OPINIONS OF THE TREATISE. 
195 
there is not one to which this argument may not be 
extended, until we should require from revelation a full 
development of all the mysterious agencies that uphold the 
mechanism of the material world.” 
This argument is unanswerable, and in an article on 
the work in the Quarterly Review (April 1836), it is so 
treated by the reviewer, who regards the Treatise as one cal¬ 
culated to “ astonish and delight all lovers of science, if any 
such there be who may be ignorant of the extent of the 
field which geology has laid open.” In concluding his 
notice of this “ most instructive and interesting volume, 
of which every page is pregnant with facts inestimably 
precious to the natural theologian,” the author of the article 
thanks Dr. Buckland for his 
“ industry and research, and for the commanding eloquence 
with which he has called forth the very stocks and stones 
that have been buried for countless ages in the deep recesses 
of the earth to proclaim the universal agency throughout 
all time of one all-directing, all-pervading mind, and to 
swell the chorus in which all creation ‘hymns His praise/ 
and be a witness to His unlimited power, wisdom, and 
benevolence.” 
It is interesting to observe that the Edinburgh Review 
(April 1837), in an elaborate article on geological science 
suggested by the same work, writes in a similar strain, 
and praises the book “as pregnant with the deepest in¬ 
struction and calculated to inspire the most affectionate 
veneration for that Great Being who has made even the 
convulsions of the material world subservient to the civilisa¬ 
tion and happiness of His creatures.” Later on, the writer, 
