1,4 
believed they would be of great value for educational and 
scientific purposes. 
A Paper was read, entitled “ On the Relation of Force 
to Matter and Mind.” Part I. By the Rev. Thomas P. 
Kirkman, M.A., F.R.S., Hon. Member. 
There are at least three schools of thinkers, among us, 
about the relation of force to matter. The first and most 
popular one conceives of matter as leally existing and occupy- 
ing space, whether it be or be not the seat or subject of force, 
so that if all force were withdrawn, matter would remain, 
quiescent and unexciting. The second school, not, it is to 
be hoped, a numerous one, affirms that matter exists of neces- 
sity, and is of necessity endued with force; that no power 
can divorce matter and force ; that every form of chaos or 
order is but one of the combinations that eternal matter must 
assume by the eternal play and collision of eternal force ; 
and that the notion of an Author and Preserver of the 
Universe is but the dream of ignorance. This is the school 
of the Materialists. A third and I think a growing school 
denies the • existence of matter as distinct from force ; this 
may be called the school of the Immaterialists. The Xmma- 
terialists are not the idealists of Berkeley’s type, for the 
former affirm space, and an external world of force having 
a real existence* in space, which the latter are far from 
affirming. 
If any leading philosopher will boldly preach this Iinma- 
terialist gospel, and proclaim a crusade against matter, I am 
prepared to promise him one humble follower. 
Of force no man is required to give either a demonstration 
or a definition. We cannot converse without agreeing in 
affirming ourselves in space, which is simply the affirmation 
