Full text of "Science a stronghold of belief : or, Scientific and common-sense proofs of the reasonablemess of religious belief, as based on a plain and candid study of nature and the Scriptures, the whole forming a general practical view of belief and an opposition to modern doubt and infidelity"

See other formats

f ■
I ^

-'m^^^wm

1 -^ I i^

.Will"' > .* » ••'.'-•>«' • . '»':'».'^'' {»<.; \-' . f' v'/ Ji.{

. r

PRINCETON, N. J.

5/5

BL 240 .P25 1880
Painter, Richard Budd.
Science a stronghold of
belief

PEOSPECTUS.

The foUoiving is tJie scheme of the worh in ifs entirety,
one Volume of which is herewith. The plan of the ivhole is,
however, more fully described in the Introduction,

SCIENCE A STEONGHOLD OF BELIEF

OE,

SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON-SENSE PROOFS OF THE
REASONABLENESS OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF,

AS BASED ON A

3plaiu aitK CantJitJ ^tiitfu of l^aturc aiiK tijc ^niptuvfs" ;

THE WHOLE FORMING A GENERAL PRACTICAL VIEW OP BELIEF, AND
AN OPPOSITION TO MODERN DOUBT AND INFIDELITY.

SECTION I. — On Conceit in Science and Philosophy.

SECTION II.— God in Natuee.

( A simple account of the Elementary things of

Division 1. ^CwEA-Tio-^i— Matter, Force, Spirit : and of the different

/ phases of Spirit as seen in Life, Heason, Instinct, «&c.

Division 2. — The Organism (the plant or the animal).
Division 3. — Causes.

ii P7'0spectiis.

SECTION III.— God in Evolution.

SECTION IV.— God in the Scriptures.

SECTION v.— Hindrances to Belief.

SECTION VI. — General Summary of the tvhole Work; and
ITS Conclusions.

The above Sections into which the subject matter of the whole "Work
is divided will be discussed in five separate Volumes, forming a Series.
Each Volume will be complete in itself as to the especial subjects of
which it treats ; but if it be desired to consider the whole question of
Belief — as viewed by the Author — all the Volumes must be read in
consecutive order.

VOLU]\IE I. comprises Section I. and Section II. as far as the end
of its first division, and contains a simple account of Matter,
Forces, Spirit, and the outcome, or different manifestations of
Spirit as seen in Life, Mind, &c.

(Surmnan/ of Contents. — Matter — Force — Spirit — Intellect of Man — Nervous
svstcm — Reason and Instinct — "Will — Memory — Language — Language in animals
— Facial expression — Pleasure and pain — The pure instincts.)

VOLUME II. The Organism. — This will contain the second
division of Section II, and give a plain untechnical description of
the Organism, and of how the Elementary things of Creation, —
Matter, Force, and Spirit (described in the previous Volume) —
can, when united and working together, constitute the living
organism — be it plant or animal.

{Summary ofCon'onts. — An Organism defined — Protoplasm or Bioplasm — Blood
and Sap — Tissues — Bones, &c. — Skin, hair, feathers — Circulation — Digestion — .
Respiration — Growth — Special senses — Reproduction — Development — Embryology
— Disease — Death, &c., &c.)

Prospectus. iii

VOLUME III. Causes. — This will embrace the third division of
Section II., and will contain a plain discussion on the causes of
things.

{Summary of Contents. — Necessity — Fitness — Chance — Design and Causation.)

VOLUME IV. God in Evolution. — This will comprise Section III.,
and contain an untechnical description and discussion of the theories
of Evolution and Darwinism.

(^Summary of Contents. — The struggle for existence, and tlie survival of the fittest
— Inheritance — Variation — Habit — Development — Man and the ape — Chemical
and physical evolution — Evolution of nerves, of intellect, &c., &c., &c.)

VOLUME V. God in the Sceiptures. — This will contain Sections
IV., v., and VI, and will consist of a common-sense as well as
scientific examination of the Scriptures in proof of their truth,
together with a consideration of some of the hindrances to Belief.

{Summary of Contents. — The first chapters of Genesis — Authenticity of Scriptures
— Anthropomorphic expressions — Symbols — Evidences of design in construction
of Bible — God and evolution — Savages and worship — Antiquity of Man —
Religions of old, &c., &c., &c.).

All the above Volumes are in an advanced state, and, it is hoped,
will be issued in succession at intervals of eight or ten months — that is,
if the way in which the present Volume is received justifies their
publication.

SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

"The works of Nature and tlie words of Revelation display-
religion to mankind in characters so large and visible tliat those
who are not quite blind may in them see and read the first prin-
ciples and most necessary parts of it, and from thence penetrate
into those infinite depths filled with the treasures of Wisdom and
Knowledge." — Locke.

SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD
OF BELIEE;

OR,

SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON-SENSE PEOOFS OF THE
EEASONABLENESS OF EELIGIOUS BELIEF,

AS BASED ON A

3^lmx antJ CautiiK ^tvCttv of feature antJ tijt ^cnpturt^.

THE WHOLE FORMING A GENERAL PRACTICAL VIEW OF BELIEF, AND AN
OPPOSITION TO MODERN DOUBT AND INFIDELITY.

EICHARD BUDD PAINTER, M.D., F.R.C.S.

SontJon :
SAMPSON LOW, MARSTON, SEARLE, & RIYINGTON,

CEOWN BUILDINGS, 188, FLEET STREET.

1880.

[y//Z rights reserved. 1

LONDON :

GILBERT AND KIVINGTON, PRINTERS,

ST. JOHN'S SQUARE.

PHIITCEITOIT
.fttC. IV1AB1882
THSOIiOGIG&Ii

TO THE
PKAISE, HONOUR, GLORi^, AND
WORSHIP OF GOD.

PREFACE.

In the following pages it is proposed to lay before the reader
in respect to the subjects^ treated of, an outline of the evi-
dences dedncible from them in favour of holding a belief in
God, and the Scriptures, such as may be considered leasonable
according to the dictates of a common-sense judgment as en-
lightened and aided by the teachings of science, and as opposed
to the doctrines of modern scepticism.

The general plan of the volume is to present a plain sketch
of the nature of matter, force, and spirit, as far as science and
common sense can decipher them; and to show that they could
not have come of themselves by haphazard ; and could not
work solely by their own self-created powders ; but must have
arisen, and must work, according to the design and purpose of
a Supernatural power. It will also be endeavoured to be
proved, that the vital principle, or life force, is a distinct force,
and a specially created thing; and, above all, that the intel-
lectual mind, or spirit of man, is a quality not only superior
to, but essentially different from, the mind of animals.
• The author is an old and devoted student in science, and it
will be seen that his constant object throughout is to endea-
vour, in a strictly scientific spirit — as distinguished from a
mere blind and dogmatic faith — to reconcile modern scientific
discoveries, and theories, and philosophic modes of thought,
Avith the old belief in God and the Bible, such as was, and is
held by so many of the wisest and best men of the past, and of
the present.

The inquiry, which has resulted in this work, was, in the
^ As to other subjects see " Prospectus '^ on the fly-leaf.

xii PREFACE.

first instance, undertaken many years ago, solely for personal
guidance, and in consequence of feeling as a young man, that
the pui-suit of science was tending to bring in question the old
truths I had been taught as a child ; but having long ago be-
come convinced of the soundness of the conclusions I arrived
at, and having found great satisfaction and comfort from the
line of thought, and mode of investigation pursued, I now ven-
ture to present to others my mode of examining the subject,
trusting it may aiford aid to such as may not have adopted a
similar method, or had similar experiences.

I would, at the onset, draw the particular attention of the
reader to the fact that in writing down my ideas, one of the
main aud earnest objects I have had before me has been to
present the subjects discussed, in such a simple and untechnical
manner, as that all persons, however unscientific, hut who will
devote i^eal attention to the facts and arguments adduced, shall
be placed in a position to form a reasonable opinion for them-
selves. For the same motive it has been my constant endea-
vour to give dispassionate arguments on both sides of the many
questions considered, and to afford such explanations on tech-
nical points as to render feasible a due comprehension of the
subject, in order not only that the reader may judge for him-
self, but that he may be in a position — as I hope — to arrive at
the conclusion I would fain wish to assist him in coming to,
viz. : the holding of an enlightened, and firm Belief and Faith
in God, and the Scriptures, by conviction, and as established
by reason.

As may be gathered from the title, the foundation of this
work is based on science, and my object in this is threefold.
First, because I think that next to the Scriptures as the word
of God, there is nothing by wdiich He is more plainly revealed
than by His works — which works, be it noted, it is the office
of science to investigate and explain, as far as man's compre-
hension can fathom them ; and secondly, because I am very
desirous of meeting the Unbelieving Materialists on their own

PREFACE. xiii

ground, and opposing — and, as I believe, destroying their
position by means of their own weapons ; and thirdly, I base
this work on science, because I wish to try and aid the
efforts of those writers who have already taken up the
question of Belief in its Scientific aspects, by offering a
more extended and special treatment of some of the branches
of the subject, than has hitherto, I believe, been at-
tempted.

A part of my method I am aware will be objected to by
some very excellent men, because it consists in blending reli-
gious and scientific inquiry ; whereas, according to their view
— and they hold such with earnest contention — religion should
be kept separate from science and philosophy. I, on the con-
trary, think that they should be considered together, and my
object throughout will be to combine religion, science, and
philosophy ; and I maintain that they ought not to be sepa-
rated ; for it seems to me that in the same way as you cannot
reasonably enter on the study of any one of the sciences, or
on any branch of philosophy, as a distinct investigation, and
without considering other cognate departments of knowledge ;
so especially would it be unreasonable — indeed, impossible,
with a due regard to a broad and full understanding of the
subject — to enter on an examination of religion, and at the
same time banish the sciences and philosophy from the
mind. And in like manner as I believe this to be true for
religion, so, too,'^I believe is it that even science and philo-
sophy cannot be fully and rationally examined, except in
conjunction with, and as aided, illumined, and checked by
the lights and sanctions of religion. The book of nature
(including man's intellect) must be studied in connexion
with the book of Revelation — the Bible — if it is wished to
be comprehended as far as man is permitted so to do. In
my opinion — and I distinctly hold it — it is impossible judi-
ciously and reasonably to dissever, and isolate one of these
main branches of knowledge, and thought, and fact, the one
from the other, if the sole object be truth. For example.

XIV

PREFACE.

you cannot arrive at full knowledge concerning either subject
if you separate physics from chemistry — logic from naatheraatics
— history from politics. Neither can you reasonably separate
the full consideration of the human mind as apart from matter.
Then neither in like manner, as I hold, can you separate
the Natural, from the Supernatural — the Seen from the
Unseen.

Let me ask then, if religion solely of all the mental cogita-
tions, and branches of knowledge, is to be isolated from the
rest, and to be considered alone ?

Putting aside for a moment the question of propriety,
would this be philosophical and reasonable ? " Oh ! but," dog-
matically affirm some philosophers, '■'■you must Jceep separate the
consideration of physics and metaphysics " — the natural, and the
supernatural. But why the " must " ? I contend that — even
irrespective of the religious view of the question — it is not in
accordance with true philosophy, to attempt any artificial
separation of the various facts, and evidences, and modes of
thought in regard to any subject in the whole range of things
that come within the scope of man's cognition. I was always
led to understand that the true method of philosophy was to
reason from " the known to the unknown," and to seize and
use the known of whatever kind.

It is quite true at the same time, that we can only judge j^^//^
concerning what we can really know, and see, and prove to
demonstration ; and sceptics, I am aware, say that religion is
nothing more than " poetical and emotional superstition and sur-
mise." But because there are some things that we cannot see
and understand so completely as others, and that we must
accept in some measure in faith, would it be philosophic to
ignore all such things as we can only partially discern, and
understand ; and positively to refuse to put any credence in
their existence even although there may be safe clues to them
by the ways of reason and analogy, induction and revelation ?
clues which to the minds of many men of genius, have
yielded proofs, little, if at all short of actual demonstration,
proofs so clear as to have been amply satisfactory in respect of

PREFACE. XV

religion to such men as Newton and Shakespeare ; Butler and
Paley ; Faraday, Herschel, and Owen !

Why, in pure science, faith (scientific) is in constant re-
quisition ; and is acquiesced in ; and the scientific nse even of
the " imagination " has been called largely into service, and is
warmly accepted as a necessity in working out many problems.

Then surely, to refuse any credence in religious belief, and in
the highest branches of metaphysics, and the supernatural (1 do
not mean " spiritualism," as to that see page 220) after such
men as I have named above, have been satisfied with it, is as
foolish as it would be for a traveller in nearing an unexplored
land ivliose existence had been proved, but on the actual shores
of which no man could set foot — it would be as foolish, I say,
for such a traveller on just glimpsing this land — the unseen
icorld — to hurry back and say there was no such place, and no
such Ruler, or King, or First Power in it — God — (as it had
been reported there was) simply because the reports and belief
of others did not fit with his theories, or because he could not
make out all about it; as for the Materialistic philosopher to
say " there is no supernatural," — " there is no God," — and to
have no faith in the existence of such, merely because he can-
not understand, or weigh, or measure, or analyze Him !

Why such a state of opinion would be the very height of
philosophic conceit !

According to my view then — and I hold it very earnestly —
Religion and Science are mutually helpful to one another in
the elucidation of truth, and to understand the one or the other
properly, you must study both together — the book of Revela-
tion and the book of Nature, — just as you must study Physics
and Chemistry together, &c., &c.

What can you know of Causation without reading the Bible ?
and what can you know of the works of Nature unless you study
conjointly Astronomy, Physics, Chemistry, Anatomy, &c., &c.?

Truly religion is greatly indebted to science, and science is
equally beholden to religion ! How comparatively limited
and narrow is even the believer's view, unless his mind is en-
larged, and his knowledge widened, by the acquisition of the

xvi PREFACE.

marvels made known to us by science ! What but science tells
ns of how the Universe consists of matter and forces con-
stituted, and working, by Power and Design ; of how the
countless stars that crowd space are as big or bigger than our
sun — how that our sun has planets, and therefore that judg-
ing by analogy it may be presumed that the stars too have their
attendants — all working in harmony ? Of how all physical
and chemical things work by laws — of how organisms are
developed from germs and seeds ; and it is science only which
tells us exactly as to the nature of the intimate structure and
functions of these ; and so on, and so on. In fact science
rightly pursued is a religion in itself, and it is in that sense
that I, and those who think with me, rejoice in tracing out God
in His marvellous design, and works. It is therefore only by
means of science that we can at all realize — and even then only
feebly — the power, and vastness, and marvels of God's creation,
from the spheres rolling in space, to the microscopic speck ;
which latter when looked at by the aid of science, reveals
beauties and perfections as astonishing even as the gigantic
wonders of the heavenly bodies.

And in the same way we can only by means of a study of
the Bible and religioD, apprehend — however imperfectly — the
Author of all these wonders and beauties.

Religion and science therefore must be studied together, if
you would understand as much of each, and of God, as it is
possible for man to do. And indeed we may — as a very im-
perfect simile— say, that to consider by itself one of these
branches of knowledge only, would be, in an insignificant way,
like studying a sculptor's works without knowing anything of
liira, or reading his writings (equivalent to Bible) or a memoir
of him : or conversely, like studying his writings aud memoir
without ever having examined his carved works. (This beino-
like those persons who study the Bible without studying the
works of Natui-e).

Having thus given my reasons for blending the consideration
of Religion, Science, and Philosophy; it may next be desirable to
say that I shall not treat my subject by means of the dogmatic

PREFACE.

quotation of texts, but use tbem only as aids to my main argu-
ment, and in a manner which I hope may be deemed reasonable.

But there is another topic besides religion proper, which I
shall be blamed by some persons for mixing up with pure
science — and that is the subject of Spirit — the Spirit of God
— the Spirit of life — the Spirit of Man. I can only reply
that in my opinion no thorough consideration of creation
and its works, and ways (science), could be complete without
it. 1 would specially guard the reader, however, from thinking
I am inclined to the doctrines of what is called ^^ Spiritualism^
Far from that, as see page 220.

But if I am blamed for mixing up the subject of ^^ spirit "
with a conjoint or blended consideration of religion and
" nature," and science, in so far as the Spirit of God, the Spirit
of Life, and the Spirit of Man are concerned, how much more
shall I be condemned by some, and derided by others, for bring-
ing in, and even dwelling and insisting on a due consideration
of Sin, the Spirit of Evil, Satan.

But I shall not heed such anticipated disapproval, because I
entirely believe that no examination of the essential causes and
state of this world and some of the things in it, as we now
have experience of, can be thorough, unless a full consideration
is given to the influence of the Great Blight, not only on
spiritual and moral, but also on material things. Indeed I
have no clearer conviction than that it is impossible to form
any reasonable hypothesis concerning, or comprehend in any
rational degree some of the phases and developments of
spiritual, moral, and organic things, as to their causes and
working, and various attributes and effects, unless we grant
not only a spirit of goodness but also a spirit of evil, a God and
a Devil ; and that you look on this world as being at present
in a measure the scene of a state of conflict between them.
Depend on it, if this world in all its details is fully and can-
didly examined and scanned, one can come to no other con-
clusion than that it is a world fallen from its first estate of
beauty, and order, and love, and that it is now blighted in
some respects by Evil, and that much in it, as we now see it,

xviii PREFACE,

is due to tlie malice of him who is called the "God of this
world."

This to some persons may appear wild, but I think that I
shall be able to prove — as has been previously said— that one
cannot reasonably and even scientifically comprehend in a just
degree this world and its various things and attributes, unless
we acknowledge the Spirit of Mischief such as is asserted and
portrayed by the Scriptures, and such as has exerted a cor-
rupting influence in times past, does so now, and will do, we
are told, for a further season, until that period when he shall
be cast down. (See ''Death,'' '' RapaciUj,'' and ''Chance,''
Vols. II. and III.)

It may be proper next to say that some explanation may be
due to the believer as well as to the unbeliever, for the author's
attempt to treat as a whole, so vast and important a matter as
Belief, and the many abstruse and enormous questions con-
nected with it, in so comparatively brief a manner as they
must be in this volume and those to follow it, even if justi-
fiable for him to treat at all, so gigantic, so profound, and so
difficult a subject.

The apology is this.

That almost overwhelmingly great as is the subject, it is
nevertheless one so urgently important, that every person who
thinks himself a reasonable being, is bound as a primary duty
to consider it — in however imperfect a manner — to the utmost
of his ahility and knowledge.

" Now science is long, but life is short," and knowing by his
experience in science, and in the former practice of his pro-
fession, the full truth of this axiom, the author is most anxious
to contribute his mite towards supporting the old truths of
belief, in opposition to the present rapid growth of scepticism,
especially that of the scientific kind. He full well knows how-
ever, the limited extent of his own, and of every separate
person's knowledge, and the fallibility of his own, and of every
individual's j udgmcnt, hut he knows too it is hy, and according to
the kind, or state, or grasp, or decision of every one's judgment,

PREFACE. xix

however right or however wrong, and according to that only,
ihat every person must abide, whether it be in regard to the
estimation in which his opinions and conduct may be viewed
by God (if such be granted) or by his fellow-men, or by him-
self on full reflection.

Acknowledging, therefore, how conscious he is of his own
imperfection of information, and of his own liability to err in
regard to a subject that no man can grasp as a whole — God
and His system — hut uihicli every man must nevertheless encom-
2)ass and try to understand to the best oj his ability for himself
tlie author pleads finally the earnestness of his own con-
victions, and his desire that others should if possible share
them.

Let not any man put off a full personal consideration of this
subject. Death must occur to all, even to the most gifted alike
as to the most ignorant. Let all men (especially such as
doubt) consider that illness may occur at any moment, and
every one of experience will say that the sick-bed is not the
place for scientific or philosophical deliberation. Let the
doubter reflect too, that there may at his last hour, be no oppor-
tunity for pondering, or that his mind may not be clear. Lives
there the man who can in full health of mind and body declare
" there is no God and no devil and no immortality, of that I
am positive " ? But if there be such a man, can he say so cer-
tainly noiVf what his opinion will be w^hen he feels that death is
at hand ?

Let him reflect then on the possibility of his poor
mind being suddenly surprised by illness of body in the
midst of a conflict of hazy theories, and of his passing
away in doubt and the agony of a dreadful uncertainty
as to the future, in place of an end full of the resignation,
hope, and trust, such as is the blessed privilege of the
believer.

The writer has witnessed death-beds of all kinds, and while
he is too much penetrated with the scientific method, to wish
any one to try to believe, simply in blind faith, what he does not
think reasonable, still he implores sceptics by an act of volition,

a 2

XX PREFACE.

to wish to believe. Let that be done and all will be well, " Seek,
and ye shall fhul."

Considering the vastness of the subject, the reader must not
expect that all the topics entered on can be treated exhaus-
tively, but yet it will be the aim of the author in this volume
and in the others of the series, to endeavour to embrace and
discuss all the most salient facts and arguments (especially the
scientific) that appear to his mind as important, and that can
be adduced either for or against the views he entertains as a
believer.

And I would add, speaking directly in the first person, that
I have blinked or slurred over no fact or argument that has
occurred to my mind as contradictory to the views I entertain.
Indeed I have considered such with the closest attention,
because it is not simply a thesis I have endeavoured to write; or
that I have sought merely to air myself before the world as a
partisan and upholder of a particular theory; but it is that I
have earnestly sought to analyze, to test, to probe, and to prove
the old rock of truth on which so many millions of men have
relied, and tn which I have sought to build my own belief and
rule for conduct in this world, and my faith and hope in a
future one ; and I may add further, that my own mind is so
constituted that a single doubt, until explained away, would be
fatal to my conviction. No doubt therefore or conflicting view
that has presented itself has been smothered or hustled out of
my mind, but each one has been fully considered to the utmost
extent of my reason, my knowledge, and my judgment.

There is another point to which I would particularly draw
attention. Of course in discussing such a subject there are
some questions attempted in a measure to be answered which
no man can really and fully fathom. In each such instance
my excuse for offering a conjectural answer is because that in
the present state of restless inquiry, a reason is expected to be
offered for everything. In making the attempt therefore to
answer some of these recondite questions, I do so not because

PREFACE. xxi

I am certain I am always right as to the exact way in which I
may put it, but because I may adduce a reasonable hypothesis
from the believer's side of the argument (which though he
knows to be true in the concrete, he may not be able to analyze
completely in all its details) and thus to show the sceptics at
the least, that they have not all the theoretical reasoning at
their disposal. At the same time, however, it has been my en-
deavour never to forget the scientific basis and method on which
the work is founded, and never to surmise on any other founda-
tion than what I trust may be considered reasonable as well as
reverent. And further, on this score the reader is requested to
bear in mind throughout, that every argument and every theory
concerning the unknown, is made and advanced, not with the
futile attempt to dogmatically solve hidden mysteries which
others have failed to make clear, but simply to endeavour in a
plain manner to reconcile what we see in nature, and what we
read in the Bible, with what we can comprehend of both, and of
our own selves, by the exercise of plain common sense, as aided
by science, in such a way as to uphold the truth of those ancient
writings which so many of our wisest ancestors and compeers
have considered, and do hold to be sacred.

I know, as I have previously said, that I shall have the taunt
thrown at me by some, that I have attempted in one work (this
and the volumes to follow it) to do for a number of abstruse
subjects, what men of the highest intellects have failed to com-
pass, even perhaps as to one of the many, when treated sepa-
rately. But then I beg the reader to remember what I have
already stated, that this is a personal argument on a subject
that no man can entirely grasp so as to thoroughly compre-
hend, but one nevertheless which everyhody mu&t consider and
settle for himself to the best of his ability. Therefore I only
pretend to present my OAvn view, and those of other men as far
as I can gather and understand them, and leave the matter
thus summarized and argued for the reader's own reflections.

And thus I send forth my book, strong to the fullest extent
of mj convictions in regard to the truths it advocates, but

xxii PREFACE.

fully conscious nevertheless, of bow much better many of the
facts and arguments given in it might have been stated.

As to these imperfections, I beg the critic to bear in mind in
so far as mere faults of style, and phrase are concerned, that
I am not a literary man by profession, and as to tautology
which I am aware I have been greatly guilty of — I ask too for
his leniency ; because as ray sole object has been to endeavour
to convince, I have very frequently chosen by repetition, and
by putting previously used arguments in fresh lights, rather to
brave condemnation for prolixity, than to run the risk of fail-
ing to make myself clear. Indeed, as this work is addressed
to the general reatler — as well as the scientific — I have not
adopted, but rather endeavoured to avoid, the brief terseness,
and rigid formality of a strictly scientific treatise.

But now we come to a point open to more serious criticism
— to the question of the truth of the main principles, and state-
vients, and arguments of the book — but concerning these,
(although I hope they will meet the approval of the believing
critic), I ask for no quarter from the unbeliever.

Of course as to such points as those of " Organic Mind,''
" Consciousness,'' &c., these are subjects on which every man
has a right to criticize according to his own view — whether a
believer or an unbeliever — and if unfavourably put towards
me, I must accept such with a good grace. All adverse criticism
therefore on the subjects I have mentioned, or on any similar
questions, or on any minor errors, would fail to affect me.

I will now, however, make bold to point out the subjects
that the critic, if unfavourably disposed, should direct his atten-
tion to, and on which I should alone consider his criticism would
have any real value.

These subjects — as to those contained in this volume — are to
prove that 1 am unreasonable as to my arguments concerning the
" Supernatural;" and of the impossibility of things having come
as they now are by a ^^purposeless self -creation," and " self-
action." Then to show me wrong, if he can, as to my judgment
concerning the existence of a distinct " Vital Principle ;" and
as to my view of the difference between " Reason and Instinct :"

PREFACE.

and to prove that it is more reasonable to suppose that the
" Pure Instincts " are self-acquired, than that they are — as I
hold — a result of endowment ; and so on as to other cognate
subjects. That is to say, in short, that disregarding any minor
faults, there may be in the book, I challenge him to prove me
wrong, and ask him to put me right if he can prove I am
wrong, as to the fundamental principles of my work.

In future volumes I shall also challenge him on the subjects
0^ '' Design,'' " Causation,'' ''Necessity," ''Fitness," &c.

Nor let the materialistic philosopher say he will not criticize
my book, because religion and science shonld be kept separate ;
for he should reflect that he himself does not keep them apart,
when he argues as he is so fond of doing, against the believer's
ideas concerning " soul," and " prayer ;" the Biblical account
of Creation, and the " old conception of God."

The very fact of his deriding the believer as to these sub-
jects, and explaining them in his own way, is really a very
active conjoint consideration of the would-be severed subjects,
for he scoffs at religion by, or in consequence of, his scientific
notions and arguments.

There is another subject to which I must allude. It is that
I fear it may be thought I have used the ideas of some authors
without due acknowledgment, but in writing on so vast a sub-
ject— and writing too in these days of multifarious reading of
books, reviews, journals, &c., it is almost impossible to make
copious references.

There are, nevertheless, four authors I must thank in general
and grateful terms — Dr. Carpenter, and Professors Beale, Par-
ker, and Mivart, from whose writings and lectures I have
derived great assistance.

The learned in science and philosophy will know what I
have borrowed from them ; and also be able to judge how
much of what I say is original on my part in regard to some
of the subjects they have discussed. In justice to myself
however, there is one most important idea which I may be
supposed by some to have derived from Professor Mivart, viz :
the surmise that what I call " Organic Mind " or " Life

xxiv PREFACE.

Force,^^ and which lie calls the ^^ Principle of Individuation,''^ is
a more important constituent of an individual plant or animal,
than the material parts of which the organism is composed.
Now this leading idea of my whole argument concerning life
and its attributes, I had conceived long, long before I read
Professor Mivart's remarks — indeed it is one of the most pro-
minent bases of the whole work in so far as life and mind are
concerned.

Of course it does not signify as to this, who glimpsed the
idea first, whether a Greek, 2000 years ago, or a modern
author, but a man likes to get the credit of what he believes to
be original as far as his own thought is concerned.

In the next place, and in view of the fact that this work
will throughout deal largely with the subject of religion, it
may be proper, I should declare my Creed. I am a staunch
Protestant, and a member of the Church of England ; but I
have no extreme sectarian views, and the reader need not fear
any narrowness from me in that respect.

I may add in conclusion, that at one time I had an idea of
publishing this work anonymously, thinking that such might
be better than to send forth a book on such a subject with a
name attached to it of a comparatively unknown person. But
on full consideration I determined otherwise, because I thought
it so very important that it should be known to the reader that
the author was not a clergyman, or other minister of religion,
whose views might be professionally biassed, but that the
w^'iter was a practitioner in medicine and surgery. It appeared
to me, that such a fact would much enhance the force of the
book, because it is undeniable, that in no one pursuit does a
follower of it combine, in an equal degree, knowledge of such
various kinds as does the " doctor." He must be acquainted,
more or less, with the bases of all natural knowledge. Chemistry,
Physics, and Anatomy, (which can be only learnt early in life,)
with Physiology, Medicine, and Surgery ; the Microscope and
Comparative Anatomy ; with Botany, leading on in many men

PREFACE. x^v

to Zoology, Geology, and Palceontology. In fact Astronomy
is the only one of the natural sciences with which most doctors
as a rule in the present day, have not some acquaintance ; and
lastly, but most importantly, no one but the doctor has such
full experience, by direct observation, of life, of disease, of
death, of mind in all its phases, both healthy and 'diseased, and
of the practical working of religious belief ; or of infidel in-
difference.

Consequently it appeared to me from all this, that by stating
the book to be the work of a doctor, who had till lately prac-
tised actively for thirty years, the reader might possibly be
inclined to allow all the more weight to its arguments and
conclusions.

BjEAUFORT Gardens, S.W.,
London, May, 1880.

CONTENTS.

PREFACE. PAGE

Object and scope of the work — Inquiiy first undertaken for per-
sonal guidance — Meet Materialists on their own ground —
Science and Religion not separate — Religion and science
mutually helpful — Shall not quote texts dogmatically —
Spirit — Conflict between evil and good — Every one ought to
consider subject — Death must occur to all . . . . xi

Inteoduction.

Men's minds dazzled by modern science — Should now recover
from such — Nature is God's handiwork — Darwinism and
MaterialisticEvolution — Spirit — Life — Authors and Scientists
not avow belief — I do not deprecate science — A personal
God — God co-extensive — Materialistic Evolution and one-
ness of matter — Bible and God — Let him who doubts
reason in this way — Bible and moral truth — The truly
scientific waits in faith for fresh light — Causes of doubt
and disbelief — Social and moral causes of doubt — Scheme
of work .......... 1

SECTION I.

Positivists and Agnostics — Cannot comprehend God — Believe
nothing that cannot be proved — Mistake to think they can
know everything — Vanity in intellect and knowledge —
Worship of intellect — God's handiwork to be treated reve-
rently— How slight is our knowledge — Pessimism — Sceptical
Biologist and Psychologist — I know I am ignorant, you don't
— Definition of Materialism — Questions to materialistic philo-
sophers— Uncertainties of science — Microscope — Repetition
as to Natural Philosophers being humble-minded — Limit to
free inquir}^— Scientific inquiry a duty — Prying curiosity —
Humility, manner, motive, &c. — Sir T. Watson — Walk with
Philosophers — Flowers and insects — Science — Highest appre-

CONTENTS.

PAGK

ciation of common sense — Flowers, and beauty of elm
— Materialist and beauty — Links — Honey, cause of— Faith — .
Believers and Materialists — Advice to non-scientific . . 15

SECTION II.

CHAPTER I.

Introductory — Matter — Atoms — Solids, Liquids, and Gases —
.Ether — Quality of atoms — Vortex atoms — Size of atoms
— Vibration of atoms— Shape of atoms — Placing- of atoms —
Compounds — Summary as to atoms — Reflections — Compounds
and their molecules — A Molecule — Movement, size, and
shape of molecules — Inorj^janic Matter — Elements — Chemical
combination and affinity — Atomic weights — Law of multiples
— Law of equivalents and substitution — Reflections — Matter
indestructible — Organic matter — ^ther . . . .53

CHAPTER II.

The Physical Forces — Gravitation — Attractions, homogeneous and
heterogeneous — Electrical attraction and repulsion — Mag-
netic attraction and repulsion — Capillary attraction — Endos-
mosis and Diffusion of liquids — Diffusion of gases — Repul-
sion— Polarity — Corollary on the various forces of attraction
and repulsion — Important distinction between atoms as
affected by inorganic or by life influences . . . .99

CHAPTER III.

Physical Forces continued — -The Co-related Forces — Nature of
heat and of Light, Klectricity, Magnetism, &c. — Energy —
Transformation and C(mservation of Energy — Dissipation of
Energy — Continuity— Sound — Wave theory of sound, light,
heat, &c. — Colour — Summary as to Matter and Force — Re-
ligious and Scientific Reflections 120

CHAPTER IV.

The Metaphysical Forces— Spirit, Mind, Life— Vital principle —
Organic Mind — Power of perceiving the fitting — Caution to
non-scientiflc reader — Mind of two kinds, Spiritual and
Organic— Life and Bible— Life and Soul— Old Testament
and Spirit -Old Testament and breath— New Testament
meanings of breath, &c.— Christ and the words Life and Soul
and Spirit — Alford — Comparison of plants and animals —
Organic or Vital Mind — Specialized Organic mind is the

CONTENTS.

PAGE

Organism— Pangenesis— Vital mind has different faculties in
different parts— Severed portions of Organic Mind— Mag-
nificat *^ 25Q

CHAPTER y.

A slight sketch of intellect in man — Its qualities distinct from the

mental faculties in animals . . . . . . .191

CHAPTER YI.

3. Ideo Motor — Reflex Cerebration — Religious and scientific
reflections— Spiritualism, " Spirit-rapping " — Spirit — Essen-
tial, primary, or direct nerve action— Origin of ideas, '* Sen-
sationalists," "Realists" — Spirit working in the blood— Brain
renders ideas manifest — Nerves and secretion — Analogy of
spinal cord and brain in Invertebrata— Three essential
questions as to Spirit— The Spirit constitutes the Organism
—"Mind" in every particle of Bioplasm— Secretion,
nutrition, &c.— Mind in plants— Mind in brutes, &c.—

" Spirit " as acting on nerve cells 195

CHAPTER VII.

Reason and instinct— Mind ; the Intellectual, and Organic-
Unconscious mind is the spirit of life in plants and animals
— Limit of spirit consciousness— Four qualities of Mind or
Spirit— 1. Conscious Cerebration — 2. Unconscious Cerebra-
tion—Dreams— 3. Instinctive Cerebration — Benevolence —
Animal language— Dog's association with Man— The Mind
specialized and endowed for the particular organism — Gene-
rosity, anger, cunning, &c., explicable like benevolence— Rats
stealing e-^gs— Abstract ideas— Distinguish between Instinct
and Reflex action— Another instance of evasion of difficulties
— How far animals' minds are conscious — Habit — Instinct —

4. Life causing action ........ 234

CHAPTERVIIL

Conscious will — Ur con:- cious will 263

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER IX. PAGE

Memory — Imacclnation— Conscience and the Moral Sense — Otlier
qualities of mind supposed to be possessed by Animals — In-
tuition, or Innate Ideas— Faculty of Invention . . .270

CHAPTER X.

Language— Abstract ideas— Signs, notes, cries, and vocal lan-
^(ruage — Parrot and dog talk— Animals have a language —
Human language; words, ideas— Conimon terras — Words
arise in the mind in two ways — Simple ideas — Abstract ideas
— Conscious thought impossible without abstraction— For-
getting of words — Abstract ideas in animals — An animal's
abstract ideas not so vivid as to form a word— Animals must
h:ive a sort of abstract reasoning faculty — Sceptic cannot
a<^ree to essential dissimilarity of mind in man and animals
—Summary as to abstract ideas — Thoughts and actions that
can be effected without words— Inward talking to oneself-—
Sportsman climbing — Consciousness in animals— Infant's
thoughts without words— Origin of Language in Man —
Naming — Max Miiller " roots " — Reason why men can talk . 279

CHAPTER XL

Modes of language in animals — Deviations from nature by
animals as to language, &c. — Imitation of vocal and other
sounds by animals and birds — Recapitulatory and Explana-
tory— Analogical method — Animal immunity from certain
poisons ..........

CHAPTER XII.

Facial expression — Laughter — Weeping — Anger, joy, fear, pain
— Astonishment — Blushing — Self-evolution theory — Dog the
top twig ! — Sneezing and snarling — Recapitulatory and Ex-
planatory— Differences in exhibition of emotions in animals . 327

CHAPTER XIIL
Pleasure and pain — Pleasure and pain may be reflex in animals . 337

CHAPTER XIV.

The Pure Instincts — Self-preservation — Maternal Instinct — Selec-
tion of site, &c., for nests — Questions for Materialistic
Evolutionist — Birds' nests — Insects' sites for placing eggs —
Inhabitants of the land who lay their eggs in water ^ —
Questions for Materialistic Evolutionist — Maternal care of
eggs — Questions for i\Iateriali!jtic Evolutionist — Care of the

309

CONTENTS.

PAGE

young — Pipe fish — Questions for Materialistic Evolutionist —
Believer's view — Instincts of the joung — Questions for
Materialistic Evolutionist — Mr. Darwin .... 340

CHAPTER XV.

Instinct as_ to kind of food — Questions for the Materialistic
Evolutionist — Variation — Fitness — Instinct as to cries and
song — Instinct as to Movements — Questions for Materialistic
Evolutionist — Instinct for making habitations — The Social
Instincts — Beavers 372

CHAPTER XVI.

Bees— Killing drones — Honey storing — Ants— Termites— Ques-
tions for Materialistic Evolutionist — Instinct of hibernation
— Instinct of storing for food — Instinct of migration — Enu-
meration of a few other special Instincts — Instincts in Man
— Cause and origin of Instincts — Instinct an ordained gift
— Action of mind in animals — Variation of Instinct . . 396

CHAPTER XVII.

GENEEAL ILLUSTEATIONS OF INTELLECT, ANIMAL EEASON, AND PrEE
INSTINCT IN MAN AND ANIMALS.

No brute is aware it is an individual — Animals in a manner
Automata — Sight, hearing, smelling, &c. — Unconscious
action of mind — 'Walking — Dressing — Animals swim, crawl,
fl}', all by Organic mind — Do not know why or how —
Pleasure, memory, judgment, &c. — Acts of flying, spinning,
&c. — Playing with yoang — Sporting — Bird sentinels —
Doings of bees — Chicken have no schools — But though no
intellect, animals have senses and faculties we are ignorant of
— Summary — Consciousness in animals — Animals do not im-
prove— Spiritualized Mind — Evolutionists say difference in
mind of man and brute only one of degree — Spiritualized
love — Pet dogs supposed to understand— Horses, &c. not re-
main in lowly state, rebel — Dog and responsibility, honour,
duty — Utilized and " Performing " animals .... 43'1

CHAPTER XVIII.

Geneeal Summaey of the whole Book, and its Conclu-
sions 462

SCIENCE A STEONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

INTRODUCTION.

Men's minds dazzled by modern science — Should now recover from
such — Nature is God's handiwork — Darwinism and materialistic
evolution' — Spirit — Life — Authors and scientists do not avow belief
— I do not deprecate science — A personal God — God co-extensive —
Materialistic evolution and oneness of matter — Bible and God — Let
him who doubts, reason in this wslj — Bible and moral truth
— The trul,y scientific waits in faith for fresh light — Causes
of doubt and disbelief — Social and moral causes of doubt — Scheme
of work.

Considering the marvellous discoveries that have been made in
all departments of science during the last hundred years, it is
not surprising that the minds of many persons should have been
dazzled thereby, and that some should have erred on the side
of an undue exaltation of the human intellect.

When the chemists, physicists, geologists, and biologists first
unfolded to human gaze some of the great scientific facts in
regard to the world and its contents, it was perhaps pardon-
able that some men, who were not imbued with the spirit of
religion, should have unduly estimated the extent of man's
knowledge and his power of penetrating the mysteries of
creation. But now that the novelty of many of these dis-
coveries has passed away, it is surely time that the mind
should recover from its first overwhelming surprise, and pro-
ceed with greater humility and reverence and faith to investi-
<iate those marvels which must ever eno;ao;e the attention of
the intelligent. Surely it is time, when scepticism is so rife
and so unreasonable, and when many otherwise estimable men
seem so immersed in their scientific studies of " Nature " as to
appear oblivious of all else but the immediate object of their

SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

investigation. Still it is strange that any persons so gifted as
to be capable of profound study, and even of original research,
should be so blind or so oblivious as not to see, or to forget,
that what they call by the cold name of " Nature " is either
the Great Cj'eator Himself or an emanation from Him in the
form of His handiwork, perverted though this handiwork may
be in some of its forms by the influence of the Evil One. I
by no means w4sh, however, to accuse all scientific men of
infidelity — far, very far, from that — but I do desire to affirm
that some of the scientific doctrines of the present day, Avhen
unduly pressed and solely dwelt upon, do tend in that direc-
tion ; and that even although the originators of the doctrines
of Darwinism and of Evolution may not have so appHed them,
nor wished them so used, nevertheless that they are so under-
stood by many of their followers, and interpreted solely in a
materialistic and godless sense. Indeed the disciples of
" Darwinism,'^ as originally promulgated by Messrs. Darwin
and Wallace, have gone beyond their masters, and have sought
to establish a theory still in advance of theirs, and which
may be named materialistic evolution.

The discussion of the distinctions that may be drawn
between these theories I shall defer to Vol. iv., and speak
here only of evolution in a general sense. Evolution as a
mode set in motion by God for developing His design and
purpose, may very possibly be a true thing, and although as a
theory it is still on its trial, there is great reason to believe
that it will ultimately be accepted as an explanation of the
phenomena traceable in nature. Still, what I shall contend
for in this work is, that true though the doctrine of evolution
may be, it is impossible it can be a process which has
developed itself by the chance action of secondary causes.
That is to say, I shall urge throughout that " evolution," so
far as it may be proved to be a fact, must be an action that
takes place according to the will of God, and according to a
pre-ordained design. The chain of sequences, then, that
scientific men of the present day think they have traced out,
may be true in the sense of a gradual evolution or unfolding

INTR OD UC TIO.V.

of God's plan and power; but materialistic evolution as a
self-creating and self-acting process, I shall do my best to show
the impossibility of, and the absurdity of setting it up as an
explanation of creation and its working.

Since first I became a student, thirty-five years ago, a great
change has come over the tone of science generally in regard
to belief in the First Great Cause. God as a Spirit used to
be looked on as the Creator and Governor of the world and
universe ; but now, matter and the chemico- physical forces
have been exalted to a place above " spirit," and mind has
been relegated to the lower position of being but a mere out-
come and effect and offspring of the interaction of brain
matter and chemico-physical action, and " life " is looked upon
as arising and working in like manner.

The effect of this has been to ignore ^^ spirit ''^ altogether
as a causative power ; indeed the use of the word in the old
sense is quite abandoned by the materialists, and the equiva-
lent quality, mind, is looked on by them, as I have said, as a
thing which can be ground out of the brain-cells by chemical
action. This denial of God and of spirit, and this materializ-
ing of " mind " and " life force," is greatly to be deplored in
the interest especially of the young and the ignorant, who not
being in a position to judge for themselves, have been unwit-
tingly misled. And it is not surprising that they should have
been led astray, for the material structure of the earth and its
living inhabitants, both animal and vegetable, have been so
examined and analyzed and dissected by men who have not
mentioned God as connected with such, that God's power and
design have dropped out of sight. Also the material applica-
tions of the forces of nature have been made so conspicuous,
and the forces rendered so tractable and so utilized to man's
service by various scientific discoveries in the form of steam
and telegraph, &c., without also in general such discoverers
making any allusion to God as the Author of all force and all
matter, that the minds of very many unreflecting persons have
been completely dazzled, and such persons have in very many
cases been induced to think that the branch of knowledge —

B 2

SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Science — which could produce such astonishing results must
be the infallible guide on which to depend in the search after
truth, and that its apostles should be followed in place of those
old-fashioned ones whom their fathers believed in. And thus
it is that many discoverers and professors and authors, by
neglecting to avow their own belief, if they hold any, and by
adopting a cold, materialistic mode of reasoning and of ex-
planation, have caused the worship of God to be not only for-
saken but even His very existence to be doubted or even
denied. But the mischief has not rested here, for a barrier
bavin"- been thus raised against belief in a God, the result is
that the blessed truth of Christ is not examined. For the be-
lief in a God must precede the entrance of the mind on an un-
biassed investigation of the history and truth of the Saviour.

Manv of the young, and even older persons who do not
sufficiently reflect, have drawn the hasty inference that if such
o-ifted men as the authors and professors in science do not
believe, or, at any rate, do not give such public expression to
their faith as it is to be presumed they would do if hearty
believers, it is consequently not necessary or rational, under
such circumstances for them — the " less enlightened " — to sub-
scribe to such antiquated " superstitions " as the religion of
the Scriptures and the God of the Bible.

The writer holds the opinion, however, very strongly, that
this coldness towards religion, or actual unbelief, in many,
both of the learned and unlearned, has arisen from mere
carelessness or looseness of thought, or from their minds
having been unduly concentrated on their studies or on their
business, or even their pleasures, and that in consequence they
have not given themselves time for such personal and fair and
deliberate consideration of the difficult and intricate question of
'■''belief ^as to have stood a chance of arriving at aproper conclusion.

It is, therefore, hoped by the writer that any one who reads
this, and who has not reflected on the question of " belief," or
is a doubter, will read on — and especially so if he is a man of
science — for any candid mind will admit that such an impor-
tant matter as belief ought to be well investigated, and the

INTRODUCTION. 5

more conscious any one may be of possessing mucli special
knowledge of any kind, the more fully he must be aware how
probable it is that on any given subject ivhich he has not fully
examined, he may be likely to hold an erroneous opinion.

But it is not simply that want of examination has left some
in darkness and in a state of passive unbelief or that the
material applications of science have misled others ; but I
believe the specious and very attractive theory of a mechanical
evolution has had the eifect of producing a widespread and
active unbelief, for it has been so enthusiastically and capti-
vatingly advocated by many able men, that teachers and
pupils, alike carried away by a vivid charm in conceiving that
at last they have got a clue to some of " Nature's secrets,"
have committed the amazing folly (even in a philosophical
sense) of ignoring the Author of these " secrets," and have
forgotten that every mechanism, and every mechanical action
must have a primal cause, and which cause they do not
explain. Nor are they content w^ith themselves ignoring
God's power and design, but even deride those who believe in
Him.

The advocates of a godless evolution have taken a few facts
and on them have built a superstructure of very attractive
conjecture, but without its having any substantial basis on
which to rest. At the same time, however, that I would thus
express the opinion that too much has been thought of scien-
tific discoveries, and that scientific speculation has been too
exaggerated, I would not, as an old student myself, wish it to
be inferred that I estimate man's discoveries and inventions
lightly, or that it is desirable to place a limit to his research
and conjecture, but that I would fain see them conceived and
conducted in a different spirit, for it surely behoves us all to
tread on the sublime limits of the unknown with great humility
and delicacy of feeling.

For example, I remember the time when it was the custom
for a writer on natural science to put a few Avords at the be-
ginning or end of his book in praise of the Creator ; and, to
use a simile — but in all reverence — who ever heard of review-

6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

ing aud criticizing a human work, be it book, picture, or
building, without naming its author or executant ?

