397 
• “ L t „ WOuld v G , as y multiply instances of this unknown analytical newer 
ire, which has thus balanced the tendency which we see in the nrn 
cesses going on around us, to mix all things into one even mass/’ P 
It seems to me that the point of the paper is to show that there is a desimi 
although the writer of the paper does not point out, what is beyond his ken’ 
what that particular design is. I should like to ask one question for the sake 
o information as to the nebulous bodies being known to consist of inflam- 
mable gases. Is there any reason why they should not be solid substances 
surrounded by incandescent gases l It does not follow that there does not 
he behmd that incandescent gas a solid body. (Cheers.) 
. J - E - Howard, F.R.S.-The only fault I should find with the paper 
is that it is perhaps too short. If the argument had been carried more 
deeply into the chemical part of the question it would have left nothing to 
be desired. At the same time I admit that this would involve treating 
questions incomprehensible to minds not trained in that particular line of 
research.. It would be as difficult to lay before ordinary hearers the problems 
o chemistry , as to teach the children in our common schools the higher 
branches of mathematics. It seems to me that the constitution of matter, 
particularly in its chemical aspects, thoroughly indicates the working of an 
infinite mind and infinite wisdom. Nobody who studies the subject can 
possibly be drawn to any other conclusion. I will not take up the time of the 
meeting by illustrating this. But in proportion as we ascend in the scale of 
creation we certainly find greater difficulties in proving our point, because when 
we come to the vegetable and then to the animal world, although we find 
marvellous instances on every hand of adaptation and design, we are met by 
the evolutionists, who say that there are gradual changes taken advantage of 
by some obscure force of so-called natural selection, and wrought out without 
the help of any Deity or any mind at all, in some incomprehensible way, 
into something advantageous to each particular creature. Of course, this argu- 
ment cannot be carried back into the antecedent portion of the subject— into 
the arrangement of atoms, and the atomic forces of matter. A Darwinian 
must be very much enamoured of his view indeed if he carries it back so far, 
and declares that atoms are the parents of each other ! Although I have seen 
attempts to insinuate even this absurdity. In proportion as we°ascend in the 
scale of creation we meet with greater difficulties, of which theology takes ac- 
count, and of which the opponents of the doctrines of theology take advantage ; 
but the greatest difficulty of all is man. The adaptation of man is to fill the 
highest place in creation, but he is marred in many respects by his fallen 
self-will. We find a great want of order in his actions ; but there is no such want 
in the actions of the atoms and the molecules. They all act perfectly right, 
but man’s acts are very often perfectly wrong. Taking the scriptural expla- 
nation, the argument holds good with regard to man just as it docs with 
regard to everything else. But the point where we meet with the fewest 
VOL. xr. 2 f 
