802 
of the earth’s orbit, either 800,000 or 200,000 years ago ; (2) that Sir W. 
Herschel’s earlier speculations on the Milky Way and the nebulae are worthy 
of confidence, being half-abandoned in his own later papers, and wholly dis- 
proved, I think, by still later observations ; (3) that the words of Scripture 
not only admit, but require, a vast interval from the first creation, so that 
these speculations, if they were part of the science of astronomy, and not 
rather erroneous guesses, could be truly said to confirm its teaching (§75) ; 
(4) that a comparison of vv. 5, 14 and 16, proves that the light of the first 
day was wholly independent of the sun ; (5) that the nebular theory lends 
thus a direct confirmation to the Mosaic record ; (6) that yom, because it may 
sometimes be used in other senses than a natural day, may be so used in 
this case, where it is joined six times with a numeral, and is composed, each 
time, of successive periods of darkness and light; (7) that each of the six 
days was a period of 7,000 years ; and lastly, that the world’s history, from 
Adam till the close of a future millennium, is really the seventh day, or 
God’s Sabbath of rest. I. Mr. Savile starts from Mr. droll's work, published 
last year, which he praises as one ‘ of the highest order of scientific know- 
ledge,’ and says that ‘a somewhat perplexing point for our geologists, 
naturalists, and botanists may now be accounted for by the gradual advance 
of science in our own times.’ I think, however, that this facility in accepting 
the latest guess or hypothesis of scientific men as a proved conclusion of 
science is a delusion and a snare, and has wrought, not only temptation to 
the faith of Christians, but injury to the progress of science itself. In Mr. 
Callard’s essay, ‘ the Geological Evidences of Man’s Antiquity re-examined,’ 
Mr. Croll’s hypothesis is reviewed, and I think it is shown, very plainly, 
that it is quite inadequate to account for the facts it attempts to explain. 
How uncertain are these estimates may be shown by one extract. ‘ Sir 
Charles Lyell, in the earlier editions of his Principles of Geology , favoured 
the view of Mr. James Croll, that the ice age was 800,000 years back; 
he, therefore, placed man’s origin near that period. But Sir John Lubbock 
considered 210,000 years to be a more probable time ; and to this latter 
antiquity both Mr. Croll and Sir C. Lyell afterwards give in their ad- 
herence, and it is also adopted by Mr. Geikie in his recent work, The Great 
Ice Age ; the calculations of Mr. Croll go to prove, simply, that the excen- 
tricityof the earth, about 210,000 years ago, would be ten and a half millions 
of miles, and, 850,000 years ago, thirteen and a-half millions. Taking the 
lower date, the distances of the earth from the sun would vary from 81 to 
102 millions of miles, a ratio of .four to five, and the ratio of incident 
heat, in aphelion and perihelion, would be nearly two to three. Thus the 
excess or defect at the extremes would be one-fifth of the mean value. 
The theory assumes that the northern hemisphere will be subject to the 
greatest cold when its winter solstice is in the aphelion. But Mr. Callard 
observes, I think decisively, that Mars has a greater excentricity than this 
ascribed formerly to the earth, and is more distant from the sun, and yet 
gives no sign of an ice age, and the snow cap never extends more than six 
degrees from the pole. Still further, it seems very doubtful whether the 
effect would not be both very much smaller than the theory requires, and of 
an opposite kind. An addition of one-fifth to the incident heat at the 
summer solstice would be greater than the defect of one-fifth heat at the 
winter solstice, because the mean incident heat is less in winter than in 
summer. It seems to me that while the winter cold and the summer heat 
would both be greater by an increased excentricity, the total heat incident on 
the northern hemisphere, when its winter is in the aphelion, would be in- 
creased, and not diminished. At any rate, the difference is so slight, either 
way, in the total amount, that it could never account for a glacial period. 
II. Again, Mr. Savile remarks that ‘stars situated in the more remote edges 