But now, with such exceptions as to make them notable,
there is seldom even a hint as to a God, and I was very sorry
to see that so very eminent a man as Sir C. Lyell, in the last
edition of his " Student's Elements of Geology," had expunged
the gracious words of praise he had placed in previous editions.
The apology for that and similar omissions might be that a
book on geology or biology and the like, is not one on religion;
but it appears to be incompatible with good feeling to attempt
to separate from Nature's works Nature's God.

This flishion of the day, however, in avoiding all allusion
in science to the existence and very name of God, appears to
me not only irreverent but unphilosophical ; for as things could
not have come as they are by themselves, they must have come
by a Creator's impulse ; and whether we imagine that impulse
as producing continuous evolution, or creation by stej^s, still
the creative mind or force must have touched all matter and
"natural " forces, or they could have had no existence. It is
to me really remarkable to hear Physicists, Chemists, and
Biologists, talking of the " laws of gravitation," the " laws of
combination," the " laws of development," and so forth, and yet
apparently forgetting that laws cannot make themselves.

To my mind, however, it is not only most true, but most
satisfactory and pleasing to acknowledge a God — and that
God, not a cold abstraction, but the personal God as portrayed
in the Bible. And as to the question of His personality, does
not science itself show us that the same mind or force, for
example, that gave origin and plan to this world, must have
made the one principle gravitation which pervades and com-
mands obedience in the whole of creation visible to us, not
only by our unaided vision, but as extended and magnified
by our telescopes and microscopes. And this view is confirmed
by the further fact that our spectroscopes likewise tell us that
the same power which made this planet, with the metals and
gases of which it is composed, must have made also the sun,
and the stars, and the comets, and nebulne, because, as
spectnira analysis shows us that these heavenly bodies contain

INTRODUCTIOX.

-metals and gases, or gases alone, similar to those in the earth,
it is thus proved to demonstration by science itself that the
whole of creation must have been conceived and executed on
one great plan by one Designer and Maker. Therefore, as the
Creative Spirit must be co-extensive and co-existent with His
universe. He must consequently be one, and indivisible, and
therefore a personality — and moreover a living personality— for
we cannot conceive that such a j^ower having once made such a
creation would extinguish Itself, or go away.

Notwithstanding what I have stated, however, I am quite
aware that a materialistic evolutionist might as an explanation
of the oneness of matter and forces, argue that it arose not by
designed creation, but in consequence of " the primary nebu-
losity in space" having when it became concrete necessarily
produced similar results in the different stars (suns) and
planets. If the evolutionist did use this argument, however, it
would be requisite not only to point out to him that the results
are not in every case similar, and that the stars, &c., differ
among themselves, but it would be needful to go back a step
iarther in the order of creation, and press him to explain how
and why the nebulosity itself first arose, and became possessed
of its qualities and potential powers. And it would be
necessary also to ask him to explain how it is that although
the various stars, &c., do possess similar elements and forces in
general, yet as far as we know that all elements are not present
in each one, but that an element that may be abundant in one
star, &c., may be absent in another.

Now if all things have come by a self-created nebulosity,
which by evolution broke up into stars, planets, &c., one would
expect to find sameness and uniformity in all the heavenly
bodies as to quality and action, and probably also as to size
and shape, and that we should not have different kinds of
single stars with different colours, and hence with different con-
stitutions, and double stars (often too of different colours)
revolving round one another in circles ; and comets flying
through space in elliptical orbits — and that we should not have
planets with satellites, and planets without such ; nor a planet
with rings (Saturn), and others without. Surely if the heavenly

8 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

bodies arose simply by materialistic agency, we should see
greater uniformity than there is ; or if there were grades in
consequence of the bodies being at different degrees of heat,
and in different progressive stages of evolution, we should not
witness such startling divergences as we certainly know of in
many instances, especially in the unique case of the rings of
Saturn ; the remarkable eccentricity of the paths of the comets ;
and the great chemical and physical differences in the com-
position and constitution of the stars, and j^lanets generally I

Bat it is notorious that uniformity is not the rule, and that
"one star differeth from another." And this is quite in
accordance with what we see throughout creation — that there
is " variety in unity," and yet " unity in variety" — from the
smallest atom to the largest sun. But it is not simply that the
argument as to unity in variety, and variety in unity, as an
evidence of design by one vast Personal Creator, can be
applied to the case of the heavens, for it can equally be made use
of most extensively as to the different kinds of matter : of force:
of organisms: and of organs as seen in this world. (See Design.)

But the Materialistic philosopher may again object, and say
that even granting the omnipresent and all-powerful person-
ality, that I insist on ; where is the proof that it and the God
of the Bible are the same ?

Let him who doubts, reason with himself as follows : "That
considering the fact of so many clever and good men in all
ages having believed in the truth of the Bible, and its God, it
is desirable to examine that book very carefully. Therefore,
putting aside all prejudice and prepossession, let me (the
inquirei) with an open heart, and a mind willing and wishful
to believe, at once begin a study of the question for myself." ^

Let him do this, and I have no fear for the result, if he will
be dispassionate, and humble-minded, warning him, however,
always to bear in remembrance that the Bible was written, not
to inform men on science, but to give them instruction chiefly
as to spiritual and moral truths ; and at the same time most
mysteriously to act as a test of faith. If he objects and says
^ The fifth part of this work is intended as an aid to such study.

INTRODUCTION.

that *' if it was granted that the Bible was written to convey
spiritual and moral truths, he cannot conceive why at the
same time many parts of the Scriptures should have been
written in a way to puzzle even the cultured and scientific,"
I can but reply that such difficulties are only deterrent to
those who desire to quibble, for there are so many parts of the
Scriptures that appear superhuman in their truths, and in the
mode of expressing them, that the truly intelligent and humble
mind pauses in full reflection, and hesitates to reject as a
whole a work which contains so much that is evidently true,
and which meets his highest reason and spiritual aspiration,
simply because there are a few facts which he cannot under-
stand. And I would especially remind the educated doubter
that the more scientific and cultured he may be, the more
ready he ought to be to acknowledge that there is no one
department of knowledge that he can fully comprehend, and no
one branch of it, or theory, in which he is not compelled to
acccept some points in simple faith.

The believer, therefore — and especially if at the same time
a man penetrated with the full liberality and humility of the
true scientific mind — which is always conscious of its own
ignorance and liability to err — is content to wait in full faith
for a future revelation of such parts of the Holy Scriptures —
as well as the book of Nature — which he cannot understand ;
but which he feels fully conscious will assuredly be one day
made manifest, so far as it may be proper for him, in his age
of the world, to know ; and so far as it may be necessary for
his own spiritual and intellectual enlightenment, if earnestly
sought for in furtherance of the worship of God, of righteous-
ness, and of salvation.

Having, in the preceding pages, given a general statement
of the subject, and of the light in which I view it, I shall now
proceed to enumerate some of the causes which have probably
led so many men of science and culture to disbelieve in an
Almighty God and the Scriptures, and by their unfortunate
influence and example, have given rise to such a large amount
of doubt and disbelief amongst less learned men who look to

10 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

them as guides, and even occasioned disquiet amongst some
men of high culture, but who may not happen to be versed in
the truths of science.

Of course it will be beyond the scope of this work to at-
tempt to enter into any detailed consideration of the social
and moral causes which have contributed to this result, so
much to be deplored, and although I may allude to such, 1
must confine myself as much as possible to a review and dis-
cussion of the effects produced on some persons by the culture
of the mind in the various branches of knowledge, and espe-
cially in science, and the liability, in some instances, to the
production of doubt thereby, when pursued in a careless or
narrow-minded manner.

In doing this, I shall first briefly enumerate some of these
effects and their causes ; after w^hich I shall discuss them in
detail ; and in such discussion I hope to adduce evidence to
show the hoUowness of the rationalistic and materialistic
dogmas of doubt and denial, and to bring forward irrefragable
proofs that there is a God, and that He is a living, acting
Spirit, such as the Bible represents Him to be.

Enumeration of some of the effects produced on the
Mind in regard to Unbelief by a Narrow or
Perverted Culture.

1st. There is the effect produced on the mind by a training
in science and philosophy, where undertaken in a spirit of
cynical indifference to, or in a state of opinion actually hostile
and antagonistic to a belief in God and the Scriptures.

2nd. There is the effect produced on the mind by examining
the Bible in a spirit of cold, scientific, and philosophic
analysis, without faith, and with a pre-determined desire to
disprove its statements rather than to discover and assert its
truth, leading to doubts as to creation, and its order as given
in Genesis ; doubts as to Bible chronology arising from sup-
posed discovery of antiquity of man ; doubt concerning the
anomaly of sin, the existence of sorrow and pain, flesh-eating

INTRO D UCTION, j j

beasts, &c., &c., &c. Also doubts given birth to by the cease-
less cavilling of sceptical literary critics.

3rd. There is the effect produced by the modern discoveries
in geology, and by the promulgation of the theories of evolu-
tion and Darwinism.

4th. There is the effect produced on the minds of some
educated people by the revival of extreme views as to Sacer-
dotal Authority, Papal Infallibility, Ritualism, Confession,
Absolution, &c., and by the fact of there being so many kinds
of religion in the world.

Other causes might perhaps be named, but these, as the
most important, I propose to consider in the separate parts
into which this work is divided, and it seems to me, look-
ing at the immensity of the scope of the subject, the vast
number of topics to be discussed, and the necessary com-
parative brevity with which I must treat all the points or
questions as a whole, that the following division into sections
will best meet the object I have in view.

In each section I propose to give as briefly and lucidly as
I can an account of the subjects with which it deals, and at
the same time shall give a full consideration to the effects
produced on the minds of some men by a perverted view
concerning many of the points connected therewith, and I
shall dwell on the doubts and denials, and as I deem them the
errors of the cultured sceptics, Positivists, Agnostics, Monists,
and Materialistic scoffers in such manner as that by candid,
fair endeavour, dispassionate argument, and clear proof, I
may be able, as I hope, to show the hollo wness of their
notions.

SECTION I.

On Conceit in Science and Philosophy,

Will treat of the effects wTought on the minds of some per-
sons in the way of unbelief, by a one-sided or prejudiced
culture, and especially by a narrow training in and grasp of
science.

12 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

SECTION II.

God in Nature, or the Things of Creation simple
Described.

This will consist of a familiar, though strictly scientific
account of the " Things of Creation," — Mindy Matter, Force,
Life, Organization, Organisms, &c., &c., and is intended at once
as an aid to an intelligent and reasonable comprehension of
God's works by the unscientijic, as well as at the same time
to render both to them and to the scientific a series of demon-
strative proofs of the existence of a Supernatural power —
presumably the personal God of the Scriptures — the Designer
and Creator of the Universe.

This section will be separated into three divisions.

Division 1. Matter, Force, and Spirit.

Division 2. The Organism (the plant or the animal).

Division 3. Causes — such as Causation, Design, &c.

The first of these divisions will be treated of in this volume,
and the other two in succeeding volumes.

SECTION III.

God in Evolution — being a Consideration of Evolu-
tion AND Darwinism.

In this section Evolution and Darwinism will be discussed,
their truths advocated, and their assumptions and fallacies —
according to the author's view — exposed.

And I would say here at once, in anticipation, that I beg
the reader not to imagine— as above intimated — that I am
altogether an opponent to the theories of evolution and Dar-
winism, for, on the contrary, I am a believer in them, so far
as that I think all things have come as they are, first, by a
primary creation by God, and then by a gradual modification
or evolution l)y God's Will, according to ceri^an pre-ordained
causes and powers and laws. But what I do oppose with all
my might is the supposition that all thino^s could have come as

INTR OD UC TJOiV. 1 3

they are by purposeless, liap-bcazard, self-acting causes — causes
which could uot have created themselves, could not therefore
work by their own self-created powers, and could not adapt
themselves to the requirements of fitness, by means of a self-
manufactured necessity, capable of the faculty of perceiving'-
and accomplishing fitness. (See "Faculty of Fitness,"
VoL iii.)

What I oppose, therefore, is the preposterous idea of a
self-created, and completely self-acting, organic, Godless
evolution.

Consequently it will be found that I agree with Mr. Wallace
in some of his views — and who, with great and most praise-
worthy candour, acknowledges certain difiiculties in the way
of an unlimited acceptance of the theory of evolution, and of
its application, in some respects, to man — rather than with
Mr. Darwin in his extreme one-sidedness, and that I ao-ree
still less with Professor Haeckel in his exaggerated notions
concerning mechanical self-action in organisms.

SECTION IV.
God in the Scriptures.

In this part many general and scriptural truths and diffi-
culties will be considered from a common-sense as well as a
scientific point of view.

SECTION V.
Hindrances to Belief.

In this section I shall glance at various hindrances to belief,
especially those caused by the fact of the existence of such
numerous religions and creeds, and of the bitter wranglino-
and strife shown by their respective professors towards one
another, and the even terrible hostility often waged against all
those outside their own pale. Also of the frequency with
which "rehgion," as so-called, leads to corruption and un-
righteousness in other ways than those above named.

14 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

SECTION VI.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION.

These six sections I propose to arrange and discuss in four
parts or volumes, in addition to the present one (as see pro-
spectus on fly-leaf), each of which volumes will be complete in
itself for the subjects it treats of, but will have to be read in
conjunction with the others if it be wished to encompass the
whole subject of belief according to my view of it.

I would add that I am fully aware of the very great objec-
tion there is to dividing this work into a series of five volumes
and publishing them separately, for by so doing the force of
the general argument must, for the time being at any rate, be
much lessened.

But entirely alive as I am to the urgency of this objection,
it is insuperable. First, because of the vast scope of the sub-
ject and the uselessness of treating it at all unless with some .
degree of completeness of detail ; and, secondly, because of the
fact that although I have written the greater part of all the
volumes (especially the most difficult subjects), I am, in con-
sequence of my inexperience in literary work, necessarily
slow in completing the various articles to my satisfaction, so
I think it best at once to publish what I have finished, as the
subject is at present engrossing so much attention.

Nevertheless, I hope, if my life is spared, to issue the re-
maining volumes of the series at intervals of eight or ten
months; but whenever I may finish my task, or rather my
labour of love, I can promise the reader who may care to
study the entire work, that he will, in its several volumes,
find that, if read in connexion with one another, there is a
complete unity of idea in the series, and that that unity of
idea irresistibly leads to the conclusion of the reasonableness
of a belief in God and the Scriptures.

SECTION I.

ON CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY,
AND ITS BEARING ON SCEPTICISM.

A consideration of the effect wrought on the minds of some
persons by a one-sided or prejudiced culture, and espe-
cially by a training in Science.

Positivists and Agnostics — Cannot comprehend God — Believe nothing
that can't be proved — Mistal^e to think they can know everything —
Vanit}^ in intellect and knowledge — Worship of intellect — God's
handiwork to be treated reverently — How slight is our knowledge —
Pessimism — Sceptical Biologist and Psychologist — I know I am
ignorant, you don't — Definition of Materialism^ — Questions to
materialistic philosophers — Uncertainties of science — Microscope —
Eepetition as to Natural Philosophers being humble-minded — Limit
to free inquiry — Scientific inquiry a duty — Prying curiosity —
Humility, manner, motive, &c. — Sir T. Watson — Walk with
Philosophers — Flowers and insects — Science — Highest appreciation
of common sense — Flowers, and beauty of elm — Materialist and
beaut}^ — Links — Honey, cause of— Faith — Believers and Material-
ists— Advice to non-scientific.

One of the most remarkable circumstances in this world of
mysteries is the fact that, notwithstanding the advance of
knowledge and the assumed progress of the human mind in
intellectual capacity, there should exist in these boasted times
of enlightenment so large a number of men of science and
philosophy who are unbelievers, or if not really such at heart,
are at the least so lukewarm in their belief, or so reticent of
their views concerning God and religion as to lead most per-
sons to consider them sceptics.

And what makes this open scepticism in some, or silence
in others as to belief, the more extraordinary, is, that it is a
state of mind exactly contrary to what one might have fairly
expected — for what could have been more reasonably antici-

1 6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

pated than that these men, of all others, who know the most
conceruing the marvels of nature and the impossibility of fully
comprehending the wonders and beauties it displays, would
have been the very first to look above matter and forces, as we
know them, for a Great First Cause and Designer and Fabri-
cator of all ?

These philosophers one would also have expected to be the
most humble-minded and the most ready of all men, amid
all their knowledge, to confess their ignorance and liability
to err in judgment. But, as matter of fact, it is not so.
Indeed, we see that some of the most conspicuous men in
philosophy and science at the present time are the very reverse
of being believers, or of being diffident and humble-minded,
but, on the contrary, that they are conceited and arrogant in
their opinions, and with great confidence, and even eagerness,
take on themselves to deny, and even to sneer at, the belief in a
God and the Scriptures, and at the generally accepted view as
to the true position of man in this world, such as have in
each case been held by myriads of the clever and good in
past ages, and such as satisfies, comforts, and cheers hosts of
clever and good men and women now living. And why is all
this doubt and arrogant denial ? Forsooth ! because the sec-
tion of thinkers who call themselves Positivists, Rationalists,
Agnostics, and Monists, &c., say they will not believe any-
thing that cannot be positively proved true to demonstration,
or that they cannot understand.

What ? Why, this is sheer nonsense ! Do they disbelieve
that the water boils in the kettle because they cannot tell
what heat is ? or do they disbelieve that their hand will be
scalded if they dip it into boiling water, simply because they
cannot explain what sensation essentially consists in ? Why,
we know they believe in the boiling of water and its scalding
properties at 212°, yet no man can explain what heat and
what sensation are fundamentally.

True the Positivist will say experience tells him that suffi-
cient heat will cause water to boil and, when so heated, that
it may scald his hand ! Then the fact ultimately is that he

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. ii

does believe in heat and in sensation, though he cannot
explain them.

Mr. Huxley, in his " American Addresses," p. 21, sajs : —
" Scientific men get an awkward habit — no ! I won't call it
that because it is a valuable habit — of believing nothing unless
there is evidence for it, and they have a way of looking upon
belief which is not based upon evidence not only as illogical,
but as immoral ! "

Again, Professor Tyndall, as a representative of the same
school of thought, will not believe in the doctrine of the
" soul," I suppose because he cannot get evidence of it by
being able to grind it out of his machines or analyze it by his
instruments, "and other physical devices ; so he calls the idea of
the " soul," as entertained by most men, " a poetic rendering
of a phenomenon, which refuses the yoke of ordinary
mechanical laws," and he goes on benevolently to remark that
if any one is content to accept such a " poetic renderino-," he,
for one, ''' does not object to this exercise of ideality.^ "

"Exercise of ideality !" Why, if the reader will refer to
the articles on " Soul^ Spirit,''^ and " Organic Mind," I think
he must admit there is full evidence of the existence of such
quality or qualities as that of soul, as tested and proved bv the
scientific and logical modes of investigation alone, and with-
out entering on the moral or religious aspect of the question.

Now, as an axiom, we may say that no men of sense can
deny but that it would be foolish to believe in anything which
does not afford clear evidence of its truth.

All our beliefs then must depend on the decision of our
judgments as to the value of the evidence presented concern-
ing any one thing.

Now let us, in view of the object of this work, apply Mr.
Huxley's dictum (and I quote from him because he expresses
so lucidly the opinions of his fellow-thinkers) to the case of
God and the Bible, in the same manner as I applied the argu-
ment as to evidence and belief, to the case of heat and the sen-
sation of scalding.

1 Address to Midland Institute, Oct. 2, 1877.

i8 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

A Positivist believes in "heat" andiu " sensation" because,
lie says, he has evidence of such ; and yet he cannot explain
what heat and sensation essentially consist in, but still he be-
lieves in them because his senses tell him that there are certain
occult factors, or states, or conditions, called heat and sensation.

Just in the same way have we not the fullest evidence for
belief in the occult factor or prime cause, God ? For how,
but for such a cause, would it be possible for creation to be
as it is, and to show such manifest evidence of supernatural
power and superhuman — I may say superphysical — design ?

And as to the Bible, is there not the fullest evidence for its
truth intrinsically, historically, morally, and intellectually ?
(See Yol. v.) Some half-hearted Positivists, perhaps, in reply
to this, may say, " But we do not disbelieve in a First Cause,
nor do we ivlioUy disbelieve in the Bible."

Then I w^ould say as a rejoinder, " Why are you always
deriding the Bible, and making mouths, and shrugging your
shoulders, at religion ? " And why do you maintain an omi-
nous and cold silence in regard to God, and never use His
name but in the cause of philosophical opposition to the old
apprehension of, and foundations of belief in Him ? Some
Rationalists will not believe in God, because they say they
cannot comprehend how He, as a First Cause, could Himself
have come into existence, and this assertion they cling to
because of their dogma, that they will believe nothing of which
they have not full evidence, and which they cannot understand
by the utmost exercise of their reason.

Why ! — to make use of an illustration, imperfect and incon-
gruous as it may be — this is like the case of an untutored man,
who although he might have seen books (God's works), and
pulled them to pieces (dissected), and fully admired the beauty
of their binding, the admirable nature of their paper, the
curiousness of their printing, type, &c., yet because he had never
seen the author, or printer, &c., should say, that notwithstand-
ing the book being before him, yet as he could not understand
it, and although he heard other men read from it (believing
naturalists), still that he would not believe that other men

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PIIIIOSOPIIY. 19

could read, or that ideas could be conveyed by printinij or
that books were designed and made for a purpose by any man
or Being, foreign to his exact knowledge and comprehension, as
to origin and place of residence, &c.

Now the refusal of the Rationalists to believe in God and
their denial of the book of Nature having had an Author and
Maker, is like the supposed behaviour of the untutored man
above described, for although they have the evidence of a God
before their eyes, in the shape of " this hook of Nature,"" yet
although some believers can read it out loud to them, and can
discern and acknowledge that it must have had an Author and
Maker, still they as Rationalists say they cannot read it, and
cannot see design and purpose and a Causative power in it ;
but affirm that, marvellous as is this book of Nature, still that
they, as the most advanced philosophers of the day, cannot see
but that it made itself somehow by '' secondary causes," work-
ing somehow by self-action, as worked on by a self-constituted
and co-relative power called " Materialistic Evolution'' causes
and powers I presume which they imagine came first by " a
necessity," which I cannot call otherwise (as I understand the
Rationalists) than " a necessity " that must have arisen by
chance, and made " secondary " laws or causes for itself,
according — as they first arose — to a chance haphazard.

But though I am thus censorious on some of our leading
men in science and philosophy, and whose names are familiar
to us as household words, yet I by no means wish to imply
that all workers and teachers and writers on scientific subjects
are sceptics — far from that — indeed if I did say so I could be
immediately refuted by mention of the opinions and well-known
names of Owen, the most eminent of living Biologists ; of Prof.
Parker, the consummate Morphologist and Embryologist ;
Dr. Gladstone, the accomplished Chemist ; Dr. Balfour, the
eminent Botanist ; Dr Carpenter, the famous Physiologist and
Philosopher ; Dr. Nicholson, the learned Zoologist ; besides
many others, none of whom hesitate to mention the name of
God, or are ashamed or fearful of doing so, lest their reputa-
tions for acumen should suffer !

c 2

20 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Still, it is a fact that such opinions, or at least the open ex-
pression of them, are not the rule ; and I must say that it does
seem remarkably strange that so large a majority of men of
science and philosophy (if not confessed sceptics) should
abstain from expressing their opinions and testifying to their
belief in regard to the Great Creator, if they really do hold
such views in regard to Him and the Bible as were held by
Newton, and Faraday, and Herschel, and are still maintained
by such men as those above named, as well as by many others.

To me this reticence appears very astonishing.

It is not, however, that any large number of learned men
publicly deny a Creator, but they seem afraid to mention the
name of God, and apparently shrink from so doing, because,
forsooth, it is not the fashion to speak of that Power ; or because
such mention is deemed " unscientific."

Not scientific ?

Pray let me ask any one of such living ultra-scientific
philosophers if he will dare to affirm that he is more scientific,
or if he considers himself intellectually superior to Newton,
Faraday, Herschel, or Owen ? I will leave this question for
sceptics to answer, reaffirming, however, that if these modern
scientists do really possess any religious belief, it is surpris-
ingly remarkable that they should nearly all be so completely
dumb in regard to the most interesting question that could
possibly engage their attention, viz., whether or no there be a
Creator — a living, personal, ever-acting God ?

In regard to Evolutionists in particular, the majority of
them are simply silent on the question, and although they
ignore God, are very careful not to flatly deny His existence.

Other Evolutionists however, and the literary and philoso-
phical sceptics are less reticent, and openly flout the idea of
the God of the Bible, and call Him an " Inscrutable " or
" Anthropomorphic " conception, &c., and declare, or leave
their readers to infer, that those persons who believe, are
weak-minded people who are led astray by poetry, and emotion,
and false sentiment.

But as to emotion, I would beg to ask these calm philoso-

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 21

pliic gentlemen who try to lead us poor mortals to believe
that they have overcome and banished this (as they seem to
think) attribute of men in a low stage of mental evolution,
whether they consider they really have risen superior to it ?

Why, we know that they themselves are emotional to the
last degree, for who more angry, nay, passionate, if one
opposes their cold, narrow, and irrational hypotheses ?

But is emotion despicable by whomsoever felt ? Does not
emotion often lead to some of the grandest acts of humanity ?

Let us now consider what appears to have been the main
cause which has produced scepticism and conceit amongst so
many persons of culture.

This cause probably has been, and is, the effect produced on
the mind hy a training in science and philosopliy when unchecked
hy humility , and candour, and breadth of judgment.

The effect of such training on the minds of some men,
when uninfluenced by humility and breadth of judgment and
candour, has been the production of

(a) A highly critical spirit, which in many instances has
led to

(h) An undue exaltation of the power and grasp of the
human intellect, culminating in

Let us consider these factors of error : —

(a) It is really almost pardonable, when one reflects on the
frame of mind of the student in science, that he should fall
into the habit of doubting the truth of everything which, in
his view, cannot be actually proved, logically or experimen-
tally, and that he will accept nothing in faith.

His mind gets so completely into the groove of looking at
everything in the sequence of proposition, analysis, and de-
duction or demonstration, that he insensibly falls into the
habit of saying he will not believe what he cannot prove or
understand.

Nor is this surprising, for during his patient studies and

22 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

labours, and with his ideas concentrated ou what is before
him, and putting aside till another day the difficulties he
cannot solve, he does in process of time get to comprehend
very much, and so much, and of such marvellous kind, that it
is again almost pardonable that he should

(I)) Begin to exalt, to an erroneous extent, the power and
grasp of the human intellect. But having arrived at that
point, the thinker stands in a position of great danger, for
then, unless his judgment be good and his view widened,

(c) Vanity may step in and lead the philosopher to believe
that he has only to inquire with sufficient patience, and per-
tinacity, and acuteness, to know everything.

But this vanity having once been allowed to take posses-
sion of the mind, in consequence of too narrow a view having
been formed, one can no longer pardon the thinker, for we see
in some men that it is apt to carry them to the most irrational
lengths of folly. To such an extent, indeed, does this feel-
ing seem to actuate some, that, in their pride of intellect, they
will not acknowledge there are some things they cannot
understand, so they commit the amazing folly of ignoring
from investigation and deriding such things as they cannot
explain according to their own notions.

Thus it appears that some minds, made so highly analytical
and critical by long habit, and puffed up with pride in having
found out so much and understood so much according to their
own views and powers of comprehension, will not incline to
religious belief, partly because they cannot find out and under-
stand all about God, according to their oivn inodes of investiga-
tion, as by means of chemical analysis, dissections, geological
diggings, &c. ; and partly because the due consideration of the
subject, and its acceptance, requires humility of mind, and
is humbling to man's intellectual supremacy.

Moreover, I can imagine that the materialistic philosopher,
if he gives a cursory thought to religion, may be very likely
to dismiss the subject in some such way as the following :—
He, with his critical powers (which, I fear, are apt to be
cynical) warped by the bias of his narroAV views and his re-

CONCEIT TN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 23

stricted method of study and research, may say, " I cannot
beheve in a system of religion which sets up a hypothetical
Being called God as supreme, and as Governor of the world ;
for if so, and he was benevolent and always everywhere pre-
sent, we should see a happier and more orderly state of
things than we do. For example, there would be no pain,
no sorrow, no rapacity, no crime, no sin, and no wrongdoino- of
any kind — because, being so all-powerful and loving, He
would abolish the devil and all his works."

And thus the Materialist ignores God and sneers at the
supernatural and spirit of every kind, and at those who believe
in such. And if you press him to explain the material crea-
tion and consciousness and mind and reason, and to tell us as
to how all things arose and work, he replies that " the
theory of evolution accounts for all that," forgetting appa-
rently, that " evolution," even if true, must itself have had a
prime factor.

But this way of dealing with religion and creation occurs
simply because the scientist is so very conceited in his own
knowledge and abilities, and because he does not investigate
the subject, or does not do so in a fit state of mind, or in a
proper manner; also because he does not give due credit to
other men — who do believe — for possessing intellects and
knowledge and judgment, which may be at least equal to his
own, and which men have examined the subject in a fitting
spirit and mode.

Besides this, the materialistic philosopher, in his pride of
knowledge, and fancied power of reasoning, forgets, that great
though man's intellectual capacity is, still that his mind is
finite. Yet, surely it must be that even this very clever kind
of person must sometimes get a glimpse of an idea that his
mind really is finite, and, although he may try and shut his
eyes to the fact, yet it seems impossible he can quite abolish
the feeling.

Then, let me ask if it would not be most rational for him
to be honest and candid ivitli himself, and to pause, and reflect,
that seeing the wonders of Creation around him — which he

24 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

cannot account for or fully understand by his finite mind —
lierhaiis it may he, after all, that all things were constituted
by a mind superior to that of man — an Infinite Mind ?

And surely this must be so ! Creation must have come,
and must work by and through the will of an Infinite Mind.
Then, how can man reasonably expect to enter into the mind
of the Infinite, and understand all his works and ways ? It
would be folly in us to expect for one instant to comprehend
God's plan, and working in the material world ; and, if so,
then, too, of the moral ; and if these, still more as to the
spiritual.

Truly, the system of the Universe is altogether a scheme
beyond our powers of intellectual grasp.

Yet men proceed in their reasonings and their speculations
as if they could and onght to be able to understand all about
these things. And here is their great mistake in thinking that
they can, and ought, to understand all — every thing.

Nor, it is to be feared, does the mistake stop here, for this
state of opinion in ignoring God, seems actually to lead to the
setting up of the human intellect as an idol, and as the All-in-
all, and distorts or twists the mental gaze into looking to it, as
the object of adoration — and almost of worship — rather than to
the Great Architect of this intellect— the true God.

Sad to say, it is not the professors, and followers of one, or
other, of the various branches of knowledge that have been
touched by this overweening spirit of pride in man's intellect ;
but in all departments there are some men who either doubt
passively, or give active expression to defiant unbelief.

We have sceptical, materialistic Physicists, Chemists,
Geologists, Biologists, &c., &c.

I will take the case first of the two former.

I fear it is, with many of them, the old story of "long
familiarity breedeth contempt;" for, although of course there
are notable exceptions, they, as a body, speak and write of
the matter and forces with which they have to deal, as if
such things were self-existent, or self-created, and self-en-
dowed. They do not appear to reflect — or, at any rate, they
do not publicly acknowledge— that all matter and all force

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 25

are parts of Gotl's creation, and must have been touched by
His impress.

For liow else, I would ask, could it be that the elementary-
bodies and gases exist, not only passively, and simply as
such, but that they can combine actively with one another in
certain definite proportions — and those proportions only — so as
to form new compounds, quite different to the original com-
ponents in quality, and perfectly definite in their new charac-
teristics. How, I say, could ihis be, unless they were ruled
by certain laws ? Or, again, how could any physical attrac-
tion or repulsion act, or how could the great correlatives heat,
light, electricity, &c., be, or do, unless by laws ordained by
a Creator's will ? " (As to laws making themselves, and
"necessity," these questions will be discussed elsewhere.)

Therefore I contend that all these things (matter and
forces) when dealt with, or handled, or analyzed by the
scientific investigator, should not be considered and looked on
as so many playthings to be pulled down and split open ; or
built up, or turned hind side before, as a boy may treat his
toy bricks ; but rather that the things of " nature," when
dealt with by the philosopher in a spirit that one necessarily
estimates as a thoughtful one, should always be regarded as
things in a manner connected with the Divinity : and con-
sequently as being a part of His handiwork to be treated
reverently, and with humble-minded ness.

But such tone of mind as this — whatever may be felt — is
not generally displayed in the present day. For example,
one hears the Chemist talk confidently of oxygen ; and the
Physicist of the " electric current," and the like, and in so
off-hand a way as to lead one almost to believe that they
think them to be their own invention, creation, and property,
and that they know all about them !

But what do they know ?"

2 It may be thought that this savours somewhat of " Pessimism," or
the doctrine that all knowledge, and all things in this world are vain,
and barren, and useless and hopeless.

Not at all ; I believe to the full in the usefulness, the fruitfulness, and
the joy of science, when rightly pursued.

26 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Marvellous, I grant, is the knowledge of such things,
worked out during years of patient thought and labour ; but,
after all, how slight is our real knowledge of them ! We do
not even know what such familiar things as oxygen and
electricity really and essentially are, and consist in and of.
To take the case of oxygen only, even supposing we could
split it up into component parts, or atoms, then the question
would arise, what are the atoms ? And even supposing we
discovered that oxygen atoms, and atoms in general — every
thing material — w^as composed of one certain kind of atom
differently combined, in dilFerent cases, so as to form diiFerent
sorts of things. What then ? What is the composition of
the atom ? Why was it so ? Where did it come from, and
how ? Did it come by chance ? Did it make itself?

There could be but one rational answer.

God made it what it is, and endowed it with certain laws.

Therefore I would say, let us be humble-minded and re-
verent.

At the same time however that I would urge these con-
siderations, I am quite ready, as a life-long and eainest lover
of science, to grant, that what can be shown us by analysis is
very, very clever. Take a piece of marble, for example, and
how wonderful is it to be able to tell that it is composed of a
metal (calcium) and gas (carbonic acid), and a non-metallic
solid (carbon) united together !

And so the Chemist writes his symbols, Ca C02, on the
diagrarn board, and glories in his knowledge ; and well he
may, if he viewed it with humbleness of spirit, and reverently
in regard to his highest thoughts. But, with some men, it is
notorious that there is no Godly reverence.

To ponder on this fact is not only a very sad reflection, but
the existence of the fact itself is very remarkable. It is
astonishing indeed that men who know so much of the rough
working of matter and force, as do Chemists and Physicists,
should fail to discern and appreciate how very little, after all,
they really know of the essential causes and finer workings of
things.

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 27

If men were reasonable, it surely ought to be, that the more
they know, the more ready they shoukl be to confess their
iirnorance, and littleness ; and the more we should have ex-
pected they would feel pleasure in turning to the admiration
and worship of that Infinite Power, which must necessarily
be the first cause of all the wonders of the universe in which
the scientific mind rejoices.

It is remarkable, I say, that Chemists and Physicists should
be sceptics ; but, when we come to Geologists, and much more
to Biologists, who have to deal with " life," and Psychologists
who have to study " mind," one's astonishment is even
greater. That any men can believe that " life " and " mind "
can have " evolved" by spontaneous self-action, is almost past
conception : yet it is the fact that many men do so believe, and
it is one of the strangest things in " these modern times of
enlightenment," that many men, in treating of mind and life,
appear to forget altogether that they are dealing with God's
highest works, and actually seem to try and persuade others
— if not themselves — that they have only to think, and reason,
and question, and experiment long enough, in order to know
all about their origin and working.

These men, it is only charitable to infer, must have be-
wildered themselves by study, or have blinded their minds by
devoting themselves to one kind of pursuit, and in this way
to have starved their judgments, as you may starve the body,
by feeding on one sole kind of selected food.

There is nothing more true than that it is requisite for a
man to have studied, and thoroughly digested a great deal of
mail?/ hinds, and branches of knowledge — and not one or two
only — before he can arrive (unless conceit prevents him even
then) at a true estimation after all his pains, of how little he
really knows.

I have often felt inclined to say to an " unbelieving " spe-
cialist, who might be confidently and dogmatically urging some
particular view — and with all the greater unction, because it
Avas in contradiction to the belief of the great men of the past —
" My good fellow, do permit me to say, that small though my

28 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

own knowledge may be, it is sufficient, nevertheless, to enable
me to discern hoAv really ignorant you are yourself. I know
how ignorant I am, but you evidently don't know how ignorant
you are."

As an illustration of our comparative ignorance in the
sciences so earnestly prosecuted in these days, I will now select
two or three questions out of hosts that might be put to the
Professors of the various branches of knowledge already touched
on, and who may happen to be materialistic in their views.
But before doing so I would distinctly wish to separate the
" Materialistic " Professors from the believing ones, by giving
a definition of the former, because, of course as an enthusiastic
lover of true science, my criticisms are directed solely against
Materialists and Sceptics in general.

To use some lines of Wordsworth, a Materialist may be
described as, —

" A reasoning self-sufficing thing,
An intellectual All-in-All."

As this definition however would not be accepted by a
Materialist, I will quote what the staunchest advocate for his
philosophy says on the point. Haeckel in his " History of
Creation,'' translated by Eay Lancaster, (vol. i. p. 35,) writes : —
" Scientific materialism, which is identical with Monism,
affirms in reality no more than that every thing in the world
goes on naturally, that every effect has its cause, and every
cause its efifect. It therefore assigns to causal law — that is, the
law of a necessary connexion between cause and effect — its
place over the entire series of phenomena that can be known.
At the same time scientific materialism positively rejects every
belief in the miraculous, and every conception in whatever form
it appears, of supernatural processes. Accordingly, nowhere
in the whole domain of human knowledge does it recognize
real metaphysics, but throughout only physics, and through it
the inseparable connexion between matter, form, and force,
becomes self-evident.^

3 In regard to this work from wMch I have now quoted, I would say
briefly, that the whole book, in my opinion, bears the same relation to

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY,

Having thus made clear the creed of the MateriaHst, I will
proceed to put the questions already alluded to.

Out of the multitude of questions I might put to the
Chemist, who may liold materialistic views, I will ask if he can
tell what chemical affinity is, and why carbonate of soda and
tartaric acid will unite to form two new things totally different
to the two originals ? or why, in electro-chemical decomposition
of water, hydrogen will be given off at one pole, and oxygen
at the other ? and if he thinks he will ever be able to explain
these facts, which in his ignorance he simply names " laws " ?
To talk of the elective affinity of this thing for that : or of
the repulsion of that for this, only affirms the fact, but affords
no explanation of the why and the wherefore. Why is it
invariable that the elementary gases, &c., will only combine
with one another in certain definite quantity, twelve of carbon
with sixteen of oxygen, &c. &c. ? Could such definite regu-
larity as w^e see in regard to these combining numbers have
arisen by chance ? And again, how could such opposites, as
alkalies and acids, have originated by self-action ? If the
Materialist says that according to the combining numbers or
equivalents of the elementary bodies and gases, so possibly the
combinations or reactions can only take place according to the
constitution, or number, or size, or shape of the atoms com-
posing them, so as to fit, as it were with each other; even then
we do not arrive at the end of our conjecture and questioning.

Why and how did these atoms acquire their different con-
stitutions or shapes (or whatever it may be) and their powers
of attracting or repelling one another ?

So to return to my first question. How can it be that when
we mix tartaric acid with carbonate of soda dissolved in water,
the tartaric acid and soda show such a powerful liking, or
attraction, or elective affinity for one another, and joint mutual

true science wliicli a very exaggerated historical novel does to true history.
It is therefore a very amusing book, but I would caution any one against
reading it, unless previously well grounded in science, because many of
its assertions and surmises are, as I believe, so questionable, as to be
likely to mislead the ill-informed.

30 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

repulsion for the carbonic acid, as to spring together with such
force as to turn out the gas by a violent effervescence, during
which the latter flies off ?

AYhy and how is this ?

To say it depends on elective affinity is really to tell us nothing
as to causation.

Also of the decomposition of water by " voltaic action:" who
can explain why the gases constituting the water can be torn
asunder, and why the oxygen is always given off by one pole,
and the hydrogen by the other ? To say that such is " a law''
is also to tell us nothing of the reason why.

Then, too, the questions that may be put to the Physicist,
who may be a Materialist, are equally numerous and imposing.
To name a few : —

What is ether ?

What is the nature and cause of gravitation or attraction ?

Can he tell the prime factor and source of the correlative
forces of light, heat, electricity, magnetism, motion, and chemical
affinity — what is their essential nature and constitution, and
how they work ? But a question I will enlarge more upon,
because it is so eminently practical, is for him to tell us why
water does not obey the law common to other things, and
become specifically heavier in the solid, than in the liquid
state ? And whether this departure from the general law is
not a clear evidence of design ?

I may here, for the benefit of the unscientific, enter into
some details as to the freezing of water. Every collection of
water has vertical (or up and down) as well as other currents
in it, and in cold weather the surface water in cooling becomes
denser and specifically heavier, and therefore falls to the
bottom of the lake, &c., its place being taken by water rising
from below ; this vertical change continues till all the mass has
reached the temperature of 40" and then ceases. Having ceased,
and the weather being cold, the surface water loses more and
more of its heat, and finally at 32'' it freezes, and in so doing,
the w^ater in solidifying as ice, most remarkable to say,
expands, and by this expansion becomes considerably lighter

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 31

than water, and floats with much buoyancy. Now mark two
things.

1st. If the water did not cease to fall to the bottom at 40°
the wdiole depth of the lake or river Avould become ice, on losino-
8 degrees more of heat.

2nd. That if water in becoming solid, followed the general
law of fluids, and became denser and heavier on solidifyin"-, or
freezing, it would sink to the bottom, and aid in converting the
whole into a solid mass.

The consequence of such solidification of the whole bulk, if
it took place, would be not only the death of all the fish, &c.,
but that all water, except in the tropics, would be constantly
frozen, because it could not, under these conditions, all melt in
the summer; therefore that all parts external to the tropics,
would at the least, be untenantable, and perhaps the whole of
the earth.

Then as to the Biologist who may hold Materialistic views,
I would ask him, —

What is the cause of life ? Also what is the power that
produces and guides "differentiation " — that is, the power which
in organization, and growth, causes protoplasm to form, or
curdle, or coagulate into totally different structures, in immediate
contact with one another, but intended for entirely different uses,
as we see in the development of the seed, and Qgg, and their
embryonic formation respectively of the rudiments of stems,
leaves, blossoms, &c., or of head, legs, wings, and so on.

Also of the Geologist, who may be a Materialist, I would
ask, why there is so much water on the globe, and no more
and no less ?

Whether if tliere were more or less, this globe would not be
uninhabitable, either through the submersion of land, or
through too much humidity ; or conversely, through too much
dryness, and all things becoming parched, for want of rain, and
humidity, and water ?

If he can tell if the centre of the earth is igneous, or
gaseous, or solid, or, as was formerly thought, full of water ?
Or of the Materialistic Phf/siologist, I would ask, if he can

32 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIER

explain how the blood is made, and what is the essential force

that effects it ?

Also if he can explain the elective faculty possessed by the
cells of various organs, by which they can select from the
blood, the particular materials needful for forming particular
secretions and excretions, such as it is their function to
elaborate— whether it be bile, or saliva in animals— or turpen-
tine, attar of roses &c., in plants.

Or further, let me ask the Pt<ychologist, who may be a
Materialist, what is consciousness, and thought ; and what is
the essential cause of such respectively— and how, why, when,
and where, they arose : also if he can tell why it is that sleep
should be possible ? And why, if sleep is a rest procured by
materialistic necessity, such temporary death in regard to
many faculties, should be recoverable from, and why it does
not become complete, and fatally lasting ? Whether sleep is
not clearly an ordained function in the economy of life ? And
finally I may ask them collectively, whether in all candour,
they think it in the remotest degree pi'obable, they will ever
be able to answer any one of these questions ; and especially
so in a way to prove materialism— i\\2,i is, that everything is
self-made by self-acting causes — and that the God of the Bible,
and the believer, is for certain a myth ?

Assuming their replies to be in the negative, I would say, " Then
as you don't know for certain about any one of these things, would
it not be most rational for you all to be more humble-minded, and
more inclined to belief in a force superior to matter and mere
physical force — in fact, in the existence of a Supernatural Force,
or Spirit— the Great Designer, Architect, and Governor of the
Universe ; and this, one would have thought, ought to have
been particularly the case with the one Scientist who has the
most to do with those almost overwhelming mysteries life and
death, and the history, and doings, and iacts connected with
oro-anization, viz., the Biologist : yet singular to say, he is one
of the most daringly speculative, and actively unbelieving.
The only explanation for this remarkable circumstance seems
to me to lie in the fact, that very- many Biologists confine their

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 33

attention to dissections, and preserved specimens and dry bones
and fossils : they compare this shaped bone with that — and that
with another — and so on, and so on — until immersed in their
study of dry facts, they altogether forget life, with all its asto-
nishing mysteries of develoj)ment, differentiation, growth, &e.

By looking too intentl}'-, and with too circumscribed a view,
at comparatively trivial details, they lose sight of what, after
all, is the main question, and marvel, and miracle. And this is
what we are apt to do on many questions. We shut our eyes
to one thing, and look at another till dazzled.

But to return again to the subject of the propriety of
humility in scientific investigation.

It should always be borne in remembrance that in addition
to the fact of our ignorance on a multitude of subjects which
are every day before our eyes, but which we know on careful
reflection, we can never fully comprehend, investigate them as
we may, there is another powerful reason why we should be
humble-minded, and that is, the consideration of the ^^uncertain-
ties of science,'" — the uncertainty as to whether we are correct in
our surmises, in regard to things we think we can comprehend —
the uncertainty whether what is actually received as true after
patient research, and earnest pondering by the science of our
period, may not be proved in another to be false. Thus even
the great Newton's " emission theory '* of light has been given
up and substituted by the "wave theory," which theory itself
depends for its truth on the assumed presence in space, of n
theoretical "something" called "ether," but the nature, and
actual presence of which has really never been proved.

This conflict of opinion in the views of the greatest men of
science of the present and past times as to the reception of
leading scientific facts, and principles, is ably commented on
by the Rev. Canon Birks in his " Uncertainties of Science."

There is indeed so much doubt and discrepancy of opinion
in science, that there is scarcely a so-called " scientific fact "
one can absolutely depend on, as a true explanation of the
working of God's laws in Creation.

But I must not dilate further on this, but pass on to another

34 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

branch of our subject — the Microscope, and its influence on the
minds, I fear, of many persons.

I believe the microscope and its use in the pursuit of phy-
siology and minute anatomy, has much to answer for in regard
to the growth of scientific scepticism.

At first sight this appears anomalous, as one would have
expected that a revelation of beauties and wonders such as it
has made manifest, would have had the contrary efiect. But
the fact is that, although the study of minute structure may
at first lead the student to think of the wonders, power, and
glory of God as shown in creation, the mind, unless influenced
by a right bent and motive, soon forgets God — fascinated and
enthralled by the wondrous material structures brought under
immediate observation ; and the eye is strained, and stronger
objectives are used, and the eye strained again and again, to
look deeper and deeper into the unrevealed mysteries of-matter,
and the hidden secrets of " Nature " — the cause and main-
spring of that "Nature" being (singular to say) quite dropped
out of remembrance.

Marvellous and beautiful are the structures so seen, and the
natural processes and functions so faintly traced out even by
the keenest observation.

