49 
doubt called “ exact science ”; but there is nothing less exact 
in the universe. Some of these notions are held to be “ settled 
points ” in science ; but there is nothing less settled on earth 
or anywhere else. The “form ” called a “ variety ” to-day is a 
“species” to-morrow, perhaps a “genus” next day, not 
unlikely something higher next, and maybe it is back to a 
“ variety 33 again in a month ! So a fundamental law of creation 
last year is a myth in the present ! This would be wonderful 
if it occurred among the realities of nature, but need not 
surprise us in the states of a strongly speculative mind. 
This ever-fluctuating thought, too, has relation to a material 
world of perpetual change. That natural history, indeed, into the 
essential principles of which the scientific and philosophic in- 
quirer is ever searching, is proceeding in a manner calculated 
profoundly to increase the fluctuations of his thinkings. There 
is truly immeasurable variety — incessant change. I believe 
we are right when we say that no two substances in the universe 
have exactly the same form. Neither has the same substance 
had the same form twice. Neither does any substance retain 
the same form during two seconds of its existence. The rocks 
composing “ the everlasting hills 33 themselves are undergoing 
incessant metamorphosis — perpetual change. That which is 
dead and decaying is changing as truly as that which is living 
and in a state of growth. When we speak of “permanent” 
forms or types of either the living or the dead in nature, we 
should remember that we are speaking of ideas only — not of 
actual things or beings in the natural world. 
It is because of considerations like these that we are dis- 
posed to discuss certain notions as to the origin of life in a 
somewhat metaphysical rather than in a purely physical manner 
in this paper. Our aim really is to test the consistency of 
thought , rather than to follow the mere detail of fact on which 
that thought is so far founded. We are mistaken if in the end 
this mode of dealing with fanciful theories will not be found 
to be the most ready and efficient for the common mind. 
Ordinary inquirers get bewildered amid millions of facts thrown 
upon them as it were in cartloads, while they can trace the 
truth, or detect the fallacy of principles if these are fairly 
placed in comparison. 
And yet we must remember that there is a field of fact on 
which the ever-fluctuating spirit broods, and in which it 
searches for those thoughts which constitute truth, from their 
being in due correspondence with the actual state of things. 
Among the myriads of fancies there are myriads of true ideas. 
The grand object of science is to gather and treasure up these. 
In doing so it must sift out from among heaps of chaff the true 
VOL. IV. e 
