161 
this case, where the poet deprecates the 'persons of the divinities being 
unnecessarily introduced in the construction of their ordinary plays : — 
“ Nec Deus intersit, nisi vindice nodus 
Incident.” — (Horace, Ars Poetica.) 
That is, never let the Deity be introduced into your poem unless 
something important is to be gained by such interference. It appears to 
me that the presumption of some such miraculous interference of the Deity 
with the progress and course of events, certainly does not exalt the con-, 
ception which every Christain would entertain of the infinite wisdom of the 
Deity. I must say for myself that I am strongly inclined to take a limited 
view of the Noachian Deluge. 
Rev. M. Davison. — I shall be very brief in my reply, because other 
gentlemen who have spoken have so completely met and overturned the 
arguments brought against my paper. Our esteemed and excellent honorary 
secretary, Mr. Reddie, has called in question some of the facts to which I 
had occasion to refer in my paper. He has, for example, called in question 
what I said about the volcanic mountains of Auvergne, and has told us that 
a writer in the Quarterly Review, in 1844, declares that the eruption of those 
mountains dates no further back than the fifth century. Now this is really 
a question of authorities, and Mr. Row has said emphatically that he did not 
believe the Quarterly Review .[ We must be allowed to bring against the writer 
in that review the authority of such men as Lyell and Miller. It is a question 
of authorities ; and I believe the eruptions date much further back than the 
fifth century. With regard to the Scandinavian coast, Mr. Reddie says it 
has been recently ascertained that there has been no such great rising from 
the sea as was supposed. Well, even if we make Mr. Reddie a present of 
that fact, he does not doubt that there are subsidences and elevations going 
on ; and my argument, therefore, remains untouched. With regard to the 
question of species, I admit that it is a difficult question, but I am 
not yet prepared to accept Mr. Darwin’s ’theories, as Mr. Reddie seems 
disposed to do 
Mr. Reddie. — No, no. 
Mr. Davison. — Then Mr. Reddie objects that the insects and some 
species did not require to be taken into the ’ark. But I would ask 
him, if they were not taken into the ark where did they find a habitat 
during the universal flood? There must have been some portion of the 
globe not submerged, and therefore the Deluge was partial and not universal* 
even on his own showiDg. (No* no.) Then he objects to my exegesis of the 
passage from Deuteronomy, as not quite fair. Dr. Rigg and Mr. Row have 
combated him on that point : but what have one or two texts to do with 
it ? Mr. Reddie does not deny that the usiis loquencli, both of the Old and 
the New Testament, is in favour of my theory. Take away a score of texts and 
still enough will remain to prove it. I will now read from the paper which a 
friend of Mr. Row’s has drawn up. He finds that the word earth (eretz) 