But use the strongest power capable of ever being con-
structed (and we are told more powerful ones than we now
have cannot be made) and what do we see ? Nothing more
than what may be called the coarser details of structure. We
see cells, and cell contents, and nuclei, and granular matter,
and structureless cell walls, &c. But we cannot see the ulti-
mate molecules of which any of these parts are composed, and
science says we never shall.

Nor can we see, or tell, how these tissues or materials were
developed (as to their initial growth and causation), or formed,
or how they work.

In fine, ive can only seethe hroad result of the actions of in-
visible forces on invisible atoms. We discern effects only, and
not causes.

I may tire the reader, but I must here again repeat that it

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 35

may truly be said, after dispassionately considering these facts
and arguments, that Natural Philosophers ought to be the most
humble-minded of men, both because they deal with and scan
what the best and wisest men in all ages have considered the
works of God, but also because, if clear-minded, they must
apprehend more and more, day by day, how really ignorant
they are, and how impossible it is, and ever must be, to tell
how Creation works. And, in short, that they can never ex-
pect in this life to know more than the coarser outlines of such
substances, structures, properties, actions or functions as they
may investigate.

It may be thought by some that the views here advocated
would, if put in practice, place a limit to free inquiry, and
would check investigation, and produce something of the be-
numbing or paralyzing effect on the mind resulting from the
forbiddance, by the Roman priests to their faithful, of certain
books and questions. By no means : for free inquiry in a
reverent spirit may become an act of praise and adoration,
though I fear it is too true that science^ si7nply pursued as
science, does not lead in that direction.

But prosecuted in a right spirit, I would urge that scientific
investigation is not only a proper object of study, but that it is
a duty, in the sense that it is actually incumbent on man to use
the great gift of the intellect which God has given, to the fullest
extent of which it is capable, in investigating His marvellous
works in order that he may be able more and more to appre-
ciate His wisdom and power.

But I need scarcely say that the inquiry should be very
differently conducted to what it often is. Now, it frequently
looks as if the scientific investigator proceeded in the spirit of
a conceited and prying curiosity rather than in one of reverent
investigation : seeking how much he may discover in order
that he may render his name famous, or make money, or ad-
vance the science as science, or perchance that he may achieve
something for the advantage of mankind.

All this, praiseworthy however though it may be in a lower
sense, should be done in a different manner to what we now

D 2

36 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

witness. Instead of the attitude above portrayed, think of
the inquirer rather as looking into God's works with humble-
mindedness and worship, striving to reveal still further their
beauty, and order, and usefulness ; but bearing always in mind
that any new light or benefit he may be permitted to reveal or
secure, is not simply the result or produce of his own genius
and ingenuity, but really the showing forth, or manifestation
by permission, of the light of God's power and glory. And
here surely, ought, in place of conceit, &c., to be sufficient
motive to stimulate and gratify any man's legitimate desire for
fame or profit. But men of science, as a rule, are not animated
by this kind of idea ; yet in science, as in the doing of a thou-
sand other things, it is the motive, and manner, and mode
which makes all the difference.

For example, a mother's kiss is one of the very purest and
sweetest things on this earth ; but the kiss of the hypocrite
one of the most detestable.

In like manner, the reverent man, in touching or reasoning
on God's works, in the pursuit of science, and in order that he
may explain their beauty and wonder, performs a very high
act ; but the irreverent man, " in forcing Nature," as he calls
it, to reveal her secrets, may, in my opinion, by his godless
way of proceeding, actually injure his own soul. Granted he
may, nevertheless, be permitted to make discovery which may
be beneficial to man, yet his work may be hurtful to himself in
the end, in the sense (as I have contended for elsewhere) that
good is often worked out, and springs from evil — the evil
agent itself suffering eventually.

I have said just now that it is the motive, and manner, and
mode which makes the difference in the doing of a thousand
things.

In my opinion, when the chemist, the physicist, the biologist,
&c., engage in their respective studies, they should regard,
handle, and speculate on tlie various natural things not simply
with earnest interest and curiosity, but with feelings approach-
ing those of reverence and even of awe.

But the chemist, biologist, &c., in touching God's works,

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOFHY. 37

may say, " Why should I in analyzing chemical things, or dis-
secting an animal, or pulling a flower to pieces, be expected to
think more of God than other people ; for, in all our acts, all
men really deal Avith what you call God's works ? A man
eating his dinner is really engaged in a physical and chemical
dealing with God's works, only, instead of putting the sub-
stances into a test tube, he puts them into his mouth to be
conveyed to the stomach. A carpenter hewing wood, a butcher
cutting up a sheep, a paviour breaking stones, are each also
dealing with what you call God's works."

I reply, all this is true to a certain extent ; but, as I have
already said, it is the motive, and manner, and mode, and
object which makes all the difference.

When the man eats his dinner, or the carpenter, &c., hews,
cuts, or breaks, according to his speciality, each one does not
engage in the act for the purpose of scientific investigation.
The man, in eating ; the carpenter, &c., in hewing wood, &c. ;
each perform acts which are, I may say, of a natural kind.
But when the chemist subjects chemical things to analysis, or
the biologist makes sections of wood, or dissects sheep, or pulls
a flower to pieces ; or when the geologist chips the rocks, &c.,
the case is very different. These acts are totally abnormal
ones ; the motive and the object also are entirely different.

The philosopher, instead of doing a natural thing, is engaged
in seeking to look into and discover some of the secrets of
Creation and its working. Or the lecturer, in demonstrating
to his class, tries to explain God's works and laws ; or if any
one studies nature simply for amusement, still he is looking at
God's works in what may be called a special and unnatural way.

In each case, therefore, where the scientist touches God's
works, his motive and mode and manner and object should be
of the highest kind. He is dealing with and looking into
Nature, in order to try and find out, or show and explain,
some of God's works and ways and modes.

Let him, therefore, be thoughtful and reverent, let him
seriously consider what he is about. He is seeking to com-
mune with the Power that gave origin to all things. And let

38 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

him reflect that it matters not, in a philosophic sense^ whether
this Power be called God, or Nature, or the Unknowable, or
the Inscrutable, or the Unthinkable ; it is at the least a
Power, that when you commune with, by endeavouring to
understand, every man certainly ought to approach with
humility and diffidence. It gave liim life, it gave him
thought, and by its laws he dies.

Sir Thomas Watson has made some admirable remarks on
what should be the effect on the mind of a scientific training.*
Speaking of Anatomy and Physiology as the basis of medical
knowledge, Dr. Watson says, —

" But I do not think I am wandering from my proper sub-
ject, when I bid you remember how profoundly interesting,
how almost awful is the study in itself, and for its own sake,
revealing as it surely does the inimitable workmanship of a
Hand that is Divine. Do not lose or disregard that grand and
astonishing lesson. Do not listen to those who may tell you
not to look for the evidence of purpose in this field of study ;
that the visible mechanism of that intricate, but marvellously
perfect and harmonious work, the animal body — the numberless
examples it contains of means suited to ends, of fitness for a
use of even prospective arrangements to meet future needs, of
direct provisions for happiness and enjoyment — that all these
have no force at all in true philosophy, as evidences of design.
For my own part I declare that I can no more avoid perceiving
with my mental vision the evidential marks of purpose in the
structure of the body, than I can help seeing with my open
eyes, in broad daylight, the objects that stand before my face.
There are however minds, very powerful and cultivated minds
too, — that cannot or will not, or at least do not, recognize, or
acknowledge these teachings of anatomy, but denounce as
unscientific and unsound all reference to final causes in Nature.
To me, believing in their honesty, this is intelligible only on
the hypothesis suggested by an eminent living philosopher, and
anatomist, that the minds in question labour under some defect
analogous to that which render certain eyes imperfect and un-
•* See " Watson's Practice of Physic," fifth edition.

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 39

trustworthy, and which has received the name of colour-blind-
ness. It is upon the facts of anatomy, in its broadest sense,
that Paley, takes his stand in his unrivalled argument for
Natural Theology, — an argument in which I can trace no
flaw ; and sixteen centuries before him, Galen had felt that in
writing his anatomical treatises, he was composing a hymn to
the Deity, — that a display so indicative of the being, wisdom,
the power and the goodness of God, was a service of piety,
and praise."

But it is not only medical students who should be led to
belief by the study of anatomy, and other branches of Natural
science, for all men should see that all the works of God tell
the same tale, if looked at with an understanding free from
intellectual " colour-blindness.^^

In order to the further consideration and discussion of this
question, I now propose that we should take an imaginary
walk in the country with some men of science, and philosophy,
all of whom we must suppose to be materialistic sceptics with
the exception of a physician, who, like the writer, has seen too
much of the processes of life and death, and witnessed too
often the wonderful working of the mind, or intellectual spirit
of men when animated by belief, ever to be a sceptic — a work-
ing by which sorrow can be turned into cheerfulness ; suffering,
into patient and even joyful hope ; and death be deprived of
its sting.

Come, Materialistic Philosopher ! Materialistic Biologist !
Materialistic Chemist ! Materialistic Physicist ! Materialistic
Psychologist ! &c., &c., let us go together to the water
meadows of a luxuriant valley, on a clear, warm gladsome day
of spring, or early summer, and there let us look around and
revel in the delights so amply abounding, that ravish the
sight, and the hearing, and the smell ; and afford such scope for
the exercise of the reason; the imagination; and the emotions.

The eye is rejoiced by the bright sunshine beaming on the
vividly green fresh young grass, — by the lovely flowers, the
gay, fluttering butterflies ; the enchanting birds, headed by

40 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

the kingfisher who, with his brilliant hues, flashes past, with
the directness of a meteor.

And then too, the ear, and the nose participate in the luxu-
ries, for the air laden with the scent of flowers, and of new-
mown hay, echoes, and trills with the melody of birds, and
with the splash and murmur of the running water.

The thrush sings boldly its rich and varied song in the tall
elm, the reedling warbles its mellow, cheerful notes, in yonder
hedge, or low bush, — the butterfly flits past— you stop and
gather the gorgeous marsh-marigold — the silver-sided trout
with its scarlet spots glides swiftly through the crystal
water.

All these combine to make up a picture, a perfume, and a
melody and a scene of delight, such as can only be equalled
by the beauties and joys of the somewhat different delights of
a wood in early autumn.

But all these contribute not simply a paradise for sense ; for
the intellect of the thoughtful believer rejoices equally at this
display of God's power, and design, and love ; and ponders
long, and reverently, and thankfully on the wondrous scene.

Now, materialists, with these surroundings, ask your vaunted
reason, whether all these perfections of form, and colour, and
melody, and aroma can all have come by chance conditions ?
Whether all these glories, and beauties, and charms can have
come by accident ?

What ! Chance beauty — chance harmony — chance order —
chance perfume — could they all have come by chance, " liap-
pening''^ out of a chance chaos ?

Truly the materialist's creed is a difficult one indeed for
acceptance ; and one that makes a powerful call on the
credulity !

Does that glorious sunshine happen to be so beautiful, simply
by chance physics, and is it by mere chance mechanical and
chemical principles " happening so," that its animating influence
causes growth, and fosters life in animals and plants, and that
few of them could exist without it ?

" Oh ! " says one of the materialists, " you see it is only a

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHIIOSOPHY. 41

case of cause, and effect ; you must not ask me as to a First
Cause, that is ' Unknowable,' and therefore I don't bother
myself about it. The sun shines, and that is enough for me,
and it is interesting to the last degree to follow out, not only
its life-compelling influence on organization and on function, by
means of the stimulus of its light, and heat, and chemical
power ; and all the results which proceed therefrom : but also
to trace out its effects on the inorganic things of this globe — for
example, on the water, and the atmosphere. We are finding
out now all about this influence, as producing the currents of
the ocean, and the air ; and as effecting the evaporation of
water, and the consequent formation of rain, and dew, by
which plants ' are watered ; ' rivers formed ; hills lowered by
denudation, &c., &c. We are beginning to understand it all ;
and day by day we see more and more clearly that the action
of the universe, and all in it, is a mere matter of physics, and
chemistry, one action producing another, and that one again
causing a further one ; so that the whole universe is one great
self-acting machine !"

Thus speaks the materialist.

But let us pass on. And again the inquiry is made by the
believer, whether the azure heavens — the rich green grass —
the bright limpid stream — the wondrous flowers — the waving
trees — the birds enchanting — the gorgeous insects, can all
have arisen by the chance action of materialistic evolution,
without a plan, and without a God of love ?

Putting aside the question of organic structure and function,
which will be considered in detail elsewhere, we will only here,
look at the outward appearance of things.

Can it be seriously maintained that the blue sky, and the
green grass, and the trees, and various coloured flowers, and
birds, and butterflies please the eye simply, because they
liappen by chance to form a contrast to each other in regard
to colour, and so on ?

Can it be, that the heavens are blue, simply because it
happens by chance to be so, according to one of the " laws "
of light ! Or can it be that the grass is green merely because

/L2 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

its colouring matter (chlorophyll) happens hy chance to be that
colour ?

Or that the crystal stream — (I speak of a chalk stream, —
say the Itchen at the Worthys near Winchester)— is so bright,
and limpid, and beautiful, simply because the molecules com-
posing water happen to have little cohesion for each other, and
happen to form a transparent fluid, and happening also to have
a considerable specific gravity flow on, because of the chance
'' law," or necessity of gravitation !

Or that the colours of the flowers are so various (according
to the materialists) and charming, simply because it so hap-
pjened, that from many of them secreting honey in their
interior, they have attracted insects to frequent them, and
these by mechanically assisting in the dispersion of pollen, and
choosing the most conspicuous for their visits — have thus
" happened " by a blind chance to " improve " flowers by aiding
the fertilization and cross-fertilization of the most beautiful
kinds ?

Or can it be (according to the Darwinists) that birds are so
musical, or so beautiful in plumage, solely because their
ancestors " happen " to have cultivated an aesthetic taste for
harmony and colour, when choosing their mates. And for
like reasons, can it have so happened that insects are so gaudy,
and variously marked, simply because their predecessors have
also been nice and fanciful, and even eccentric in their notions
of form, and colour, when selecting their partners ?

In regard to this conspicuousness of gaudy insects I may
remark in parenthesis, that according to what one would have
expected in a materialistic evolutional sense, it ought to have
occurred to insects just the reverse to flowers, and just the
contrary to what really has taken place in many insects, sup-
posing them to have ^^ acquired''' colour by survival, &c., viz.:
that if an insect had " tended " to become more gaudy, it
would have been more readily seen by birds, fish, frogs, &c.,
and so would have been more likely to be captured ; and thus
" gaudiness " have been prevented in consequence of the action
of the law of the ''survival of the fittest"! Consequently

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 43

that dingy, inconspicuous insects ought to have stood the best
chance of survival !

To resume. But seriously, can it be, that all, or any one
of these things above-named, have come to be what they are
by " necessities,''^ happening by 2'>ure chance ! Would not such
a belief be a straining of faith in materialistic and utilitarian
philosophy a little too far — even to a disruj^tion of it on close
examination by exposing its hollow and incongruous absur-
dity.

Come, my friends, who have accompanied me in this
imaginary walk, let us reason.

It has been said that science is the highest application of
common sense. Then let us try and divest our " common
sense " of overstrained theories, and, without entering here
on all the subjects that have presented themselves to us, let
us discuss, for want of space, one thing only we have looked
on — the elm-trees.^

Now, as to these, even the Darwinist, who is moderate in
his views, glories in the supposed discovery that flowers are
so beautiful, simply because insects visit them — for being
attracted to the most conspicuous, they get the pollen of such
entangled on their legs and bodies, and in this way by in-
advertently conveying pollen from flower to flower of the
most gaudy kinds, secure the fertilization of the most beautiful,
and thus aid the law of heredity in perpetuating and improving
the most attractive flowered plants.

I would here note that all this must be considered by the
" unbelieving " materialistic evolutionist to be by a chance
and undesigned action ! And he must admit this, according
to his view, or he would have to confess to design by a Su23er-
natural Power, which admission would blow his whole theory
to the winds.

Now, I quite grant that flowers may become improved in
this way, according to an ordained law ; and according to the

5 The other questions will be dealt with more fully in succeeding
volumes.

44 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

capacity for " improvement " and " variation " possessed by
particular flowers ; but what I wish particularly to show here,
is, that even if in the designed economy of nature, insects
have had somewhat to do with increasing the beauty of some
flowers by cross fertilization (see ^'Beauty in flowers"), yet they
can have had nothing to do with improving the beauty of
leaves, and the beauty of numerous plants and trees that may
have no conspicuous flowers.

Then, why are hosts of leaves and trunks and branches
so beautiful ? Look at that splendid elm -tree, the bole of
which two men with extended arms cannot span !

See it in all its glory, with its diverse branches as big as
ordinary trees, and its beautiful rugged bark, and its myriads
of marvellously-formed serrated green leaves. It has no
gaudy flowers, and its blossom (which has no petals) appears
amid the frost and snow of February, before the insect world
has aroused.

Why, then, this beauty ? " Oh ! bosh as to beauty," says
the materialist, " the perception or ideation of beauty is very
much a matter of symmetry, or of contrast, or of sentiment in
the beholder, and affects some minds, the same as does poetry the
kind of persons who are emotional, the people who are crazed
concerning the old superstitions of religion " ! ! I

But still there is the elm-tree in all its beauty. Explain
it, materialist, if you can. Did it — failing insects — come as it
is simply by the " chance " action of some other " secondary
causes " which have not at j^resent been discovered ?

Is that an answer that would satisfy the mind of any reason-
able common-sense man ?

Granted, that " secondary causes " act by law, in regard to
chemico-physics, organization, growth, &c. ; but whence came
the laws ? and how could mere chemico-physics order develop-
ment, growth, form, and shape of stem, branches, leaves, &c.,
not only of the elm-tree, but also of all other kinds of trees
and plants, leaves and flowers ?

No ! Surely such law and such beauty and such marvels
could only have been brought about and eflected by a First

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 45

Cause — a Spirit capable of, and possessing, design, will, and
power. (See "Development," and "Reproduction.")

Why, in this walk of ours, just look around at the diversit}-
of form and colour in vegetation only ! What a contrast
between the upright, noble elm, and the bending, graceful
willow ! And look at those herbaceous plants, scattered in
profusion in all directions, humbler, it is true, in size, but no
less beautiful and varied in form and colour as to stems
leaves, &c., &c.

Could all this beauty and diversity, this harmony and con-
trast, this variety, yet specific fixity, have come only by
chemico-physics, and a self-constituted power of inheritance ?
Powers, all of them, I grant, working by law according to
endowment, but powers quite incompetent to have created
themselves, or to have produced organization, difierentiation,&c.,
and the vast variety we see as to form, and function, and use,
unless ordered by a Power, above, and superior to, mechanics ;
and capable of plan, creation, and endowment.

Oh ! says the Darwinist, as to diversity, you do not see " the
links " by which, during the lapse of incalculable ages, the
various forms have been very gradually developed by mecha-
nical evolution.

Links ! Darwinist ! Why, if you could arrange in one vast
row, specimens of each plant and creature — from the humblest
in the past to the highest of the present, and could convey
me along this prodigious line, and show me the gradual tran-
sition and melting of one form into another; do you think I,
or any unprejudiced man, could grant that it had been all
effected by self-acting chemico-physics working by chance
hap-hazard, and independent of power and design ? Could
any man grant it, who, being sufficiently informed in science
and religion, and unblinded and untrammelled by theory, was
asked for a candid and rational opinion ?

Then let us call in candour and common sense to our aid,
and acknowledge God — the Almighty Spirit— as demonstrated
by His design, and laws, and works. But to return for a
moment to " links." Suppose there are, or have been links.

46 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

and that plants and animals have gradually changed from one
form to another, according to the pressure of a vast number
of circumstances. Granted, I say, even, that evolution is true,
let me ask him if any change could take place in the form
and structure of any organized being, so as for it to become
different according to the altered circumstances of climate,
&c., unless it had been endowed with a capacity for change ?
Surely, unless organisms did possess this capacity, they would
die, and not change under altered conditions of climate, &c.

But this would be design, and not chance materialistic
evolution ! So, too, of all things in organization, and organized
products that are said to have arisen by " secondary causes."
Take the case of one of the favourite examples of the evolu-
tionist— the instance already quoted of beauty in flowers.
Granted for the sake of argument only, that flowers have been
brought to their present beauty by the circumstances atten-
dant on the visits of insects ; how come some flowers to have
honey ? Was it by chance ? and was it by chance that
flowers were capable of " improvement " and of becoming so
attractive in appearance ; and further, was it by chance that
bees " acquired " the " habit " of making combs, and collecting
honey ?

There is no time now for us to linger on these questions
(see Vol. IV.), and we must walk on — besides, if we stay longer,
I fear that Berkleyite — who instead of being materialistic,
disbelieves in matter altos-ether — and who has been restins:
all this time, will sit too long on the damp grass, and will
suffer rheumatic pains to-morrow, and although of course in
his view such phenomena will be subjective, and purely
imaginary, still it may be well to avoid them if possible.

But see, the trout rises, and takes a lovely May-fly ; and in
another instant is itself seized by the rapacious jaws of a pike,
and struggles in vain for liberty, and life.

A falcon too appears, poised over his intended victim, the
thrush ; he hovers in mid-air — suddenly he swoops, and his
quarry, sure-struck, is pierced by his needle-like claws, and
the beauteous creature that a minute before had warbled

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 47

sweet melody is dead — mercilessly torn to pieces by the
kestril's sharp bill.

Simultaneously from those of the group of philosophers
who are scoffers, bursts forth a jeering chorus, " Now, be-
liever ! In the presence of this pain, cruelty, and death,
where is your God of love, and beauty and order ! ! Hide
your diminished head ! ! " (To avoid repetition the answer to
this will be found under the headings of " Rapacity " and
''Cruelty'' in Vol. II.)

But we walk on, and far down in the valley, descry an
angler ; and watching him, a lady. Deftly he twirls his rod,
and his artificial fly dances on the sparkling crystal water of
the deep pool, at the " tumbling bay." He hooks his fish,
and " plays him ; " and then in reaching forward with his net
to land the writhing and coveted prey, he steps on the slip-
pery old woodwork of "the hatch," and in an instant is himself
struggling in the water. The lady rushes to the rescue of
her lover, who ^vould have been safe enough if left alone —
she frantically stretches over the water to extend him her
parasol, and overbalancing, is herself immersed.

The philosophers witnessing the disaster from a distance,
and forgetting their discussion, merge all differences in the
common call of humanity, and each is eager to arrive first at
the scene of disaster.

The physician's coat is off — he plunges in, and in a few
minutes both bodies are recovered from the water — alas ! I
say bodies, for the lady by taking hold of her lover's arms,
and clinging too tightly to him whose life she would will-
ingly have saved by the sacrifice of her owm, has actually
drowned him by impeding his efforts, and has thus prevented
him from rescuing her, as he otherwise doubtless would have
done, if left free.

The doctor resorts to artificial respiration, and under his
skilled and earnest, yet carefully deliberate guidance, all the
party work with equal zeal and solicitude.

But all, alas, is in vain. The great mystery has occurred
to both lovers ; and stretched inanimate on the grass (the scene

48 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

made all the more impressive by the contrast of the joys and
the beauties around) lie the lifeless material remains of what
half an hour before were two of the brightest, and best, and
intellectual of mankind — loving and beloved.^

And this is the climax to our walk, and to its wonders, and
its mysteries.

Here, without a moment's warning, are two souls gone to
their account in the heyday of youth, and in the full enjoyment
of life and hope.

Think, too, of the families and friends of each plunged
suddenly in deepest distress !

Oh ! mystery — mystery ! Oh ! woe, woe !

And the unbelieving philosopher asks the believer if he can
unravel the former, or offer any reasonable consolation in
regard to the latter ?

In reply, I would say, that in this world of mysteries, the
believer can only do what the unbeliever must do also — try to
understand.

Neither can do more than try — and each in faith and hope.

But the kind of faith ? And the kind of hope ?

And here the two thinkers separate, and differ as much as
does the night from the day — darkness from light.

The scientific unbeliever, in his "conceit in science," arro-
gantly scorns wonder, and flouts mystery, and says that all
that happens is simply the result of " secondary causes,'' and
that these will all be understood some day ; forgetting, ap-
parently, in his faith in and his exaltation of man's intellect,
and science, and power of investigation, and comprehension,
that "natural" and "secondary causes" and their effects,
marvellous as they may be, still are but phenomena subordinate
in origin, and resulting from, a Great Prime Cause.

The scientific sceptic seems to forget — he who in general is

6 This last incident may, by some persons, be deemed too sensational
for a work of this kind, but it is necessary for my purpose to insert
some such illustration of what man is liable to as one of the exigencies
of existence. (See '^ Accidental Death/' ''Chance," ''Probation," Vol.
III.)

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 49

so fond of inquiry, and of facts — that all causes, and all effects,
must have a primary source ; but, with curious inconsistency
and unwonted forbearance, he contents himself in this instance
with inquiring into, and speculating on, secondary cau.^es, and
their effects only, and will not bring his mind to the examina-
tion of the Great First Cause, because, in order to do so, he
must first pull down from its throne his idgl — man's intellect —
and approach the question in humbleness of spirit.

And because he will not be humble in his ideas ; and because,
in his conceit, he will not admit openly that man's intellect is
finite ; and because he will not examine dispassionately the
question of the First Great Cause — for the reason that he
cannot understand all about It, according to his own views — he
contents himself with muddling his brain by laborious research,
in regard to the subordinate minutiw of " secondary causes'' and
" secondary effects," instead of looking at the broad fundamental
parts of the case.

But the believer's faith is of a totally different kind. He,
while acknowledging the mysteries and wonders of Creation,
beUeves that all things occur in a way, and for a purpose he
cannot possibly fnlly understand; but, nevertheless, that of
two facts, he can be quite certain : —

1st. That all things did not come, nor can now work, by
pure chance, but must necessarily have had a Creator, and
must now possess a Ruler.

2ndly. That notwithstanding the impenetrable mystery of
the origin and active working of sin, and its multiform con-
sequences, every man, who is a believer, may be sure " that
all things work together for good to them that love God."
{Romans viii. 28.)

Holding these views, therefore, the believer, while fully, and
even emphatically, acknowledging the profound mysteries by
which he is surrounded, and his inability completely to under-
stand them, at the same time infers that as such marvels as he
can apprehend cannot have come by themselves, they must neces-
sarily have had a Designer and Maker, and concludes that that
Maker, according to all rational conjecture, and earnest re-

50 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

search, cannot, in regard to the general constitution of this
world and all in it as to perfection in what is pure, and good,
and righteous, and lovely, or loving, be any other than the
God in Whom his fathers believed, and of Whom the most an-
cient writings tell us, and to Whose truth witness is borne
by every man's inmost heart and reason (if unconstrained), also
by the history of the Jewish nation, and the testimony of its
most Illustrious Son — that Illustrious Son — that Wonderful
Being — Who, deigning to be born of a humble Jewish maiden,
declared and proved Himself God Incarnate.

And in the same way as the believer holds that all purity,
and goodness, &c., come from God ; in the same way he holds
that all evil, and ugliness, are brought about by Satan.

And now let me say a few words of advice and instruction
to the non-scientific.

They shall be very brief, but, as I believe, very important.
They are these. Not to let themselves fall into the error
of thinking that men of science know so much as they may
appear, or as they may assume to know ; or as they may even
honestly really believe they do. Consequently, not to be led
too hastily by reverence for authority, and admiration for toil-
some research, and brilliant discoveries, and dazzling specula-
tions, to cast aside the old beliefs too suddenly. Also, always
to bear in mind that the marvellous applications of science in
modern times to the uses of man ; such as Steam — the Tele-
graph— Photography — Gas lighting, &c., and which applica-
tions have very justly raised scientific men so high in estimation,
are really only new and highly ingenious mechanical applica-
tions of forces and principles, known for ages, but now so
moulded as to produce novel and most useful results and effects.
I say effects : for as to the cause of the forces and things them-
selves, men of science know absolutely nothing.

A child watching the steam issue from a kettle, or making
small pieces of paper dance by holding near them a rubbed piece
of sealing wax, can tell as well essentially why each event
occurs, as could a Watt, or a Wheatstone. Why does water
boil on being heated, and fly off rapidly in small particles at

CONCEIT IN SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY. 51

212°, and with such irresistible force ? Why does the rubbed
wax attract the paper ?

No one knows the essential causes of these or any like
occurrences. But by most keen observation, thought, and in-
genious mechanical adaptations, Watt invented and made the
engine, and Wheatstone the telegraph, but they did no more
than direct natural force — they did not make or invent the
force in either case — that was God's making. Man can only
mould ; fashion ; bend ; and use. God alone can know the
origin of causes. God alone can create.

Looking therefore at the foregoing facts and arguments, I
hold that a person who gives his mind to a scientific or philo-
sophical training, should study above all things to avoid conceit
in the intellectual and mechanical powers of man ; and should
learn, that instead of seeking solely to exalt the capacity, and
capabilities of man, he should rather, as the only creature able to
realize and able to appreciate the wonders around him, and
capable, moreover, of doing worship — turn with all humility
and praise and adoration to Him who — higher than man —
is the Great Power and Intellect, Author and Governor of
Creation — the God of our Fathers and ourselves.

As a conclusion to this section, let us contrast the believer,
and the unbeliever.

There is the Sceptical Materialistic Evolutionist ! Accord-
ing to his own showing nothing more than a superior reasoning
Animal ; alone ; helpless in affliction ; cursing illness, pain,
and adversity ; hopeless of a future life. Yet he is self-suffi-
cient, and looks down on other men who do not hold his
views, and regards them as having an "emotional" and
poetical craze.

But how different the believer. He believes himself created
to be what he is ; and feels that his mind is superior to that of
brutes, inasmuch as it is an intellectual mind, made after the
image of God's (though unlike His, of limited capacity). Yet
he is humble-minded. He is never alone.

In joy; in sorrow; in pain and sickness; in poverty; in

E 2

52 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

affliction — in solitude on the hill side, or on the bed of death,
he is never alone, his God and his Saviour are with him — the
Christ with whom he can be heart to heart, on whom he can
lean and derive help and consolation from in all trials — the
Christ, moreover, who has promised him after this life, a life
eternal of happiness.

Will you change. Materialist ? Oh ! yes, I know you will if
you can conform your reason. But how to do this !

First knock down from its pedestal your idol, — man's intel-
lectual self-sufficiency.

Then kneel down and ask God's grace and assistance ; but
you must do it heartily.

Then take the Bible — with a thorough wish to understand
it — and not merely to pick holes in it — and study it candidly,
— and if you do this (aided perhaps by Paley's, Butler's, and
Porteus's works), examining Nature's wonders at the same time
in a reverential spirit, — I have no fear but that you will
become a believer, if you are really in earnest, and humble
your mind sufficiently. Be willing and wishful to believe, and
it will come to you.

SECTION II.

GOD IN NATURE.

A simple account of the Elementary things of Creation.

CHAPTER I.

MATTER.

Introductory — Matter — Atoms — Solids, Liquids, and Gases — ^ther
— Quality of atoms — Yortex atoms — Size of atoms — Vibration of
atoms — Shape of atoms — Placing of atoms — Compounds — Summary
as to atoms — Peflections — Compounds and their molecules — A Mole-
cule— Movement, size, and shape of molecules — Inorganic Matter —
Elements — Chemical combination and aflBnity — Atomic weights —
Law of multiples — Law of equivalents and substitution — Reflections
— Matter indestructible — Organic matter — ^ther.

Introductory. — In this section of the work, I propose to give
a familiar though strictly scientific account of the things of
Creation — Matter — Force — Mind — Life — Organization — Or-
ganisms.

The object I have in view in thus doing, is that I may by
plain language, and explanation, at once render aid to an in-
telligent, and reasonable comprehension of God's works by
the unscientific, as well as at the same time to afford both to
them and to scientific sceptics a series of proofs demonstrative
of the existence of a Supernatural Power — presumably the Per-
sonal God — Designer — Creator — and Governor of the Universe
— a power such as is depicted and asserted in the Scriptures.

Some persons may at first sight think that I am wrong in
going, as I propose to do, into details (some of which must
necessarily be speculative) concerning the constitution and

54 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

working of the matter ; and forces ; and things generally of
the Universe ; but on reflection it will be seen that unless one
does so, and makes a very intimate study of nature, it is im-
possible to arrive at a just and intelligent conception of the
wonders and mysteries of Creation, and of the power and
marvellousness of its First Great Cause.

Moreover ^t is only by such close investigation of God's
works and ways that it is at all feasible to attain to such a
kind of knowledge as is requisite in order to effectually con-
front the Materialist, and to oppose and confound him with
his own weapons. There is also another reason why I should
take this course, which is, that I may have an opportunity of
presenting to scientific experts — whether believing, or not
believing — the particular scientific views on which I base my
arguments, especially as some of those views and arguments
are either novel ; or unusual ; or at the least not in fashion.

Of course I shall only have space to give a very brief
outline of such an immense subject, but my object will be to
present as plainly and concisely as I am able a tangible view
of what little we can understand, or reasonably conjecture,
concerning the marvels we shall have to investigate.

At the onset, however, I must emphatically remind the
learned and impress on the unlearned, the leading fact that
although we have the things of Creation constantly before us,
we can really find out and know but little of the essential in-
timate constitution and working of such natural things, and
of their relations to one another ; also, that extraordinary as
have been the discoveries of man, the high probability that
what we can see and apprehend is as nothing compared with
what we cannot discern, or comprehend.

Consequently that as speculation and hypothesis must enter
largely into every scientific statement or exposition concerning
the marvels of Nature, it behoves us in making such specula-
tion, and building up such hypothesis, to carefully avoid con-
ceit, and to approach the consideration of such mysteries with
diffidence and humble-mindedness. Another leading idea that
will animate and guide me in this exposition of the things of

GOD IN NATURE. 5-

Creation, will be the main principle that all speculations con-
cerning its hidden or difficultly-discerned mysteries ought to
be subordinated to the Bible and its teachings ; for that col-
lection of ancient writings, whatever modern sceptics may say,
is certainly composed of books written by exceedingly clever
men. I hold therefore that in regard to the Bible we ought
to observe the same rule in respect to it, and its assertions, as
we do to other books written by very clever men — to accept
its fundamental statements as true, or probable, unless they
can be disproved.

This is not only most in accordance with common sense,
but also most philosophical. Without here entering on the
question of inspiration, it seems to me monstrous to attempt to
set aside the statements and views, and record of facts as ex-
pressed^ or testified to, by men of genius in times past and
given in language whose beauty, dignity, and force has never
been surpassed — even if eqifalled: and all merely because
some of such views and statements either do not — or it is
assumed they do not — fit with modern science, or agree with
the particular theories and reasonings of a section of bold
thinkers.

In the Bible it is stated that God is Creator and Governor
of the Universe, also that there is an Evil influence which has
in a most mysterious manner corrupted this world for a season.
These are statements which have never been proved to be
untrue, and on them I shall base my main explanations and
arguments, for I hold that however much certain passages and
words in the Bible have been objected to, and criticized, and
denied, these, as well as all other of the broad facts and declara-
tions of that book, have never been disproved; but on the con-
trary— as I hope to aid in showing — that quite the reverse is
the case.

As to such scientific difficulties in the Bible as of the sun
going round the earth, &c., &c., that, and analogous questions
may be quite put aside, because it would have been useless,
and even harmful in the then state of knowledge, for the
prophets and men of old to have written differently, on such

56 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

points, to Avhat they did — they could only speak of the aspect
of the heavens, &c., in a way to be understood by persons
living in their period. They had no mission from God to
promulgate science, and if they had said the earth revolved
round the sun, &c., they would have so discredited them-
selves as to have been useless as preachers. Indeed it is pro-
bable that the prophets themselves spoke usually of natural
things, only as they appeared to be according to their own
minds, untrained in science as they were, and that when they
did speak of things surpassing the knowledge of their days,
or even of ours, and necessary to be known, their utterances
or revelations were then and then only by inspiration.

Nevertheless, although I hold these views concerning the
Bible and its statements, the reader may rely that in all I
write as to science I shall keep strictly to the facts as shown
us by modern research and discovery, as far as such facts are
'proven^ and that I shall not try*to conceal any such acknow-
ledged truths, nor to attempt to twist, distort, or belie them
in a manner to suit my purpose. All shall be candid and true
as far as my knowledge and judgment extend. Nor on the
other hand in regard to things unproven^ shall I give expres-
sion to any surmises or conjectures that may fit with my re-
ligious views unless they appear justly and fairly reconcilable
with such scientific facts as it is believed at the present time
we are sure of.

I shall make use of no conjecture that a scientific sceptic or
materialist can disprove. At the same time I shall not hesi-
tate to avail myself of conjecture where scientific proofs fail
us, because I wish to present to the minds of my readers as
vivid and concrete a view as I can, of what the animate, and
inanimate forces and things of Creation are, and how they
work ; or rather how a believer may humbly suppose they are
constituted, and how they may be presumed to work ; and I
shall do this I hope in such' a manner, as that the mind may
have some definite conception to rest on in trying to trace out
the marvels of nature.

GOD IN NATURE. 57

The Elementary ; primary ; or fundamental things of Crea-
tion consist of matter and force — including in the latter that
most intangible of all forces — spirit. — I propose first to speak
of matter ; then of force ; and lastly of spirit, and life.

Constitution of Matter. — Matter may exist in at least three
forms — as a solid — a liquid — or a gas. As to what may be the
ultimate or fundamental constitution of matter there have been
many conjectures, but as there is no certainty that any one of
them is correct, I shall, in our ignorance, adopt in these remarks
that one which appears most acceptable to a common-sense view.
It is this. That as matter consists of a definite " someithing '*
which we can handle and weigh, it must consist of substance
however subtle (as in the case of gas), or attenuated, that
substance may be. And further that this substance must con-
sist probably of solid atoms or indivisible particles ; because
although you may divide, and divide substances again and
again by mechanical means (so far as our coarse powers of so
doing extend), still it is most reasonable to suppose — especially
as shown by Chemical Philosophy and its laws of " equiva-
lents ;^^ (see Index) and ^^ multiple proportions f and "sub-
stitution " — that, beyond our mechanical means of showing, there
must nevertheless exist a limit where divisibility is no longer
possible. This limit is the atom — the substance, or mass of
matter.

There are many other reasons for believing in atoms. For
example, if you decompose water by electricity, it breaks up
into two gases — Hydrogen, and Oxygen, one passing off at
one pole, and the other at the opposite one, showing that
water is composed of two things of different natures. The
inference therefore is that Hydrogen and Oxygen are different
in atomic constitution — that is, that the constituent stuff of
which each is made up differs in quality, and that although
the little pieces of substance of which each is composed, will
under certain circumstances, cling together in a definite and
orderly manner so as to form water, yet that under other cir-
cumstances— e. g. the presence of voltaic action — they will
spring asunder and separate the one kind from the other.

SS SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Another important reason for believing in atoms, is the fact
that the simple elements will nnite with one another in certain
invariable proportions, also that in the instance of " substitu-
tion " (or the case of one thing during chemical change taking
the place of another in the constitution of a molecule) it can
only do so according to fixed numbers as to quantity. (See
" Compounds and Equivalents^) Again, the theory of atoms
receives very strong confirmation from the fact, First, that if
you heat any one of many solids, or liquids, you may cause it
to pass into a state of vapour, which vapour on cooling will
again become a solid, or liquid of the same kind as before.

Second. That if you take a gas and violently compress it
in a specially-made vessel, you may so squeeze its (supposed)
atoms together as to cause the gas to become a liquid, or even,
by further pressure, a solid. It therefore seems reasonable
to conclude according to this, that matter is made up of in-
finitely minute particles which can be separated as by the
first experiment, or squeezed together as by the second.
Another inference too may be drawn from these experiments,
and that is the very strong surmise, that atoms are placed
near together in the solid (see " Vibration of Atoms ;") further
apart (and so capable of gliding over one another) in the liquid:
and still further apart in the gas.

Now supposing that there are such things as atoms, does
anything exist between them ?

We do not know for certain, but it has been thought there
must be a " something " so as to allow the atoms to move
about or shift their positions between or in relation to one
another. This " something " which fills their interspaces is
believed to be the same stuif that according to hypothesis
fills all space, and is called " ether " (see Index). But however
that may be, it appears certain that in some way or other the
atoms or particles do not actually touch each other, and that in
these interspaces they are able to oscillate, or vibrate, or rotate
between one another — that is to say, that this ether or " some-
thing" which exists between the atoms is so elastic as to
allow them the capacity to shift their positions and move

GOD IN NATURE. 59

about — and to use an engineering term, the ether allows them
room for a certain "play," and in that way not only "ives
opportunity for the atoms to obey their ordinary attractions
and repulsions for one another, but permits them probably to
alter their oscillation, vibration, or rotation, &c., or their
relative positions to one another ; or even perhaps their shape,
according to the varying conditions they may be exposed to,
of heat, or cold, or melting, or chemical action, &c.

But I will not pursue this further here. I only wish so far
to impress, and fix strongly in the mind of the non-scientific
reader the almost certainly true conjecture that everything we
can handle and weigh is composed of little atoms, and that it
is w4th the holding of these together, and building them up
and arranging them, and controlling them, or pulling them
apart, and separating them, that the various forces of Nature
have to do, which wnll be spoken of further on. (See ''Forces.'')

But we have not yet done with the atom. I say again it
seems most rational to consider that as we know we can divide
a solid into small particles, or a liquid into drops, so it seems
certain that these particles or drops must themselves be
capable of division till you come to an ultimate jDart, or atom,
or point, w^hich can be no further divided ; and though these
atoms are so small that the highest powers of the microscope
fail — and must as we are told ever fail — to reveal them, I trust
I have given good reasons for assuming their existence to be
a fact.

Now supposing these atoms to exist, it may be presumed —
seeing how various matter is in kind — that they differ de-
finitely in certain things ; in quality of substance and attraction ;
size; description of vibration; and probably in shape. These
differences, I say, are probable, although we do not know such to
be really the case ; but it may be fairly presumed that they do
so differ in any one, or in all respects as above described, aud
that these differences are not only the factors which determine
the solid, liquid, or gaseous conditions, but that they constitute
the real distinguishing characteristics of all elementary

material things.

6o SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF,

How much material things differ we have proof of when
we consider the extreme dissimilarity of solid iron, and
liquid mercury ; of light and scentless hydrogen gas, and heavy,
pungent, chlorine gas. Or when we observe the difference
between hard iron, soft wax, brittle glass, and elastic india-
rubber, &c.

The differences too in specific weight, and in the boiling and
vapourising points, indicate strongly the immense variety there
must be in the essential constitution of things.

Again there is another strong reason (which I have already
glanced at) for thinking that atoms differ very much in quaUty,
&c., and that is, our knowledge that some different kinds of
things will unite to form new compounds, and that others will
not so unite ; and therefore it is fair to suppose, that it is the
differences between the properties of the various kinds of
atoms which determine the possibility of their union, or non-
union. That is to say, their union or non-union will or will not
take place according as the respective atoms or molecules are
consonant or disconsonant as to quality of substance, size,
kind of vibration, or shape and mode of placing. I will now
speak in more detail as to these supposed differences, but
I must warn the tyro that much of what I shall now write will
deal largely in conjecture.

The duality; or Nature of the Substance of Atoms.—
Although it has been thus far comparatively easy to establish
on pretty clear grounds the fact of the existence of atoms,
still when we come to inquire of what they are composed, we
are met by an impenetrable veil of mystery which not only
baffles our positive ken, but even our conjectures. For myself
I incline to the old view of the atom being hard, and solid, but
it is nevertheless quite possible that an atom may be composed
of a homogeneous, incompressible fluid.

Whether solid or fluid however, all we can say is that an
ultimate atom of every kind of matter must consist of an in-
divisible unit of " something." But what that something is in
its intimate nature no man can tell — still it seems most reason-
able to surmise that such different things for example as iron,

GOD IN NATURE. 6i

mercury, and oxygen, must be composed of atoms possessing
substance of different essential qualities. At the same time,
however, it is right to say that it is quite possible that every-
thing is made up of the same one kind of material atoms
differently conditioned, or put together as to vibration, placing,
&c. : but anyhow we may feel certain from the amazing dif-
ferences we see in the qualities of what we consider elements,
that we cannot reasonably doubt but that such differences
(whatever they really consist in) must have been ordered by
God and could not liave come so by mere chance, or self-
action. Matter, if so clever as to have created itself, one
cannot conceive to have been in such case of dissimilar kind,
and various as to quality of substance, sort of attraction, &c., —
it must surely have been of one kind only, as to its nature of
substance, attraction, vibration, &c. And again, if this clever,
evolutionary stuff had been able to become from one simple kind
to many complex kinds, why should there ever have been
stability and fixedness in any element ? All ought to have
been change as to the elementary things, and not such fixity
as to elementary quality, as we know is the case ; for we
cannot change one element into another — iron into gold — or
oxygen into hydrogen, &c. Therefore I say that this variety
in elementary bodies, and yet definite fixity as to individuality
of character, is to my mind a proof of God's impress (see
" Physical and Chemical Evolution,'^ Vol. IV.) For myself I
should not be in the least disturbed if I heard to-morrow that
all the elements were discovered to be made of one kind of
thing, or substance, differently put together. I should at once
say as to atomic constitution and nature of vibration. Here is
fresh proof of design ! because no one kind of matter
generating itself could ever have become differently self-consti-
tuted and self-active from other kinds, and yet stable in such
difference: for the very power of becoming different, 2iiid perma-
nently remaining so under ordinary conditions, would, I hold,
show design. Still whatever may be the exact nature of the
differences between different sorts of substances, and whether
the atoms are solid, &c., we know as a fact that differences do

62 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

exist, and whether atoms of metal and atoms of gas consist of
one and the same stuff put together differently, or whether the
fundamental stuff of each is unique and peculiar to the kind,
does not alter the fact of their being different ; and does not
signify any further — barring scientific curiosity — than as a
question of causation, and as to that, the inquirer must take
his choice between God and chance, or " necessity arising by
chance," if the reader can imagine this latter possible. (See
" Necessity r " Chance,'' Vol. III.)

It makes no difference, however, to the believer's faith in
God as to what matter really consists of, and whether an atom
or elementary part is a solid ; or a subtle fluid ; or a vortex
ring, or what not— there is the matter — How came it ? What
is it?

Hitherto I have proceeded on the assumption that atoms are
solid ; and I have done so because that theory is most easy of
realization, and fits best with a large nuuiber of facts such as
those I have mentioned ; yet though I have dwelt on solid
atoms, and advised the reader to accept that theory as the most
practically useful one, it is right, nevertheless, I should make
some remarks on another hypothesis put forward of late by
Helmholtz and Sir W. Thompson. This is the theory of
" vortex atoms." It is very abstruse and difficult of compre-
hension, and far from being proved to be true, but I mention
it as the most modern attempt at solving the mysterious

enigma.

According to this view it is assumed that matter consists of
a primitive fluid which is constantly gyrating in little rings or
whirls. This fluid is supposed to be homogeneous — that is, to
be continuous throughout, and not made up of atoms or little
pieces. Also that although incompressible yet that its form
may be altered though its volume will remain unchanged.
Every mass or collection of matter, therefore, according to this
theory is supposed to consist of a multitude of little vortex
rino-s of this primitive fluid in a ceaseless state of rapid motion.

I will not attempt to go into the details of the theory, for

GOD IN NA TURK. 63

they are most elaborate. Besides, it tells us no more than does
the other theory in regard to what the substance of matter
really is. Indeed it is less satisfactory in this respect than the
solid atom theory, for the vortex theory dwells almost solely
on motion, and gives no tangible explanation concerning the
existence of mass — it insists solely on motion — motion — motion,
and the mind seeks in vain for anything more definite than this
infinitely divisible hypothetical fluid whereby it may realize or
mentally grasp the conception of substanGe.

