ON THE IMMORTALITY OF ANIMALS. o^l 
living beings that do not accomplish any of these purposes, I would 
reply, that at any rate they are sent into the world to fill up the 
expanse of nature; and after enjoying a transient existence, in 
which their moments of happiness infinitely preponderate over their 
moments of pain, they pass away, or, as Mr. Youatt beautifully 
expresses it, they fall asleep. Here we have an evidence of the 
bounty and wisdom of the Creator; and we can see both benevo¬ 
lence and design, without supposing that these countless beings 
possess immortal souls. You say that ‘‘ you cannot believe that 
an intelligent Creator formed such a world, peopled it with inha¬ 
bitants furnished with instincts necessary to their existence, sim¬ 
ply for the purpose of devouring each other.” No, my dear Sir, 
this is not the purpose of their existence, but only one of the means 
that conduces to the sum total of their happiness. The object of 
their existence is, as I have before remarked, to enjoy happiness, 
even when other purposes cannot be discovered; and then, before 
sickness, and discrepitude, and misery come on, they are (often 
with a mere momentary pang) cut off by a larger animal. 
In asking the question, whether animals are to appear in the 
body or spirit ] I did not mean, for a moment, whether the same 
atoms which compose them now will compose them hereafter, be¬ 
cause this is quite unnecessary for our argument, seeing that at 
different periods of our life we ourselves are composed of different 
materials, though remaining essentially the same. I meant, are ani¬ 
mals to appear with bodies similar to those they have at present ? 
which I contended was impossible in this world. The scriptures 
tell us, if I mistake not, that man will be raised in the body; and if 
he alone is to be so raised, there will, probably, be sufficient ma¬ 
terials in the globe to furnish bodily frames. 
The best—in my opinion by far the best—argument in favour of 
the immortality of the human soul is derived from the pages of 
inspiration. Next to this, perhaps, is the circumstance of man’s 
faculties being constituted for a future state of being ; while those 
of animals have reference only to their present fife, and are entirely 
absorbed by the objects of their passing existence. 
How is a lion or a tiger to employ himself in a future state of 
being] Mr. Manthorp, in the last VETERINARIAN, has made 
some very judicious observations on the distinction between man¬ 
kind and animals ; and it is well worth your consideration to reflect 
that, among all the inhabitants of the earth, man is the only one 
capable of understanding the operations of nature, of wdiich you so 
ably treat—the only one capable of improving himself and his 
fellow men—the only one that can avail himself of the advantages 
of science and knowledge. 
Allow me to urge more forcibly on your attention the difficulties 
