290 
interest the early chapters of Terre et Giel, and almost feel, 
with a kind of shock, that they must he considerably re- 
written. The ordinary manuals must, of ° 0 >Y se > ' ? n , ^ 
think pause for a while at the statement of Mr. Hind m the 
public papers, that the mean distance of Neptune, for instance, 
Fs less by one hundred and twenty-two millions of miles than 
the calculations of Adams and Le Yerner had supposed. Very 
S^at prepared to take the whole subject into their own 
hands. feir to as k_Are astronomers disheartened by 
all this, as to the foundations of their science? 
£■ Surely not. Yet it is to be feared, from some past 
£?d r fSiei experiences, that had any errors of like gravity 
place. been canvassed among us as to the interpretation 
of some passages in Genesis in connection with past geo ogma 
ages, a loud chorus of very unworthy banter would have been 
hS Ours, at all events, is another feeling. We have referred 
to these things to show what we mean when we claim a free 
exposition of the details of our knowledge, even when they 
seem to be of widely extending import To us, these grand 
and fearless examinations of nature and truth m a word aH 
honest explorations of fact, are subjects of both admiration 
and gratitude. We cannot look upon what prove to be 
sublime failures of earnest searchers into the laws of being, 
•without a feeling akin to reverence. . . 
Perhaps, however, the parallel which we are claiming may 
be disputed j though in general terms, and m suitable matter, 
the claim to liberty might be conceded, as indeed, it cannot 
be withheld. We may be told that we could not, as rational 
beings, decline the facts around us, or refuse to own mistakes 
l a respecting them when pointed out The parallel 
moral order of +] 20 xl only holds good whore real facts are r 
SSfcf J5 With. We are content with this. For there is 
SSoL *“■ a moral order of being (to which all Religion be- 
longs), indirectly perceived perhaps, but powerful, active, real , 
and S its abiding facts can no more be denied than those > direc^ y 
taught us by the senses. The irrational fancy of a former 
day 8 that a religion, with a philosophy like ours, was all 
« invention of priestcraft,” might be sufficiently answered by 
tliP words “ When V* “ Where ?” f( How? ,J -as we shall 
see ; hut Mr. Herbert Spencer frankly bids unbelief to rely 
on no such flimsy plea. ( First Principles, p. 14.) 
We point then to great facts in that moral order and 
primarily to a great tradition penetrating the “oral 
man more widely and deeply than any other, and different m 