To me this appears a most serious flaw in the theory ; but
putting this difiiculty as to substance aside, there is another
point on which the believer is and must remain importunate
for explanation, and that is as to the motion. The atoms may
be solid, or consist of " vortex rings," but what is motion ?
And what set motion in action ? Could it have started
itself?

But this is not the place to go into the question of " causa-
tion " (see Vol, III.), so we will return to the subject of
atoms.

Even if according to the vortex theory it could be shown
that the mass of matter consists of a homogeneous fluid, every
part of which is constantly gyrating in little whirls or rings, I
say even then that the theory of atom-like or separate parts
would not be rendered untrue, for each ring, although not a
solid as under the other theory, and constantly changing, would
nevertheless be at any given moment a separate thing, and it
would be the sum total of rings which would constitute the
mass, just as it would be under the other theory that the sum
total of the bulk was made up of solid atoms.

Again, in combinations of substances of different elementary
quality, it is difficult to imagine but that a homogeneous fluid
gyrating in whirls or circles must separate into particles or
ultimate rings, so as to admit of equal mixing and of union
between one difi'ereut thing and another — say between oxygen
and hydrogen — and thus we arrive again at something very
like atoms and atomic constitution.

It will be seen therefore that the old atomic theory cannot

64 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

yet be negatived even according to the speculations of the
philosopher and mathematician in his study. But when we
come to the case of the chemist in his laboratory he really
cannot do without it — without the theory of atoms, practical
chemical philosophy is a tangled maze. At the same time,
however, that I thus contend for atoms, I am quite ready to
admit that the splendid discovery of ''vortex motion'' renders
clear to us some points on which we were previously ignorant,
and gives us most beautiful illustrations and explanations of
the movement en masse of currents in air and fluid, such as we
really see ; but whether it is applicable to the movements of
the primitive elementary stuff, and whether it tells us anything
as to the real constitution of matter is another question, and
one on which there is great room for doubt. Anyhow, as I
have already said, I cannot see that we can in our reasonable
surmises dispense with an ultimate atom or unit of some kind,
nor that we can doubt that these element a?^ units must in some
way differ in quality of substance. Even supposing — simply for
the sake of argument — that the theory of the solid atom and
its various sorts of component stuff was shown to be a wrong
theory, and that it could be proved that all matter consists not
of solid atoms but of Sir W. Thompson's primitive fluid, or
essence, always in a constant state of vortex motion or gyra-
tion, what then ? Why it would be necessary in that case to
imagine, or rather to prove, that all the differences in all the
elementary things depend not in difference of quality of sub-
stance, but in difference of vortex motion. That is to say, in
order to account for differences in quality and substance and
rigidity, elasticity, &c., it would be necessary to imagine or
prove that every one element differed from every other not
because it possessed a different kind of fundamental stuff, but
merely because, though made of the same elementary fluid as
everything else, it was diametrically different solely because it
possessed a characteristic whirl — and which was different to
the whirls of i)ther things. I ask, is this a rational, or pro-
bable conjecture ?

Let us take iron as an example. We must on this theory

GOD IN NA TURE. 65

suppose its substance to be made up of a multitude of whirls
of the primitive stuff or essence, and as these whirls must
somewhere have a limit in size we may consider that iron, on
such a theory, must be composed of myriads of little whirls all
acting harmoniously to each other, in the same way as the solid
atoms heretofore believed in. But then we may be sure that
if iron is constituted of such vortex whirls it follows that these
whirls must be of a certain definite kind, and peculiar to iron,
and that all other substances than iron must have different
sizes, shapes and kinds of vortex whirls of the universal self-
same essence. That is to say, that everything must possess a
characteristic kind of whirl, or there could be no differences in
the simple elements. Also that in regard to compounds, every
one of such must be made up of groups of whirls of different
sorts (each of which whirls would be the counterpart of one
atom). Very well ; then we come to this, that as far as my
argument is concerned it does not signify whether everything
is composed of solid atoms, or of vortex whirls. There must
be an ultimate vortex if there is not an ultimate atom, and in
order that these vortices should differ there must be a cause
for difference — also a cause for harmony and assimilation ; or
discord and repulsion, just as in regard to solid atoms ; con-
sequently whether matter is composed of myriads of solid
atoms, or of multitudes of little vortex rings of a fluid essence
is quite indifferent to the believer in creation by an All-
powerful Designer and Architect. There is the matter before
us, and although no man knows what it essentially is — or
doubtless ever can know — still it must be constituted some-
how, and for myself I must confess I cannot conceive that
different things of apparent diverse quality of substance differ
i<olehj and simply because their supposed whirls of primitive
fluid essence are of different shapes, rates of movement, &c.,
and not because they are composed of substance of different
intrinsic qualities.

With this amount of doubt therefore, and seeing that the
vortex theory does not explain the " why" and "wherefore"
of the ^' mass^' of any substance, I advise the ordinary reader

66 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OE BELIEE.

to dismiss the vortex conception from his mind, and to let it
dwell only on the theory of the solid atom as being at least the
most easily realizable. By picturing the solid atom, one's
mind has something substantial to rest on and as it were to
take hold of, which is not the case with the other theory. By
accepting the solid atom theory we also get a satisfactory con-
ception of a tangible substance on which the forces of nature
(to be spoken of further on) can act.

Accepting therefore the theory of the solid atom as the
most practically useful one, I shall now proceed to depict a
rough working model representing what matter may be sup-
posed to be like, so that one may be able in some feeble degree
to realize the marvellous material construction of creation. In
other words, I shall try to present to the reader, according to
common sense, what may be fairly deemed a reasonable repre-
sentation of the intimate construction of matter. Not that this
model may be exactly correct, but that at the least it will give
us something tangible to fix our ideas on, and will enable us
the better to realize the wonders of the material universe.

I may remark here in parenthesis that I have said nothing
concerning other theories than those I have mentioned, and
v^'hich have been advocated as explanatory of the quality and
structure of matter ; and I shall not do so, because by trying
to make one believe, as they do, that matter only consists " in
centres of force ;" or of something which is " infinitely divisible ;"
the common-sense mind in endeavouring to trace substance to
a point wdiere it vanishes, becomes utterly bewildered. I hold
that substance must consist of substance, and I shall therefore
not trouble the reader by dilating further on any theory than
that of the substantial atom. What I want is that the reader
shall be able to see as it were with his mind's eye substantial
atoms ; and how they work ; and how they are built up on one
another so as to compose all material things.

I shall therefore now proceed to speak of " size," " vibra-
tion," and " shape " in atoms.

Size of Atoms. — So infinitely small are atoms supposed to
be that not only can no microscope enable us to discern them,

GOD IN NA TURE. 67

but it is said no magnifying power can ever be made to show
them. For instance, " a cube whose side is the 4000th of a
millimetre may be taken as the minimum visible by our highest
powers. Such a cube would contain from sixty to a hundred
millions of molecules of oxygen or nitrogen; but since the mole-
cules of organized substances contain on an average ^//^?/ of the
more elementary atoms we may assume that the smallest or-
ganized particle visible under a good microscope contains about
two millions of organic moleculesr." (Article " Atom,''^ Ency,
Brit.)

So small indeed are atoms, that figures can convey to the
mind no just idea of their infinitesimal minuteness. A fraction
represented by a long string of cyphers such as is necessary in
this case, is incapable of comprehension. The number of par-
ticles, or atoms, for example, in a cubic inch of air is said by
Professor Tait (" P%s«caZ ^C2>?icd," page 317) to be only capa-
ble of being represented in figures by writing 3, and placing
twenty cyphers after it (i.e. 3,000,000,000,000,000,000,00).
To give his readers, however, some definite conception of the
size of atoms. Professor Tait (^Physical Science, page 318) states
that an atom probably bears the same relative proportion in
size to a drop of water as does a small orange compare rela-
tively with the size of the whole mass of earth ; and that
supposing water to be really composed of atoms, and that a
drop of water could be magnified, so as to make it appear as
big as the earth, we might perhaps then be able to see that it
was composed of grains, or atoms. Or again, Sir W. Thomp-
son says, " Imagine a drop of rain the size of a pea magnified
to the size of the earth, the molecules in it being increased in
the same proportion. The structure of the mass would then
be coarser than that of a heap of fine shot, but probably not so
coarse as that of a heap of cricket balls."

Now it is quite reasonable to suppose that the atoms of
different things differ in size, though doubtless they are rigidly
definite for the particular substance, and this variation in the
size of atoms has probably a very important influence not only
on the quality and condition of the element itself, but also on

F 2

SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

its capability of mixing with other things, or of chemically
combining: with them in the molecular form.

Vibration, or Movement of Atoms, and Molecules. — There
are good reasons for supposing — as has already been hinted
— that the atoms and molecules of all things, whether solid,
liquid, or gaseous, are in constant movement; and that as
the largest heavenly bodies we know of are never still, so
also that the smallest atom is never at rest. When atoms, or
molecules, compose a solid it is believed that the extent of
their movements is limited, and that they oscillate about
certain positions of equilibrium which they do not quit un-
less acted upon by external agents. {Fownes Chemistry,
page 6Q.)

In the liquid state, on the other hand, it is supposed that the
molecules or atoms have no determinate positions of equilib-
rium, and that they have not such strong homogeneous attrac-
tion for one another as those of the solid, but glide over
one another and move about ; but yet weak as their mutual
attractions may be as compared with those of the solid,
yet they are sufficiently strong to retain them in union unless
subjected to violent strain, when they separate, as when you
pass a spoon into your tea and so divide one part of the liquid
from another ; or as when you drop drops from a bottle.

The atoms and molecules of gas on the contrary have no
attraction for one another but move in straight lines, and seem
so actually repulsive of one another as to fly apart, and diffuse,
unless confined in a closed space.

But although it may be presumed that these statements are
correct as to the general tendency of the movements of atoms
in the solid, liquid, or gaseous states ; there can be little
doubt, but that different sorts of things have different special
and particular kinds of vibration and modes of movements, or
progression. The smallest atom, like the largest, may have a
rotatory movement on itself ; or it may be a gyratory vortex
motion ; also a movement as to direction which may be simply
a swaying to and fro like a pendulum, the vibration of which
may be in a direction horizontal or vertical to a certain plane ;

GOD IN NATURE. 69

or the movement may be of a progressive kind, limited in the
liquid, but quite free and constant as in gas.

Then too the rotations, or vibrations, may be rapid, or less
rapid ; the gyrations large or small in area \ the swayiugs of
the vibration long or short.

Then too again the rotations, vibrations, or gyrations, and.
their respective rates, sizes, and kinds may be capable of being
altered by various different degrees of heat, and cold, or kinds
of chemical action, &c.; and thus it may be that the kind of
vibration, &c. &c., may be a most important factor not oulj
in conditioning the usual state of any substance, but being
altered in direction or rate by any external agent (as heat, or
chemical action, &c.), the effect may be to alter the form of
such substances, as is witnessed in melting — freezing— vapour-
izing — chemical decomposition, &c.

It seems difficult I grant for a person who has never before
heard of the movement of atoms to receive the hypothesis as
likely to be correct, it seems so wild and improbable a supposi-
tion ; but there is no disagreement on the point amongst
those who have well considered the subject, and we are con-
fidently told by the most eminent philosophers and mathemati-
cians that every atom of matter — even of the most solid
substances — as iron, or diamond — is in a constant state of
rapid movement ; nor is there any reason to doubt the truth
of this astounding statement. Accepting this hypothesis there-
fore as likely to be true, it seems rational to conclude, as I have
before said, that the nature and quality of different things will
greatly depend on the kind of vibration of their atoms. You
may imagine for instance that diamond atoms have one kind of
movement, and iron atoms another ; moreover that iron atoms
when cold, or when melted, have different modes, or different
amplitude of vibrations. And so on for all things.

What a marvel ! Picture to the mind as far as it is j^ossible
that all matter possesses a grained structure, and that eveiy
one of such grains (atoms) is in a perpetual state of very
rapid motion — think of this movement going on in every mass
of matter — ceaseless — orderly — and though different for different

70 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

things, and for different conditions of such things ; and though
perhaps these movements may in many cases be most complex,
yet that every atom will perpetually and always fulfil its
ordained modes of movement !

Conceive what a mass consists in, whether it be a large
rock, or the smallest particle visible under the microscope.
It is a crowd of atoms, and a crowd each unit of which is
placed with perfect exactness as to its relative position in
regard to other atoms, and moves necessarily with the utmost
regularity, not only by its own intrinsic qualities and powers,
but as conformed to the modes and necessities of its neigh-
bours.

Fancy a crowd of millions of persons each hurrying to and
fro in an allotted space, or turning rapidly round and round
day and night — night and day — always. Then reflect that
such kinds of movements, more complex perhaps, and infi-
nitely more rapid, are incessant and universal in all matter,
and the thinker is lost in wonder.^

Shape of Atoms. — I believe most modern theorists in-
cline to the opinion that all atoms are spherical ; but I would
humbly suggest that the older views which held that atoms
differ very much in shape may not be wholly incorrect ; espe-
cially when we consider how vastly different numerous solids
are in the qualities of hardness, softness, &c. ; and liquids in
degree of fluidity, &c. It seems difficult to imagine that the
atoms of rigid iron and flexible steel, of brittle glass or seal-
ing-wax, and soft bees' vrax or elastic india-rubber, can be of
the same shapes. And so likewise of liquids ; that the shapes
of atoms of sticky syrup, and smooth oil, &c., can be the same.
Of course I do not go the length of thinking with the ancients
that some kinds of atoms may have hooks by which they cling
to their fellows and in that way cause hardness, and tenacity
of structure, &c., but nevertheless I cannot see why if some
atoms or molecules possess a vibrating to and fro movement,
that the shapes of these in solids may not be square, or
diamond-shaped, or octoha^dral, or broad, narrow, short, or
1 See "Differentiation."

GOD IN NA TURE. 7 1

loDg, &c. Still if all movements be gyratory, or rotating, then
I can imagine that the shape would necessarily in that case be
either spherical or sphoBroidal.

1 can believe too that each kind of atom or molecule mi*Tht
possess an endowed physical jjower, peculia?' to its Jcind, of
changing its form under varying conditions. For example,
that the molecules of water may change in shape when
freezing occurs ; or that the molecules of carbonate of lime,
constituting amorphous chalk, may be different in shape to
those of the chemically similar crystalline marble in conse-
quence of these differences in physical endowment causing
the shape to vary according to different conditions. I say
this may be so, but at the same time it may be that difference
in state as seen in water and ice — or chalk and marble, &c., —
may depend solely on differences of vibration of atoms, as to
direction, or rapidity, as already described. That is to say,
that the quality of the atoms being the same in any given
instance, the state of the substance may depend on the kind of
vibration.

The Placing of Atoms ; or their Relative Position to eacli
other. — I have already said that atoms under the compulsion of
new influences may perhaps be forced to change their shapes, or
modes, or rates of vibration, &c. I will now speak of the
liability of atoms to change their positions relatively to each
other as pressed by various disturbing causes. We can well
imagine that in any one kind of simple substance all the atoms
are naturally equi-distant from one another, forming a per-
fectly equal homogeneousness of mass ; or that in another,
they may be in groups^ — also that these groups of similar
atoms may, according to the ordained constitution of the sub-
stance, be of different shapes. In brittle things we may say at
a guess perhaps each group may be globular, and that these

2 As to the groups of atoms composing "molecules" they are quite
diflferent in constitution, being made up frequently of different sorts of
atoms joined together, whereas these are all similar. I shall speak of
molecules hereafter.

72 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

globular groupings acting as partially independent compound
units, may have weak attractions for one another.

In tenacious things the groups may be elongated, and each
long, fibre-like group overlapping its neighbours or having
strong attractions may be the reason of the toughness.^
Again, in very hard things the groupings of atoms may be
very close together, and in soft things further apart. Nor is
it any violent stretch of the imagination and jvidgment to
suppose that there are really such groupings of atoms in
simple elementary things as are thus described.

Look at the broken surface of a piece of cast iron, or
wrought iron ; or zinc ; or tin ; or sulphur, and you will — even
with the naked eye — see a fibrous, or granular, or crystalline
arrangement of the substance, and it must be always borne
in mind that these fibres, or grains, or crystals, are not the
ultimate atoms, for they are invisible ; consequently the fibres,
&c., we can see must consist of groups, or collections of atoms
arranged in a special manner, and which manner may even
be unique, and possessed only by one particular kind of sub-
stance. Therefore as we can positively see differences in the
structure of many simple elementary solids, it follows that
such differences must I think arise from the little atoms being
arranged and grouped differently in different things.

Then too we may feel certain that in addition to this effect of
the placing of atoms will be the influence of shapes, and sizes,
and vibrations and kinds of substance of the atoms composing
the groups, which must also have important bearing on the
constitution of such groups. For instance, we are told that
charcoal and diamond are each composed of carbon. Then
as their essential kind of element is the same, may w^e not be
certain that the differences between these very diverse sub-
stances as to hardness, colour, transparency, brilliancy, dul-
ness, &c., must depend on this elementary substance (carbon)

3 It may be well to remind the reader that in making use of the word
fibre I am speaking here only of simple elementary things, and that
compound substances^ organic fibre, &c., will be spoken of hereafter.

GOD IN NA TURE. 73

being specially different in each as to the shapes, sizes, vibra-
tions, or modes of placing of their atoms respectively in one
or in all particulars.

And farther, as to the effects of new influences, it is most
probable that the incidence of such agitating things as heat,
light, electricity, chemical action, mechanical blows, &c., will
in either case have a most important effect in altering the
relative position of the atoms, and their groupings, as we
witness in the changes things undergo in appearance in
melting, freezing, vapourizing ; or being decomposed chemi-
cally, &o.

We can easily imagine that under the influence of any one
of the above disturbing causes the atoms and their groupings
may be extremely altered as to their mode of arrangement
relatively to each other. For examj^le, as when you throw a
stone into a pond, or boil water,^ you see an enormous dis-
placement, and commotion, and flying about of particles, and
of currents of water here and there, and finally taking up new
positions relatively to each other — so you may picture how on
the application of any one of the disturbing forces already
named, any solid, or liquid, or gas may have its component
parts put into great agitation — more or less — according to
its fundamental constitution — and that like the water in the
pond, or tea-kettle, the disturbances will cause the relative
position of the particles to be altered in regard to each
other.

All this appears to me so clear that I shall dilate no further
upon it, but leave the reader to picture for himself how in
vapourizing, freezing, crystallizing, decomposing chemically,
&c., &c., the atoms and their groupings are in some way altered as
to their relative placings, &c., &c., and I leave it for him to pre-
sent to his mind's eye the wondrous scene of how in any mass, or
liquid, or gas, the atoms may spring asunder from each other, or

^ It is not strictly correct to make use of water here as an illustration,
because it is a compound, and I am now speaking of simple bodies, but
it is an apt and familiar example and not violently improper.

74 SCIENCE A STROXGHOLD OF BELIEF.

collect closer together and arrange themselves in new groups, and
change in other respects — begging him, however, always to re-
collect that all these changes take place according to inherent
qualities and laws, and that no substance or thing can alter in
any way other than it is capable of according to ordained law.

Summary, or Recapitulation. — We may say therefore that
it is the quality of the substance of the atoms, together
with their size, shape, kind of vibration, and mode of placing
relatively to each other, which collectively conditions and rules
mechanically, as to the nature of the sort of thing which such
atoms compose ; also that it is these factors which dominate as
to the influence of the various powers of attraction and repul-
sion of, or over, the thing itself, and of this again over the
atoms of other substances ; or conversely of its susceptibility
to be attracted or repelled by them (see Attraction).

Each atom, according to its endowed quality of substance,
nature of vibration, size, shape, and mode of placing, has an
individuality of its own which is in many cases peculiar to its
kind, and though an atom may change in many respects — as in
liquefaction, vapourization, fresh chemical union, &c., — it can
only be within certain strict limits, and according to the
amount of change of which it is capable, according to its
endowed capacity for change. Therefore it is quite rational
to believe that the differences or likenesses in the atoms or
molecules such as I have hinted at, may be the factors that
rule not only as to the properties of all physical and chemical
things, but also that determine when you mix different things
together whether they shall (for example) mix, like water and
spirits ; or not mix, as oil and water ; or dissolve, as sugar in
water ; or not dissolve, as mercury in water ; or dominate as
to whether chemical action shall or shall not ensue, and that
if it does that a neAv compound shall be formed, as when you
add an acid to carbonate of soda.

To my mind this mode of speculating as to what may be the
real nature of matter, and the acceptance of the atom — various
in kind — as a real entity, is the only practical and tangible way
of conceiving and picturing what matter really is. If in

GOD IN NA TURE.

theorizing you attempt to dispense with a solid atom — and with
solid atoms moreover of various fundamental differences as to
substance — and try and substitute ^^ modes of motion'''' for
substance, you are then landed in the dilemma of trying to
imagine that motion can produce mass, — which appears to me
absurd ; also that difference of motion can produce complete
difference in fundamental quality of substance, which is almost
equally difficult of conception. Granted that change in mode
of motion may produce change in some degree in many things,
but it is highly questionable if it can alter fundamental
quality — it cannot make oxygen into hydrogen, or iron into
gold. If this could be proved and shown, then indeed we
should have found the philosopher's stone.

I am quite aware nevertheless, and notwithstanding all I
have said, that some persons do really imagine that all the
elements may consist of one kind of stuff differently conditioned
in different things : but even if that could be proved to be true
it w^ould not in the least affect my main argument that all
matter exists as it is, and works as it dors according to crea-
tion and ordainment and law as made by God ; and therefore
that the elements and their atoms are what they are, and
possess their particular qualities at particular degrees of heat,
&c., all according to God's will and design.

Believing therefore as I do that matter consists of sub-
stantial atoms constituted at given temperatures to manifest
certain definite qualities, let us now according to this view sum
up the subject of atoms.

Atoms possess mass, and this mass is different in quality in
the different elements. Each elementary atom also possesses a
shape, a size, and a mode of vibration, or rotation, and way of
placing peculiar to its kind in one or more of these respects ;
and it is probable, moreover, that the shape, and mode of
vibration, &c., may be altered to a definite extent according to
definite but restricted capacities and endowments if the atom
be exposed to new influences. (See "Attraction.'')

It is then these inherent qualities and powers which rule not
only as to the kind of mass, or liquid, or gas which they com-

76 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

pose, but they order the relations of the constituent atoms to
one another, and also rule as to the behaviour of atoms of
one kind in the presence of atoms of another kind, and of
attractions and other forces foreign to and external to them-
selves.

When in juxtaposition to atoms of its own kind, and all
are under like conditions, they will all be similar, and con-
stitute a simple homogeneous mass of a definite characteristic
kind.

If, however, such atoms are exposed to new influences, as
heat, &c., or get placed near a different sort of atom, the
characteristics of the mass may be changed — but mark ! no
change can take place beyond a certain definite degree special
to the particular kind of atom concerned — or in the words of
the believer, beyond the ordained limits.

Let us now try and picture the atomic constitutions of a mass
— say of pure iron. When cold, every atom of the entire bulk
will be oscillating to and fro, or round and round in ceaseless
but identically similar modes and rates of movement. Each
oscillation or rotation taking place in a limited space as con-
formable to its neighbours' positions and movements. Every
atom will also possess the definite shape natural to cold, pure
iron.

Let the iron, however, be heated or melted ; or welded ; or
cast; or exposed to the influence of oxygen, or other agents,
and its textural qualities will be altered.

We may therefore fairly imagine that when iron is sub-
jected to any of these new influences, that the atoms become
altered as to their placing relatively in regard to each other,
or as to their modes of motion, or possibly as to their shapes.
Surely one or all of these things must be. Think of the
marvellous difference in the texture, &c., of wrought iron,
cast iron, steel, iron oxide, &c. Is it then any stretch of the
imagination to suppose that when iron is subjected to new
influences capal)lo of affecting it, that it must be the atoms
which yield to the new influence ? Let the iron be heated,
&c., and we may reasonably by the mind's eye picture the

GOD IN NA TURE.

millions of atoms of which the mass is composed, changino-
their shape, mode, &c. It must be a wondrous transformation
scene indeed. Each atom as soon as it comes under the
domination of the new influence changing from its previous
state.

Suppose all the atoms have heretofore been equi-distant
from, but very near each other, it may be that under the new
influence they will spring further apart (melt ?) or even still
further asunder (vapourize ?).

Or, under other circumstances, they may arrange them-
selves (say) in round groupings, and render the whole mass
brittle (say like cast iron), or the atoms may fall into elon-
gated groupings forming a fibrous arrangement, which fibres
may interlock or overlap and thus form such strong material
as wire, or bar iron.

Or atoms may arrange themselves in definite positions with
such peculiar regularity and symmetry of outline as to con-
stitute a crystal. And so on, and so on as to all substances, and
forms and states of matter.

These of course are but guesses as to how the arrange-
ment, &c., of atoms and molecules may be affected by exposure
to new influences; but the speculation is so interesting, audits
surmises so likely to be correct, that it will be no waste of
time to dwell further on the subject in the same vein.

To draw a simile. Fancy a hundred million of soldiers
(atoms) each one of whom is walking as a sentry to and fro.
Suddenly an order (new influence of heat, &c.) is given to the
whole army (mass) for each man (atom) to run backwards
and forwards quickly, and take a larger beat than before; or it
may be ordered that the soldiers (atoms) shall arrange them-
selves in lines, or groups, or squares, &c., and each one also
may be ordered to change his shape by placing his rifle at the
charge, &c. Or, again, the soldiers might be all told to join
hands, or run in circles, or each one to turn round and round,
or jump or hop, &c. What a different aspect would any one
of these changes give to the entire mass of troops. (See
*' Dijferentiation.''^)

SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

This is a very rough sketch I grant, but in such similes
one cannot arrive at exactness, or help their being meagre and
even grotesque. Yet there is some degree of truth in the
travesty. It indicates very, very roughly the radical changes
which must take place in a substance by the alteration of the
position, &c., of its component atoms when melted, or solidified,
or vapourized, or rendered fibrous, or subjected to chemical
chansre, &c. : still, that however much the state and form and
mode of motion may be changed, yet that each atom (soldier)
will retain the same individuality, and possess the original
quality in essential ultimate substance.

Reflections. — The surmises I have now given as to atoms
and their qualities, &c , as constituting matter may or may
not be correct, but whatever may really be the truth as to
the quality of substance, size, kind of vibration, or shape of
atom — in other words, the exact reason for difference in
the substance of things — we may be certain there must be
some cause for the extreme diversity we see in the nature and
properties of the various solids, fluids, and gases of the
universe ; and whether the foregoing conjectures are right or
wrong they at least give us a tangible basis on which to reason
concerning the properties and modes of action of the physical,
chemical, and vital things of creation in respect of their qualities
and hidden workings such as are beyond our positive ken.

It is quite certain, as I have before said, that there is a great
variety of solids, liquids, and gases, but whether they differ in
the ways I have suggested, or whether they vary on account
of other occult reasons, it is of no importance to the argument
I shall maintain of their having been created by God.

There the things are before our eyes, and we see how vastly
they differ, and though we may speculate and give guesses as
to these differences, we cannot possibly know if we are cor-
rect, or how or why the differences first came. As believers
we can say no more than that all is according to God's will
and pleasure. At the same time, however, that I express
this, I hold that the conjectures I have given are in strict
agreement with religious revelation and belief, and with the

GOD IN NA TURE. -jc^

teachings of science, and that they afford a reasonable basis on
which to argue in defence of faith before men, and in exalta-
tion of God's power and glory.

Whether we suppose matter to be composed of solid atoms
or of whirls of a homogeneous fluid, &c., either way neither
the one nor the other could have made itself; nor further, could
the energy or motion which moves them have actuated itself
and set itself going. If it is true that atoms and molecules
are always in motion, why is it so, and how did the motion
first begin, and why ? Indeed what is the essential cause of
motion at all, of any kind ?

In short, a Supernatural Power capable of creation and
design must be granted by all reasonable men as a necessary
explanation for the existence of all the natural things ot
Ci'eatiou, whether spiritual or substantial, good or bad.

Thus far I have had the argument in my own hands, but
I can imagine the impatience of the Materialist. He must
have chafed long before this to break in with the exclamation,
*' You talk of endoived qualities, and endowed this, and or-
dained that — but how do you know that all these things did
not come, and do not now work simply by chemico-physical
mechanics and interactions ? A certain substance is as it is,
and works as it does, and possesses all its qualities because
mechanically it] could not be and do otherwise." I reply :
Exactly so, Materialist, but you are bound according to your
view to explain how substance, and motion, and mechanics
first became, and how they invented, and made, and work by
laws. It is unscientific, and uuphilosophical, and irrational to
be content with putting off the main inquiry by making use of
long words and saying, as Mr. Herbert Spencer does, that
" Cause " is " Unthinkable " and " UnkuoAvable," &c.

If the Materialist says that all that I have stated con-
cerning the qualities, sizes, shapes, vibrations, placings, and
groupings of atoms is hypothetical, then let him explain ac-
cording to his self-evolutionary, chemico-physical theory in a
more lucid manner than I— as a believer in a Creator — have

So SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

done, how substances, fluids, and gases came to be what tliey
are in all their constitutions and their differences ; and how
the forces arose which cause them to be what they are and to
act as they do. If he says it all came by chemico-physical
laws — then how came the laws ? Did they arise by chance ?
If he says yes ! then let me ask again how could these powers
or laws have had the chance of arising ? Something could
not have come out of nothing by chance, and made laws for
itself. (See " Cansation;' '' Chance;' " Necessity;' Vol. III.)

I return now to the previous line of arguing.

Accepting therefore, for the sake of argument, that the
surmises I have made are correct, we may say, that according
to the endowed qualities and sizes of the atoms composing
matter, and their modes and rates of vibration ; or rotation ;
and w^ays of placing ; and their shapes ; so, all the various
kinds of inanimate things are made, and composed : and
further, that being so made, are capable of being ordered,
and governed, by the physical and chemical forces I shall
speak of further on, so far as their own qualities permit.

I say inanimate, because to produce Hfe, those same kind of
atoms which compose lifeless things must be touched — as I
hope to prove — by something higher in God's plan, and
resource than those of His forces which we call physical and
chemical.

Compounds and their Molecules. — I will now speak of
compounds. In a simple element it is probable, as I have
shown, that the atoms are all similar in respect of their
qualities, &c., and therefore that there is sameness of essential
substance throughout the entire bulk, and that however much
the atomic constitution may be altered by heat, &c., still that
the quality of substance cannot be changed — Lead will always
be lead, and so on.

But there are very few of the elements that are found
simple, and uncombined. Even water is a compound of
hydrogen and oxygen ; and air is a mixture of nitrogen and
oxygen.

In a compound it is supposed, according to the theory of

MATTER. Si

Daltou, that an atom of one element is joined to an atom of
another kind of element, or according to the law of " multiple
proportions " an atom of one kind is joined to two, or three,
or more of another kind. When atoms of dissimilar kinds are
capable of thus uniting together, the little collection or agglo-
meration of atoms — one to one — or one to two, &c., is called a
molecule,^ and it is believed that the little molecule thus con-
stituted is then able to play the same part as an individual
unit towards other molecules of the same sort, as atoms of a
similar kind perform to each other. And therefore as when
you look at a mass of a simple element — a metal for example
— you may imagine its whole bulk to be composed of similar
atoms ; so when you look at a compound you must conceive
that its whole bulk is made up of molecules — each molecule
being a little compound thing consisting of two or more dis-
similar atoms in close union. Therefore unlike a heap of
shot, each pellet of which is similar, a compound made up
of molecules might be pictured as follows. Suppose you take
a little round pellet of, say bread, and two pellets of cheese,
and imagine that they have such an attraction for one another
that when brought near they will cling together and form a
little triune closely allied co-partnership; then that would re-
present a molecule composed of two kinds of material. You
have then only to suppose a large number of such molecules
(each one like the other and complete in itself) massed to-
gether and arranged by, and obedient to, mutual powers of
attraction, &c., for each other (after the manner of atoms), and
then you can fancy what the mass, or bulk of a compound is
like. Substitute real atoms of elementary things for the little
pellets of bread and cheese, and then you have a real mole-
cule.

* It is proper, however, I should state that modem discovery has shown
that a molecule is not always composed of dissimilar atoms, for in the
case of some of the elements, the atoms of such, apparently cling together
in twos, and threes, &c. ; but for simplicity of description, and ease of
comprehension by the unscientific, it is best, I think, to put it as I have
done above, this not being a systematic treatise on chemistry.

82 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

As sim'ple elementary things, therefore, are composed of
similar atoms ; compounds, on the contrary, are built up of
molecules, each one of which is composed of two, or more
kinds of dissimilar atoms united together in close connexion.
To impress this more on the mind, I may say, the proximate
component part, or unit of every compound, is a molecule
made up of different sorts of atoms ; just as the proximate
unit of a bag of cartridges is a cartridge, each one of which
cartridges however, is an assemblage of grains of powder and
shot.

Molecules, as compound individual units, are doubtless sub-
ject, as I shall presently point out in greater detail, to some-
what similar laws to those which constitute and rule simple
atoms, in regard to their shape, and size, and vibration or
rotation, and mode of placing, or grouping relatively to each
other. In this way molecules thus made up of different kinds
of atomic substances, and differing in the ways just indicated,
form all the various compounds of Creation— 5o//67s, whether
hard, soft, brittle, or elastic : — fluids of all kinds : — and ^ases;
and we know how marvellously the two former of these
may differ the one from the other respectively as to quality
of substance, consistency, fluidity, rate of evaporation, &c.
And as to gases how they vary in quality — and that some are
heavy, some light — some more, others less diffusible — some
pungent, others odourless, &c.

In brief, a molecule itself made up of various kinds of atoms
united together so as to compose an individual molecule, is
able, in conjunction with other molecules, to form every kind
of compound mass, or liquid, or gas; and in organization
molecules of different sorts of quality, or kind, can be built up
into a tissue. And thus, in the same way as simple elementary
things differ as to quality, &c., according to the special kind
of atom of which they are composed, and its size, shape, kind
of vibration, mode of placing or grouping, so in compounds of
molecules we find also, for the same reasons, endless differences.
As to these differences I will not on account of space repeat all
the details I have given under the head of " Atoms " as to their

AIA TTER. 83

varieties of quality, size, vibrations and mode of placing and
size. Still, though I do not repeat such, I beg the reader to
understand that there can be no doubt, all the remarks I have
made as to simple atoms are equally applicable to the partner-
ships of atoms we call molecules ; for as an aggregation of
simple atoms constitutes a simple body, so an aggregation of
molecules forms a compound body, each molecule of which,
although a complex unit, playing nevertheless the same part
relatively in the compound, as the simple atom does in the
elementary substance.

And thus the molecules of different substances have
different qualities according to the kind, and which are special
to such ; and doubtless have particular sizes, shapes, modes
of placing, and vibrations. But as to the latter I would
draw marked attention to the wondrous complexity of move-
ments there must be in compound bodies, because it is not
only that the molecules, as independent units, must have
special kinds of rotation, or gyration, &c., amongst one another,
but that the constituent atoms of each molecule must also have
their particular fundamental vibrations, or oscillations.

So that marvellous as are the movements going on in simple
bodies they are as nothing compared with those in compounds.

Picture each molecule having its particular mode of move-
ment, and that ivithin it, its constituent atoms are also pur-
suing their normal movements.

To illustrate this very roughly, imagine a large building to
represent the mass or bulk of a compound, and each room in
it to stand for a molecule ; and say that ten persons in each
room represent the ten constituent atoms of the molecule. Then
suppose the rooms to have the power of moving round and
round, and to and fro between one another, ceaselessly, and
that as ceaselessly all ten persons are constantly waltzing in
each room, and you would have a faint ideal representation of
the movements of molecules, and their atoms.

But to return to plainer narrative. From what I have said
it will be seen that in a normal state, the molecules and their

G 2

84 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

constituent atoms, which comprise any substance, have normal
and regular shapes, and modes of placing, and movement ; but
it seems that the atoms composing each molecule are able
under altered circumstances to change position or something
of that sort, so as probably to alter the shape, size, vibration,
&c., of the molecule, and in this way to so alter the body as
to constitute a new kind of thing, but which altered substance
although molecularly different, and hence different in appearance
from the previous state, is really atomically, and chemically, of
the same quality ; i. e. composed of the same kind of atoms
though differently arranged in the molecules. Thus chalk and
marble are both carbonate of lime. Also liquid water, and
solid ice, are both chemically similar. Consequently, it must
be, that the vast difference there is between each of these
familiar things must depend respectively on the shape, position,
or vibration of their atoms and molecules, each being capable of
alteration, and transposition in regard to their relations to one
another, whether in the amorphous, or crystalline state ; or in
the liquid, or solid condition. Thus to make a far-fetched
simile for the purpose of illustration we may imagine how
differently atoms and molecules may be arranged if we think
what different forms and shapes soldiers may be placed in by
shifting them about in drill and forming them in lines, com-
panies, squares, &c., and altering their distances from each
other, and their relative positions, and making them stand,
kneel, lie down, run, be far apart, or near, &c.

But I will not speculate further in this place on these
interesting mysteries, though I shall resume the subject further
on. At this point I only insist that atoms or molecules of
some kind must certainly exist ; and that all material things are
built up or composed of them ; and that they reach their highest
phase of construction, or piling up, or union, in that marvellous
structure — the living organism — be it plant, or creature.

Matter has thus far been spoken of as a thing which, while
composed in all its forms of millions upon millions of atoms
and molecules associated together in bulk, presents itself to

MATTER. %-^

our ken always in one of three forms — as a solid — as a liquid,
or as a gas; either of which may be simple, or compound in
its constitution.

But although this is true as giving a description as to state^
there is another classification in which matter may be con-
sidered, viz. : —

as, I. Inorganic,
II. Organic.

I. — Inorganic Matter.

Inorganic matter may exist away from and independent of
life, and organisation, whether as to its origin, or continuance;
and may occur either as a solid, liquid, or gas. I will mention
a few of its natural forms.

a. Inorganic solids. — Rock, carbon (or charcoal), sulphur,
silicum (flint), the various ores, all the metals, &c., (earth is a
mixture of orgauics and inorganics),

b. Inorganic fiuids. — Water.

c. All gases are inorganic, as Oxygen, Hydrogen, Nitrogen,
Carbonic Acid Gas, Chlorine, &c. So too the air is inorganic,
being a mixture of Oxygen and Nitrogen gases.

Now many of the natural inorganic things we are cognizant
of, exist in a simple and uncombined state, as the diamond
(pure carbon), gold nuggets, &c., but in general they occur in
combination with other elements, which can be separated
either by natural action, or by the chemist. Air for example
is a mixture of Oxygen and Nitrogen gases. Water is
a combination of Oxygen and Hydrogen. The ores are
composed of a metal combined with Carbonic Acid, or
Sulphur, &c.

But as I have said, the chemist is able to split up a very
large number of the compound natural things into simpler
forms, and these, when they can be no further split up or sepa-
rated, are termed the elements. Of these there are between
sixty and seventy at present known. I will mention the most
common.

SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Aluminium 27

Bromine 80

Calcium 40

Carbon 12

Chlorine 35

Copper 63

Gold 197

Hydrogen 1

Iodine 127

Iron 56

Lead 207

Magnesium 24

Mercury 200

Nitrogen 14

Oxygen . 16

Phosphorus 31

Potassium . . .... 39

Silver 108

Silicon or Silicium .... 28

Sodium 23

Sulphur 32

Tin 118

Zinc 65

Of these twenty- three elements, and those less frequent ones
which I have not room to mention, all things, whether simple
or compound, in and on this planet, are composed.

But now we come to one of the most remarkable facts in the
whole range of science. I have already said that although
some of the elements are found in a simple condition yet that
generally they are in a state of combination, two or more being
united together ; and the notable fact is that when the simple
or elementary things are combined, it is found that they are
always united together in certain definite proportions hy weight.
And not only does analysis show this to be the case in regard
to things in their natural state, but the chemist finds that in
making any artificial chemical compound he can only get the
elements to unite in these same definite pro^iortions.

To understand this we must briefly consider the laws of
" Chemical Combination/^ " Chemical Afiinity,''^ and " Atomic
Weights^

Chemical Combination and AflBnity. — If certain of the
elements come in contact with one another under favourable
circumstances, they will unite and form a compound having
properties different to those possessed by the components pre-
vious to their coming together.

The exact reasons why they will unite we do not know for
certain ; some things have an eager attraction for one another,
and will rush together with great avidity, as for example the
elements contained in acids and alkalies. Others have less

MATTER. 87

appetency — and others still less — and even some are quite
passive in the presence of each other ; or, under certain con-
ditions, manifest an actual repulsion.

These attractions are a great mystery (see ^^ Attraction "), and
all we can say is that they exist,, and that particular things
have an affinity, and that others have not. Inexplicable how-
ever as these attractions may be in a scientific sense, there can
be little doubt but that the capacity for union must depend
greatly, as I have already said, not only on the quality but on
the shape, size, nature of vibration, &c. of the atoms and mole-
cules comprising the bodies affected.

Atomic Weights. — These weights represent the propor-
tions in which the elements will unite with one another by
weight.

By referring to the list I have given above of the commoner
elements, it will be noticed that I appended to each name a
figure, or figures. These are the atomic weights, and they
indicate the relative weight of an atom of one element com-
pared with that of every other. They are estimated in the
following manner. Hydrogen being the lightest known
element is called unity — consequently one atom of hydrogen
is represented as having the value of one ; the oxygen atom
being much heavier is, in comparison, equal to 16 — a mercury
atom to 200, and so on.

These figures have been arrived at after the most elaborate
investigation, and I may remark tend yqyj greatly to prove
the truth of the theory of atoms, and of atoms being different
as to quality of substance, &c. (See ^^ Atoms.'"')

Now the proof of the existence of indivisible atoms rests on
the fact that I have already mentioned, that a given kind of
element will only unite with another in certain proportions,
and which proportions are special to the particular element.
That is to say, that in forming compounds the elements will
only unite according to invariable proportions by iveight, showing
the high probability, reaching all but to certainty, that at a
point far beyond our power of seeing, the atoms of all things
can only unite with other kinds of atoms according to the

88 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

special powers of attraction and inherent qualities possessed by
each — one atom to one atom — one to two — one to three, &c.
For example it is found both by analysis (spUtting up), and
by synthesis (putting together), that water consists of 2 atoms
of Hydrogen (1) in union with 1 atom of Oxygen (16).
Each molecule of water therefore has a value by weight of 18,
nor can water be water unless thus constituted. The same as
to all other compounds. Each one is perfectly and rigidly
definite in composition. Also every one element can only
unite with any other according to certain fixed and invariable
laws. These are the " Law of Multiples,'' the " Law of Equi-
valents,'' and of " Substitution."

The Law of Multiples. — It has just been stated that every
element capable of uniting with another can only do so according
to certain fixed proportions, as in the case of water instanced
above. But some things are capable of uniting in more ways
than one ; yet even in such case the law of proportion still holds
good, for it is found that "when two bodies, A and B, are capable
of uniting in several proportions, the several quantities of B,
which combine with a given or constant quantity of A, stand
to one another in very simple ratios." That is, one proportion
of one thing may, under certain circumstances, combine with
one of another, or, under certain other circumstances, with
three or four or five of the other. But observe the ratios are
always simple. One thing will not combine with another in
the proportions of 1 to If, and so on.

The Law of Equivalents and Substitution. — I have
already said that in forming compounds the elements will
only unite with one another according to certain fixed and
invariable proportions by weight. Now it often happens
in nature, or as arranged artificially by the chemist, that two
chemical compounds come in contact, and that they decom-
pose one another, as when you mix soda and acid. The
cause of this decomposition is that one or both of the things
brought in contact contain elements which have a stronger
affinity for one another than they have for those they were
previously in union with. In the case, for example, of the

MA TTER. 89

carbonate of soda and tartaric acid just mentioned, the tartaric
acid and the soda have a greater appetency for one another
than have the soda and the carbonic acid, the consequence
being that the tartaric turns out the carbonic acid (which flies off
in effervescence) and takes its place, and is substituted for it in
union with the soda. This is a familiar example, but it holds
good as to all decompositions and substitutions in which one
thing can turn another out from its previous union. But one
thing can only take the place of another in certain propor-
tions, and the law is that " when one element takes the place
of another in combination, the suhstitution or replacement
always takes place in certain fixed and definite proportions.
The relative quantities of the different elements which can
thus replace one another are called " chemical equivalents.^^
They are either identical with the atomic weights, or simple
multiples or sub-multiples of them" {Foivnes, 127). That
is to say, " the atomic weight of the element is in some cases
equal to its equivalent weight ; in others, twice, three times,
four times, &c., as great as the equivalent weight ; in other
words, an atom of certain elements can replace, or be substi-
tuted, for only one atom of hydrogen, whereas the atoms of
other elements can replace one, two, three, four, &c., atoms of
hydrogen. Thus, when sodium dissolves in hydrochloric
acid, each atom of sodium replaces one atom of hydrogen ; but
when zinc dissolves in the same acid, each atom of zinc takes
the place of two atoms of hydrogen. Here it is seen that
one atom of zinc is equal in combining or saturating power of
two atoms of hydrogen. In like manner, one atom of anti-
mony or bismuth can in some of its salts saturate three atoms
of chlorine, tin four atoms, phosphorus five atoms of chlorine.'
{Fownes' Chemistry, p. 256).

Recapitulation and Reflections. — Having said thus much
I need hardly insist on the very extraordinary nature of
these " laws," and there are others which rule also in re-
gard to " combination," &c., but as to them I must refer to
the works on chemistry, as what I have said is sufiacient for
my purpose.

90 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

But why or how sliould these "laws" exist? Speaking
solely in a materialistic sense, we can only answer we do not
know. Deferring, however, for the present the question of
causation, I would again insist that the very existence of the
above laws gives a most important significance to the conjec-
ture that the atoms of which the different elements are com-
posed are really indivisible, and differ in quality, size, shape,
and vibration, and hence that they can only unite together in
certain definite proportions according as they fit, or agree, or
assimilate with one another, not only as to quality, and shape,
and size, but so as to be able to balance and satisfy each other's
powers of attraction, or repulsion ; or to synchronize or blend
with each other's vibrations, gyrations, or what not, according
to ordained law. (See " Atoms.'')

If the atom was not an indivisible thing we should not
expect such exactness as to the quantities by weight in which
the elements can combine. If the essential substance of
matter was infinitely divisible, it would seem impossible to
divine why it should be, that the elements can only combine in
the proportions by weight such as I have already described.
For example, to form a molecule of water you must have two
atoms of hydrogen with one of oxygen, and in no other pro-
portions than two to one will these gases unite to form
water. To take another instance. In order to form a mole-
cule of carbonic oxide one atom of carbon (12) must unite with
one atom of oxygen (16) ; or to form a molecule of carbonic acid
gas, one atom of carbon must unite with two atoms of oxygen.
And so it is in regard to the combining weights and power of
union of all the elements — the combining quantities requisite to
form any given compound are always according to a fixed ratio.

