313 
soil and the atmosphere, and the attraction of mountain ranges and currents. 
But to have altered these climatal conditions would have involved pesti- 
lence and the slaughter of millions of mankind ; and so you must have had 
a reconstitution of the universe, a different shape for the continents, and a diffe- 
rent direction for the currents, in order to get that particular grain of sand half 
an inch higher or lower.” Now that is the doctrine of the broomstick pure and 
simple. (Laughter.) Yet one of the most distinguished men of our time — 
for I do not hesitate to say that I revere the name of Charles Kingsley — has 
thought it right to say that to pray for fair weather was, in fact, to pray that 
God would alter the shape of the continents, and the size of the solar and 
lunar bodies, and the rate at which they spin round. Notwithstanding my 
reverence for the man, I am bound to say that he said that as a Christian 
preacher. I have taken that case of the grain of sand for this reason : I 
say that what you are saying might be true in a conceivable world, where 
there was no such thing as another source of force that you have left out of 
the calculation. But there is another force — that of volition. There is a 
physical force, but there is also a primary force of volition, which makes the 
physical force obedient to it. We live in a world where there are not merely 
physical forces which act molecularly, but there are also chemical forces, and 
other forces entirely apart and distinct from chemical, physical, and mole- 
cular forces. Volition is a force. Human volition can change, and has 
changed, the destiny of nations, tunnelled the Alps, and bridged the seas ; 
and if it has transformed so many things, it is in the highest degree un- 
philosophical to say that you can have a world of volition without a 
primary volition, just as it would be unphilosophical to say you can have a 
force of gravitation, and yet deny the existence of a great reservoir of force 
of which that force of gravitation is one single specimen. Dr. Tyndall 
says the facts of religion are to him as certain as the facts of physics ; and 
when he has said that, he has given us all we ask for, and there will continue 
to be more things in volition than are dreamed of in his philosophy, 
until he has admitted volitional, emotional, intelligent forces, adequate to 
the facts of the case. (Cheers.) 
Mr. C. K. MacClymont. — I do not rise to propose any fresh points of 
controversy on this question. There seems to me, however, a broader 
view of the relation of physical science to theology, suggested by the dis- 
cussion, which I wish to direct the attention of the meeting to for a moment. 
Though Professor Tyndall has undoubtedly a certain faculty of stating in 
popular fashion the mere superficial aspects of the questions with which he 
deals, it seems to me a pity that he should be selected as the typical man 
of science, in discussions such as these ; for undoubtedly he is the weakest 
of the band whose conclusions theologians at the present day feel called upon 
chiefly to protest against. But is it true that the conclusions of science which 
we have heard discussed to-night are really antagonistic to the doctrines of 
sound orthodoxy ? I continue to think that such doctrines as those of the Con- 
servation of Energy, or of the Origin of Species, when examined in the 
true spirit of science, are not only not opposed, but are in strict agreement with 
