148 
how the writers of the hook argue on the nature of atoms. No doubt it is a 
most abstruse subject upon which to argue. No doubt it is very easy to 
joke concerning the nature of atoms, and the primordial elements of which 
the universe consists ; but the fact is, that the whole force of the argument 
on the other side depends on certain preconceived notions as to the nature 
of atoms. Those who believe that the phenomena of life are simply physio- 
logical in their character, argue on preconceived notions as to the necessary 
nature of atoms. They contend that the powers of life reside in the atomic 
structure of the body, and that when the atomic structure of the body 
is broken, and when the atoms are scattered to the winds or at all events 
those atoms which we think we can see, and which we believe are scattered 
to the winds— and have ceased to exist, then the soul, and the man, and the 
individual also cease to exist. But the writers of the book go deeper than 
this. They ask, what do we know about atoms ? and they go on to prove 
that, as far as we can tell, and as far as the highest authorities on these sub- 
jects lead us to believe, these atoms are not the primitive and primordial 
elements of which the universe consists, but that there is every reason to be- 
lieve, that before the atoms there was another substance, out of which the 
atoms, through the aggregation of which the universe consists, were made to 
exist. If this be the case, the arguments of those philosophers who base 
their theory on the existence of atoms, is at once met. The fact of death 
taking place does not prove that the powers of life will cease to exist, because, 
by the very constitution of atoms there may be something in them which 
when the body ceases to exist causes to reside in them certain forces, 
Avhich can never decay, and which will endure when the grosser and moie 
palpable atoms have ceased to exist. Whether we consider that the uni- 
verse has been developed out of vortices in an imperfect fluid, or from 
vortices in a perfect fluid, the argument remains the same . for if the 
vortices should cease, yet the fluid out of which the vortices have been 
generated, will still exist, so that if the visible universe cease to exist, 
yet the invisible universe will remain. And it seems to me that it 
this is shown, if any possible surmise is left in our minds that this may 
be the case, the argument of the materialists has received a great 
blow ; and we may be thankful to the writers of this book for bringing 
before us the only true method on which any true thought on this subject 
is possible. (Hear, hear.) It is impossible to hold in our minds proposi- 
tions diametrically opposed to one another. We must have some bridge 
over which we can project these two ranges of our thoughts, namely, the 
ranges of our scientific thought, and of our religious thought ; and although 
I do not doubt that the writers of the book will be the first to acknowledge 
that they have not completely done that which they attempted to do, we 
may be thankful to them that they have done as much as they can, to show 
to us a method by which all the branches and spheres of thought on this 
subject may be brought into that complete unity, of which we know all 
truth consists. (Hear, hear.) 