Does not this fact, therefore, afford proof of the theory of
indivisible atoms, for if matters were infinitely divisible, why
should not five grains or atoms, say, of oxygen unite with
seven, for example, of carbon to form a compound of some
kind or other ? But it is not so, for it is a fact that carbon
and oxygen will not unite in any other proportion than those
of their equivalent weights, and according to certain fixed

MATTER. 91

ratios of these, if combining in proportions of more than one
equivalent to one. Consequently it seems quite reasonable to
believe that there must be a substantial, though infinitely-
small, indivisible atom of oxygen, and also one of carbon, each
of which can satisfy the other in all respects under certain
invariable conditions; at one time uniting one atom with one
atom — or under different conditions one atom with two, but
always in the proportion of 12 to 16, or 12 to 32, &c. And
so it is in respect to the other elements and according to their
respective special properties.

This being so, then we can understand why twelve grains or
ounces, &c., of carbon will unite with sixteen grains or ounces,
&c., of oxygen; and the reason will be that the given quantity
of carbon mixed with the given quantity of oxygen will con-
tain just the right number of atoms to be applied one to one
so as to form a molecule of carbonic oxide.

Or, again, if you had used double the quantity of oxygen
that you would then have afforded a sufficient number of
oxygen atoms to unite in the proportion of two of them to
every one of carbon, and thus, according to certain ordained
powers, to form carbonic acid gas.

By this mode of examining the subject one is able to make
a surmise about the facts concerning chemical combination,
and the existence of indivisible atoms, which can scarcely be
wrong ; and we may feel almost certain the different weights
in which the elements will combine must depend on their
atoms possessing special differences, and that it is according
to these special differences whether they can or cannot unite.

Thus one can understand why it is the chemist must take
certain unvarying j)i'023ortions of certain elements to make
certain things. It is, that if he uses the proportions of any
element according to its equivalent value, the quantity of each
substance used will possess just the right number of atoms to
satisfy the other, so as to be able to arrange themselves, and
fit, and balance each other according to the special attributes
of each, and thus to form a new compound.

And the converse of this is doubtless true. That is to say,

92 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

any element capable under favourable circumstances of uniting
with another will not do so unless supplied in the exact
quantity necessary for union ; because in a proportion equal
relatively to the equivalent or atomic weight or value of each
element concerned, and in no other projoortion, is contained the
fitting number of atoms necessary for being arranged into the
definite order needful to compose the new compound.

Reflections. — Having considered thus far the behaviour
of the elements in forming inorganic compounds the question
arises how, and why, is it that the elements can so unite ?
Why should two elements each of which possesses certain
definite qualities be able to join together in intimate union so
as to form a compound having very different characteristics to
either ? The oxygen of the air, for example, will unite with
iron to form rust, which is quite unlike the originals. This
is a case of direct union ; but we have seen that the reverse
may occur, and tliat a compound possessing certain features
may be split up into its elementary constituents, or it may
have one of its constituents replaced by another — as in " sub-
stitution " — in both of which cases the new thing will be
different to what the compound was previously. We have
seen too that matter is indestructible, and that changes and
differences in compounds arise solely by the mutation, or
change of place of a few sorts of atoms (elements) which
differ in essential quality. We have seen likewise that all
unions and all disseverances take place strictly according to
various " laws " or " necessities," which are invariable in their
constitution and action under given circumstances.

The question then is, " How did all these marvels come to
pass ? Did they come so by chance ? or by certain necessities
which happened to arise by chance ? " Surely not ? The
Materialists, however, by stringing together difficult words,
in sentences difficult to be understood, attempt to offer some
explanation, but they really arrive at no result that the mind
can grasp as affording any ultimate reason for the origin of
or for the difference in things, and for the origin of law.
How can it be rationally conceived that matter generated

A/A TTER. 93

itself, and resolved itself into diverse kinds, and originated
certain fixed laws for its own guidance ?

(See " Chemico-Physical Evolution,'* Vol. IV.) Matter would
have been wonderfully clever to have made itself of one ki7id ;
but as for different kinds being able to rise by self-action —
each one unique in itself, yet each maintaining invariably its
essential quality, and capable, nevertheless, of harmonizing
with others in a rigidly definite manner so as to make various
new compounds — the conception to me is fallacious to the
extent of absurdity. (See " Necessity,'' Vol. III.)

Then as to law. Can it be possible that the laws of
^' chemical combination," " ato?nic weights," &c., made them-
selves by gradual change and evolution, and at last spon-
taneously became definite and unvarying as they now are r
Could this have all come about by chance ? Would this be a
reasonable surmise ? And as to necessity ! What is neces-
sity ? And how could "necessity " have made laws for itself?
(See ''Necessity," Vol. III.)

Is it not rather as clear as anything can be to those who
will have faith in something else than themselves, that all the
various differences in matter — and the laws which rule them —
must have arisen according to a designed and ordained plan
as originated by a Supernatural Power. I will, however,
leave the question of causation for further discussion else-
where (see Vol. III.) and pass on to consider the practical
application of the foregoing in a chemical sense.

The chemist having by patient research found out as far as
his powers extend, the differences between the elements and
the curious laws which rule them, has arrived at astonishing
results. He can take any one of the natural things of creation
— say a piece of chalk — and tell you for certain that it is com-
posed of carbonic acid gas and lime in certain unvarying pro-
portions, and he can by analysis sepai'ate these two things ; and
then by synthesis he can put them together again, and reform
the chalk, which will again remain chalk for ages if left unex-
posed to chemical changes.

94 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Now observe that in this analysis and synthesis of chalk
(and the same may be said of numberless other iNorganic
substances) the chemist is dealing with certain chemico-
physical properties, actions, and results of a perfectly definite
nature, and though he really knows nothing of the ultimate
causes of these properties, &c., he nevertheless knows for
certain, that by means of his test tubes, reagents, scales, &c.,
he can arrive at invariable results, and he calls the hidden
factors of these results "laws." And so invariable are they
that he can predict for certain that whether he acted on a few
grains of chalk, or what not, in a test tube, or on a cubic mile
of chalk, if that were possible for him to do, he would get in
the small as in the large quantity, certain definite and inva-
riable results, and that all the particles he caused to he acted on
hy heat or acid, ^-c, would he affected in the same manner in so
far as they were exposed to the same hind and degree of dis-
turbing causes; and so invariable are these results that he
knows they would be the same if they took place in nature,
and not by his procurance. Like chemico-ijhysical causes acting
on matter untouched hy the life force invariably produce like
chemical results.

But it will be seen hereafter that in vital chemistry like
chemico-physical causes as far as we can understand them are
able to produce dissimilar results in certain given instances —
that is to say, that heat, light, &c., can in things under the
influence of life produce results different to those occurring in
inanimate things ; and different results in such close contiguity
as those taking place in the tiny cell of a germinating seed, or
hatching egg, where you see differentiation taking place side
by side of different things from the same stuff — bioplasm or
protoplasm — and set in action by the same chemico-physical
thing — heat ! ! (See " Development,'' Vol. II.)

This subject of life will be resumed by-and-by, for we must
now leave the subject of Inorganic matter and pass on to con-
sider the Organic.

II. — Organic Matter.
Organic matter is composed of the before-named elements.

MATTER.

but united together generally in a most highly comj^lex manner^
and in such a ivay as in most cases cannot be effected unless hj
agencies working in a living organism, he it plant or animal.

A few of the principal forms of it are : —

a. Organic Solids. — In plants, Cellulose, vegetable
albumen, starch, sugar, &c.

In animals, Albumen, fibrine, &c.

These in each kingdom respectively form, in union with
other constituents, vegetable tissue and its products and secre-
tions ; or flesh, bone, brain, nerve, hair, &c.

h. Organic Fluids. — Bioplasm or protoplasm (semi-fluid),
blood ; fluid albumen, milk, oil, &c.

I have just said that organic products are chemical things
made by the influence of the life processes of plants and
animals ; but it is necessary I should explain that the chemists
have succeeded in producing imitations of some of the simpler
organic products, such as sugar, urea, &c. {Foivnes, p. 1, 2),
things which were formerly supposed could only be elaborated
by living organs. But this is in no degree surprising (beyond
the fact of the cleverness of the chemists), because we know
that the life force itself acts both in plants and animals by
using chemico-physical action and change as its servant.

The act of living in plants is carried on by " the life " force
causing the simpler chemical elements to be built up or united
into more complex ones (see Vol. II.), and the act of living
in animals is also carried on by " the life " force causing
chemical change, but which change is just the reverse of what
takes place in the plant, as it is a pulling apart of complex
chemical substances (food) and reducing them to simpler
forms. (See Vol. II.)

At the same time, however, that the life processes of the
plant are chiefly concerned in building up inorganic food ; and
that conversely, those of the animal are employed in pulling to
pieces organic food ; yet both plant and animal in performing
their allotted functions in life can, and do, produce anew very
various chemical organic compounds, some of which the
chemist can, but the majority of which he cannot, imitate.

96 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Seeing, therefore, that the act of living, in the chemical
sense, is for the most part synthetic (putting together) in the
plant ; and analytic, or pulling apart, in the animal ; I say-
again, it is not surprising that the chemist with his endless
devices in artificial synthesis and analysis should be able to
make a few chemical products which it was formerly thought
could only be made by living organs. But though the chemist
can- make a few such things now, and may hereafter succeed
in manufacturing more, it is quite certain he can never in all
time succeed in making sap, or blood, or milk, or flesh, or bone,
or any organized structure, or tissue — that can only he effected
under the influence of life, even although we know that such
organized structure or tissue, in ultimate composition, is really
made up of atoms, or particles of the inorganic elements.

The chemist, I say again, can now make artificially an imita-
tion of some of the chemical compounds which plants and
animals are able to elaborate by their natural vital processes,
and doubtless the chemist, as time goes on, may succeed in
forming more pseudo-organic chemicals, but it ^appears cer-
tain that, even although he may possibly succeed in causing
the elements to combine together in the same che7nical propor-
tions as are found in even albumen and the other higher
proximate animal and vegetable principles of which the fluids
and structures of plants and animals are composed and built
up, yet it seems certain he will never be able to make living
bioplasm, or a vegetable or animal cell.

What does it signify to the believer if the chemist can
make some " organic " products such as sugar, alcohol, some
scents, &c, (Fownes* Chemistry, p. 2), things which formerly
it was thought could only be produced by the vital processes
of organisms ? What I ask does it signify to the believer ?
Everything must be made somehow, and if the chemist by
laborious and clumsy roundabout procedures can manufacture
some " organic " things, he only effects by great perseverance
and trouble what the little living cell can do without visible
effort. But even though the chemist may make a few facti-
tious " organic " products, the most materialistic worker knows

MA TTER. 97

he can never, as I have already said, make living Bioplasm or
organic structure. But more of this anon.

Before leaving the subject of matter — whether inorganic or
organic — I must now, even at the expense of literaiy pro-
priety, repeat and particularly draw attention to the fact that
as man cannot create matter, so also that he cannot destroy
it ; the elements composing any substance, gas, or organized
structure, cannot be abolished. Man may by fire and various
decomposing agents break up the forms and combinations in
which the elements at any moment exist, but such breaking
up is only that they may then assume another form of gas or
substance. Thus man cannot destroy matter, but merely
cause change of state ; its existence as matter in some form or
other is continuous. In this way does God's power in creation
stand forth in overwhelming prominence.

And so also in regard to force, as will be seen further on.
Man cannot create or destroy it — its existence too is con-
tinuous. He can only take means to liberate it or arrest it
according to certain fixed and incomprehensible laws. (See
'' Continuity.''^)

.Ether. — In connexion with the preceding subject of
matter I must now say a few words as to the hypothetical stuff
or quality aether.®

^ther is the name given to the supposed " something "
which fills all space, and which exists also, it is presumed,
between the atoms of matter, and therefore permeates ail
bodies as already described (see page 58). Its real nature
is totally unknown, yet that this " something " does exist
seems for several reasons to be certain, amongst which we may
name chiefly, first, that we know our atmosphere is a limited
envelope — surrounding the globe and travelling with it in space,
and that it does not extend many miles from the earth's sur-
face, for if you ascend in a balloon the air becomes rarer and
rarer, until at a few miles high it will support the balloon no
longer and it can rise no further. Some miles beyond this

• The tyro must be warned that the drag or chemical called " eether "
13 a totally different thing.

98 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

point the air having got thinner and thinner, ceases altogether,
probably at about 150 miles from the earth's surface ; yet
beyond this limit we are sure there must nevertheless be
" something " in which the heavenly bodies move, and which
fills space, for it is impossible for many reasons to conceive
space to be a vacuum. Secondly, there must be a " some-
thing " which fills the spaces between the atoms and mole-
cules as already described; for in their case, too, it is impossible
to conceive that they could move, vibrate, or separate from one
another if there existed a vacuum between them and not a
" something " which is divisible or elastic. Thirdly, nor could
the facts connected with the wave theory of light be ex-
plicable unless the existence of this subtle " something " —
aether — filling all space was considered to be a certainty.

Positive, however, as we may be of its existence, it is a re-
markable fact that the greatest philosophers, even from Newton
to those of our own day, have failed to determine what this
a3ther really is, though they believe it to be a very subtle form
of matter, if not some rarer quality.

I have no room to dwell further on this subject, and must
refer to books on Physics ; but I would urgently remark as
Professor Birks has done in his " Uncertainties of Science,^^
that what has been stated in the foregoing pages concerning
our ignorance of the exact nature of matter and aether (which
are the bases of all physical things) should teach us — if wise —
to practise a far more modest tone in scientific teaching and
investigation than has been the custom of late years when
speculating on the mysteries of God's works. And this is
true even in respect to such of them as we can see and
handle ; but how much more so in regard to such qualities
as life, and spirit, and mind ; things which we can never expect
to analyze physically, and which are even more full of mystery
than physical things.

CHAPTER II.

The Forces. — {Physical.)

The Physical Forces — Gravitation — Attractions, homogeneous and
heterogeneous — Electrical attraction and repulsion — Magnetic at-
traction and repulsion — Capillary attraction — Endosmosis and Dif-
fusion of liquids — Diffusion of gases — Repulsion — Polarity — Corol-
lary on the various] forces of attraction and repulsion — Important
distinction between atoms as affected by inorganic or by life in-
fluences.

I NOW pass on to consider the physical and chemical forces
which rule over and dominate all matter which is not animated
by life ; and which also hold their sway even in organisms ;
save and except when and so far as may be needed, such phy-
sical forces are, according to God's plan, conformed to the
requirements of vitality.

These are the various forces of attraction and repulsion ; and
the qualities, heat, light, electricity, magnetism, chemical
affinity, and motion. There is also a further force (meta-
physical) connected with life, which I shall speak of separately
further on — Spirit.

Concerning the essential quality and constitution of the phy-
sical forces we know next to nothing, and all we can judge
about them for certain is what we can witness as to their
effects. I shall say a few words about each.

Of attraction there are several forms. Gravitation^ Homo-
geneous Attraction, Hetei'ogeneous Attraction, Capillary Attrac-
tion, Osmosis, and Diffusion of Liquids and Gases, but which
latter work partly by attraction and partly by repulsion.

Gravitation is a force which affects in some universal way
the infinitely great and the infinitely little.

H 2

100 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Bj its power the various heavenly bodies attract each other
in such a manner as to show it to be the principal cause and
factor of the wondrous physical motions, not only of our earth
and sun and its planets, but also of the stars, and that it is this
force which makes or compels the whole of the occupants of
space to work as one vast clock, and with a harmonious regu-
larity which is the most gigantic wonder capable of being per-
ceived and in a manner apprehended by man.

But what this marvellous force which we call gravitation
really is, and essentially consists in, even the great Newton
himself could not fully comprehend. All we know is that such
a force exists, and that in the same way as it compels the
motion of the system of suns (stars), and worlds in space, so
does it aifect all matter even to the minutest speck on our
earth, and in such manner as to cause all material things
on it to be drawn towards its centre, and to cling to its sur-
face or atmosphere ; also to be attracted more or less by one
another.

An apple is detached from the tree and it falls to the
ground. But why, if the detachment takes place at a time
when in consequence of the earth's revolution on its axis the
tree is really top downward, why in such case the apple should
fall to the ground, and why it does not fall away into space
is a mystery we cannot solve ? We can only say it is in
consequence of the force of attraction exerted by gravitation,
and there we have to leave the question. We cannot glimpse
even what the force really is.

Then, again, it is the force of gravitation which probably is
the most important factor in regard to the weight or specific
gravity of everything, and in this we have another example of
the fact that the nature and constitution of the different kinds
of matter must differ intrinsically, or there could not be
different weights — in other words, that as the attractive or
drawing force of gravitation is an equal force for equal bulks
of like things at equal distances, and as many things of equal
bulk differ in weight under like conditions, it follows that the
cause of the difference must be inherent in the thing itself,

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. loi

and that the greater appetency of the attraction of gravitation
for some things over others, occasioning greater weight in
such, must depend not on any difference in the quality of
gravitation, but in the difference of quality of the thing itself.
I will now speak of some other forms of attraction which are
as universal and important as gravitation, and as great
mysteries in regard to their essential nature as is it.

These are '' Homogeneous attraction," " Heterogeneous
attraction," " Electrical attraction," " Magnetic attraction."

Homogeneous Attraction {homos, similar) is the force which
in some way (perhaps connected with gravitation) causes
the atoms and molecules of an exactly similar kind to cohere
and cling together in such manner as to form a substance, or
fluid, of a like quality throughout, as iron, or water.

When speaking of homogeneous attraction as applied to
liquids, it is often called "fluid tension," and a good example
of this is seen in the soap bubble, where the molecules of the
soap cling together so tightly as to refuse readily to separate.
The molecules that are on the surface cling especially tight,
because they are attracted only by those beneath them, and
have none to pull them on their free surfaces. This is called
surface tension, which performs most important uses in many
ways. It conditions the form of the surface of the fluid, and
has an important effect in capillarity (as see) and in the mixing
of fluids. The degree of cohesive attraction possessed by the
molecules of fluid for one another, and of the tension or strain
they will bear without separating, is well seen in treacle as
compared with any spirit — as brandy. The former approaches
a solid in the manner in which its molecules cling together —
the other is so brittle, if I may so say, that if you shake a bottle
of it, any bubbles that form break instantly, because the mole-
cules of the spirit have so little cohesive attraction for one
another, and hence the fluid so little surface tension. Hence,
too, spirit — and aether more so — will evaporate readily, its
molecules being easily severed from their companions, and
absorbed into the air by the force of its attraction.
Heterogeneous {heteros, different) Attraction. — This is the

I02 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

force which causes atoms and molecules of different khids
of quality to attract one another, and to cling together in
intimate companionship. There are a great many modes in
which this kind of attraction works, and it is difficult to say
which is the most important in causing things to be as they
are in all creation. One of the most striking examples of its
action is that of the very numerous instances where the atoms
of different elements are caused to unite together to form the
molecules of compounds. (See '* Compounds^)

This form of Heterogeneous attraction can be set in full
action when you artificially set up chemical decomposition, as
for example in the familiar instance of mixing tartaric acid
with a solution of carbonate of soda.

The molecules of tartaric acid and those of soda are dis-
similar, yet they fly together with great force and remain in
union. And thus it is with the atoms and molecules of all
kinds of different substances which have a chemical affinity for
each other ; they can by means of heterogeneous attraction
unite under favourable conditions, and form permanent com-
pounds.

Again, heterogeneous attraction is seen in the adhering to-
gether of various different substances — as gum sticking to
paper, or putty to wood.

Or again, many fluids will cling to many solids. Pour
water out of a tumbler and the inside of it will remain wet,
because there being heterogeneous attraction between the
molecules of glass and the molecules of water, some of the
latter adhere to the former.

Two other most important examples of heterogeneous at-
traction are : the evaporation of water into the air, and con-
versely, the solution of oxygen from the air, by water.

Both these operations are absolutely essential for the carry-
ing on of animal and vegetable life in the entire extent of this
globe, both in air, and in water. The air dissolves, or sucks ■
up into it, the watery vapour ; it may be more or less, accord-]
ing to the amount of heat. At night this evaporation causes]
the " dew," for any vapour attempting to ascend is met by a '

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. lo:

cold stratum of air and falls back on the earth condensed as
water. But in the day-time it is wafted away — perhaps for
miles — when it too meets a colder stratum of air, and is con-
densed into rain to fall to the earth to fertilize it and form
rivers, &c. As to the oxygen sucked from the air by water,
and retained in it in solution, this action of heterogeneous
attraction is necessary for the well-being of the fish, who
absorb the oxygen from the water, and use it in respiration,
as land animals imbibe it in from the air.

Then again heterogeneous attraction is seen in the case of
all solids that w^ill dissolve. Sugar for example, and salt, will
dissolve in water ; so there must be a heterogeneous attraction
between the atoms of sugar, or salt, and water. But yet this
attraction is not very strong — it stops short in fact of chemical
attraction, so that the molecular constitution of the sugar, or
salt, is not broken up by decomposition, and you may evaporate
the water, and the molecules of sugar, or salt, will unite ao-ain
to form a solid. Conversely stone or oil will not dissolve in
water, because their atoms have a stronger affinity or force
of homogeneous attraction for each other respectively than for
those of water.

A further striking instance of heterogeneous attraction is
witnessed in the mixing of various fluids with greater or less
facility according to their power of attraction for one another,
and it is by this power aided by other forces which cause many
liquids to mix when brought in contact. (See '' Endosmosis:')

From the foregoing it will be seen that so powerful a force
is heterogeneous attraction that it can in hosts of instances
even overcome homogeneous attraction, and can compel atoms
to separate from those of their own kind, as seen in the cases
of chemical decomposition, solution, evaporation, &c.

Commentary. — I will now, by way of commentary, remark
very briefly as to the foregoing, that the clinging together of
atoms so as to form a simple elementary substance — as caused
by homogeneous attraction — is sufiiciently wonderful ; but when
we come to consider how different species of atoms and mole-
cules will cling together by heterogeneous attraction so as to

104 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

form complex intimate unions of very different sorts of atoms
and molecules, as is the case in compounds, and that these
unions take place — as already described — with the most exact
regularity and definiteness, then the fact becomes truly as-
tonishing, and you have to look above matter and mere
physical force for a prime cause capable of producing wonders,
such as are quite inexplicable by science as to their essential
causes. Indeed heterogeneous attraction and the manner in
which different kinds of atoms will unite in definite modes and
quantities to form compounds is to my mind one of the very
clearest proofs we possess of the existence of a Supernatural
Designer and Creator. (See "^toms," " Chemical Affinit?/")

Electrical Attraction. — Here again we have to deal with
a mighty mystery. Rub a piece of glass with silk and
place it near a small scrap of paper, and the paper will be at-
tracted to the glass and will adhere to it : adopt other expe-
dients well known to experimenters, and repulsion will take
place.

Why is this ? We are entirely unable to say. The
physicists tell us that the equilibrium of the things dealt with
is disturbed ! — Granted; but that explains nothing essentially.

This much, however, we do know, and that is, that this force
which has often been looked on as trivial, and even used as a toy,
is, in its production and use in nature, amongst the very most
important of agents in causing the entire machinery of the
universe to work, both in its great, as in its minutest parts.

It will be seen presently in the article on the " correlative
forces " that electricity is a form of force which is rendered
manifest, wherever heat, friction, chemical action, &c., are in
operation ; and conversely that it can in turn cause these to
be set in motion, and made apparent.

The chemist makes his galvanic battery by putting pieces
of copper and zinc into acid ; chemical action ensues, and
voltaic electricity is set free in consequence of the chemical
decomposition.

On the contrary, let him pass a voltaic current through
many chemical substances, and they will be decomposed, and

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 105

split up into their elements. Again let the chemist pass an
electrical spark through a mixture of oxygen and hydrogen,
and it will cause the atoms of these to spring together,
and form water. Here we have instances of how electro-
chemical action can, under different given circumstances, cause
repulsion of atoms for one another, or attraction ; and thus hring
about decomposition or composition.

In short, wherever any kind of physical or chemical action
is going on, there will be electrical attraction or repulsion at
work, decomposing, composing, or moving the particles of
matter it is in relation with. And this applies to plant and
animal life as well as to physical action and states. The functions
of plants develope electro-chemical action, and electrical action
influences plant functions, and so in regard to animals. You
cannot move a muscle without setting in action currents of
electricity ; a morsel of bread cannot digest without the pro-
duction of the same. You cannot move, or breathe, or
digest, or be nourished, or even think, without the production
of chemical action, and this sets free electricity, which in turn
reacts in setting up chemical change, &c. Even as I shall
show in the next article your blood cannot flow along your
small capillary vessels without developing electricity. In fine
every mechanical and every chemical action in the system
sets free electricity, and in turn the attractions and repulsions
of this force react and produce other needful, physical, and
chemical effects.

Digestion, respiration, nutrition and all other essential life
actions depend — as influenced by the vital force — on the con-
stant production of the attraction we are discussing, and this
again producing certain effects. It is all action and reaction.
But mark! life does not consist only in electricity; or its
correlatives heat, magnetism, &c. These are hut agents wliich
the spirit of life can conform to its uses.

Magnetic Attraction. — Most persons have seen a mag-
net, and are familiar with its powers of attraction and repul-
sion.

As to the essential cause of these phenomena, we are

io6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

however as ignorant as of that of electrical attraction and repul-
sion. Simple, however, as may appear this force to the child
playing with needles, or iron filings, or toy fish, there can be
no doubt that, like electricity, it is really one of the most
important agents in the working of creation.

Its influence and actions are however even more obscure
than those of electricity ; but as will be seen in the article on
the '■^Correlatives^'' there are good reasons for believing that
where, and whenever, electrical action is set in motion there
too will be in action its congener — magnetism. They work
together ; and the same remarks probably will apply to
magnetic attraction, and repulsion, as I have just made in
regard to electrical actions.

But this is an enormous subject, and I cannot enter fally
upon it ; suffice it, that to show its importance I must state
that the electrical, the magnetic, and the chemical attrac-
tions and repulsions are always acting, or laying dormant in a
potential state, in all atoms, and molecules, and masses
throughout creation ; and consequently are in action, or in
reserve, in the tiniest speck of matter, as in the largest globe ;
working, or ready to work, on the smallest, as on the most
gigantic scale.

Capillary Attraction is the physical action by which
fluids pass along narrow tubes, such as small blood, and sap
vessels, &c., or are sucked up between the particles of porous
substances such as lamp wicks, lumps of earth, or sugai*, &c.

It is a result arising from the joint action of two forces, the
mutual heterogeneous attraction acting between the atoms or
molecules of the fluid and those of the solid with which they
come in contact ; and the homogeneous attraction or fluid ten-
sion of the liquid itself by which its atoms try as it were to
cling together, although disturbed in their cohesion by the
heterogeneous attraction of the contiguous solid. In the wick
of a lamp for example, an atom of oil is attracted by an atom
of the wick a minute fraction of an inch upwards : it is loath
to go, but in yielding, it pulls up with it by fluid tension or
homogeneous attraction one of its own kind. The uppermost

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. xo;

atom of oil is again attracted by an atom of wick still higher
up, and this being repeated again and again the fluid is
gradually passed on up the wick.

This same kind of action takes place in very narrow tubes
caused in au analogous manner by the struggle as it were
between the forces of homogeneous and heterogeneous attraction
inherent in the fluid, and in the sides of the tube.

The same kind of action also takes place between the
particles of earth and the water which percolates it ; or is
adjacent ; and thus an all-important process is efiected of dif-
fusing moisture throughout the ground.

Similar actions take place between fluids, and all substances
which have interstices. Place a lump of sugar, for example,
on a wet surface, and the water will be quickly sucked up to
the highest point of the mass.

But there are other forces that come into play in the action
of capillarity besides those named, for it is a remarkable
fact that in the passage of fluids through capillary spaces,
electricity is developed, and that this urges on the flow ; also
that this flow itself causes the manifestation of electricity.

And here again we see how one action in nature begets
another, and how all actions work in harmony to produce
designed results.

" Surface tension" (s,ee^^ Homogeneous Attraction^^^ also plays
a most important part in capillarity and in causing motion in
tubes ; and motion in fluids of different qualities. But I must
here leave this interesting subject for want of space, though
capillarity will be again alluded to in the article on circulation
of blood and sap in their respective vessels.

Endosmosis, or Osmosis, is the force concerned in the
difliision of liquids, and of substances dissolved or suspended
in them, when different kinds come in contact, or are only
separated by thin membranes.

Place some thick gum in a glass, and pour some water
slowly on it so that it shall not immediately mix with the gum,
and stand it aside. In a few hours the whole will have equally
mixed.

io8 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

The same would be the case with syrup and water, or salt
and water, &c., &c.

Or you may fill a glass with thick syrup, or what not, and
then tie over the top with a piece of bladder, or parchment,
and stand the glass in a tub filled with water high enough
to reach above the glass. In a ^Qy^ hours the sugar will have
passed out of the glass and mixed equally with the water in
the tub.

That is to say, there will have been an interchange and
mutual passage of the fluids through the membranes.

And not only thick (as albumen) and thin fluids will
interchange, and mix through membranes in this way, but the
various mineral and alkaline salts of potash, silica, &c., will
when in solution also pass, or diffuse through membranes,
whether animal, or vegetable.

Looking at these facts we see therefore what a very im-
portant function is performed by osmosis in carrying on nutri-
tion in plants and animals ; for it becomes evident that the
circulation of blood, and sap, and of albumen, and bioplasm,
and salts contained in them, is not only effected by the vessels,
and arteries, and veins ; but that diffusion takes place generally
throughout the entire organism by the osmosis or soaking of
fluids through the sides of the vessels, and the cell walls, and
tissues of every part of the plant, or animal.

This process of endosmosis (passing in) and exomosis (pass-
ing out) is effected partly by the heterogeneous attraction
of the different things on either side of the membrane for
one another, and partly by the quality of the membrane
itself.

As to the thickness, and quality of the fluids, the denser
can attract the thinner.

Solutions of gum, albumen, and such-like (colloids) pass
slowly — solutions of the various salts much more quickly.

As to the nature of the membrane. Professor Graham states that
" the interposed membrane, whether animal or vegetable, is very
actively concerned in the intensity and direction of the cur-
rent."

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 109

To this I may add that electricity doubtless plays the same
important part in osmosis as we have seen it does in capillarity.
and in a similar way — by action and reaction — it is produced
by motion, and can itself in turn cause motion.

Diffusion of Gases.— This is the force — arising it may be
by the repulsion of the atoms or molecules of gas for each
other ; or it may be by the motion caused by heat ; or it may
be by the mutual heterogeneous attraction of the atoms of the
atmospheric air and the gas for each other — which compels all
gases set free, to mix in the atmosphere, and thus to purify the
air and render possible the existence of plants and animals by
respiration.

If it were not for the law of diffusion of gases, the heavy
carbonic acid gas would accumulate on the surface of the
earth and destroy all animal life by suffocation, and when that
had occurred the plants would soon use up the stratum of
carbonic acid, and languish for a supply of that gas which the
animals had previously supplied them with.

The same principles apply to the diffusion of gases as those
already spoken of in respect to liquids.

Place two gases together in a bottle and they will mix
equally by means of the powers of heterogeneous attraction in
the same way as liquids.

Enclose any gas in a bottle and tie it over with bladder,
and the gas will pass out through the membrane and air pass
in, just in a similar way to osmosis in liquids.

So powerful indeed is the law of the diffusion of gases that
if you shut up gas in almost any kind of closed vessel (except
one of glass) it will escape through the very substance of its
sides — it will even diffuse through a metal bottle.

The law then of diffusion being so almost irresistible, we
see how it is that carbonic acid, and all noxious gases that may
be set free, diffuse and pass away into the air even on the
stillest day; and also how oxygen is brought to the animal
equally, as carbonic acid is conveyed to the plant.

It will be seen, therefore, that the great law of the diffusion
of gases (quite independent of the wind, though aided by it)

no SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

is oue of the very most important in respect to the continuance
of life in plants and animals.

By this action of perpetual mixing, the good air also, be it
observed, is brought to towns from the country, and the bad
is conveyed away.

When we close our doors and windows ever so tightly it is
this law chiefly, which causes the air to rush in and out of all
the little crevices; and if it were not for this, and the perpetual
supply of fresh oxygen thereby, and conveyance away of the air
which had been expired, we should be very quickly suffocated.

Repulsion is a more difficult subject to deal with than even
the foregoing attractions, because we cannot always distin^
guish whether a given action is one of repulsion or attraction.

Pour oil in water, and the oil will gather itself together
and refuse to mix. Is this due to the superior homogeneous
attraction of the molecules of oil for one another ? or is it due
to repulsion between the oil and water ? or is there discon-
sonance because no heterogeneous attraction exists between
the two kinds of molecules in consequence of the respective
molecules being of shapes and vibrations, <fec., that cannot as-
similate ? or, lastly, is it owing to the oil being of less specific
gravity ?

In answer to these queries we know the last-named is not
the cause, because although spirit is much lighter than water,
yet they will mix. But what is the reason why oil and water
will not assimilate nobody can tell. We can only say that
such and such things w^ill mix or assimilate and that others
will not.

In this and similar examples we must, therefore, be content
to remain in doubt as to the real cause of repugnance between
bodies.

But there is another class of cases which, though at first
sight very apt to mislead, we can on reflection better compre-
hend.

Thus — pour mercury into a glass, and it will not wet its
sides as water will; also if you observe the edge of the surface
of the mercury, you will see that it does not " run up " the

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. m

sides of the glass for a short distance as water does, but, on
the contrary, that it shrinks away from the glass, and forms a
convex surface.

At first sight you might say that was due to repulsion
between the glass and mercury; but the phenomenon is really
due to the very strong attraction the atoms of mercury have
for one another, and the absence of any considerable hetero-
geneous attraction between the mercury and the glass : there-
fore what looks like repulsion is really due to strong homo-
geneous attraction.

Difficult of comprehension, however, in regard to the ques-
tion of repulsion, as may be the class of cases like that of
water and oil just spoken of, and misleading on hasty observa-
tion as may be such an example as that of the mercury and
glass, still it is easy to find instances where the presence of
repulsion is quite certain.

For example, there can be little doubt but that the atoms or
the molecules of gas repel one another, for if gas be not confined
in a glass vessel it will rapidly fly away — that is, the ultimate
particles of the gas will loosen from each other and part
company.

From this we see that not only is there no homogeneous
cohesion between the atoms of gases, but that they actually
get away from one another if possible, and this is the case not
only with light hydrogen, but also with heavy carbonic acid.
It might be said that this tendency of the gases to split
up and diffuse into the air, might depend on the existence of
very strong heterogeneous attraction between the atoms of air
and the atoms of gas. This doubtless does exist, but the
physicists tell us that there can be no doubt also that the
other condition is ever acting, viz., that gas atoms are con-
stantly repelling one another and trying to separate even when
shut up in a glass bottle.

Take the case also of heat. It unquestionably produces re-
pulsion between atoms and molecules, as we see in melting,
boiling, and forcible evaporation, and in chemical decomposi-
tion produced by heat.

112 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Hold a wet towel to the fire and the heat will quickly break
up the cohesion of the particles of water for one another, and
overcome the heterogeneous attraction between the water and
the fibre of the towel, and drying will occur from the water
being rapidly repelled and driven away.

Other forms of repulsion also there can be no doubt about,
viz., the electrical and magnetic, to which I have already
alluded, and by either of which we may cause a great number
of things — even heavy masses of iron — to be repelled.

Most persons have witnessed instances of repulsion by the
magnet and by electricity; but I must say a few words of
explanation.

Suspend a bar magnet, and its ends will point north and
south. One end, therefore, has one quality and the other the
reverse. One end, therefore, is called the north pole of the
magnet and the other the south. Now, if two magnets are
brought near, their poles will affect one another in an invari-
able manner. The north poles, or south poles of each, will
mutually repel one another ; but a north pole and a south
pole will attract one another and spring together with avidity.
The law is " poles of the same name repel, and poles of a
contrary name attract one another."

Much the same may be said as to the two qualities called
" positive " and "negative " electricity. Two bodies charged
with the same electricity repel one another ; two bodies
charged with opposite electricities attract each other.

Now how far these forms of magnetic and electrical repul-
sion may be connected with the kinds of repulsion we have
previously considered, we cannot say, but it will be seen
by the next article on " Polarity '' that, in regard to the con-
stitution of bodies, there is strong reason to believe that
somehow or other ^^ repulsion''^ of some Icind is the constant
counterpart of attraction and complimentary to it, and that
both repulsion as well as attraction are present in some form
in all bodies except gases; and that it is these forces acting
differently on different kinds of matter, according to the en-
dowed different qualities of the substance of the atoms (see

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 113

'-'■Atorn.s ") and their endowed modes, &c., which in a mechanical
sense rule matter in a very important degree.

In this view, therefore, it is not only that atoms of different
kinds have different degrees of attraction according to in-
herent quality, &c., but that they have different degrees of
repulsion.

These attractions and repulsions acting with the atomic
constitution may balance each other, or one may overcome
the other. That is to say, attraction and consonance of atoms
may prevail, and cause or perpetuate union ; or repulsion and
disconsonance of atoms may predominate and prevent union,
or even cause violent separation under certain conditions of
heat, or chemical or electrical excitation, &c. : when repulsion
having acquired the mastery the atoms will loosen, or even fly
apart.

These latter remarks, as I have said, apply to the mystery
of the constitution of the substance of bodies, and the way in
which the atoms are possibly kept together or separated ; but
as to how and why it is that one substance en masse, com-
posed of millions of atoms duly arranged, can affect another
body also en masse, as we witness in the repulsion or attrac-
tion of needles, feathers, &c., &c., it is more difficult to con-
jecture.

Polarity. — The theory as to this, is founded on the as-
sumption of the existence of the mutual action and reaction
of attraction and repulsion, where they are equally balanced
in regard to force.

It is supposed, according to the principles enumerated in
the last article, that it is quite possible that the atoms and
molecules of some things are marshalled and arranged in their
union by the magnetic polar, or the electrical polar, forces ;
and that one side of an atom in association with others be-
comes north polar and the other south polar, or one side
positively and the other side negatively electrical, and thus
that the atoms by mutually attracting one another cling to-
gether and form a mass. To give a familiar picture of this,
take a number of marbles and imagine them to be atoms ;

114 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

mark one side of each " north " and the other " south ; " or one
side "Positive," and the other " Negative."

Having done this, throw a large number together in a
heap, and on the assumption that they are all charged with
magnetism or electricity, the result will be according to the
laws given in the last article, that all the marbles will imme-
diately arrange themselves in definite order, north pole side of
one to the south pole side of the other — or Positive side to
Negative side ; and in this way each marble will cling to its
neighbours in a perfectly symmetrical manner throughout the
entire bulk.

Corollary. — I will now make some very important remarks
on what I have tried to explain as to the forces of attraction
and repulsion.

These powers (various in their kinds of manifestation al-
though perhaps allied in essential constitution) are the forces
which as far as we have yet advanced in our examination, we
find to be those which arrange, order, and affect not only the
largest heavenly bodies in the universe, but also the smallest
particles of matter, both in their own innermost constitution as
well as in regard to their behaviour to each other in bulk
individually and collectively.

Gravitation keeps the heavenly bodies in their course ; and
the other kinds of attraction so act on the different kinds of
atoms, and bulks of atoms, and molecules, as to cause them to
cling closely together ; or by repulsion to separate widely
apart ; or to resist, or to yield, in various degrees, to any
extraneous force or new condition that may be brought to
bear on them.

But I would here beg emphatically to impress on the reader,
that in respect of the action of these forces on the inorganic or
inanimate things of creation such as we have hitherto con-
sidered, whether solids, liquids, or gases, that each of such
inanimate things is always affected, according to its sort, in a
similar manner, and strictly according to the kind of force, and
its degree, and the kind of substance affected, and the condi-
tions present. That is to say, that all the atoms or molecules

THE PHYSICAL FORCES.

115

composing any given inanimate mass are always, all of them,
similarly affected according to the scope to which any given
force extends in such mass. This, I repeat, is a fact to which
I especially desire to call attention in regard to inanimate
things, because we shall see by-and-by that the atoms of the
elements are not always similarly affected hy some of the physico-
chemical forces, when such atoms compose an organism, and are
wider the domination of life ; for that under the vital influence,
gravity can be overcome, diffusion restrained, chemical change
resisted or initiated, as the case may be : all of which things
take place, in each instance, in a manner never seen hut in
organisms. Also that many other processes are constrained by the
vital force to take place, which cannot occur in inorganic things.
(See ^^ Differentiation,^' '^ Bioplasfn,'' " Organization,''^ Vol. II.)

I wish it also to be steadfastly borne in mind, as pointed out
in the article on atoms, that in all iNorganic things at rest, and
not subject to change, all the atoms and molecules of a par-
ticular body are similarly arranged throughout the entire mass.

Whether it be a single grain of a solid, a powder, a liquid,
or a gas ; or whether it be a million tons of such inorganic
things, all the atoms, or molecules, and their groupings will
be arranged in a certain definite and regular manner — according
to the kind— throughout the entire bulk, and whether such
bulk consists of a uniform quality like chalk, or of mixed con-
stituents like granite, in which latter case all the components
will be similar, and the repetitions of them, and their mode of
commixture, b^ similar also, throughout. Indeed sameness,
and regularity — repeated — and repeated again, is the law in
regard to the composition of inorganic masses throughout their
entire bulk, be that small or great.

And as to form in inorganic things, the shape of the bulk
in its entirety — and Avhether as a solid it forms a concrete mass
of rock, or a grain of a powder — the mass — be it great or be it
small — will possess no regular and specific shape ; except in
the case of crystals, where a perfectly geometrical, symme-
trical arrangement is met with, such as is unique in all Nature.

Now mark ! that the facts above stated in regard to regu-

I 2

ii6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

larit}), and sameness, and repetition, in respect to the structure
oj substance^ and the materials composing it ; and conversely of
irregularity, and the absence of specific definiteness as to the
shape of the mass, or bulk, are in each instance exactly the
reverse to what we meet with in organization, and organisms.
And to prove this we must note that in all things touched by
the force of the magic spell of life, there is in regard to
structure of substance an endless variety, and irregularity, as
to the kinds of materials (wood, or bone-tissue, or muscle; sap, or
blood, &c.) composing the bulk (plant or animal) and the sorts
of atoms of which they are made up ; and yet at the same
time there is a perfectly regular and definite order in which
each sort of material is placed, so as to form definite structures,
organs, parts, bodies, and limbs, such as are needed to constitute
a plant, or an animal.

And as to shape, we know that, unlike masses of rock, and
lumps of earth, &c., every animal and plant has its specific
form and contour in every organ, part, and limb.

A mountain or a grain of sand may have any shape ; but an
elephant — or a fly's leg — or a muscular fibril each possess a
definite form.

For the sake of emphasis I would repeat that the atoms and
molecules which compose the bioplasm (or protoplasm) and
albumen, and cell walls, and fibre, and muscle, &c., of the
various organic substances of which the organism is formed,
are of course definitely placed in regard to one another (as
are the atoms in inorganic things) ; so as to form a definite
thing, as muscle, &c. ; but the great and marvellous
difference between inorganic bodies and organisms, is, that
in organisms these component things — (themselves made up
of atoms) such as albumen, fibre, muscle, membrane, (fee-
are placed here and there throughout the entire bulk, or body
of the plant or animal in a rigidly-definite condition of irregu-
larity— that is to say, they are, as to form, and state, and mode
of placing, differentiated for different uses in different parts of
the organism, muscle here — bone or nerve there, &c. — all
which irregularity, be it noted, is quite different to what we

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 117

meet with in any inorganic body — as granite, &c. — where
regularity and the constant repetition of sameness is invariable
throughout.

But why have I made so much of the foregoing, and so
laboured to make myself understood ? Simply that by dwell-
ing on the subject, I may impress on the mind of the reader the
very important difference that exists between the construction
of the substance of inanimate matter and that of organized
structures and organisms ; so that we may be the better pre-
pared to consider, further on, the subject of matter, when under
the denomination of the life force. For the present, how-
ever, we will pursue the subject of inanimate things, and I
will urge the point a little further, even at the risk of repe-
tition.

From what I have said in the previous account we can
understand that inanimate or inorganic matter, whether in the
form of a piece of iron, or chalk, or wax, or a crystal, or a
quantity of water, or a jar of gas, is composed in each instance
of atoms all arranged according to their respective kinds in a
certain defined order, with definite powers of attraction or repul-
sion for one another.

Therefore, that if the piece of iron, or chalk, wax, &c. &c., in
each case is exposed to new physical conditions, the particles
according to their respective kinds will be all similarly a^ected
in each separate case. That is to say, if you heat iron all its
particles will be similarly affected as to their powers of
attraction or repulsion for one another, and will resist up to a
certain point a great amount of heat without melting, but at
last those particles most heated will melt, and if the heat be
still applied the whole will soon fuse, and after a further
time will even vapourize at an enormously high tempera-
ture.

But mark ! all the atoms ivill do the same as every other
iron atom accordinsc to the degree of heat.

Again, boil water, and at 212° its particles will loosen from
one another and fly off as vapour. But mark again, that
although the water is different to the iron, in being more easily

iiS SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

vapourized, still all the atoms, or molecules of each, are affected
just in a similar manuer respectively, according to their kind.
There is no variation, or differentiation. All the particles of
iron, or of water, must form a solid, a liquid, or a vapour,
according to the degree of heat they are subjected to, and?;ms^
change from the one state into the other with complete uni-
formity tliroughout the entire hulk as affected by any given altera-
tion of temperature.

To illustrate this further.

Strike, or heat, or melt a piece of iron, or calcine a piece of
chalk, or agitate, or heat, or freeze a bulk of water, and in each
case, as I have already said, all the particles of the thing ex-
posed to the new influence will be similarly affected in a
strictly mechanical manner — the atoms and molecules will be
pushed this way or that, and may be quite disassociated and
pass away as a vapour or gas, or if this does not occur, the
molecules and atoms will yield to the new vibration or what
not, and will rearrange themselves in some one of the con-
ditions of sameness peculiar to the kind of thing affected —
each atom or molecule in the new state [e. g., frozen water)
occupying as of yore a definite relation of sameness to its
neighbours, different although, these positions or vibrations
&c. may be to those held in the previous state ; and let the
reader note particularly that the molecules and atoms of these
inorganic things will in changing from one state to another, not
only all be similarly affected, but that in arranging themselves
in a manner adapted to new conditions, they will not and
cannot depart from their order of sameness, and that they
cannot and will not arrange themselves differently in one part
of the mass to what they do in another, so as to form anything
like a differentiated structure, such as can be formed in a
mass of matter (bioplasm) under the influence of the life
force.

Observe well ! therefore, that the atoms and molecules of all
inanimate things being always all affected in a similar manner
by definite causes according to kind, it follows that if by way

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 119

of experiment, you mixed together in due proportions all the
different kinds of atoms needed to compose the proximate and
other chemical principles, and salts, necessary to form an
organic body, such as an egg, and placed them in a glass vessel
and heated them, and maintained them at the temperature of
a sitting hen's body for two or three weeks, it would be found
that the atoms of each kind of element so used by the chemist
would follow their ordinary inorganic modes, and would obey
the usual attractions and repulsions, &c., natural to each, and
would not become a chick (see ''''Development^'' Vol. II.) unless
the chemist had the power of touching the mixed particles ivith
the mysterious force of the vitalizing influence.

But if he could do so, the particles in his glass vessel would
take on and assume, not mere self-same regular positions, or
actions as in the absence of the vital force — but each according
to its kind would be constrained, appropriated, and arranged
according to a higher order than that of regularity and same-
ness, and would be differentiated, and formed into the various
composite tissues and organs of irregular construction and shape
such as are necessary to constitute a bird.

