TLE S VINEE TMC Leite OSOMMVa TLS LHLORV OF HVOLOLION:: (Sil 
tion of matter is a theory; and the polarity of such atoms is also a theory; both 
of which appear to be true, but neither of which has been demonstrated by ex- 
periment. To these Mr. Spencer adds the additional theory that these atoms are 
unlike, and that their polarity is unlike ; for in no other way could their combi- 
nation produce a complex molecule, or their polarity thus combined constitute a 
complex polarity. This assumed unlikeness of atoms, and of polarity of atoms, 
is unaccounted for. It is not embraced in his definition of exolution—and inte- 
gration of matter and a dissipation of motion—for it is an integration of some- 
thing else than matter—an integration of polarity. These complex molecules he 
calls ‘‘Physiological Units.” From what has already been said of them, it would 
seem that they rest upon a very doubtful basis; but if this weakness be over- 
looked, and their existence and adequacy be conceded, it will be found that other 
and greater difficulties are encountered. If it be conceded that there are such 
units, and that to their existence is due the tendency of matter to grow into 
certain defined forms, the mystery is removed one step further back, and 
there occurs the question, why does organic matter form itself into such 
complex units? If this be accounted for by the same principle, which it 
seems must be done, because all the laws of evolution are general and, 
with appropriate modification, apply alike to all parts of the process, the 
mystery is again removed, and the question occurs: why does inorganic 
matter have a tendency to form itself into organic matter? This question 
cannot be answered by the same principle, for there is no form of matter behind 
the inorganic form. These physiological units, therefore, appear to lead to an 
unanswerable question, and explain the fact in explanation of which it is offered, 
only by a removal of the mystery supposed to be explained. 
If, then, the only theory advanced by Mr. Spencer to explain this phe- 
nomenon, which lies at the foundation of all animal and vegetable forms, fails to 
explain it, it is safe to assume that an explanation must be sought elsewhere. In 
a recent paper on the ‘‘ Unity of Nature,” it is referred to the Duke of Argyll, 
whose book on ‘‘ The Reign of Law” sufficiently establishes his standing as a 
scientist and thinker. He says: ‘‘ There are structures in nature which can be 
seen in the process of construction. ‘There are conditions of matter in which its 
particles can be seen rushing, under the impulse of invisible forces, to take their 
appointed places in the form which is to them a law. Such are the facts visible 
in the process of crystallization. In these we see the particles of matter passing 
from one ‘molecular condition’ into another; and it is impossible that this 
passage can be ascribed either to the old arrangement, which is broken up, or the 
new arrangement which is formed in its stead. Both structures have been built 
up out of elementary materials by some constructive Agency which is the master 
and not the servant—the cause and not the consequence of the movements 
which are effected, and of the arrangement which is the result. And if this be 
true of crystalline forms in the mineral kingdom, much more is it true of organic 
forms in the animal kingdom.” P 
In some form and under some name all creeds and philosophies have recog- 
