THE RELATIONS^ BETWERN SCIEXCK ANO ItKMQlON, KTC. 273 



universally, and at all times, be found to attract one another 

 with a force which varies in the perfectly accurate measure of 

 the inverse square of the distance. Newton, in the grand 

 Scholium at the end of the Privici/^/V^, insists on the fact that the 

 word "God" implies dominion. " Deus," he says, "est vox 

 relativa et ad servos refertur- : et deitas est dominatio Dei, non 

 in corpus proprium, uti sentiunc quibus deus est anima mundi. 

 sed in servos." In Newton's mind, therelore, God lays down 

 laws which his creatures shall obey, and accordingly it was 

 Newton himself who describes the axioms from which hi--^ 

 reasoning starts as the three " Laws of Motion." 



I venture to think, therefore, that some confusion prevails in 

 such recent explanations of the" Laws of Nature " as I have just 

 quoted. It is quite true it is not a Law of Nature that the sun 

 should rise to-morrow ; there is only the highest probability, 

 and not a certaint5^ that it will do so. But if it does rise, it is 

 quite certain that its movements will conform to the law of 

 ;4ravitation. The confusion seems to be between uniformity 

 of occurrences and uniformity of the principles or laws in 

 conformity with which those phenomena are produced. All 

 the phenomena of Nature, like the leaves of a tree, are more 

 ur less irregular. It is not possible, for instance, to predict the 

 exact spot at which a projectile will fall, although the condi- 

 tions under which it is fired are exactly known, for it may 

 be slightly deflected by some unforeseen interference, such as 

 that of a sudden gust of wind. But it is quite possible to say 

 where it ought to fall, because the mathematical laws by whicli 

 its course is governed are known and are invariable. If we 

 allow this justification for the use of the term Laws of Nature 

 to be forgotten, we obscure a vital point in the argument for 

 the Divine dominion which Newton asserts. That all particles 

 in nature should attract one another, is a fact which may seem 

 sufficiently described by saying, in the phrase just quoted from 

 ^Ir. Whetham, that it states " the result of experience in a form 

 suitable for future reference." But, as I have said, that this 

 attraction should be maintained, throughout the whole universe 

 open to our observation, in accordance with the exact mathe- 

 matical rule that its force varies as the inverse square of the 

 distance between the mutually attracting bodies — this implies a 

 controlling force over everyparticle in the universe; unless, indeed, 

 as the late Lord Grimthorpe humorously suggested, the atoms 

 resolved unanimously, in some ethereal parliament, to attract 

 one another in this definite proportion, and — what would be 

 quite as surprising — have all adhered to their resolution. The 



T 