CHAPTER III.

The Forces {Physical) — continued.

Physical Forces continued — The Co-related Forces — ^Nature of Heat
and of Light, Electricity, Magnetism, &c. — Energy — Transformation
and Conservation of Energy — Dissipation of Energy — Continuity —
Sound — Wave theory of sound, light, heat, &c. — Colour — Summary
as to Matter and Force — Religious and Scientific Reflections.

The Co-related Forces. — Having now considered some of the
facts connected with the behaviour of matter as affected by the
attractions and repulsions, I will proceed to give a short
account of some further forces which also influence matter in
a very powerful degree.

These are Heat^ Light, ElectricitTj, Magnetism, Chemical
Affinity (or chemical change), and Motion.

Of these forces, as of those of attraction and repulsion, we
again can only judge by their effects. God alone knows their
cause, and real quality.

Until a few years ago they were supposed to be quite dif-
ferent things essentially, but Grove, Joule, and others have
now shown them to be so co-related as to be convertible the
one into the other, and hence the brilliaut theory of the
" Correlation of the Physical Forces."

To show this co-relation and capacity for transformation I
will give a few examples. Rub a piece of iron briskly, or
repeatedly strike it with a hammer, and it will become warm.
We know from this, therefore, that motion will produce heat.
Or strike a lucifer against the box, and the rapid motion of the
match against the hard surface will produce sufficient heat to
cause the sensitive chemical substance at the end of the match
to inflame, and so to give out heat and light. Or watch a horse

I'lIE PHYSICAL FORCES. 121

trotting on a hard road at night, and sparks will everj now and
then fly from his feet.

This is because by the rapid forcible motion of his legs the
iron of his shoes every now and then comes in contact with a
stone, and a minute particle of steel being struck oiF with
great force and rapidity it becomes red-hot, and thus pre-
sents another example of how motion can be converted into
heat.

These are instances of heat and light being produced by the
motion of friction. But now let us look at the converse case,
of heat producing motion.

Light a piece of coal, and set a kettle of water on it. The
flames resulting from chemical change soon leap out, and flicker,
and flare, and presently the water too becomes agitated, and
boils with energetic motion, and steam rushes up into the
air.

Place water in a proper machine, and the force you get from
the chemical change of the coal causing the water to form steam,
can make a railway-train weighing hundreds of tons rush along
the rails at a mile a minute.

These ai-e familiar examples of how man may set in action
the correlative forces, but instances abound universally in all
creation where the correlative forces are constantly producing
each other by mutual conversion, and eflfecting thereby all sorts
of natural changes.

By the stimulus of heat and light, ^c, received from the sun,
motion and chemical change are compelled throughout nature,
both animate and inanimate. As an example of the latter take
the case of water.

The water of the seas and lakes, &c., being aflPected by heat
moves by evaporation into the air, and afterwards descends as
rain or dew to perform the well-known and indispensable uses
pertaining thereto.

Then as to the way in which light and heat produce move^
ment and chemical change in plants and animals, I will also cite
one example, selecting plants as being the most ready of illus-
tration*

122 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

It is under the stimulation of light and heat that the plant
grows and performs its functions ; and astonishing to say the
rays, both of light and heat, which fall on the plant are absorbed
into it and fixed there.

That is to say, the chemical changes necessitated in the plant
by the light and heat, result in these factors of change being
themselves incorporated, with the new wood, &c», in such a way
as to be retained there in union with the atoms of carbon and
other constituents of the tissue and products of the plant.
Thus fixed they may remain for ages, until the wood, &c., is
itself subjected to change, and then either as wood or as coal
(if turned into such) it will — if burnt — again give out that
light and heat which it received and appropriated during
growth.

Hitherto I have spoken of Chemical Decomposition only as
produced by motion, and heat, and light, but now I must give a
familiar instance in which you can produce great chemical
change and movement amongst atoms by simply mixing two
chemicals together. Add tartaric aeid to a solution of car-
bonate of soda and a great commotion ensues, owing to the
superior affinity of the tartaric aeid for the soda ; and which
acid displaces the carbonic acid in previous union with the
soda, and the latter acid is turned out and escapes by violent
effervescence.

This instance is but a typical example of chemical decom-
position in general, and may occur in thousands of different
ways in different chemicals, and producing not only chemical
transformation, but the manifestation in many cases of heat,
and light, and electricity, &c.

I will next speak of electricity and chemical affinity con-
jointly. The electrical spark will produce heat, light, chemical
change, and movement.

Faraday showed also that electricity produces magnetism,
and magnetism electricity — that indeed you cannot produce
the one without the other.

Again, electricity will set in motion chemical affinity or
decomposition, and conversely chemical change will produce

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 123

heat, light, electricity, motion, &c. To show this, place pieces
of zinc and copper in an acid — that is, make a voltaic battery.
The acid attracts the metal and sets up chemical action, and
the result is that this chemical action by producing a change
of state, sets free electricity, which being conducted by " the
poles " or wires of the battery can there be made manifest in the
following different ways : —

Bring the poles together and heat, light, motion, &c., will
be produced as witnessed in the dazzling electric light.

Or, to produce chemical change only, plunge the wires con-
stituting " the poles " of the battery into water, and wonderful
to say the molecules of water will have such motion imparted
to them that they will be broken up into their constituent
gases ; and what is most marvellous the oxygen will always
be given off at one pole and the hydrogen at the other.

This is electrolysis or electro-chemical decomposition.
Numbers of compounds in solution may have the molecular
states of their atoms broken up thus, by the voltaic current, and
curious to say of the atoms so dissevered, as above noted, those
composing a given element will always be evolved by the same
pole — the positive pole or the negative pole as the case may
be. Some elements that is to say, always appearing at the
positive pole and others always at the negative.

Lastly, I will say a few words specially as to motion.

We saw how the motion of striking the lucifer match pro-
duced chemical change, and light, and heat. We have seen
also that chemical change — that is, the movement and change
of place of the infinitely small atoms of matter — could be pro-
duced by heat, and light, and electricity ; and that chemical
change could also itself interchangeably produce all these.

We have seen, too, that motion can be produced by heat — as
by the production of steam which drives the engine: also that
light can cause motion, as in the growth and nutrition of
plants ; and it remains only in this brief summary of an im-
mense subject, to remind the reader that electricity and mag-
netism can also both of them produce motion, not merely
amongst atoms but even in large masses by means of their at-

124 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

tractions and repulsions. Rub a piece of sealing-wax or glass
with clotli or silk, and the friction will cause such a change of
tttate in the glass or wax as to set free electricity, and this
force, thus made evident by motion (rubbing), can itself pro-
duce motion by attracting pieces of paper, &c.; indeed by using
well-known methods you may lift hundreds of pounds' weight.
So likewise as to magnetism ; it can produce motion, as we
see in the oscillation of the needle of the mariner's compass —
the attraction by a magnet of iron filings, &c.

From the above short survey of this marvellous subject, it
can, I hope, be understood by the reader that in the correlated
forces we have a most striking — nay ! miraculous instance of
^' Continuity'''' (as see) — that is to say, that the force, or essence,
or energy, whatever it may be and whatever you may call it,
that constitutes heat, light, &c. &c., is never lost, but merely
changes from one form, or kind, or state, into another, in a
perpetual series of everlasting transformations, each one form
being capable of producing or changing into one or more of the
others — motion, for example, being readily transformed into
heat, or heat into motion, &c.

My illustrations have necessarily been scanty, and my ex-
planations brief, but I hope I have adduced sufficient to show
the unscientific, that in the six correlative powers we have a
protean force which is able to assume the most astounding
changes and varieties of form, according to some mechanical
law we are totally unacquainted with.

But what is the real nature of this force or forces ?

As to this I can say but little : it is one of the mysteries of
Creation o Experiment demonstrates that heat and light are
kindred in their mechanical constitutions, and that they con-
sist of vibrations of " a something " which is called aether, and
it seems pretty certain that this " wave theory " is correct ;
but why they vibrate we do not know. (For theory of waves
see article on *' Soimd,'^ also article on " Colour^)

Then of the nature of magnetism and electricity we know
even less, and can only say they are changes of the state of

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 125

" something " which produces changes in the state of other
things, both of matter and forces.

Some persons have thought that whereas light consists
probably of the vibrations of " aether " in a particular manner,
so, that electricity and magnetism may depend also on different
kinds of strain or wave motion of this same " cether," — either of
that of space, or of the " tether " that permeates all substances.
But, of course, this is all hypothesis.

So too of " Chemical affinity,^'' we do not know exactly why
it acts as it does, or what its force really consists in ; we can
only say that it depends on the different motions and appe-
tencies or repulsions of the atoms of the various kinds of
matter being made manifest, when such atoms are loosened
from their previous condition by heat or what not, and so
being rendered free, are able, through their inherent qualities
and attractions, to arrange themselves afresh under the new
conditions, in the order compelled by such endowed qualities
and attractions.

So also as to the quality of moiion, force, or energij — all we
can say of it is, that it is movement, or the capacity to move
or to do work. As to what it is essentially, we know nothing.

We can only judge of motion, or force, or energy by wit-
nessing its effects ; and when we say that gunj^owder or coal
contain in them a store of potential energy, we only know
that they do contain the capacity for producing movement
and doing work. The gunpowder will, if inflamed, expand
suddenly by the production of gases resulting from chemical
changes induced by heat, and in such explosion will give
liberty to enormous force.

And so likewise as to coal : on being subjected to
chemical change by heat, it will, though in a less rapid way,
give off its equivalent of force or energy; but as to what this
acting force or energy really is, we know nothing more than
that it is motion — and as to what potential force is, we know
nothing more than that it is the capacity for movement in
store. (See " £'?2fr/7?/.")

I had intended to say more of each of the correlatives sepa-

126 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

rately, and of what little we can surmise as to the essential
nature and qualities of each, but I have already so far ex-
ceeded the space allotted to the subject, that I must be content
to enlarge only on the nature of heat and motion as deciphered
by the " Dynamical Theory of Heat"

The dynamical or force-producing power of heat is a theory
of the first importance, not only in regard to the chemistry and
physics of inorganic, but also of organic things.

Wherever there is active generation of heat, there is move-
ment, and it is for this reason that heat has been called a mode
of motion ; not that heat is the only mode of motion, because,
as we have seen, light will produce molecular motion, as in
the atoms of silver salt when decomposed in the photographic
process. Electricity will produce motion, as witnessed in its
power of attraction, repulsion, &c. Magnetism will produce
motion, as we see also in its power of attraction and repulsion;
and, lastly, chemical change will produce motion.

Nevertheless, although we know motion can be produced by
all the other correlatives besides heat, it is heat that is looked
on as the most usual mode of occasioning new molecular motion,
or decomposition, in atoms and molecules ; and this is the case
whether such atoms or molecules compose an inorganic sub-
stance, or whether they form part of an organic structure.

I suppose this habit of looking at heat as the principal
agent concerned in motion, has been because it is so manifest
to our senses, and because flame is such a ready way of setting
up chemical and physical change — as witness our fires, our
candles, our steam engines, &c.

But when one reflects on it, there is no real reason why
heat should be so generally looked on par excellence as the
mode of motion.

Nevertheless, a description of the mode of the action of heat,
in a dynamical sense, is so good a way of exemplifying the
manner in which motion is produced by the interaction of the
correlative forces, that I will give a description of the process
we call " hurning,^^ and if I am guilty of some tautology I
must ask to be forgiven, as it is so very important that this

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 127

subject should be understootl, not only because the action of
heat is so very importaut a process, but because the commo-
tion and changes of place, &c., produced amongst the atoms of
matter by heat, may be taken as representative in considerable
degree of the changes of place, &c., caused amoDgst atoms by
the other correlative forces.

Set fire to some coal, and the agitation j^roduced thereby
amongst its constituent molecules is so great as to cause
them to be broken up ; for the heat, and motion of the flame
which lit the fire communicates such an acceleration of the
normal vibrations of the molecules, and atoms of the coal, that
the movement soon becomes so general, and so extreme, as to
cause disunion or disseverance between all the constituent
atoms, and the formation of a gas is the result, which, itself
burning, adds further to the flaming and heat.

These chemical and physical changes thus set up, spread,
and spread, till the whole bulk of coal becomes a moving,
roaring mass of fire.

Let us ponder on this. We have seen that molecules of
gas are mutually repellent (see " Repulsion "), and now we see
that heat can break up a solid, and convert it into gas, which
then burns and disappears.

How can this be ? Why it would seem that heat must
either get between the atoms and overpower in some way
their natural attractions and cause them to become repellent
of one another ; or it must so increase, or alter their vibrations
that cohesion is no longer possible or endurable ; and in this
or some other way the atoms become so shaken or loosened, or
disconsonant in their relations to one another, that eventually
they break up their union, and drive one another apart.

And this is the case not only in coal, but in hosts of other
things.

Apply heat cautiously to any one of numberless solids, and
it would seem that the component atoms will first alter as to
shape, or vibration, or attraction — one or all — and the mass
will soften, and finally melt, in consequence we may suppose
of the cohesion of its atoms being loosened.

128 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Continue to supply heat, and eventually the atoms become
so repugnant of one another, that, as in the case of coal, they
fly off as vapour, or as gas. The same too occurs with
liquids.

Now it is common, as I have already said, to consider that it
is heat only which acts as an active agent in this disseverance,
but really we may fairly believe that in the act of burning, all
the other correlative forces are more or less set in motion, and
may assist in the dissolution.

But, however that may be, I wish here particularly to
point out that in whatever way the dynamical power of heat,
or chemical decomposition, may act in destroying the cohesion
between previously-associated atoms, and causing them to
spring asunder in consequence of altered vibrations, &c., it is
at this very time when they are so forced apart, and driven
into unwonted movements, that they are in the most fit state
to yield to new attractions, and to unite with other sorts of
atoms they may come in contact with, so as to form new com-
binations.

To illustrate this, let us return to the case of the coal fire
which we left roaring with dancing flames.

In this case the atoms of carbon and hydrogen, &c., which
had constituted the mass of cold coal, had become so active in
motion that they were rapidly passing away in a changed
state, soon to leave only mineral ashes behind. What has
become of them ? We have seen that when coal is heated,
the atoms which compose it, are at a certain stage of the heat-
ing so affected, that they separate from their old partnerships,
and when so torn from their old companions, they rush ofl* by
the impulse which has been given them, which motion they in
turn communicate to others by their own increased motion.
But though they have been thus torn from their old friends,
still the natural appetencies inherent in them for nnion with
anything which their endowed qualities are consonant with,
and suited to, is ever strong within them.

The consequence is, that in the case of coal, the instant any
of its atoms of Carbon or Hydrogen are separated from their

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 129

union as solid coal, and fly oif, they are at that moment just in
a fit state to form a new combination with any suitable element
they may come in contact with.

Now mark the following. We all know a fire will not burn
unless supplied with air. We know too that the air contains
oxygen in a state ever ready to combine with appropriate
things. It results therefore that when the atoms of Carbon
and Hydrogen are separated from the solid coal in the act of
burning, they immediately come in contact with the air which
is rushing in through the bars of the grate, and thence between
the pieces of coal.

See then what occurs ; the atoms of hydrogen, and carbon
just set free in a nascent state, and uncombined, and longing
as it were for fresh union, spring towards the oxygen that is
passing through the fire, and its atoms too being ever eager for
appropriate union, these several elements unite together and
form at least two fresh things. The hydrogen and oxygen
form watery vapour ; and the carbon and oxygen form car-
bonic acid, both of which newly-made compounds rush up the
chimney to perform their proper uses elsewhere.

But mark again, that it is when the atoms of carbon and
hydrogen leave the state of solid coal and pass oif in an uncom-
bined state, — that it is at this very moment of disseverance,
and passage from one state into another, that their movement
or vibration is the greatest ; consequently that as heat is a
mode of motion, it is at this very instant of disunion that their
agitation being supreme, — it is then that they form the flame
which perpetuates the conflagration and decomposition ; and
it is then, that they form the new combinations as just de-
scribed.

And thus the fire burns, and thus the dynamical power of
heat is rendered evident.

Let us now consider the dynamical, or motion-causing
power of heat as utilized in machines of man's manufacture.
By the motion of your hand you give motion to the match, and
this motion by the friction of the match on the box, causes the
chemicals of which it is composed to evolve heat, and the

I30 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

other correlatives ; and these perpetuate the movement by
communicating agitation, and chemical change, to the atoms
and molecules of the coal as this lies in — say the furnace of the
engine. The coal burns, and in so doing its atoms are dis-
severed, and the heat occasioned by their burning, or dis*
ruption, communicates movement to the molecules of the water
in the boiler. The water itself soon moves, and presently
l)oils, and in a short time the heat and motion imparted to the
water become so great, and the disseverance of its molecules
so rapid, and the violent efforts of these to escape as steam so
vigorous, that the engineer is able to utilize their endeavours ;
and so by pistons and cranks, &c., he conveys on, from the
agitated atoms, their motion, and communicates it by ingenious
contrivances to the wheels of the railway-carriage, or the screw
of the steamship, &c.

And thus we see that the motion of the train, or the steamer,
is but the continuance of the motion communicated to the
match, and passed on by the coal to the water, and by its
molecules to the engine, piston, &c.

In this case of the combustion of coal, and the steaming of
water, we have apt instances of the effect of motion, and of
chemical change as produced hy heat ; and conversely of the
coal, and the steam, by their burning, and vapourization re-
ppectively, producing, in turn, both heat and motion.

I have thus demonstrated the dynamical, or force, or motion-
])roducing power of heat when the conditions are such as to
give rise to flame ; but I must now speak of a slower, and even
more important species of burning, or oxidation, where the
combustion takes place imtlwut flame.

This occurs where " Chemical Affinity," " Heat," and the
other correlatives cause chemical change, or decomposition,
without producing flaring (the rusting of iron for example),
and takes place in a vast variety of instances, for examples of
which, as occurring in inanimate things, I must refer to the
previous part of this article on the " Correlative ForeeSi^\
" Chemical Affinity,^^ &c.

But there are instances even more remarkable, and inte-

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 131

resting than those there given ; and these are the astonishing
chemical processes — such as the oxidation and transformation
of food ; and blood ; and tissue — which take place in animals,
and in which the dynamical power of heat and its correlatives
may be traced out as plainly as in the case of the coal and
water in the steam engine ; but to save space 1 shall for the
present defer this aspect of our subject, and also the conside-
ration of the exact mechanical equivalent of heat, see " Food^^
" Transformation of Energu,'' " Animal Heat,'' " Nutrition,'"
&c.

As a last word I will finally add as a compendium of my re-
marks on the Correlative Forces, that it must ever be borne
in mind that what those forces really do, is to affect the atoms
of matter in such various modes, and degrees, — according to the
kind of atoms affected, and according to the special kind of
mode and degree, — as to produce exalted or unwonted move-
ments and changes amongst such atoms ; and that in so doing,
various manifestations are produced, which are directly evident
to our senses, or detectable by our instruments — such as motion,
burning, electric currents, &c.

In fine that it is " the correlative forces," working with
gravitation, and the other attractions, which cause all the
phenomena in which matter is concerned short of those com-
manded by a further force — " the Vital " — which we shall
consider by-and-by.

Energy or Force. — Although I have previously spoken of
"Energy" when discussing "motion" as one of the ^^Co-
related Forces,'" it is needful that I should say more on this
very difficult and very obscure subject.

The word energy in a i^lujsical sense ^ expresses the capacity
to move, or to do work ; and is synonymous in its meaning
with the word " force."

Physical Energy is spoken of as possessing two states, or
modes. When in action it is called acting, or "Kinetic
energy : " when in reserve, " potential energy."

' The reader must observe that I am not speaking here of "energy "
as a quality of the mental will.

K 2

132 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

For example, when coal is in the pit its energy is potential —
when it is burning in the furnace and causing water to boil,
and form the steam which drives the engine, its energy is
Kinetic.

Similarly, wlien I sat down to write this, my brain cells,
and the muscles of my hand, possessed stores of potential
energy — which potential energy has since been rendered
active or Kinetic, in placing these thoughts on paper. After
a time the potential energy stored in my brain cells and
muscles will be used up chemically, and otherwise, in doing
work, — and they will become tired. I shall then rest them,
and by taking food enable them to abstract from such food a
fresh supply of energy for use another time.

Physical energy then is a force, which being contained in a
potential form in a thing, may, in changing into the Kinetic
form, do work ; and in so doing may be transformed into heat,
motion, light (see " Correlative forces "), and may even, in the
case of its liberation in brain and nerve cells, be able to render
active those mysterious processes of the vital force — both
organic and mental — which are peculiar to them, and are
manifested as nerve action, nutrition, consciousness, voli-
tion, &c.

According to this therefore, it would hardly be an over-
strained figure of speech to say that ph 2/ si cal potential energy
consists of the essence of all the co-related forces, ready to be
developed in any of its specific forms, according to the kind
of call that may be made upon it for active manifestation, and
according likewise to the kind of matter it may be associated
with, or have to act upon. I may say also that in inanimate
things, the physical energy of gravitation and all the other
attractions, and all the co-related forces, act in invariable modes;
but on the contrary in animate or living organisms that all the
attractions and all the co-related forces — also the energy by
which the atoms of matter work in their fundamental consti-
tutions, may be constrained, as I stated just now, to work in a
different manner to what they do in inanimate things — con-
strained that is in such ways, as, within certain bounds and

THE PHYSICAL FORCES.

laws to be subservient to the vital force in contributing to
tlie various actions in which life consists.

But the reader, after all my pains may say, " You puzzle me
sorely by the number of names you make use of, and the
number of forces you describe, and the number of powers and
qualities you attribute to the atoms of matter. You speak of
the attractions, and the correlative forces, &c. 5 and lastly, you
have spoken of a quality or force you call ' energy,' but even
when you make use of the word ' energy ' you don't always
adhere to that word, but sometimes call it ' force ' or ' motion.'
Is energy a separate thing ?" Well ! the fact is, the word
" energy," as I have stated, only expresses the inherent
capacity to do work hy means of the various forces and the
qualities of the atoms all acting together. If a stone falls, it
does work, and exjDends energy, or force, hy means of the
attraction of gravitation acting on its substance ; and in like
manner it is the work performed by the energy of heat,
chemical action, &c., wdiich produces the phenomena peculiar
to them ; and it is the work compelled by the vital energy of
the spirit, which in organisms conforms — within certain
degrees and limitations — all the physical processes which con-
stitute life, to the act of living, and even of thinking.

Lastly, it may be asked what physical energy is essentially ?
I can only reply we do not know. Some have thought it is
God's will visibly manifested, but for myself I think this cannot
be so in a direct sense, because organic physical energy is often
displayed in the furtherance of evil; as for example in the pro-
duction of venom, and rapacious teeth, claws, &c., which, in
my article on " Rapacity " Vol. II., it will be seen came in my
opinion from the action of the Evil One, on matter and organi-
zation; and it is impossible to believe that God's ivill could be
used by Satan, whatever may be his power to pervert God's
worJcs.

In regard then to the exact quality of " energy " we can say
nothing ; we have to leave that question — like so many other
mysteries in God's creation — as beyond our capacities to fathom.

134 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

At the same time, as believers, it is most interesting to noie
that this " innermost factor,''^ if I may so say, of the machinery
of God's creation, has been, as I hold — and as I have just
Iiinted — touched in some instances in this world by the in-
fluence of evil. (I shall enlarge on this in the second volume
as already stated.)

Sources of Physical Energy. — Whatever doubt there may
be however as to the exact nature of energy, there is none as
to where it comes from physically ; or at least no doubt as to
the sources from whence comes the force or influence that makes
physical energy active.

These sources, to mention the most important, are {a) Che-
mical decomposition, such as arises from the interactions of the
primal energy or^force inherent in different sorts of matter — as
for example the rusting of iron when it comes in contact with
oxygen. (5.) Then there is the heat, &c. experienced on the
surface of the earth by conduction from the heat of its interior,
and by the action of volcanoes, hot springs, &c.

(c.) There is also the heat, &c. produced by the friction of
the axial rotation of the earth within, and against, the great
tidal waves, (d.) But lastly and most important of all, is the
energy received on the earth from the sun in the form of
heat, light, magnetism, &c., and which, as we proceed, we shall
see more and more are the most important agents in rendering
active, multitudes of actions, both inorganic as well as organic,
that could not otherwise take place ; and this applies in a
most remarkable manner to the case of organisms, and their
digestion and transformation of food in aid of nutrition.

It is the light, and heat, &c. received from the sun which not
only in inorganic things causes fluidity of water, and evapora-
tion ; compels oxidation, both by flaming and by non-flaming ;
assists in bringing about currents in the air and ocean, besides
hosts of other actions ; but also, most importantly — as aifect-
ing organisms — enables the plant to silently appropriate in-
organic food, and convert it in such a way as to render the
organism capable of performing all the various organic acts of
life and growth, &c. During growth the plant, as I shall show

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 135

hereafter, stores up heat, &c., &c., all of which may be set free
again bj burning by fire ; or if the plant is eaten by an animal,
this heat, &c. may be utilized by the animal in stimulating its
growth and functions (see " Transformation of Energf').
MarJc^ therefore^ in regard to animals, that their physical energy
comes in the first place from the sun. That is, the plant is first
caused to grow by the sun, and then the animal eats the plant,
and in digesting it, imbibes, and uses, and transforms, the energy
that the plant had originally derived from the sun. Or if the
animal instead of eating a plant, eats another animal, that, pri-
marily must have got its energy also from plant food, and hence
from the sun.

All this will be traced out in detail further on — what I wish
to insist on here is, that the sun is the principal source of the
physical energy of the universe ; and that it, especially, renders
life physically possible in plants and in animals.

In connexion with this subject, however, I must throw out
one hint as a caution against error. It is this. Some persons
perceiving the enormous influence of the sun, have said that
the sun is the life of the world, and that the world (indeed the
whole solar system) and all in it, both inorganic as well as
organic, lives and moves as a vast organism of many parts, but
one complete whole.

But this is a misinterpretation of what life really is ; and a
confounding of the true meaning of the word motion : and
understanding the two as if synonymous. Persons who labour
under this confusion of ideas, forget that life consists in some-
thing more than mere mechanical motion of a physical kind.
Granted that the heat, and light, and other co-related forms of
energy received from the. sun, working with gravitation and
the other attractions, do cause fuudamentarily all purely
physical phenomena, still it is a fact, as I shall show further ou,
that in order to cause true vital phenomena to be manifested,
there must be present a further kind of force, or energy, to
any I have yet described, but which I shall dwell on hereafter.
(See " Vital Force:')

Transformation and Conservation of Energy. — In the

136 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

article on the " CoiTclative Forces " it bas been shown how
marvellously these forces can severally change the one intO'
the other — motion into heat — heat into motion, &c. &c. And it
was pointed out also as to these, that in the same way as it is
impossible to destroy matter ; and that under all €irciimstanee&
producing change, matter merely alters its form — so it is my
duty now to urge, that energy as manifested in the co-related
forces can likewise never be destroyed ; but can only be
changed in its mode, or condition ; although in a future article
on the "Dissipation of Emergi^^'' I shall show that it can be — if
I may so say — degraded.

Seeing therefore from the study of the co-related forces that
in all probability no action of force or energy — not even the
fall of a pin, or the buzzing of an insect in the air — is ever
completely destroyed, and lost ; but that the motion, &c., is
only transformed into some one, or more, of the other forces, —
so it has become general to speak of this perpetual preserva-
tion of force, as the Conservation of Energy.

This theory is apparently so true ; and it is so astounding ;
that I must enlarge somewhat upon it, and I shall do so under
two headings. I shall show first its applicability to inanimate
things ; and afterwards how it helps us to understand, in a
measure, some of the facts concerning the functions, ka,, of
plants and animals.

1st. Conservation of Energy in inorganic things. Dr. Joule
has had the glory of showing by means of the motion set m
action by a machine of his invention, how it is possible
actually to measure the quantity or equivalent of heat produced
by a given amount of motion.

The same thing also has been proved in regard to chemical
action ; and the result is, that it has been demonstrated that
the force derived from the chemical decomposition which will
raise the temperature of a pound of water 1° Fahrenheit
would, under a mechanical mode of motion, lift 772 pounds
weight one foot high — that is to say, that 772 foot pounds are
the dynamic equivalent of 1° of heat. This power of produc-
ing heat, &c., by chemical decomposition is well seen in the

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 137

dissolving of zinc in the voltaic battery by which means heat
may be rendered manifest as in the electric arc.

From these experiments we therefore now know that in
regard to motion, and heat, and chemical action, none of
their force, or energy, is really lost when they act : and
the same is the case in regard to light, electricity, and
magnetism ; consequently we may feel certain that in all the
multitudinous actions in which these forces come into play,
the energy of each manifestation, however trivial it may be, is
never lost ; but that it is *' conserved^'' and merely transformed
into some other kind, or mode.

But the tyro may say he cannot believe this. For example,
lie may say, " What becomes of the motion of the railway
train ? " " What becomes of the heat of the sitting-room fire ?"
Well ! the motion of the railway train is converted into heat by
friction, and it makes the rails hot ; and the rushing of the
train through the air heats the air (also by friction) in its
passage, and this heat is diffused into the atmosphere, or
absorbed by the earth, to be utilized in both cases in various
ways. Then as to the domestic fire. In and by it, not only
all those changes are efiected which I have described else-
where, but the heat which is radiated into the room, aids the
chemical processes of your body in carrying on the functions
of life, and assists your own chemical and other forces in pro-
ducing animal heat, &c.; or it cooks your food, &c.

Then in nature, and independent of the doings of man,
hosts of cases of the physical transformation, and conser-
vation of energy are constantly taking place. Heat causes
water to evaporate into the air, and hence rain, &c., also
multitudes of chemical changes, transformations, and conser-
vations are constantly occurring — as in the oxidation of
rocks — the action of light, &c. : but I have no room to
multiply examples.

2nd. Conservation of energy in organic bodies — plants, and
animals. In considering this, we will first take a mixed case
— one, that is, where the principle of the transformation, and
conservation of energy, in an inorganic thing, may contribute

138 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

partly to the continuity of force in inorganic things, and
partly in organic bodies.

Thus a fire burns — its carbonic acid passes up the chimney
and is conveyed by diffusion to the country. Arrived there it
may be absorbed by the plants, and in them by means of their
functions of nutrition, &c., as stimulated to action by the heat
and light, &c., of the sun, the carbon of such carbonic acid
will be deposited in the substance of the plant, and the oxygen
be set free, and given off into the air. The carbon thus fixed
in the plant has then four principal careers before it ; it may
remain in the plant as wood till the plant dies, and rots, and gives
up its constituents to nourish other plants ; or it may be burnt as
wood ; or perchance may be turned into coal, to be transformed
again by fire, in a future age, into heat, light, &c.; or the plant
being eaten by an animal, the carbon may be utilized in the
animal. Then as to the oxygen which formed part of the
carbonic acid, it, on being set free from its carbon by the
plant, may pass away, and unite with some inorganic thing it
may come in contact with — say iron — and oxidize it. Or
instead of this it may be inhaled by an animal, and go to con-
tribute to its life and nutrition : after which to be again
exhaled as carbonic acid, which will then play the same part
in nature, as the carbonic acid given off by the fire as just
narrated.

But fascinating as it is to trace out these metamorphoses, I
must desist, and only mention one other as rej)resentative of
such as are constantly taking place in organisms.

We have just seen how carbonic acid, and oxygen, are
passed, and repassed, from fire to plant — plant to fire— or
plant to plant by decay in the earth : or from animal to plant,
and from plant to animal ; but now I must say a few words as
to the transformation, and conservation of energy, or force, as
occurring in the food of animals.

And truly this is one of the most astounding occurrences in
the whole range of creation. The animal takes food (animal
or vegetable), and then in its stomach and system, this food
becomes so transformed as to minister not only to the functional

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 139

needs of the animal, but even to contribute some of its particles
to the restoration and building up of such parts of the animal
structure as are being worn away.

But it may be said, What has all this to do with the " Con-
servation of the physical forces ? " Everything ; for it is hij
their aid that digestion, nutrition, and growth are carried on.
Indeed (as conformed by the vital principle) all the chemico-
physical functions of life consist in the actions, reactions, and
interactions on matter, of the various fundamental attractions,
and correlative forces, working with, or on, one another — they
affecting matter, and matter them — and thus producing mole-
cular movements and changes of all kinds. Heat producing
motion, chemical action, electricity, magnetism, &c. ; and these
in doing their work again producing one another by transfor-
mation; and in this way being momentarily perpetuated in
one form or other by conservation — this conservation, he it
noted, being the very reason physically, why the animal has a con-
tinuous existence for a certain period.

And thus it is that by the constant transformation and
conservation of force, acting on the material particles
of the organism, and the material particles of the body
in turn responding to and helping the forces ; that the
animal (or plant) lives on for a time according to certain
laws.

Observe however, energy could do nothing alone : also that
matter would be inert but for energy : and thus the two are
complimentary the one to the other ; and both being indestruct-
ible, their actions and re-actions — acting — (kinetic) — or in sus-
pense— (potential) — must be continuous as long as the Creator
chooses — existence, life, death, being as it were no more
than phenomena, in the continuity of the eternity of matter
and force.

But this last sentence is rather anticipatory of subjects we
must discuss farther on, so I will return to the particular ques-
tion in hand, and give some further special illustrations of the
" Transformation and Conservation of Energy " in Organisms.
In doing this, however, I shall be guilty of repetition ; but the

140 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

subject is so very important, that I wish purposely to go over
the matter again, so as to impress it.

To repeat. The plant receives energy in the form of heat
and hght from the sun, and these acting in its tissues in con-
cert with the life force, enable the plant to absorb carbonic
acid from the air, and nutriment from the earth.

By the chemical action (as conformed by the vital principle)
thus set up by the heat and light, the other co-related forces
are also put into action, and all these working together perform
all that is needed. As far therefore as chemico-phiisics are con-
cerned, the life of a plant consists in heat, light, electricity,
magnetism, and motion, being transformed from one into the
other ; during which actions, matter is so affected — and matter
also so influences the co-related forces — as to produce together
the phenomena of growth, respiration, nutrition, &c.

And it is just the same with animals. They take food (the
energy of which food was originally derived from plants, as
see " Sources of Energy "j, and inhale air. Chemical changes
ensue ; during which, heat and electricity, &c., are produced,
and these reacting on the food, and the tissues with which
they are in contact — as do the molecules of the food, and
tissues in turn act reciprocally on the forces — the general
result being, that all those changes take place in which life
consists.

And thus the latent potential energy contained in the food
is transformed into all these forms of force which are needed
by the organism, — some to be immediately again transformed
in carrying on respiration, nutrition, &c. : other forms, or
quantities, to be stored by conservation in muscle, or in brain
cell, &c., until wanted, in order to be also again transformed
into motion by the muscle ; or to aid the brain cell in making
thought consciously manifest.

But it is not in muscle, or in brain, or in nerve, or in
stomach, or lung cells only, that the co-related forces are at
work, producing and undergoing all sorts of transformations,
and conservations ; but the fact is that every action of life,

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 141

however minute it may be — whether it consists of a fractional
process in nutrition, respiration, growth, muscular action,
thought, secretion, flow of blood in the vessels, &c., — each is
produced by a transformation of heat, or light, or motion, &c.
(as conformed and constrained by the vital principle), these
transformations at the same time, in turn by the action of con-
servation, producing again heat, or electricity, &c., for further
use in the organism by action and reaction.

No flow of blood in the smallest capillary, but by its friction
gives rise to heat, electricity, &c. ; no change in a cell of any
kind, or even in the infinitesimally small blood corpuscle,
but a modicum of transformation of the physical forces is
effected.

And thus the chemico-physical forces act, and react, in the
system, and perpetuate constant change in all and every part
of the body — even the most remote — and during every instant
of time — aiding nutrition — helping circulation and ministering
to all the motions and processes in which life consists. But I
must stop and refer for further details to " Food,'"' " Digestion'''
and '■'Nutrition,^'' (Vol. II.), adding here only one remark —
pregnant though that may be in significance.

It is this : that in inorganic things, as we have already
seen, the co-related forces act as it were blindly ; and pro-
duce effects which are limited only by their own powers and
degrees of disturbance, and capacity for transformation, and
quite independent of order, as to place, and rhythm, and
time. Not so, however, in the healthy organism, for in it
(during the presence of the vital principle), as we shall see
more fully hereafter in our consideration of development, &c.,
all things occur in the right place ; in the proper rhythm ;
and at the right time — moreover one process cannot get the
upper hand of another; and so it happens that all the trans-
formations and conservations of force are so beautifully har-
monious, and work with such perfect and assorted symmetry,
that the organism never takes fire; or is never destroyed by
chemical explosion; or killed by an electric discharge, &c., &c.

In conclusion, I mu'^t note that in the same manner as in

142 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

plants, so in animals, their secretions, dejections, and exhala-
tions; and finally their entire bodies (if not eaten by other
animals), are received into the air, or earth again, to be utilized
eventually in either case by plants, and transformed in the
ceaseless round of change and conservation — all of which
changes constitute in their entirety a perpetual miracle in the
course of nature.

Dissipation or Degradation of Energy. — We must now
jrlance at the melancholy theory which holds that the earth is
cooling, and that the sun is parting with its energy, or burning
away; the consequences of which being, that eventually all the
present physical conditions of this earth and our solar system,
will end in a comparative annihilation.

And I must state that the reasons for holding this view are
exceedingly powerful. Before discussing them, however, I
must return for a few moments to the question of the trans-
formation and conservation of energy.

I have stated in previous pages that by the action of these
principles, or laws, no force is ever lost — nor is it — but yet it
is a fact, that in a measure, force or energy becomes in the
lapse of time degraded. Professor Tait (" Recent Advances in
Physical Science," p. 146) says, '' Every operation in nature
involves a transformation of energy, and every transformation
involves a certain degradation. The energy of the universe is
getting lower and lower, and its ultimate form must be
that of heat, so diffused as to give all bodies the same tem-
perature."

When that state of things comes to pass (if ever it does)
we know that everything being then at the same temperature,
all the chemico-physical changes such as we now know of,
must cease.

But before we can quite realize the end, we must consider
the beginning ; and in regard to these two questions, we have
within the last few years been put in possession of the most
astounding and satisfactory knowledge, chiefly through the
very brilliant reasonings and proofs of Sir W. Thompson and
Professor Tait.

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 143

In order, however, that we may understand these views, I
must premise a brief statement concerning the nebular theory
of the formation of our solar system; and consequently of our
earth.

Sir W. Herschel, in 1779, gave great attention to the hazy
patches of light which are dotted about the heavens and are
called nebulas ; and from the difference he perceived in these,
arrived at the splendid surmise, that nebula are suns and
worlds in the course of formation.

Laplace took up the idea and worked it out more fully; and
it is now generally believed that our sun and its planets, in-
cluding our earth, were formed from a nebula gradually
condensing and breaking up into several parts, the central one
of which is our sun, and the other portions the planets. The
heat caused by the condensation and falling together of these
tremendous masses of matter must have been prodigious — and,
indeed, so great, that at first they must have been at a white
heat. This heat, however, has since then been greatly dis-
sipated, though it is the cooler remains of it which still gives
energy to the solar system.

As to the mathematical, and other branches of this great
subject, 1 shall not enter on them ; suffice it that there seems
little doubt of the truth of the main theory.

Here then was the beginning : and now let us trace out
what we can reasonably surmise as to the probable end.

Common sense tells us that the sun, unless it receives fresh
accessions of energy, must eventually burn itself out ; because
we know, that each day and night — perpetually — ever since
its first creation, it has been parting with its energy (heat, &c.)
by radiation into space in all directions.

Whether it really does receive accessions of energy we do
not know, although some have thought that meteors are con-
stantly falling into the sun, and so by the heat, &c., caused by
their impact, assisting to keep up its energy.

Nor — most imi^ortantlij — do we really know, but that in
some way the sun may have its energy renewed by means past
our science to reveal.

144 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Nevertheless it must be stated, that according to what we
appear to know, it seems that the sun is really using up its
energy, and slowly cooling.

Reasons for believing the Sun to be Cooling, and losing
its Energy. — Granted the truth of the nebular theory, then
we may fairly infer that at the first falling together of the
nebulous particles or haze, and its after separation into distinct
masses, all our planets, as well as the sun itself, must have
consisted of molten matter of prodigious heat. Now as we
know in regard to the earth, that it, for certain, has cooled
extremely since its first formation (because plants and animals
can now exist on the earth, which they could not have done if
it had remained always at a white heat), we may confidently
believe that the sun has cooled likewise, because although
the exact constitution and qualities of the earth and sun may
not be the same, yet they are so similarly placed in regard to
facility of parting with heat, that we cannot believe but that
the loss of heat by radiation must have affected each in a like
manner.

Indeed, unless the sun possesses some power of renewing
its energy, such as by the constant falling of meteors into its
midst, &c., then we may be sure, according to our present
science, that it must eventually radiate all its energy and
become inert. Look at the conditions.

Suspended in space, the sun — or at any rate its photosphere
(or surrounding envelope) — is constantly in a state of incan-
descence, and giving off light and heat unceasingly in all
directions, and from every part of its surface.

Now whether this incandescence arises from chemical
burning, or from some other mode of change of energy,
matters not, for we know that all transformation of energy
must be at the cost of change of state, and as the results of
this change of state are, in the case of the sun, given off as
heat, light, &c, &c., it is clear that unless the fuel or other
source of energy is constantly renewed, the sun, like any other
fire or mode of consumption, must burn itself out, or use itself
up.

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 145

Reasons for believing the Earth to be Cooling and
losing its Energy. — I have already given some of these
reasons, but I must repeat them.

First. It is believed that the earth has been gradually
cooling by dissipation of heat, ever since it first became concrete
from a slowina' mass of incandescent nebular matter.

And supposing the nebular theory to be true, we may feel
certain of this, because we know, that unless it had cooled
from its primitive white heat, it would have been impossible
for plants or animals ever to have existed as we see them.

We may be sure, too, that the reasons which caused the
earth to cool sufficiently to permit of vegetable and animal life,
did not cease at their creation, but doubtless have continued
to act even to this day.

Secondly. It is believed that another cause of the cooling
of the earth, besides the loss of its own primitive heat, is
because, notwithstanding the preservative influence of the
powers of the " conservation of energy," it really dissipates
into the air more of the energy it receives from the sun, than
is stored up in plants by their growth, &c. Consequently as
we believe the earth will, during the lapse of time, receive
less and less energy from the sun as that consumes away,
there must come a time not only when the earth will be too
cold for the continued existence of organisms, but a time also
when its own integral energy will be expended.

And further it is predicted by some of the best men of science
(see " Unseen Universe," p. 91), that when that time of general
lassitude and loss of energy arrives, the earth — as well as the
other planets of our system — will by setherial friction be caused
to approach spirally nearer and nearer to, and successively
to fall into the sun ; and in so doing will on each occasion
cause, by the force of their impacts, a blazing up and renewal
for a time of the sun's energy, until at last, having finally
engulfed Neptune and benefited temporarily by its inception,
the sun itself having used up all available energy will languish,
and it and its system will cease to exist in the form we now
know it — its cold, black mass wandering on in space until

146 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

perhaps it is itself engulfed in some other mighty heavenly body
— probably Sirius.

Corollary. — So much as to what science tells us as to
these gigantic and awful questions, and I will now make a few
remarks thereon.

In the first place the believer need entertain no hesitation
in accepting these views in so far as they satisfy his reason.
Indeed the student of the Bible, and of God's works, lies
under the greatest obligations to Sir W. Thompson, Professor
Tait, and other able physicists who have worked out these
views, because they prove — as far as the science of our day can
do so — that there was a beginning ; and that there must he an end
to the world as it is at present constituted. And this is just
what the Bible tells us. Genesis sets forth the beginning,
and Peter declares in his Second Epistle, iii. 10, " But the day
of the Lord will come, in the which the heavens shall pass away
with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with a fervent
heat ; the earth also and the works that are therein shall be
burned up."

Could any man of science of the present day, however
gifted with eloquence and power of lucid description, portray
more vividly than this does, what science predicts is certain to
take place in the future ?

Again Paul says, " They (the heavens) shall perish ; but
Thou (God) remainest ; and they all shall wax old as doth a
garment ; and as a vesture shalt Thou fold them up, and they
shall be changed ; but Thou art the same, and Thy years
shall not fail" {Heh. i. 10, 11, 12). Or again, "Heaven and
earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away"
{Matt. xxiv. 35).

Some writers have considered these remarkable declarations
(similar ones to which will be found Psahn in cii. 25, 28, and
also in Isaiah xxxiv. 4), clothed as they are in the fervid
language of Eastern allegory, as no more than forcible meta-
phorical expressions of how the evil institutions, and laws,
and bad moral habitudes, and practices of man, are at the last
to be ended in their present corrupt forms, and to be changed.

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 147

Other persons, on the contrary, have thought that the predic-
tions are to be understood in a literal physical sense only.
For myself, I think these prophetic announcements may be
intended to convey an intimation of both a moral and physical
end to things as they now are. Certainly in a physical and
scientific sense, there can be no room for doubt, seeing how
remarkably they concur with the reasonings of modern science;
nor can we fail in this connexion to see the support that
science gives to the Bible when one reflects that Moses, and
David, and Peter, and Paul wrote in days so very remote,
and when the modern facts and speculations of science were
unknown.

It is proper, however, that I should mention the chief
argument on which the opponents of the physical view rest
their conclusion. It is the circumstance that in many places
in the Psalms it is stated that the sun, the moon, the stars,
and the heavens are to endure " for ever and ever," see Ps.
civ. 5; Ps. Ixxviii. 69; Ps. cxlviii. 6; Ps. Ixxxix. 36, 37.^

For myself, however, I believe that in the phrase " for ever
and ever," as used in these Psalms in connexion with the
earth, " sun, and stars," simply means that they are to endure
for a very, very long time ; but as to their lasting literally and
truly " for ever," I cannot conceive how any believer in the
inspiration of the Scriptures can understand that any of the
heavenly bodies are to be eternal in their present form, that is
to say, how he can reconcile his interpretation of " for ever "
in a literal sense in regard to a perpetuity of the earth, and
sun, and stars with the definitive statements respecting their
end as given in 2 Pet. iii. 10, and the other texts already
quoted; also with Mev. xx. 11, where it is stated that the
earth and the heavens are to pass away, to be followed {Rev.
xxi. 1.) by "a new heaven and a new earth." I would
venture to think therefore that " for ever " as used in the
above Psalms, and as applicable to the earth, sun, and stars,

- See an excellent statement of this argument, SiDaldiDg, " Scripture
Difficulties;' p. 328 and 329.

L 2

148 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

means no more than that they are to continue for a very long
period, and until the time appointed for their dissolution.

And now a few final scientific observations on the theory
of the physical end of this world as at present constituted;
and of the end of our sun, and its system, and even of the
other stars of the heavens — our sun itself being a star.

First, I may remark that a partially corroborative proof of
the surmise of the physicists on this score being correct, is
given us by the astronomers, who report that there are records
of stars disappearing from the heavens ; or of stars (suns)
previously unobserved, coming into view, and then after a
time fading away, and at last becoming quite invisible.

Now it is quite possible these may be instances of the
burning up and destruction of heavenly bodies ; or of blazing
up through a collision ; though I admit the comparative sud-
denness of disappearance of the latter kind is rather difficult
of explanation, as the collision of two large heavenly bodies
would cause a renewal of energy for a long time.

