism, it lands me in even greater difficul- 



^ See the famous Collection of Papers, published by Clarke in 

 1717, Leibnitz says : " 'Tis also a supernatural tiling that 

 bodies should attract one another at a distance without any 

 intermediate means." And Clarke, on behalf of Newton, eaj)S 

 this as follows : " That one body should attract another without 

 any intermediate mcaiis is, indeed, not a miracle, but a contra- 

 diction ; for 'tis supposing something to act where it is not." 