Still although we may at present be unable to account
accurately for these phenomena, there can be no question that
these extinctions of old stars; and apparitions, and then dis-
appearance of new stars, are strong proofs of the instability
of the heavenly bodies.

But unstable and changing as may be the bodies tenanting
the heavens — indeed unstable and changing as may be the
present form of the universe, and of all things in it which the
speculations above given appearto countenance — it seems never-
theless quite clear that neither the scientific believer, nor the
scientific sceptic can believe in complete annihilation (see
" Continuity ") of either matter, or force ; for both revelation
and science echo the same word — or tell the same tale — and
that is — continuity — everlastingness. In the very texts I
have quoted, it is stated that they (the works of God) " all
shall wax old as doth a garment, and as a vesture Thou shalt
fold them up, and they shall be changed {Heh. i. 10, 11,
12).

Also as before stated, "the heavens shall pass away with a

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. iz;9

great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat,
the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burnt
up" (2 Pet. iii. 10).

Now as to the first of these texts we know, that to be
" changed " does not mean to be destroyed. So of the second,
we know as a matter of science, that to be " burnt up " is not
to be physically abolished, but only changed.

But objectors may here revive the argument already spoken
of as to perpetual continuance, and urge that we read, " The
glory of the Lord shall endure /o?' ever ; the Lord shall rejoice
in His works" {Ps. civ. 31). Also "His dominion is an
everlasting dominion, and His kingdom that which shall not be
destroyed" {Dan. vii. 14).

Yes, truly ! But this surely applies to God's personal
everlasting continuance, and the perpetual rejoicing in His
works ; but it does not mean that those works are to stand
fitill, and that matter, &c., is always to remain in the same
form.

No ! God will remain, and so will His dominion, and king-
vlom : matter, &c., also will be continuing ; but in the con-
tinuance of His works, this matter and the forces may be
changed in form, according to His will, but they will not be
destroyed.

As to this change as affecting matter and force, we have
already seen what science tells us in regard to continuity and
transformation, and conservation ; but let us look further at it
in this context.

Take the case of the sun, and think of the enormous quantity
of heat, light, &c., constantly given off from its surface in
every direction. Then think of the comparatively small
quantity of this heat and light, &c., that in their course of
radiation from the sun impinge on the earth, and the other
planets ! Why by far the greater quantity of its heat and
light must pass quite clear and wide of the planets, and must
proceed to a destination in the outer confines of space (if there
be confines) such as we can form no conception of.

Setting aside for a moment the ideas of the believer, let me

I50 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

ask the sceptic who has faith in the principle of conservation,
if he can think that all this energy is lost ?

Surely this heat and light that failed to strike against the
earth or any planet, cannot be really wasted and lost I
Then where does it go to, and what does it do ?
Is it not most in accordance with enlightened reason to
suppose it is essential in some way we know not of, and that
it goes to energize matter somewhere in the great circle of
God's creation ?

Again: granted that our sun and its system will be
"changed "and pass away from its present form; but yet
no scientific believer who earnestly ponders on the question
can, I think, believe in annihilation.

To return to the question of the heat, &c., given oiF by the
sun, it may be said that in some way the heat and light given
off and passed into space may return to it in the form of
meteors, and so may keep it for ever burning. I mention this
as beino- possible, though I myself incline to the belief that our
sun and its system will, as it at present exists, be finally ex-
tinguished.

Still if the theory I have just hinted at be really true, then
the texts I have above given as to " folding up " and changing,
&c. would be solely applicable as some think, and as I have
already noted, to the destruction of man's bad institutions and
practices.

But anyhow it seems impossible for the believer who is a
scientist to think that the Power which designed and made
the co-related forces, and constituted their protean conserva-
tive actions, could have created the sun in such a (may I say
buno-lino") manner as that the enormous amount of energy which
every moment is given off from it, and fails to strike against
the planets, should be lost ! — an amount of waste (if so lost)
which it is almost beyond our minds to calculate.

No! even if all this heat and light which proceeds un-
arrested into space fails in some way to return to our sun, we
must I think in all soberness and faith believe, that it must go
to other stars (suns), or what is highly probable that it may

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 151

go to assist in forming new nebulse in the ever-ceaseless round
of God's purpose in His creation — a star (sun) passing away
and being ^^ folded up " or " changed " here, and new ones
being formed elsewhere.

The same may be said as to the resuscitations of energy
which it is scientifically believed occur, or will occur, when
the various wearing-out heavenly bodies come into collision —
these collisions by the violence of their impacts must cause a
renewal of energy for a season, and as we know this causes a
fresh amount of heat, &c., to be radiated, it must go some-
where in space. Is it not most reasonable therefore to con-
jecture that all this energy, like the heat and light just spoken
of, will also be conserved and be transformed in some way —
perhaps going as already suggested to the feeding of waxing
nebulai that are growing elsewhere in space, and which in
time are to form new suns and new worlds, " a new heaven
and new earth." And so probably the eternal round is kept
up — ceaseless change — but harmonious continuity ! Here is
the for " ever and ever " in a physical sense of the
Psalmist !

Contimiity. — This is a principle in nature that is now so
often spoken of in science that I must devote a few lines
specially to it, even although I have dwelt so loug on the sub-
ject in the foregoing.

I have previously stated that matter and force cannot be
destroyed either by the operations of nature or by man. Man,
for example, can only cause matter to change its form — as
when he evaporates water, or burns coal, &c. — the water being
simply changed into the state of vapour, again to form water
when this is condensed; and the coal being resolved into heat,
gases, and ash, each of which fulfils a new function in nature
and may be transformed again and again.

These facts prove therefore that the existence of matter is
continuous.

I have shown also that the same principle applies to "/orce,"
and under the headings of " Correlatioii" and " Conservation of
Energy,'^ and the article just concluded, I have pointed out

SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

that the action of " continuity'' is as dominant and ever acting
in regard to ''force'' as it is in respect to " matter."

Coukl there be clearer proofs of a Supernatural Power
capable of design ? The fact that matter and force cannot be
destroyed by man, and cannot annihilate themselves, shows to
the believer's mind that they could not have created them-
selves.

Whether, however, the Power that created matter s^niii physi-
cal force ^ has willed that they ever shall be abolished, is past
our power of knowing for certain. The Power that could create
matter, and force, could of course annihilate both ; but for
myself I incline to the opinion that matter and force once
created will be eternal in their existence and action, changing
though they may do, in their form and mode.

Sound. — There are two other prominent qualities of energy
as affecting matter, which I have not found it convenient to
speak of sooner ; and these are sound and colour.

Sound, as most persons know, is produced by the particles of
air being put into different degrees of motion, and which shocks,
or impulsions, or waves of air being received on the auditory
nerve, occasion the sensation of sound.

The waves of sound are of different lengths— that is, the
vibrations — or wave-lengths— are shorter or longer ; quicker
or slower ; according to the nature of the substance or thing
which is put into vibration ; and according to the force of the
impulsion occasioning the movement. The quicker and shorter
the vibration the higher the pitch of the note — the longer and
slower, the lower or more base the pitch — a thin fiddle-string
will vibrate quicker than a thick one, and give out higher note.

I have just spoken of " waves of sound," and in the articles
on '' light and heat" I also spoke of " waves," but did not enter
into detail concerning " the wave theory." I will now there-
fore very briefly do so.

If you stand on the sea-shore you see the waves in motion —
they may be large or small. In a calm, they will be small ;
in a storm, large. Their size therefore (not to mention some
3 As to " metaphysical force," " spirit," see ch. iv.

THE PHYSICAL FORCES.

153

lesser causes) depends chiefly on the force with which the
water is acted on by the wind. It would consequently, in the
case of the ?ea, be possible to estimate what the height and
size of the waves would constantly be, according to the depth
of water, and the force of the wind, and it would also be pos-
sible to estimate the force with which each kind of wave would
strike against the shore, or a cliff.

Now imagine that instead of a sea of water you had a sea
composed of a heavier fluid — say of mercury : or of a lighter
one — say of alcohol, or oil; the waves of each when agitated by
the wind or other disturbing cause would, for an equal force of
wind, &c., be of different heights and lengths.

The sort of medium therefore makes all the difference to the
kind of size of the waves; and this will be found to be all-
important presently in regard to sound, and especially so when
we come to consider the subject of the vibration of aether as
causing light and colour.

Now instead of water or oil, &c., as a medium, suppose a
sea of air — the atmosphere — in the which, from the subtleness
of its composition, the waves would be infinitely small.

Let a string — say of a fiddle — be made to vibrate, and it will,
by striking against the particles or molecules of the sea of air
which surrounds the string, set them into a state of agitation,
or vibration ; and thus the air as thrown into a state of com-
motion by the string, will have waves produced analogous to
the waves of water caused by the force of the wind; and further,
these waves of air striking against the tympanic membrane and
nerve of the ear (as the water waves strike against a cliff
on the shore) will occasion by their shocks the sensation of
sound.

Then the analogy between sea waves and sound waves may
be traced still further. Thus, sound is capable of being pro-
pagated and of being heard as far away as the degree of force
with which the air is able to produce wave motion, as set
in action l»y the original agitating cause — in other words,
the sound can be heard as far away as the air waves reach
before their force is expended : that is; if they are not

154 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

stopped in transition by a material obstruction (such as the
ear), just the same as the sea wave will roll as far as it can
(if not arrested) before it gradually sinks and dies away in
consequence of the action of the wind having ceased to urge it
forward.

To go a step further: instead of water or oil or air let us
imagine the hypothetical and still more subtle "something"
called " aether," to be the thing acted on. Then in that case,
when it is thrown into agitation, its waves instead of being
seen as sea waves, or heard as air waves, will be seen as light,
^ther therefore in a state of wave commotion constitutes
light, and this wave commotion as differently affected, will be
shown also in the next article to be the cause of colour, accord-
ing to the size of the wave lengths, or number of vibrations
as conditioned by the medium, or substance the light passes
through or impinges upon.

I may say further, that heat as we have seen, is also a form
of wave motion, and that possibly the other correlatives act in
some such way.

Now as to immediate cause. In the case of the sea waves
we know that one of the prime factors in their formation is
the force of the wind ; and in the case of sound, we know that
the proximate cause of the particles of air being thrown into
wave agitation arises also from a mechanical force being ap-
plied to them. But in the case of light we do not know how
its vibrations are caused, any further than that we can some-
how, empirically produce light by chemical or mechanical
action. (As to the essential cause of light, sound, &c., see
" Design^' Vol. III.)

Colour. — In the article on '' Liglitj'^ and in the one just con-
cluded, I have stated that light consists of vibration of a
" something " which is called " aether."

Now, if a ray of light is passed through a prism it can be
broken up into the " spectrum " or " rainbow " colours.

By experiment it can be also shown that each of these
colours consists of waves of a particular length for the parti-
cular colour, shorter and more rapid for the blue, longer and

THE PHYSICAL FORCES. 155

less rapid for the yellow, aud longer still and slower for
the red.

White light consists then of all these kinds of waves 'blended
harmoniously ; but colour depends on their being assorted, or
disassociated, or split asunder. Or white light, perhaps it
might be truer to say, consists of vibrations of a certain length,
which can be broken up and split into other lengths of wave
by being aiFected in a different manner.

But now we come to the fact which practically is so all-
important.

I said that if we passed light through a prism, or lens, we
could artificially split up the white light into coloured light; but
in nature it is a fact, that substances, and gases, and vapours
have a power or quality of naturally breaking up the rays of
white light that fall on them, and of absorbing all the colours
of the ray or spectrum but one, which one is reflected. Thus
a red thing is red because it absorbs and negatives all the
parts of the spectrum, or ray, except the red portion, which
it reflects, and hence appears red to the eye ; and so as to a
blue thing, it absorbs and negatives all colours but blue, and
reflects blue to the eye ; and so on as to all colours till you
come to black, which is black simply because it absorbs
the entire ray of white light without splitting it up.

Space forbids me to say more on this subject in this place,
and I will leave it for the present, with the sole remark that
the sceptic would wish us to believe that all the wondrous
beauties of nature which depend on colour, are simply acci-
dental physical effects and mere chance results, and that what
Ave call beauty as applied to colour is no more than the
haphazard occurrence of contrast.

Summary as to Matter and the Forces. — Having finished
the strictly physical part of this work, I will now give a very
brief summary of the foregoing chapters.

1st. We have seen that Matter in all probability consists of
atoms, and that these atoms, according to a law of constitution
we cannot scientifically account for, differ as to quality of
substance as well as in various other respects.

156 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

2adlj. That when a number of atoms of one sort are united
together thej form a simple elementary body — whether it be
solid, liquid, or gaseous.

8rdly. That atoms of one kind of thing are able under certain
fixed and immutable laws to join themselves with atoms of an-
other or even several other kinds of thing, according to certain
fixed and rigid laws as to quantity, and are able in such assorted
proportions or numbers to form little independent co-partner-
ships (molecules), which are able as compound units to act in
the same manner as simple atoms, in clinging together to form
substances. Therefore, that as simple elementary things are
wholly composed of simple atoms variously placed in regard to
each other at equal distances, or in groups, and each having
special characteristics as to vibration, &c. ; so, compound
things are composed of molecules, which molecules can play
the same part in composing a compound thing, as do atoms in
forming a simple elementary thing — that is to say, a compound
tiling consists of an agglomeration of molecules, each one of
which is perfect in its own complex constitution, and that
these molecules in forming a compound, be it solid, liquid, or
gaseous, are after the manner of the atoms of simple things
either equi-distant from one another, or arranged in groups of
different forms, according to kind.

Consequently the nature of all solids, fluids, and gases de-
pends on whether they are composed of this or that kind of
atom; of this or that kind of molecule associated in this or that
kind of manner with one another — firmly in the solid, less
firmly in the liquid, and always ready to fly apart as in
the gas.

Finally, that if atoms or molecules of different kinds are
brought near together they can, under certain fixed and im-
mutable laws, alter their positions and modes in such way as
to break up their previous constitution. Also that under cer-
tain other fixed and immutable laws, these dissevered atoms
and molecules are able to reunite in a different manner so as
to form one or more products very unlike the originals.

Then as to the Forces, I have shown that these are very

THE PHYSICAL FORCES.

157

various in their manifestations, but that there is a most mys-
terious connexion between them. Force or energy in one or
other of its forms however is present in, or connected with everij
kind of matter, and according to the kind of matter it works on, or
with, is able conjointly with it, hy reciprocal action and reaction,
to produce all the chemical and physical phenomena we are ac-
quainted ivith, short of life and organization.

As to the conformation and essential constitution of the forces
we know nothing. In regard to them we can form no such
definite speculations as we can in regard to the atomic con-
struction of matter. All we can say is that gravitation and the
other attractions, together with the correlative forces, are the
manifestations of one or more forms of power which are able
to affect matter in certain immutable ways. Take energy —
motion — for example. It is energy in action that causes every
kind of atom or molecule or particle of aether to be this, or
that; or to do this, or that, according to its endowed quality of
substance, and the way in which this is capable of being
affected. That is to say, every atom in creation Ave are told is
in ceaseless motion of a certain definite kind, and one of the
most profound questions therefore in physics is — What is
motion, and how did it begin? (See ^^ Causation,''^ Yo\, II.;
also *' Chemical Evolution,''' Vol. III.)

Religious and Scientific Reflections. — Having now finished
our short survey of matter, and the physico-mechanical and
chemical forces, I wish before entering on the subject of life
to make a few observations in furtherance of the main object
of this work — the upholding of God's power and glory in
creation.

I think if any one who has been able to follow, and under-
stand my explanations and reasonings, will ponder thereon, and
especially so on the nature of heat, on the co-related forces, on
chemical decomposition, and particularly on the conservation
and transformation of energy, he cannot fail — if quite dispas-
sionate— to acknowledge but that such an astonishing variety
in detail, and yet perfect unity in completeness, and exact-
ness in execution and harmonious working by fixed laws, as

158 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

we have had evidence of, cannot have come by chance, but must
have been created with aforethought and plan. What mind
undarkened by preconceived notions, but must on careful
examination see creative power, and supernatural purpose,
and design in the existence of matter and its qualities ; and
in the laws of motion, of gravitation, and of the co-related

forces !

To my mind this truly marvellous perfection of the co-
related forces — even if we set aside the wonders and mystery
of matter — would alone in their as tounding completeness and
variety in interchangeableness, form an irresistible argument
in proof of an Almighty Designer ; and that would be so even
if we had no further evidence whereby to demonstrate His
existence ; but as it happens, we shall in the succeeding
chapters have an ample store of further proofs of the unity
of nature, and of all things working to fulfil a complete
purpose.

If I have, therefore, up to this point impressed any scep-
tical mind, I trust to urge the effect of my argument still
more convincingly hereafter.

I know the Materialist will say it is an assumption to speak
of a God Almighty as Designer and Creator, but if he can
offer a reasonable and intelligible theory as to self -causation,
and the power of matter, and force, to assume hy self-action
all their multiform differences, but at the same time perfect
harmony, and reciprocal completeness, then I for one will
begin to reconsider the foundations of my belief.

In fine, I challenge the Materialistic sceptic to demonstrate
with any fair show of reason, that it is even probable — not to
speak of possibility — that matter and all its qualities and
marvels, that gravitation and the attractions, that the corre-
lative forces with all their miraculous actions — that these as
occurring *' in the course of nature,''^ all arose by chance-
happening, self-made necessities or laivs? (See ^^ Necessity,''
" Chance;' Vol III.)

CHAPTER IV.

Spirit — Mind — Life .

{Metaphysical or Psychical Force.)

The Metaphysical Forces — Spirit, Mind, Life — Vital principle-—
Organic Mind — Power of perceiving the fitting — Caution to non=
scientific reader — Mind of two kinds, Spiritual and Organic — Life
and Bible — Life and Soul — Old Testament and Spirit — Old Testa-
ment and breath — New Testament meanings of breath, &c. — Christ
and the words life and soul and spirit — Alford — Comparison of
plants and animals — Organic or Vital Mind — Specialized Organic
mind is the Organism — Pangenesis — Vital mind has different facul-
ties in different parts — Severed portions of Organic Mind — Mag-
nificat.

We now come to the subjects of spirit, and mind, and life.
In the previous chapters we have considered the nature and
constitution of matter, and of the physical forces, and we
can conceive, and believe, that atoms and molecules which
compose non-living things may be, and are arranged, kept
together, and controlled — and even such marvels as crystals be
formed — by means of the forces which I have endeavoured to
explain the action of.

But having granted this in regard to non-living things, it
seems to me that, in regard to living things, it is impossible
reasonably to believe that matter can be constrained, and
arranged, and ordered in such manner as to perform the
functions of life, and development, and differentiation, and
growth, and reproduction, &c., without the presence and
assistance of a power, or energy, additional and superior to any
I have yet described, but which I mentioned incidentally in

i6o SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

the article on the " Conservation of Force," viz., Spirit—
" Vital principle."

Inorganic bodies, whether solids, liquids, or gases, are mere
aggregations of similar atoms or molecules, all obeying certain
definite and regular chemico-physical mechanical motions and
lav^s, and we can imagine that the forces of gravitation,
ordinary attraction, repulsion, polarity, &c., acting with the
co-related forces, may be, and are, all-sufficient for their
ordering and governance ; but I cannot conceive, as I have
already said, that such forces can alone produce life without
the presence of a further power.

In inorganic things the atoms and molecules are arranged in
a certain definite and regular physical or geometrical manner,
so as to compose the structural quality of the substance or gas
(I am not speaking only of mere outward shape, but of the
intimate atomic or molecular constitution). But this is not the
case in organic structures, for in them, in place of the regular
sameness of arrangement of the particles which ive meet ivith in
amorphous masses of rod, metal, ^-c, or in the regular geo-
metiHcal placing of the atoms which we meet with in crystals,
we find instead, in organic structures, a definite ?nzsameness, or
irregularity of the most startling description. For example,
in the development of the seed, or the ovum ; also in the
o-rowth of all organic tissues, we find the constituent particles
becoming arranged in most extraordinarily diverse ways, and
forming differentiated structures and organs of the most various
kinds as to shape, size, and use. True, a fragment of rock
may be rolled into a pebble by attrition, or a crystal may be
formed by accretion of particles, but in each there will be no
differentiation — no formation of diflferent sorts of structure and
various-shaped organs for diflTerent uses.

Stupendous and wonderful, therefore, as are the forces that
have hitherto occupied our attention, they are transcended in
wondrousness by this still further mystery — the " Vital force
or principle."

It has been the fashion with most philosophers of late years
to ignore this term, and to endeavour to lead us to think that

SPIRIT—MIND— LIFE. 1 6 1

*' Vital Force " is merely a specialized manifestation of the
forces already named. But though the vital force may, I
grant, show itself as in some degree related to Electricity^
Magnetism, Electro-Chemical force, &c., there can, I think, be
no doubt entertained by any person whatever — if he will dis-
entangle his mind from materialistic theories and godless
conceits — that it is a much higher and still more inscrutable
force than any of those named; or of any the scientist can
deal with in the laboratory, and make manifest by his chemi-
cals ; or grind out of his machines ; or demonstrate by experi-
ment on inorganic things, or even on organisms that have been
deprived of life.

Suppose it to be true, for example, that the " Vital Force,"
or " Vital Spirit," or '' principle of life " acts by causing a
display of electro-chemical or galvanic activity — yet the
electro-chemical action is not the life ; the fact being indeed
just the converse of that : namely, that in living organisms the
electro-chemical activities are produced hy, and result Jrom, the
presence and energy of the " Vital Force :" consequently that
it is this " Vital Force " which is the prime factor and marvel.

Let the Philosopher reflect that though he may prove that
the contraction of living muscle produces heat, electrical and
magnetic disturbance, &c., and though he may vicariously, and
in an artificial manner, make the dead muscle contract by
means of an electrical shock; or show that electro-chemical
force can produce a variety of most interesting results; still,
that what he can effect, is as diiFerent to what the life, or vital
force can do, as any two things we can think of. For we
cannot conceive any greater change, or contrast, than that
between the living man — an active, self-renewing organism,
with its wondrous differentiated parts and organs, teeming
with life, and the brain with intellect, and all its marvellous
attributes — and the corpse of man — an inanimate mass of
organic matter, ready in a few hours to decompose into its
ultimate elements. The Physicist, it is true, may make the
dead man kick, &c., as he may make little fragments of j^aper
dance — in both cases by the excitation of electricity — but the

1 62 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

action is not life iu either case. The Physicist may also even
injluence living animals, and vegetable structure, and functions ;
for by the use of various scientific devices he may accelerate
the working of some functions, or stop them ; but he cannot
produce the life force in the same way as he can the other
forces I have named — he can increase, or he may stop life's
actions, but he cannot manufacture life.

The Materialistic philosopher may here ask me to say
definitely in what way the "vital force" differs from the non-
vital forces.

In reply I will tell him that the " Vital Principle " is a
force, which, although under certain conditions amenable and
obedient to the physical and chemical forces already named, is
yet under certain other conditions superior to them, and indeed
can resist, control, and even utilize them in various degrees. And
this applies to all of them : to gravitation, and to other forms
of attraction; to heat, light, electricity, magnetism, chemical
action, and motion.

Materialistic enthusiasts may cavil at this ; but no plainer
proof can be given of the power of control possessed by the life
force over the ordinary attractions and forces, &c., of the
«hemico-physics, than is seen in the following facts, and which
are only a few selected ones and might be multiplied.

Thus the whole organism can, as ordered by the will,
move in a direction opposed to gravitation ; also the circula-
tion of blood and sap can be carried on in spite of gravi-
tation, and by a force which is additional to those which
carry on the transfer of fluid in inorganic things. For
example. Hales found " that by fastening a bent tube contain-
ing mercury on the stem of a vine, that the suction caused by
the forces concerned in circulating the sap raised the mercury
upwards of thirty inches" ("Balfour's Botany "). Now the
cause of the movement which can thus force the sap, contrary
to gravitation, to the summit of the loftiest tree, is a vital cause;
and which, as it cannot act in the case of a dead tree, proves
that the act is a vital one, and not a mere physical capillary,

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. 163

&c., effect, or the circulation would continue after the death of
the tree. That is, if you can imagine that on mere materialistic
chemico-physical principles, it would be possible for a tree ever
to die as long as it was in possession of fitting conditions for
living.

The effects of heat too, and that of light, electricity, chemical
change, evaporation, diffusion, &c., can, like those of gravita-
tion, be resisted by the living organism in a manner which is
impossible in the case of matter not under the influence of life.
For example, the organism can retain its moisture under
ordinary circumstances, and not dry up — it can resist great
degrees of heat, and cold, and yet maintain a normal tempera-
ture of the blood — the cells and tissues of the organism can
resist the ordinary action of diffusion, and this is seen notably
in the fact that the urine, and bile, can during life be retained
in their respective bladders; but from which they diffuse a few
hours after dsath. The blood globules also can retain their potash,
and phosphates, although floating in a fluid (liquor sanguinis)
which contains an abundance of soda and little potash — that
is to say, the living blood globules can forcibly and in opposi-
tion to the usual laws of osmosis and diffusion retain its potash
and reject the soda. This power of selection and rejection is
seen also in the fact of the blood globule selecting oxygen in
the lungs, whence it carries it to the tissues, where it rejects
it, and in place selects carbonic acid, which it carries back to
the lungs. Selection and rejection are seen too in the cells of
the spongioles of the roots of plants, and in the cells of the
stomach, and intestines in animals; and in the secretion cells
in both plants and animals. Also we shall find in the article on
" Bioplasm,''^ (in Vol. II.) that that most remarkable substance
is able to select certain molecules from certain kinds of matter,
and do certain things with them (i. e., produce differentiation,
development, growth, &c.) in a way which it is impossible for
chemico-physics to effect solely, and unaided, under ordinary
circumstances, and unless touched by " a something " superior
and additional to their own general powers.

In the foregoing actions (without naming others) I think we

M 2

164 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

liavc iucoiitestable evidence that the living organism possesses
" a something " — a force — call it what you will — which is
additional to the ordinary forces resident in, or affecting non-
living matter — a force which can in some cases, as I have
shown, conform and bend the physical and chemical forces to
its use, and will, and can, in other cases, resist the ordinary
action of such forces.

It is then this marvellous " Vital force ^ or Principle" — or as
I would prefer to call it, Organic, or Body-Mind, or Spirit —
which in action, and working with matter and the chemico-
physics, causes all the phenomena of life. It vivifies all living
things, both vegetable and animal, and is possibly specialized
in the various organisms so as to constitute the specific qualities
and powers of the particular sort of plant or creature it vivifies.^

This " organic mind " while giving life to the particular
animal or plant, knows how, if I may so say, to order and
influence the protoplasm or bioplasm of the blood, and cells,
and nerves — according to the species — in such way as in the
first place to originate development : and afterwards so to
guide and arrange the materials provided in the egg or seed as
to cause them to grow — and by a probably " unconscious " — as
distinguished from a conscious or intellectual power of percep-
tion and will — can direct every organic tissue, and even cell
in the organism, how to construct, and to do, and to carry on,
all that is advantageous and fitting for the particular hind of
individual it animates — all according to God's will, and plan,
and laws.

Thus, it not only originates development, but can order and
direct growth, nutrition, digestion, respiration, chculation,
secretion, reproduction, &c. ; but it can also cause the organism
it controls to appreciate yvlmt kind of nourishment is fitting : —

^ I need scarcely remark that the hypothesis of the connexion between
" Life and Mind "_ is a very old one, and that it has been especially
speculated on in modern times by Dr. Beale (" Life and Vital Action,"
pp. 109, 110), also by Mr. Wallace (" Natural Selection "), but as far as I
am aware no one has worked out the conjecture in such detail as I pro-
pose to do in this book.

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. 165

also what medium (air or water, &c.); or locality; or condi-
tion is most proper for its well-being."

To me it appears absolutely necessary to grant this quality
of ^^ Organic Mind" (see ^^ Reason and Instinct,''^) or intel-
lectually unconscious power of perceiving the fitting (see
^^ Faculty of Fitness, ^^ Vol. III.), as an accompaniment of, and
part and parcel of the endowment of life, or it would be
impossible otherwise for the marvellous faculties of Bioplasm
and the cells to be manifested in the way we certainly know
of (see " Growth, Nutrition,^^ &c.). And I am thus positive
because whether you acknow^ledge a God, or deny the Super-
natural-one of two things must he. Either the organism has
come to be what it is by self-action, and through its ow^n
self-created power of appreciating what is necessary and
fitting ; or the organism has come to be what it is by design.
Either way there must have been, and must be, a power
resident within the organism to perceive, to direct, and to
control. — A power to initiate cell action, and to cause
differentiation, and formation of tissues, vessels, leaves,
flowers, &c., and the performance of their respective functions
in plants, — or in animals of nerves, arteries, bones, muscles,
internal organs, &c., together with the carrying on of all their
functions respectively — a power to order and arrange the
deposit of certain atoms here, and the rejection of other atoms
there — a power to form this secretion here, and to effect that
transformation there, and so on.

To me it would appear the wildest flight of imagination
possible, to attempt to conceive that this diflferentiation and
functioning — this selective choosing, or rejection of atoms —
this placing and orderly building up of structure, or of the

2 It is this faculty of " Organic Mind " in my opinion whicli suffers
when animals and birds are placed in confinement. Their " organic
minds " are, as it were, puzzled amid such unusual surroundings, and
hence many animals will not breed in confinement ; many birds will not
lay eggs ; and lose too the faculty of making a nest ; and what is so
remarkable, lose also their natural song ; and so bewildered do they
become that they actually copy the notes of any bird they may hear
although in nature they would not do so.

1 66 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

formation of secretions, &c.. — all occurring in the right place,
and at the right time — could be caused solely by the actions
of any kind of ordinary chemico-physical attractions, repul-
sions, polarities, &c., unless these -were aided and animated
by the presence of some directing quality superior to matter,
to physics, and to chemistry — viz. Mind or Spirit. And to
me it would be equally impossible to conceive that such a
Mind or Spirit could have manufactured itself, and have
arisen in any other way than by creation, and endowment by
a Supreme Mind.

Before proceeding further with the consideration of " mind, '^
I would here beg to caution the non-scientific reader that
some views I shall express in this book in regard to "mmcZ"
and "5/92Wi" are not all of them such as are acknowledged by
men of science generally, and that my arguments in regard to
"mind" and "spirit" will, in so far as they do not accord
with the present dominant and fashionable scientific opinions,
be a personal endeavour to explain and to reconcile — in what
I deem a common-sense yet strictly scientific manner — what
we witness in nature with what we read in the Bible concern-
ing " creation," and " life," and " soul."

My object will be to disprove the reasonableness, and to
expose the unsoundness, of what the materialists maintain on
the subject. They hold that life and all its qualities and
effects, such as the act of living — thinking, &c. — are merely the
natural results of the interactions of the various chemico-physical
forces (such as are known to the scientist) working on matter and
producing the phenomena of life spontaneoiisly, as conditional
by necessity, and usefulness, during the efflux of time.

Of the quality — Mind, or Spirit — I believe there are embodied
in organisms on earth, two kinds : the Intellectncd, or Spiritual
mind, which is possessed by man and is pecidiar to him : and
the Organic mind, or Spirit of the body, which is one of the
attributes of, and in close connexion with, — even if it is not
essentially — the life itself : and which in a specialized form

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. 167

peculiar to the individual kind, is common to man, and to all
living things whether animal or vegetable. (See 'Reason and
Instinct.)

For the present I shall not consider the former, or intel-
lectual mind, but shall dwell here only on the latter.

This Organic mind — the Mind or Spirit of the body^ — is in
my opinion, then, the force which initiates and carries on all
the acts of development, of nutrition, growth, &c., concerned
in the process of living ; and dominates to its use, the needful
forms of matter, and all chemical and physical forces within
the scope and control of its endowed powers, limitations, and
sanctions. But not only does the Organic mind effect this for
the individual, but it provides for the continuance of the race
it in each instance animates. According to this view there-
fore it is the transmission of the Organic Mind by inheritance
in the egg or seed, that is the true cause of the perpetuation
of likeness ; and not merely simple continuity by means of
similar material particles being transmitted from parent to
offspring, and thence again by that descendant to the next,
and so on. (See ^^ Pangenesis.''')

In its lowest form the Organic mind or Spirit can effect
only the comparatively simple kinds of nutrition, growth, and
reproduction needed by plants and humble animals ; but in its
highest expression it not only orders and carries on all the
cell actions concerned in the act of living, but even in the
highest brutes which have the greatest nerve development,
approximates in some slight degree to the quality of the in-
tellectual mind of man ; though at the same time I shall adduce
reasons for holding the opinion that notwithstanding this
apjjarent approximation, the gulf between the two is neverthe-
less profound.

I am quite aware it will be said that according to this
theory I surmise that there are two spirits, or minds in man —
the organic, and the intellectual — and I may be jeered at by
the Materialists for holding this opinion ; but does not every
thoughtful person feel that (quite irrespective of the question
of sin) he has two natures within him — a higher, and a lower —

1 68 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

an intellectual or spiritual — and an animal or — instinctive?
(See " Reason and Instinct. ^^)

In considering the very difficult subject of life, it seems
reasonable — I had almost said natural — to turn for assistance to
that very ancient collection of writings, the Bible. One there
finds, as a marginal note to its very first chapter, that the word
translated as " life " has in the Hebrew the equivalent mean-
ing of '* living soul," or " soul," or " soul of life." So that
Scripturally "life" and "soul" may be looked upon as
synonymous terms. Again, the word " soul " is often used
as meaning " the spirit," or immortal part of man, and in this
sense it has got into very general use both in ancient as well
as in modern times. Indeed the words " life,'' " sotil," " spirit,"
" breath," are often used in the Bible in such an inexact manner
that it is necessary for my purpose to inquire carefully into
their true meanings.

It does not appear that at the time the Old Testament was
written any sharp distinction was made between the significa-
tions of the above four words. In the Hebrew the word
" chay " means life, as opposed to death, but the etymological
meanings and roots of the other three words are curiously in-
tertwined. For example, the Hebrew word " nephesh," trans-
lated as " soul "^ in English, means in the original " breath."
So too the Hebrew word ^^ ruacli," translated as " spirit," also
means " breath " as one of its significations in that language.

Then as to the Greek, of which I shall speak more further
on. The Greek word ^'- pneuma," which is translated in the
Bible as " spirit," means literally breath, or life, or soul. Then
the Greek word ^^ psyche," translated as " soul," means also in
the original " breath," " life," " sjnrit," " soul." Lastly I may
remark that the English word " spi7'it " is derived from the
Latin " spiro," to breathe. So that in short, in our ignorance
of what life really consists in, and of what spirit is, the fact

3 It slioTild be noted that in the Septuagint and the Vulgate the trans-
lators are consistent in their rendering of the words " chay " and
" neioliesh." (" Spealcer's Commentary," Vol. I. p. 597.)

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. 169

appears to be that all nations in all ages have regarded the
word " breath " as the most descriptive, or tangible lingual root
of the abstract terms " life," *' soul," " spirit :" nor has it
pleased God ever to have revealed to us the exact distinction
to be drawn between them as used in the Bible, further than
what may be inferred from the remarks of our blessed Saviour
and of Paul, which I shall dwell on hereafter.

I will now illustrate the foregoing by giving first a few
examples from the Old Testament, afterwards from the New
Testament.

We will begin with " life " and " soul.'' The first time the
word life or soul is made use of in the Bible is Genesis i. 20.
" And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the
moving creature that hath life." In other words. Let the waters
bring forth " soul " or " living soul " in an incorporated form —
that is — let them produce moving, living, sentient creatures,
endowed with perception and will.

In the Old Testament it is very common for the word
^^ sold" to be made use of in the place of the word " life" as
we now understand it. David says (Psalm cxix. 109), "My
soul is continually in my hand :" Or again he says (Psalm
vii. 5), *'Let the enemy persecute my 'soul' and take it;
yea, let him tread down my life upon the earth." So too
(1 Samuel xxiv. 11) David says, " Thou huntest my soul (life)
to take it." Likewise Job xii. 10 : " In whose hand is the
soul (or life) of every living thing and the breath of all man-
kind."

The word " spirit" too, is used very ambiguously in the Old
Testament. It may mean the " Spirit of God " (Genesis i. 2),
or the Holy Spirit ; or it may mean the " life," or " soul," or
immortal spirit of man.

Thus Isaiah xlii. 5 : " Thus saith God ; He that giveth
breath (life) unto the people upon it (the earth), and "spirit"
(the intellect and immortal part) to them that walk therein."

Then in Numbers xvi. 22 : " The God of the spirits of all
flesh :" meaning that " spirit " is the " life " of all creatures, and
that it emanates from God. But the word " spirit " is often

170 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

most unmistakably used as meaning the intellectual mind, or
spirit and immortal part of man. In Ihe first sense consult
Psalm Ixxvii. 6 : "I commune with, mine own heart, and my
* spii'it ' (or intellectual mind) made diligent search." In the
latter sense see also Eccles. iii. 21 : "The spirit of man that
goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward
to the earth." But mark ! that although no verbal dis-
tinction is here made between the immortal spirit, or soul,
or life of man, and the spirit, or soul, or life of the beast ;
still that a real, and essential, and enormous difference between
them is conveyed by the context as just quoted, which says,
" the spirit of the one goeth upward, and the other downward."
(See ''Death,'' Vol. 11.) To this I may add another expression of
Solomon's as to the meaning of " spirit" as just employed, and
the immortality of that of man as given by him in Eccles. xii. 7,
where it is stated as to the ascent of man's spirit, "Then
shall the dust return to the earth as it was ; and the spirit
shall return unto God who gave it " — clearly showing that
Solomon did not doubt a future existence for man.

As to the meaning of the word " breath, ' if we turn to
Genesis ii. 7, we find, " And (God) ' breathed ' into his (man's)
nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul " — (or
an incorporated soul). Of course in a manner this expression
is allegorical, as one must not in these days of positive reason-
ing, picture God as actually blowing into a human being's
nostrils as a man might do. No doubt therefore in a measure
the description is figurative, but yet as a vivid allegory it
conveys the exact truth. Or as another example (Job xii. 10):
"In whose hand is the soul (life) of every living thing and the
breath (spirit) of all mankind." The Septuagint has this as
"psyche" (soul or life) and " pneuma " (breath or spirit of
every man). M^o Daniel v. 23: "The God in whose hand
thy breath is " — that is, thy spirit or life. Then Psalm xxxiii.
6 : " By the word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all
the host of them by the breath of His mouth." In conjunction
with this passage read Job xxvi. 13 : "By His Sjnrit He hath
carnished the heavens ; His hand hath formed the crooked

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. 171

serpent." These two last quotations clearly show that God's
" breath " and His " Spirit " are identical. The synonymous
manner, too, in which the ancients used these words breath and
spirit is shown in Joh xxvii. 3 : " All the while my breath is
in me, and the Spirit of God is in my nostrils." Or again: Joh
xxxii. 8: "But there is a spirit in man, and the inspiration (or
breathing in) of the Almighty giveth them understanding."
Again in Joh xxxiv. 14 : the word " sjnrit " is used as mean-
ing man's immortal part, hut " breath " here stands for his
" life.^^ " If He set His heart upon man, if He gather unto
Himself his spirit and bis breath; all flesh shall perish together,
and man shall turn again to dust."

It has been thought, however, that as in the Hebrew ver-
sion the word "ma?i"is not present, the meaning may be
that if God were to withdraw His animating spirit, or breath,
all creatures would perish at once. In support of this view
refer to Psalm civ. 29, 30 : '' Thou takest away their breath,
they die, and return to their dust. Thou sendest forth Thy
Spirit, they are created."

Having now critically examined the words " spirit," " soul,"
" life," " breath," it appears that they were used in a measure
— though an observant reader may believe not entirely —
synonymously by the most ancient writers in the unscientific
days in which the Old Testament was composed. But it must
always be borne in mind that the Bible is not a revelation of
science, or psychology, or metaphysics. It had pleased God
in the days of Moses, and Job, and David, and Solomon, and
the prophets, to put into their minds only such facts concern-
ing nature, and what we call " natural science," as it pleased
Him according to His purpose ; yet how true are the inter-
pretations which they have given of many things which they
could not have understood by their own simple knowledge !

The illustrious men above named did not always, it is true,
draw a clear distinction between the exact different meanings
of " life," " soul," and " spirit," and " breath ;" but that was
because they had not had a full revelation of man's spiritual
nature, and the facts concerning immortality ; yet notwith-

172 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

standing this, they evidently comprehended, in a measure, the
real truth in regard to " spirit," **' life," and immortality, or
they could not have written as they did. For example, David,
in Psalm xvi. 9, 10, said, " My flesh also shall rest in hope.
For thou wilt not leave my ' soul ' in hell," clearly meaning
that he had hope of another — a spiritual — life. (See " Immor-
tality;' Vol. V.)

We will now pass on to an examination of the signification
attached to the words life, soul, &c., as given in the New
Testament, and I think I shall be able to show that an attentive
study of that book — containing, as it does, a greater revelation
than had been vouchsafed to the chosen men of old concerning
a future life — will enable us to interpret the words in question
in a much more definite and accurate manner than is possible
in the Old Testament. Before, however, we enter on this
critical examination, I must state that the translators of the
New Testament have in the English version interpreted the
Greek word {pneumd) as meaning Spirit — the " Spirit " of
God, or the " spirit," or immortal part of man ; and have ren-
dered the Greek word {psyche) as " soul," or " life." I may
add that my object will be to endeavour to prove that our
Saviour and the Apostles made, in many instances, so marked
a distinction between the use of these two words as to show
that they strictly stand for two different qualities, the "ps^cAe"
being inferior to the immortal ^^ pneuma^

Nevertheless it seems that in the common parlance by the
people, the use of the words '' soul " and " spirit " was anciently
— as it is now— very indefinite, and that the distinct meanings
of the two words were, as at present, conventionally blended
— the word "' soul," perhaps, being the one most frequently
used to designate the immortal part of man.

I will now consider some of the passages in which our
blessed Saviour made use of these words ; and in so doing I
must beg it to be most impressively borne in mind that Christ,
unlike various impostors, such as Mahomet, gives us very
Jittle information in regard to specific details concerning the

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. 173

unseen. Also that His language was in its extreme simplicity
of diction invariably adapted to the comprehension of His
hearers according to their then state of knoiuledge and conven-
tional use of terms. For example — to speak first of " soul " —
our Lord made use of the words " life," or •' soul," in a figura-
tive and synonymous, yet simple, manner, in Mattheiv xvi. 25,
26 : " For whosoever will save his life {psyche) shall lose
it ; and whosoever will lose his life {psyche) for My sake shall
find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole
world and lose his own {psyche) soul?^^ — i.e. lose eternal life.

To show also that Christ adapted His phraseology to the
modes of thought and expression common in His day, I will
instance Mattheiv xxii. 37 : "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt
love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy
soul (psyche), and with all thy mind." This sentence, I think,
is a clear example of how Christ made use of expressions that
were capable of being comprehended by the people generally,
and the word " soul," especially, He employed in its common
conventional meaning. Christ probably used these several
words, heart, soul, &c. (see also Deut. vi. 5, Luke x. 27,
Mark xii. 30), simply to adapt His meaning to the different
views of different men, according as they understood the
signification of these words, and to show that all our feelings,
and judgment, and will, ought to be concentrated in all their
strength on the love of God. But I would humbly venture to
think that although this view is undoubtedly correct, as far as
it goes, still that a close analysis of the above sentence will
justify another and co-relative interpretation, such as the fol-
lowing, and such as is consistent with modern knowledge, and
with the arguments contained in this book.

By '•' hea7^t " I should understand moral feeling — love.
" Soul " (psyche) I should here interpret as meaning the
lower, or body, or " Organic mind," and its appetites (the com-
mand being, as I read it, to honour God by keeping the bodily
appetites in subjection), and lastly, as to " mind " (put in this
instance in the Greek " dianoia "), I should take that as
meaning the higher or intellectual mind or spirit — the word

174 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

" diauoia," or " intellect," being here used instead of its verbal
equivalent ''^ pneuma.''''

Again our Lord says in Matthew x. 28, "Fear not them
which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul {psyche);
but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul {psyche)
and body." Here again we may surely conclude that Christ
made use of the word " soul " in the conventional sense.
Again, when in agony in the garden of Gethsemane, Christ
said of Himself, Matthew xxvi. 38, also John xii. 27, " My
soul {psyche) is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death." Yet,
although our Saviour did make use of the word "soi/Z"in this
way, so as to bo generally understood, still it is clear from
other expressions of His that man does really possess two kinds
of mind, such as Paul (as I will explain further on) called
" soul " (psyche) and " spii'it " {pneuma) ; and that Christ, as
will be seen presently, estimated " spirit " as the higher quality.
I may say, too, here that Dean Alford in his Greek Testament
holds that it is quite probable that our Lord, in making use of
the word "sowZ" in His earthly agony, spoke of that lower
quality or part of His mind {psyche) which is the seat of
human passions and aiFections, and which is touched by the
anguish of body, and which quality or part of the mind is
dilFerent from the higher or intellectual part, such as in the
Scriptures is distinguished as " pneuma," or " spirit."

Let us now consider Christ's use of the word " spirit "
{pneuma). In Matthew xxvi. 41 He says, " Watch and pray,
that ye enter not into temptation : the spirit (pneuma) indeed
is willing, but the flesh is weak." Here, I think, is a clear in-
timation of the existence of two kinds of mind — the " spirit"
being the intellectual one; and the word "flesh" standing for
and signifying the lower mind, or soul of the flesh, and its
appetites and weaknesses. He could not have meant simply
flesh — muscle — in a literal sense, but the mind or soul of the
flesh."

•* As to the spiritual nature of man's higher or intellectual mind,
see 1 Cor. ii. 14 : '* But the natural man receiveth not the things of the
Spirit of God : for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he knoTV^
them, because they are spiritually discerned."

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. 1 7 5

But our Lord's most emphatic, and literal, and unmistakable
use of the word " spirit " occurred during His last moments on
earth, and when He was no longer addressing Himself sjjecially
to man (and hence constrained by conventionalism) but
communing with God the Father. Expiring on the cross
[Luke xxiii. 46), and knowing that His immortal part was
about to separate from the body. His last words were, " Father,
into Thy hands I commend My * spirit ' " (pneuma). From all
this, therefore, I think we may certainly conclude that our
Saviour intimated the existence in man of two kinds of mind
— an intellectual one, and a fleshly one ; a spirit and a soul —
and that when He made use of the phrases such as " soul,"
" heart," " flesh," " life," &c., He did so in some cases simply
to adapt Himself to the phraseology of the people.

We will now consider the mode in which that highly-gifted
and greatly-favoured, and altogether marvellous man Paul
used the words " life," " soul," " breath," and "spirit." And I
may remark that even the greatest sceptic must acknow-
ledge that Paul, although not scientific in the modern sense,
must have been a profoundly learned man for his period ; and
certainly also a man whose intellectual ability will compare
favourably with that of any other man in all time.

Paul in his epistles made an accurate and definite use of the
Avords " soul " and '' spirit " as being different things, and
clearly considered that man possesses three distinct qualities,
body, soul (or life), and spirit ; for he says in Hebrews iv. 12,
" piercing even to the dividing asunder of ' soul ' (psyche) (or
life) and ''spirit^ (pneuma).^' And, again, to the highly-
critical Greeks in 1 Thess. v. 23, " And I pray God your
whole spirit (pneuma), and soul {psyche), and body be pre-
served."

As to these expressions it has been observed, "It is likely
enough that the Thessalonians were used to divide the man
into spirit, soul, and body (as this was the doctrine of the
Pythagoreans, Platonists, and Stoics), taking psyche for the sen-
sual soul, or the lower faculties ; and pneuma for the rational
soul, or superior faculties ; and these two they used to speak

176 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

of as two distinct souls, or rather as soul and spirit " (Burder's
Bible, 1 Thess. v. 23). But this ancient heathen view quite
accords with the religious, as well as scientific one I would
advocate, of the " soul" being the " life," or the lower quality
of mind of man ; and " spirit " his liigher and intellectual or
immortal part. And this view is made complete, and as I hold
clenched, by observing (as already remarked) that our blessed
Saviour when He died on the cross {Luke xxiii. 46) said,
''Into Thy hands I commend My spirit" {'^ imeuma'' not
^^ psyche''''). Moreover, in addition to this use of the word
^^pneuma,'' as thus applied to the immortal part of man, it
must be remembered that the various inspired writers of the
New Testament certainly all looked on ^^ pneuma " as being a
liigher spiritual quality than ^^ psyche j'^ for the third person
of the Godhead is in Greek always styled by them " Agion
Fneuma," or "Holy Spirit " (not J.^?ow Psyche), and "God
the Father " is called " the Father of Spirits " {Hebrews xii. 9).
Other passages may be quoted also to prove that spirit
" pneuma" was looked on as above the " life " of the flesh, or
^^ psyche,''^ or zoe!' In Acts xvii. 25 it is stated, " Neither
is worshipped with men's hands, as though He needed any-
thing, seeing He giveth to all ' life,' and ' breath,' and all
thino;s." Here a distinction is made between " life " and
" breath," and it is important to note that the words "Zz/e"
{zoe) and " breath " {pneiima) are both made use of, clearly
showing that Luke did not consider life, and breath (or spirit)
to be identical things ; and I would remark that Luke, like
Paul, was an educated man, and moreover a physician.

I will now return to Paul and his views. In Galatians v. 16
he writes, " This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall
not fulfil the lust of the flesh." Again, in 1 Peter iii. 18 :
" Being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the
Spirit." Again {Romans viii. 5) : " For they that are after the
flesh (that is, fleshly or worldly-minded) do mind the things of
the flesh ; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the
Spirit.'' Nowhere, however, does Paul show his emphatic
5 Zoe is a Greek word also meaning " life."

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. 1 7 7

views in regard to the existence of two kinds of mind
(the animal soul, and the spiritual) more clearly than in
1 Corinth, ix. 27 : "I keep under my body and bring it into
subjection : lest that by any means I myself should be a cast-
away." That is to say, lie strove by an act of will on the
part of his higher or intellectual mind, or spirit, to rule over,
and bring into subjection to it, his lower mind, or soul of the
flesh, and its desires, and weaknesses (which animal soul or
mind I shall further on designate as the conscious part of the
*' Organic mind "). Clearly when Paul here spoke of his
" body " it could not have been simply of its material parts,
but he must have meant the " something " (animal soul)
which animates and orders it, and gives it its various faculties
and propen&ities — faculties and propensities which have alas!
been corrupted and degraded through the power of Satan —
and it was this corrupted mind that Paul struggled hard to
bring into subjection to his reasonable mind. Yet although
Paul spoke of " soul " and " spirit " as bearing the above
meanings in their highest significations, he nevertheless some-
times employed the word " soul " in two other senses, and
such as are still in popular use. In Romans xiii. 1 he speaks
of "soul" as meaning a p^rso7i, and in Hebrews vi. 19 he
says, " which hope we have as an anchor of the " soul "
(meaning here, I presume, by the word " soul " the immortal
part of man in the sense now so commonly understood).

In pursuance of this subject it will now be well to quote the
opinion and criticism of that good man, eminent theologian,
and erudite Greek scholar, the late Dean Alford, who says
{Sermons, Vol. I,, p. 260), "The Scripture account of man
describes him as possessed of body, soul, and spirit. The
former we possess in common with all organized matter; the
organization being nobler as we advance upward through the
tribes of creation, and reaching its highest point in man. The
second, the soul (I speak now in the proper, not in the popular
sense of the term), we possess in common Avith all conscious
beings. It is that which is the seat of the instincts and appe-
tites and affections; and as the body, so this is found in various

178 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

degrees of inferiority or dignity in different tribes of animals,
reaching again its highest in ns. We possess in it not only all
that the lower animals have, but superadded to that, the
power of thought, and those faculties which characterize the
action of the human mind. Then, thirdly, beyond and above
the soul and its desires and faculties bodily and mental, is the
spirit, which we alone of all created beings on this earth
possess. The spirit — the seat of the reason, and of conscience,
and of our responsibility — is immortal and imperishable. It
is that lofty part of man's inner being in which he communes
with the Deity; it is that part wherein dwell all convictions of
sin, all apprehensions of Christ, all testimonies of God's Spirit;
in a word, all his better and higher life." ®

He goes on to say, " that in the worldly and ungodly, this
highest part (man's spirit) is crushed down, superseded,
neglected, made subservient to the flesh — to the animal soul
and its desires." Persons who thus allow their animal soul to
get the mastery, he observes, are " called in the Scriptures
^ Psycliikoi^ ^^ — that is, animal-like — concerned with this life
only — " unspiritual " — which the translators of the Testament
have rendered by the English word " carnal" — the choice of
which word, the Dean remarks, is unfortunate, for the original
Greek word " does not mean men of the flesh merely (although
these are often elsewhere opposed to men of the spirit), but
men who only care about their ' souls ' — their animal, intellec-
tual, worldly life, and have no care for their ' spirits,'' their
immortal, divine, spiritual life." (See 1 Corinthians iii. 1.)

Now I think this description of body, soul, and spirit is not
only scripturally, theologically, and literally correct, but it
also tallies with science, and common sense; and I venture
humbly, but firmly to advance the opinion, that the statement
or view as above given in regard to the word " soul " is capable
of a wider application — in a scientific sense — than came
perhaps within the meaning of the translators of the Bible,
and of the learned Dean.

They of course had chiefly in their thoughts, man, and his

^ Dean Alford.

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. 179

attributes, although nevertheless Dean Alford, it must be
admitted, saw in some measure the wider meaning applicable
to the word " so2<7," and speaks of the manner in which its
true signification has been misunderstood and confused in the
translations.

Leaving Dean Alford and his views, I would now say that
amid all the indefinite uses, or varying interpretations of the
words " soul," " life," spirit," &c. (especially in the Old Testa-
ment) there can be no dispute that " life" means the act and
power of living, whether such power occurs in a man, a brute,
or the lowest moving creature: and further still, that life is the
act or power of living even when existent in organisms incapa-
ble (in most species) of locomotion — viz. plants. It is the life
force, call it what name we will — soul — life — vital force — vital
principle — organic mind, or what not — which vivifies, direct.',
controls, and causes to be carried on in all organisms that
wondrous condition we know as " living " or being alive. In
a previous part of this chapter I have given my reasons for
believing that the principle of life or occult power by which
all organisms live, is not a mere combined working of the
chemico-physical forces, but that it is something above physics
and chemistry, though using and controlling them to its needs;
for I think it is clear that no physical forces, pure and simple,
could possibly produce unaided and alone, the marvellou^^
phenomenon of life. And this is especially the case in regard
to what we witness in the very diverse results of differen-
tiation, or the making of things different for different uses — as
muscles, bones, bile, saliva, &c.

Believing therefore that '' life " consists in the presence and
action of a distinct force, I cannot myself understand but that
the same principle (varied for the kind) must make alive, and
divell in all living things whether vegetable or animal. At the
same time however that I maintain scientifically, that the life
force must be identical or similar in its essential principle
in all organisms — though differing in quality for the particular
kind whether animal or vegetable — still I am quite ready to

N 2

i8o SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

grant that in the Scriptures the words " life,'' " sow/," and
" spirit,'' etc., and also the word " death " are not used in con-
nexion with plants. In Genesis " life " is not spoken of in
regard to the creation of plants ; and when plants are men-
tioned in the Bible as ceasing to live they are usually said
TO " wither." Still in regard to " life " and " death " in plants
there are two passages I will quote as supporting my view.
In Acts xvii. 24, 26, it is written, " God that made the world
and all things therein, seeing He giveth to all life, and breath,
and all thino^s." Also in Jude 12: "trees whose fruit
withereth, without fruit, twice dead."

Now in the first of these texts I would suggest that " life "
in that instance may possibly be intended to include all " living "
things — plants as well as animals. This I grant may be dis-
puted ; but in regard to the second text the word death is
positive in its meaning.

The reason why the words " life " and death were not more
frequently used by the inspired writers in regard to plants I
would venture to explain as follows. They wrote so that
persons could comprehend them according to the knowledge of
the day, and in this matter they stood in just the same position
in regard to Biology as in respect to Astronomy, &c.; they
could only speak usefully to the people, of things they could
see, in a way reconcilable with the knowledge of the period,
and the observation of their own unaided vision. Now the
word " living " was in their days understood as applicable
only to creatures that could " move " or " creep " — they did not
then know that many microscopic plants can move about
actively.

But because the ancient writers made use of the word
" living " as synonymous with " voluntary movement," and
thereby expressed the highest meaning of the condition —
life — a meaning which in the then state of knowledge it was
clearly proper to convey, that is no reason why we in this day
should not understand " life " in a wider sense, especially now
that knowledge and experience have shown us the analogy
that exists between animals and plants and their respective

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. i8i

life functions, — and now too that it has become general to speak
of plants as " living," and as "dying ;" and now also that the
microscope has revealed to us the fact that there are myriads
of plants that can move. Then again we now know also that
plants breathe as well as animals, and that air is just as neces-
sary for the one as the other. Consequently I do not think it
irreverent — as it is also certainly not unscientific — to adopt at
this period of greater information, the general view and phrase-
ology current in the present day, which represents plants as
endowed with life^ and as subject to deaths the same as are
*' moving " and " creeping " things.

Look at the close analogy between plants and animals.

Let us compare them.

In order to do so it will be best in the onset to consider
their differences. The first thing that • strikes one is that
plants and animals are so diverse in some essential things as
to render it clear they can never have sprung the one from the
other, inasmuch as the plant feeds on inorganic food — earth —
air — gas ; and expires Oxygen (fungi being the only excep-
tion to this rule both as to food and respiration) : while on the
contrary all animals, birds, reptiles, fish, insects, &c., feed on
organic food (vegetable and animal diet) and expire Carbonic
acid. The animal and vegetable thus show a marked dif-
ference in their fundamental constitution and functions, and
yet these very differences perform an ordained reciprocity of
usefulness between the plant and the animal, and the animal
and the plant, of the most vital and necessary kind, as will be
explained fully elsewhere.

And yet although plants and animals possess such opposite
qualities and natures in regard to the differences above men-
tioned, yet in some other most important particulars animals
and plants show a marked similarity, and display still further
a unity of design and harmonious completeness which is truly
astonishing.

Thus the seed and the egg equally develope by heat into
the young plant, or creature — they both live, feed, breathe,
grow, digest, assimilate, circulate their blood or sap, suffer

1 82 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

from noxious air and may be suffocated, feel, form secre-
tions peculiar to their kind, sleep (some of the lower plants
can move), reproduce their kind, and finally die.

But contrary to the phraseology of custom, to say that a
plant had a " soul " (life, or organic mind) would at the first
glance scandalize some persons, and occasion mirth in others.
Substitute, however, the word " life " for " soul," and think
of their equivalent significations in the Bible ; or put aside for
the moment the conventional meaning of the word soul, and
the difficulty vanishes. It is etymologically a mere matter
of words, but I think scientifically, and in regard to a
scientific view of Belief, the due comprehension of the essential
meaning and close relationship, or significance between the two
words is most important.

A vegetable, or an animal therefore equally consists of sub-
stance, or body, animated by life or soul ; man alone possess-
ing, in addition, his especial attribute, and gift — an intellec-
tual and immortal spirit.

Leaving this latter subject of man's immortal spirit to be
discussed elsewhere, I must here for the sake of clearness
repeat much of what I said some pages back.

The life, or soul, — or as I should prefer in a biological
sense to call it ^^ the Organic, Vital, or Body -mind ^^ — may be
one principle in its essential nature as a life-causing force in
animals and plants, but in my opinion is specialized by the
Creator for its particular purpose, and use, in difi^erent organ-
isms, whether animal or vegetable. It is a species of mind
which though intellectually unconscious (see " TF«7/ ; " also
" Reason and Instinct ") is nevertheless percipient as to what
is fitting for the individual, and can, as endowed by the Creator,
carry on the peculiar functions, and attributes, according to
the requirements and structural and functional needs of the
particular organism it vivifies. In its highest action, too, this
organic mind or faculty of perceiving and effecting what is
fitting and necessary for the individual, is in some of its powers,
the quality or faculty generally known by the name of " /w-
stincf.^' (See ^^ Reason and Instinct^)

SPIRIT-^MIND—LIFE.

But whatever kind of organism it may inhabit, lije^ clearly
to me, must be one 'principle or quality, call it what name you
like, though " Organic mind " in my humble opinion seems the
best for scientific use. But the materialist will inquire what
is it ? What is Organic mind ? Well ! It must be a sort of
spirit, or quality higher than any force man can produce by
electrical machines, batteries, magnets, chemical decomposition
or any other action he can set going — a principle in fine, which,
superior to any force man can manipulate, is able under God,
nnd as a direct emanation from Him, to dominate over all
things in organized Creation within its province, and scope,
and bounds.

Accepting this view we must believe there is one kind of
life force, " Organic mind," or spirit of life specialized for
plants ; another for the lower creatures ; another for fish,
another for reptiles, for birds, for animals, &c., also that each
kind is slightly dilFerent in each species.

Dormant ^ in the seed or the ^^^ the same as are electricity,
magnetism, light, heat, &c.; but yet under certain definite
conditions supreme over all these, and over all the material
particles of which the ovule or egg is composed, this Organic
Mind, or Spirit of life, is ready under certain fixed and favour-
able circumstances to cause that miraculous series of changes
which, dealing with the particular species and kind of particles
of which the ovule or the egg consists, can make the acorn
into an oak tree, or the egg into — may be — an eagle capable
of soaring high above the loftiest mountains.

Once called into activity in the seed or egg, this specialized
life force or Organic Mind working on the materials stored
in such, can with most mysterious power animate, direct, con-
trol, perceive, and do all that is needful for the development,
differentiation, &c., of the young plant or creature, and after-
wards carry on all that is requisite as to nutrition, growth,

7 It might be argued that it is difficult to imagine that"s7nVii" could
be dormant ; but really this may be quite possible, as we know nothing
of the constitution, and capacities, and mode of working of spirit of any
kind.

iS4 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

secretion, and the guidance and performance of all things
necessary for the well-being of the adult organism until the
arrival — after a longer or shorter time — of the further mystery
— death.

In fine, therefore, it appears to me that the nature and form
of every organism, w^hether animal or vegetable, depends on
the kind of specialized soul, or life force, or Organic mind,
which vivifies and animates it. Of course the right sorts of
material particles must be provided and contained in a given
seed, or o^^^^^ in order to produce a particular species with all
its specialities, but it must be emphatically noted that although
it is necessary that such special material particles should be
present, still that they are there not by the action of mere
materialistic necessity, or by chance, but because they were
selected, deposited, and duly arranged, in the seed or egg, hy the
discrimination and power and action of the life force, or organic
minds worhing in and producing the life 2'>rocesses of the parents
from which the seed or egg arose, and hy which such seed or egg
was formed. Consequently I maintain very strongly in regard to
material particles, that a seed or an egg can become such or such
a kind of organism, not simply and solely because it contains the
material particles necessary for manufacturing such or such a
kind of plant or animal, &c., but because it also contains within
it the particular sort of specialized organic mind peculiar to
the species. In short, that it is the nature and quality of this
mind which is the most important thing in the seed or egg, or
organism, and the dominating and distinguishing factor — indeed
if not present, the materials of the seed or egg would be so
much lifeless matter and no more. It is the specialized
organic mind which is really the plant or creature, and the
solid parts and fluids are no more than the vehicles of life.
This view, I need hardly add, is quite the opposite of that of
^^ Pangenesis^ {^qq ^^ Pangenesis'' Yo\. II.)

Now it may be asked why I have so laboured to prove the
existence of a vital principle or Organic Mind ? I answer,
because I wish to establish a belief in a force which, being
higher than any one ive can touch, or p)roduce, or initiate, is able

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. 185

to control matter, and direct organization in such degree, as by
its unique action to negative the reasonableness of believing
in a materialistic, or merely mechanical chemico-physical evolu-
tion : which theory is based on the supposition that life and
development and organization are dependent solely on the
occurrence and interaction of forces and things, which can act
of themselves, and with w^hich man can deal ; and of which
we have some cognizance by our instruments, machines, and
test-tubes, and which instruments, &c., we have only to keep
on questioning and improving on, in order eventually to dis-
cover— what, in my opinion, must ever be hid from the ken of
living man — the exact nature, and sort, or quality, of the
causes in which life consists.

I am quite aware that materialists will tell me that by
taking the line I have done " it is evident I have not grasped,
and fully realized, the mechanism of the chemico-physics in
nature." To any such I would in turn reverse our respective
positions as doubting one another's information and judgment,
by asking if they have " grasped and realized " how life and
'''■ differentiation" GOViX^ ever have occurred by the mere self-
action of chemico-physics ; or, what is more, how by the
unaided action of these latter forces, consciousness and mind
of any kind could ever have arisen ? And if they deny the
existence of an " Organic mind," I would also ask them how
otherwise than by the action of some such a kind of discrimi-
nating power, it would be possible for the specialized structures
and functions and secretions to be formed and effected of such
diverse kind as we know of. (See the articles " Nutrition and
Groii'tli,'" " Reproduction,''^ &c., Vol. II.) But even if they deny
" Organic mind," or " Vital principle," there is still the Intel-
lectual mind to be accounted for, and it is for the materialists
to show how that could have evolved simply by chemico-
physical action.

I may be told, too, that in advancing an opinion that dif-
ferent organisms may contain " specialized organic minds,"
graduated in degree from that of a fungus up to that of an
elephant or a dog (in which animals the mind verges on the

i86 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

intellectual), I am going very near to admitting continuous
progressive development.

Not so. Development, as far as we can see, has been by
steps; and tlie Organic mind necessary for each species has, as
I hold, been created and specialized and varied by God, or
perverted by evil, in all time, according to particular circum-
stances. If it were not so, and progressive development by
materialistic self-acting evolution were the fact, then — to take
only a few examples — we ought at this period of the world
to have elephants, and dogs, and monkeys, whose brains and
larynges had evolved up to such a degree, as to enable them to
reason in a manner far beyond what they really can, and to
talk by an articulate language. But though these creatures do
possess considerable intelligence, and can doubtless commu-
nicate with their own kind as to certain animal wants — as can
also bees, ants, &c. — still we may be quite certain, as I shall
show elsewhere (see ^'^ Language ^^), that as a fact they now
possess no intellectual abstract ideas, or articulate language.

It may be said further that in advocating the existence of a
specialized life force, or organic soul, which I call organic mind,
I do nothing to shake the theory of a self-acting progressive
evolution, because such life-force, although now in some
respects superior to, or at least acting with, or by, the chemico-
physics may have been evolved and])roduced by their self-action ;
and may at all times be liable to alteration and further evolu-
tion or degradation as controlled and compelled by materialistic
necessity, and heredity.

But to that I say again, No ! not in my opinion ; because —
as I shall argue in Vol. IV.— " that as the chemical and physical
self-evolution of matter and force was, and is impossible by the
sole action of a self- created, or chance-happening necessity,"
so I would argue here in like manner, and for like reasons,
that the self-creation, and evolution of organisms, and above
all of mind, would be an impossibility.

Life, or Organic mind could not — and cannot — primarily
create itself (see ^^ Sj^ontaneous^ Generation,'' Vol. IV.); nor
in my opinion could it evolve, or alter beyond its endowed

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. 187

faculty of variation, without its Maker's law or permis-
sion.

I may be told also, that by endeavouring to prove that each
plant or lower creature has a " soul or specialized mind," I am
going back to ideas such as led the savage to worship trees,
&c. But that also I deny. I do not argue that a tree may be
a Divinity, or have any intellectual mind, but rather that it is
the handiwork of, and is unconsciously vivified by, a force
which is an emanation from, and in close connexion with, the
One Divinity — The Lord of All.

Again the materialist may demur, and say that according to
my view I must assume that there are different qualities and
powers of Vital or Organic mind resident in the difierent kinds
of tissues, organs, and parts, each one of which must be capable
of doing just what is specially requisite in each case.

I reply. Exactly I that is just what I do believe ; and the
materialist must himself admit in support of my view^, that
inasmuch as he strives to prove that particular powers of the
intellectual mind are resident in special localities in the brain,
so it is no overstrained hypothesis to conjecture that after the
same manner, different powers and qualities of the Vital or
Organic mind may be inherent in different parts and organs of
the whole organism; and that as a man's intellectual mind is one
and individual — the faculty of language springing perhaps from
one spot in the brain — imagination from another — will from
another, and so on for all the faculties, — that so, in the same
way, the vital mind of an organism is one, and individual,
although it may perform this particular function here, and
that special one elsewhere — effect this in the liver; that in the
blood; something else in nerve cells, &c., &c.

Therefore, I hold that in like manner as the human in-
tellectual mind resident in any given brain is one, and individual,
and complete as specialized for the kind; so the vital mind,
resident in any given organism, and as specialized for the
particular plant, or creature, is aUo one, and individual, and
comjylete as a whole.

But, lastly, we must consider another objection that might

SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

be raised against the view I advocate in regard to there being
an individual mind or spirit animating every part of the
organism, and resident in every speck of bioplasm, and drop
of blood, and bit of tissue, &c.; inasmuch as materialists may
argue that when you cut oif a limb, or draw blood, that you
thereby dissever, and destroy the integrity of the Organic mind
that animates the organism so mutilated or bled, and that such
destruction of integrity ought, according to my theory, to be

fatal.

But I do not admit this to be a valid objection.
Granted that every speck of bioplasm, and every blood
corpuscle does contain a portion of spirit or mind ; and that
each, by its means, executes its proper function or work in the
part where it is situate, still it is the consentaneous and
harmonious, and instant, and conjoint working of spirit in the
sum total of organs and parts necessary to vitality as a whole,
that causes the phenomena of life to be manifested by means
of the action of spirit on matter and the physical forces, ac-
cording to ordained law. This being the case it follows that
if a part which is not essential to the vital working of the rest
of the organism is separated, the organism may not die. But
it may be said, " If the separated part contains life — spirit —
why does such part die ?" Well, it does not always do so, as
we shall see presently; but generally it will die, because, as
just stated, it is needful that the dissociated part should con-
tain all the vital requisites necessary for the act of living, and
this often will not be the case.

Again it may be asked what becomes of the spirit or organic
mind contained in the separated part when such part cannot
maintain life.

Well ! I believe it may pass away as do other forces ; and
as does also organic matter; and like them will be conserved
for use over again — nothing is lost in all creation — (see " Con-
tinuity ") and though we cannot trace the conservation of
spirit as we can that of matter and some of the forces, still
there can, I think, be no reasonable doubt as to its preserva-
tion in some way, and its continuity of usefulness.

SPIRIT— MIND— LIFE. 189

In some cases, however — as in that of some of the lowest
animals, and in some plants — the dissevered part will retain
its vitality, or organic mind ; and will live, and grow, and
develope into a perfect organism.

Lastly we have to consider in this connexion, the spirit of
man. As to his limbs, and blood, and some other parts of his
body, they may be removed as in other organisms without
causing death, and with like results — the organic material
of the part, and the portion of animal spirit removed with the
dissevered part, passing away, each doubtless to be conserved
as in the case of other animals. But as to man's intellectual
spirit — his immortal part — that is indivisible, but as it is not
situate in the limbs or any part capable of separation from the
body without causing death, there is no human possibility of
mechanically dividing it.

I shall now leave the subject of life and mind for the
present, though I shall take it up again in the article on
the " Nervous system ;" but before quite quitting here the
subject of soul, I wish to draw attention to a very re-
markable application of the words " soul " and " spirit " as
used in the ^^ Magnificats^'' or ^^ Song of Praise" and trans-
port of the Blessed Virgin. She says, " My soul doth
magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my
Saviour."

It may be considered by some that the use here of the words
" soul " and " spirit " is but a common mode of intensifying the
force of the idea, by reiterating the primary meaning in a diffe-
rent form of speech; but I would venture to suggest that this
most highly-privileged woman, filled as she was with the Holy
Ghost, and speaking not simply her own words but those such
as she was prompted, really expressed in this song of inspira-
tion, and prophecy, as well as praise, the true distinction be-
tween " soul" and " spirit." I would humbly suggest that the
word " soul " here may be interpreted as meaning her life or
Vital Force. If this be so, then we may say that her " soul"
or, " life of the body," magnified the Lord in being miraculously

I90 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

— and out of the course of nature — endowed with the power
and necessity of conception of the Saviour in the flesh; and
her intellectual and immortal sjiirit rejoiced, both in this
astounding honour vouchsafed to herself, as well as in the
blessed promise of the bestowal of " His mercy on all them
that fear Hira throughout all generations."

CHAPTER V.

The Intellectual Mind or Spirit of Man.

A slig-ht sketch of intellect in man — Its qualities distinct from the
mental faculties in animals.

The especial and most astounding characteristic of man is,
that God created him, as we are told, in His own image, and
gave him dominion over the creatures of the earth. Now, by
" the image of God," I think there can be no question but that
those interpreters are correct who understand the expression
"image of God" as applying to the Intellectual mind or
immortal spirit, with its capacity for ratiocination — for con-
science— for distinguishing good from evil — for righteousness
— and other qualities in which man's mind is constituted after
the " likeness " of God's — although, at the same time, the
one is limited and finite in its scope, whereas the other is
infinite.

In the account of the creation of man it is said {Genesis ii. 7),
" God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life."

But it is objected by sceptics that other animals have breath,
and that therefore this reported act does not of itself prove
that man was made in any specially different and distinct
manner (even if made at all). But I think the right interpre-
tation is, that this simple expression of '• breathed into his
nostrils," is but an emphatic, tangible, and easily understood
mode of declaring the fact that God did communicate specially
a something (" intellectual spirit ") to man, that He had not
bestowed on other creatures in giving them life; because we
know that hosts of them have breath; and even Moses in his

IQ2 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

history of the Dehige {Genesis vii. 22, 23), in speaking of the
drowning of all creatures, says, *' All in whose nostrils was the
breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died." But in this
sense the " breath of life " doubtless means the living principle
which is common to all, " every living thing of all flesh "
(Genesis vi. 19) : and it is declared also by Solomon {Eccles. iii.
19), "Yea, they have all one breath;" meaning one kind of
vital principle, or one way of living by respiration; and that all
are liable to death: but nowhere, except in Genesis ii. 7, is it
said that God specially breathed into any creature's nostrils but
those of man — meaning thereby that man had something
communicated to him which had not been given to other

animals.

The Intellectual mind, or Spirit of man — as distinguished
from " the Organic mind," as already described — is I believe
man's particular attribute; and of all earthly creatures he alone
possesses this marvellous gift, and by it is not only constituted
superior to all other animals, but by it is also made responsible
for his acts.

It is this that separates him by an immeasurable and im-
passable gulf from all other creatures, and renders him unique
and supreme.

His superior qualities of " head and heart " — his intellectual
ability and marvellous power of reflection and reasoning — his
moral qualities and sense of conscience, responsibility, duty,
justice, mercy, charity, sympathy, reciprocity, honour, benevo-
lence, and truth — his belief in immortality, his capacity for
worship and yearning after the Supernatural — his spiritualized
or exalted faculty of love. &c., — his power of ideation as to
abstract ideas — his articulate speech — his capability of invent-
ing, and making tools, and machines, all mark his mental power
and endowments as so far away and superior to — indeed, dis-
tinct from — the most gifted of the lower animals that I think
it needless to urge the point further here, though I shall
recur to the subject by-and-by (see ''Nervous System''). I
shall, therefore, for the present leave this discussion as to man's
superiority, and his being the sole possessor of intellect, by

THE INTELLECTUAL MIND OR SPIRIT OF MAN. 193

saying that the mind of the dog (which is probably the most
mentally-gifted animal below man) is no more than an example
of the highest kind of organic or animal mind; and although
the dog possesses memory, a kind of judgment, and other
faculties I shall enlarge on hereafter, still, that his mind is
no more than the most endowed of the non-intellectual minds,
and only possesses in an exalted degree, faculties which are
also exercised by much humbler creatures. Bees, for example,
can manifest a kind of judgment and memory; and can evince
joy and anger; and even much lower organisms than they, can
exercise will, and choice, &c. (See Chap. XVII.)

So that we may say in brief, that the quality of man's mind
is sharply divided from that of all other creatures; first, by its
superior power of intellectual ratiocination; secondly, by its
moral attributes; both of which are equally distinctive and
remarkable features of the intellectual mind of man.

But although I contend so strongly for the existence of an
enormous and fundamental difference between the mind of
man and the minds of all creatures below him, yet, in the same
way as I have endeavoured to show in other parts of this
work (see '■^Reason and Instinct")^ that the quality and range
of mind is specialized for every description of creature, and
limited according to endowment for the kind; so in like manner
do I maintain that even the intellect of man is, by design,
limited in its capacity.

Wonderfully free is man's imagination ; extraordinary his
faculty for forming hypotheses; extensive his range of com-
prehension; marvellous his power of induction and deduction;
— but yet his intellect is limited — his mind is finite. It is
with his mind as with his hand; each can grasp so much
and no more, and though a particular man may have a bigger
mind or a bigger hand than another, and may be able to make
his fingers or his mind more facile by use, and capable of
stretching rather further than some other men's; yet neither
the mind nor the hand can be made to encompass more than
men's minds and hands are designed by endowment to be able
to embrace.

194 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

His imagination is confined to the bounds of, and similitude
of things known of within his experience; his comprehension
is restricted in regard to such matters as God, space, time,
the origin of evil, &c. ; and as to his inferences and deductions,
they can of course only be drawn from such facts, and pre-
mises, and ideas, as experience can afford — his comprehension
grasp — or his imagination picture.

Having thus said sufficient, as I hope, to prove the complete
uniqueness of man's intellectual mind, and at the same time
its limitation, we must pass on to the next subject.

CHAPTER VI.

The Nervous Systeji.

Nervous system an instrument — Bioplasm in nerve — Mode of action —
Electricity in organisms a result of life — Action of blood — Disposition
of nervous masses — Structure of nerve cells and nerves — Nature of
nerve force — Nervous system of Vertebrates — Nervous system of
Invertebrates — Annulosa — Functions of nervous system — Voluntary
and Involuntary — Functions of brain — Spirit the Organism — Direct
or primary nerve via brain action — Functions of spinal cord —
Functions of Ganglia — Functions of Ganglia in Invertebrata — Motor
and Sensory — Eeflex— 1. Excito Motor, 2. Sensori Motor, 3. Ideo
Motor — Eellex Cerebration — Eeligious and scientific reflections —
Spiritualism, " Spirit-rapping " — Spirit — Essential, primary, or
direct nerve action — Origin of ideas, " Sensationalists," " Realists "
— Spirit working in the blood — Brain renders ideas manifest —
Nerves and secretion — Analogy of spinal cord and brain in Inver-
tebrata— Three essential questions as to Spirit — The Spirit consti-
tutes the Organism — "Mind" in every particle of Bioplasm —
Secretion, nutrition, &c. — Mind in plants — Mind in brutes, &c. —
" Spirit " as acting on nerve cells.

The brain and nervous system have so important a connexion
with mind and life, that I am induced to speak of them here,
and so to anticipate the chapters in Vol. II., in which I shall
enter into the anatomical details concerning the structure and
functions of living things ; but I feel it is best to make this
diversion in order that I may render myself clear in regard to
the view I take as to the true nature and qualities and functions
of life and mind.

The appearance presented by brain and nerve substance
is familiar to every one who has seen the brain of a lower
animal.

Examined by the microscope, brain and nerve tissue is found

o 2

196 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

to be made up of two component parts — nerve cells, cor-
puscles, or globules; and nerve fibres.

The nerve cell consists of a little vesicle which contains
granular matter; and the nerve consists of a bundle of threads
of nervous fibre.

The nerve cell appears to be the generator or liberator of
nerve force, and the nerve fibre to be the means of conveying
the force or energy thus set free or put in action. Of the
respective structures of nerve cell and nerve fibre I will
speak presently, but I want first to sketch roughly their
functions.

The Nervous System an Organized Machine. — In the
articles on ^^ Blood'' and on ^^ Bioplasm^'' or '^ Protoplasm,'^
(Vol. II.) it will be seen that I have there proved that it is in
them that the vital energy resides — that they are the material
vehicles of the life force — and I want to show here that the
nervous system is an organized machine, or mechanical instru-
ment which the life principle or '* Organic Mind " can work
and use; nor must it be forgotten in regard to the relation that
the life force, and blood, and bioplasm, and nerve bear to one
another, that bioplasm (the vehicle of the life force) is itself
contained in the structure of nerve substance, as it is in blood
and every living tissue.

I have just said the Organic Mind, or vital principle, can work
and use the nervous system. Yes ! it can do so ; for by means
of the brain it can make thought consciously manifest; through
the nerves it can convey telegraphic messages to all parts of
the body; and by means of the ganglions and spinal cord can
carry on all the organic needs of the organism.

I will now give a sketch of the mechanical mode of action of
the nerve cell. Speaking broadly, it is not unlike that of a cell
of a galvanic battery.

In the cell of the galvanic battery you have two factors —
solids (say copper and zinc) — that can be acted on, and an acid
fluid that can afiect them. The galvanic cell being put in
action, electricity is set free, and this can be conducted along
wires so as to form a telegraph. Thus the copper and zinc

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 197

cell may be compared with the nerve cell, the excitiug fluid
with the blood, and the nerves with the wires emanating from
the poles of the battery.

The analogy therefore in a mechanical sense is very close,
and I would draw particular attention to the fact that the hlood
is as absolutely essential to the working of nerve action as is
the jluid in the galvanic cell — in fact, all parts of the nerve
system must be copiously supplied with and bathed in blood
(notably the brain) or all action ceases, and insensibility
or even death ensues. Blood therefore is the action-causing
source to the nerve cell, just as is the acid fluid to the galvanic
cell.

Now when we add that nerve force has some kindred quali-
ties with electric force, it is not at all surprising that material-
ists who have wished to dispense with God should have been
misled by this curious analogy. Their fundamental scientific
error, however, has been this, that they have looked on the
electro-chemical action of nerve tissue as being the life, whereas
it is only a result of the ijresence of the life or vitcd force. The
electro-chemical action of nerve function cannot commence, nor
if commenced by artificial simulation cannot be continued in
action, unless the vital energy abides in the part of the organism
in question.

Also the materialists forget that although the blood plays a
somewhat analogous part on the nerve cell to what the acid
fluid does in the galvanic cell, still that an enormous and
fundamental diflerence exists between tiie blood and the battery
fluid, in the fact that the former is itself a living thing, as it
contains the vital principle or " Organic Mind." (See " Blood^"*
Vol. II.)

We must now consider the question of the disposition and
the structure of nerve cells and fibre.

Disposition of Nervous Substance. — Nerve cells and nerve
fibres occur in three different modes of disposition.

1st. The brain and sjnnal cord, situate respectively in the
skull and tube of the backbone, consist of an aggregation of
millions of nerve cells and fibres all arranged in definite order

198 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

and forming a myriad of telegraph systems which can in some
cases act separately, or may be used jointly.

2ndly. The ganglia consist of smaller masses or agglomera-
tions of nei've cells and fibres, and are located in many parts of
the body away from the brain and spinal cord.

It must be noted that each nervous mass whether large like
the brain, or small like the ganglia, is termed a " nerve
centre ;" and it is most important to bear in mind that even
the brain is itself no more than a number of ganglia massed
together.

3rdly. The nerves proper, are made up of bundles of nerve
fibres only, and serve to convey the energy generated in the
nerve cells to all parts of the body, each having its particular
rlestination and use.

Structure of Nervous Substance. — Viewed with the micro-
scope, the nerve cells, or globules, or vesicles, or corpuscles, as
they are indifferently called, are seen to vary much in size,
though all of course are extremely minute, and incapable of
being distinguished with the naked eye.

Each nerve corpuscle is a " nucleated cell " filled with a finely
granular material, and of course like all other living and acting
cells containing also Bioplasm or Protoplasm. In shape the
corpuscles differ very much, but the only form I shall speak of
is that called the " stellate/^ or " caudate^^^

This kind of cell, as its name implies, has one or more pro-
jections from its general contour, and it is from these projec-
tions that the nerve fibres arise or are given off, whose function
it is to convey away the nerve force generated in the cell to
the part or organ it is designed to affect.

The structure of nerve fibre consists of a central core of
white, protoplasmic substance, surrounded by a sheath of rather
different material. It is probable that the core conveys the
nerve energy, and that the sheath has an insulating property
as well as a protective one.

The core may therefore be likened to the copper wire of the
telegraph, and the sheath to the gutta j)ercha coating.

Essential Nature of Nerve Energy. — In regard to the

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 199

essential nature of nerve energy, force, or current, very-
little— indeed as misrht be surmised — next to notliinsr is
known.

It appears to be allied in some measure to electricity, yet it
differs very much from it, one of the most apparent of which
differences being physically, that it is much slower in its passage
than electricity ; nervous force only travelling at the rate
of 111 to 140 feet per second, whereas electricity can pass
with immeasurably greater velocity, — say 200,000 feet in a
second. But the greatest, and to materialists the most posing
difference is, that electrical currents as procured by the human
experimenter will not produce life, but only some caricatures
of vital movements, as witnessed in the contraction of dead
muscle, &c., by electrical excitation; not to mention other effects
which can be produced artificially, and which have a semblance
to vital action.

Nevertheless it is true that evidence may be obtained of the
existence of electrical currents in living nerve and in living
muscle, yet as these currents cease when life ceases, it is clear
that electricity is only a result of the life j^i^ocesses as set free
hy the vital princijAe, and not a cause of them. Indeed if elec-
tricity were the cause, then the philosopher ought to be able to
produce life by means of his apparatus, or at any rate he should
be able to resuscitate recently dead organisms.

But as to the existence of electrical currents in living nerve
and muscle — and which fact the materialists have made so much
of — I would especially insist that there is scientifically nothing
remarkable in that circumstance — indeed the wonder would
be if such currents could not be detected ; for do we not know
that the vital principle makes itself actively manifest, and
works by means of chemical action ? and do we not further
know chemical action sets free electricity, the same as electricity
can in its turn produce chemical action in virtue of the laws of
co-relation ? (See " Correlative Forces.'')

Indeed the power the vital energy has of effecting trans-
formations in, or by means of, the co-related forces, is the
great central fact in which its marvellous faculty in great

200 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

measure consists. Consequently there can be no doubt that
in effecting the needful chemical and other changes, electricity
(the same as heat, magnetism, motion, &c.) is developed
through the primary action of the life energy in every part
and tissue of the organism.

Electricity not the Life Force. — Electricity therefore, as
above shown, is to be detected in the living organism not because
it ijroduces the life, but because during the working of the vital
processes it is set free. Electricity, moreover, we know is not
nerve energy any more than heat, &c., is, although it may be
in connexion with its action.

Nerve energy is doubtless a higher quality than electricity,
and probably a part and parcel of the organic mind or life
force.

We are therefore not only at a complete loss to understand
scientifically what nerve energy or force is, but we are even
more bewildered in trying to surmise why some nerve cells
should be able to set free, or manifest, or render apparent —
consciousness, thought, &c., while other nerve cells can
initiate movement — others minister to sensation — others to
hearing — others to sight — others to secretion, &c.

Different forms of Nervous System. — I will now describe
briefly the extent to which a nervous system is possessed by
different kinds of organisms, and the position in the body of its
several developments, speaking first of the Vertebrata, and
afterwards of the Invei^tebrata.

1st. Vertebrata. — These are the animals that possess a back-
bone, and comprise the mammalia (or animals that suckle
their young); also all birds, reptiles, and fish.

All these highest kinds of organisms possess in more or less
perfection all kinds of nerve structures, such as brain — spinal
cord — ganglia — sympathetic nerves, and ordinary nerves.

The Brain is contained in a special case — the skull — and
through a hole in its base, the brain is connected with the
elongated tract of nerve substance called the spinal cord.

This also is contained in a case — the backbone — which is
composed of a number of rings of bone (vertebrge) applied end

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 201

to end to each other, and forming as so placed, a long and strong
flexible tube with numerous holes along its sides for the exit
of nerves.

The brain and spinal cord thus joined, and placed, form a
continuous structure which is called the Cerehro- spinal system,
and which supplies nerve trunks and branches throughout the
whole body, and its parts capable of voluntary, or of rejiex
movements, of ordinary sensations, or of special sense, as of
seeing, smelling, hearing, &c.

The brain varies extremely in size and complexity from its
lowest form as it first occurs in fishes, up to its highest
development in man. In the lowest vertebrates it is small and
has few convolutions (or puckered foldings of nerve matter as
seen on the surface of the brain), but in the higher animals, or
those which are endowed with greater mental power — culmi-
nating in that of man — we find the brain larger and with more
convolutions. (This question as to size of brain, &c., will be
resumed. See " Functions of Nervous System.^'')

Spinal cord. — As to this I need only say that it is possessed
by all vertebrates, and distributes nerves to the various parts
of the body capable of voluntary, or of reflex action. (See
^^ Functions of Nervous System."^

The Ganglia (see p. 198). — These too occur in all the verte-
brates. A double chain of them is placed in front of the back-
bone, and runs down the posterior part of the cavity of the
chest and abdomen, behind the lungs and bowels. In so far
their disposition is regular : but other ganglia are scattered
about the body in the most curious and irregular manner as to
symmetrical placing. That is to say, some are found in connexion
with the stomach — others with the heart, and so on as to all
the viscera, and glands, and have to do with the involuntary
functions of those organs. Wherever ganglia may be placed
however, it must be specially noted, that they are not entirely
isolated, but that they are connected more or less throughout
the entire body with the rest of the nervous system by means
of coramunicatino; fibres.

In its entirety this system of ganglia is called the great

202 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Sympathetic, and has to do with ordering, controlling and
functioning the organs and acts concerned in the animal
*' involuntary " processes of life — that is, the act of living.
(See ^^ Functions of Nervous System.^^)

2nd. Invcrtebrata.— When we examine the nervous system
of this division of the animal kingdom, which comprises all
those creatures that do not possess a backbone, such as insects,
lobsters, oysters, sea anemones, &c. &c., we find such a radical
and complete difference from that of the Vertehrata, that the
perplexity it must have caused the advocates of a self-pro-
gressive gradual evolution theory must have been extreme.

Not that the quality or intimate structure of the nerve
substance in the Invertehrata is so different {as far as ive know),
for it consists of nerve cells and fibres, but that its quantity
and mode of disposition is so very dissimilar. Thus there is
not only an entire absence of the brain and spinal cord,
and consequently of skull and backbone, but the nervous
system consists solely ^ of ganglia (that is, small collections of
nerve vesicles and their nerve branches), and these ganglia
are not massed together at any one spot, but separately placed
(though connected by communicating chains of fibres) and
located differently in different Invertehrata, as will be men-
tioned presently.

Again: another fundamental difference in the Invertehrata,
and showing that they are made on a totally different plan, is
the fact that whereas in the Vertehrata the main part of the
nervous system is behind the oesophagus (or gullet) while the
lieart and great artery are in front of it, yet that in the higher
Invertehrata (Insects) the positions are just reversed, viz. the
main part of the nervous system is in front of the gullet (run-
ning along the belly of the insect) and the dorsal artery
(which is equivalent to the heart) is placed behind the gullet
and lies along the back of the insect.

Thus in these two great divisions of creatures the nervous
and arterial systems are just reversed in position, which is a

1 Some persons have thought they could detect a special system of
sympathetic nerves in the Insecta, but the subject is very obscure.

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 203

difficult fact for the materialistic evolutionist to account for,
unless lie supposes insects crawl on what should be their backs
as compared with the vertebrata.

If this came about by materialistic self-action I should like
to know what sort of creature " the missing link " was that
turned this eccentric summersault, and was able to impress its
vao^ary on its progeny.

The Ganglia of the Invertebrata. — I will now describe
very briefly the position of the ganglia v^hich compose the
nervous system of the Invertebrata, beginning with the 8ub-
h ingdom — Mollusca.

The leading members of this group are the Octopus and
Cuttle fish, — also all the creatures known as " shells " — as the
oyster, winkle, &c.

In these the nervous system is composed mainly of three
pairs of ganglia connected with one another by nerve trunks —
one pair, the " supra-oesophageal " or " cerebral," is situated
above the oesophagus (gullet or swallow); another, the " infra-
oesophageal," is placed below the o3sophagus, and is sometimes
called the '^ pedal ganglia," as it supplies the foot ; and the
third pair, the "branchial," is placed in another part of the body.

The next suh-lcingdoni — the Annulosa — embraces all the
creatures whose bodies are composed of rings, as Insects —
Centipedes — Sjnders — Lobsters — and Crabs : all which have
jointed limbs : and the earth worms and leech, &c., which have
not limbs. In this sub-kingdom we find the ganglia are
placed in a double chain along the under side of the creatures.

The first pair, which are of considerable size, are in the head,
and are placed above the oesophagus, and have been considered
by some writers as the " brain," although not really identical
with the organ known as the brain in the Vertebrata. Each
of these cephalic, or supra-oesophageal ganglia sends off a
nerve trunk, which passing one on either side of the oesophagus,
communicates with the second pair of ganglia (sub-oesopha-
geal) which are placed beneath the oesophagus, and thus sur-
round it by a nervous collar, for which reason the digestive
tube is said to pierce the nervous system of the Annulosa.

204 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

These sub-oesopliageal ganglia then communicate by nerve
cords with the third pair of ganglia, and thenceforth the nerve
chain runs along the ventral aspect of the body, one pair of
ganglia being placed in each ring, or section.

As to the parts supplied with nerves by these ganglia re-
spectively, those of the head — cephalic or pre- (or supra-)
oesophageal — give branches to the eyes and antennae. The
second pair, the sub- (or post-) oesophageal supply the nerves
of the mouth, and the third and succeeding ones furnish the
legs and wings with nerve power.

Besides the above ganglia and nerves which bear a sort of
analogy — though it must be admitted to be a distant one — to
the braiu and spinal cord of the Vertebrata, it has been thought
by some anatomists that the Annulosa possess a " sympathetic
system," as they have detected some small ganglia, and nerves,
which seem to warrant their conclusion ; but there still rests
a great deal of doubt concerning the exact nature of the
nervous system of the Annulosa, and especially of the homo-
logy of its parts with the nervous structures of the Verte-
brata.

The next sub-kingdom — the Annuloida — contains the sea-
urchins (echinodermata) , the star-fishes, &c. Their nervous
system consists in the higher forms of a ring-like, gangliated
cord, surrounding the oesophagus and sending off branches to
the various parts of the body.

The large sub-kingdom — Coelenterata — contains the Fresh-
water polypes {Hydra) : the Jelly-fishes, or sea-nettles (Medusce) :
the sea-anemones (Acfiiiiw) : and also the corals, &c. In
the great majority of these no visible trace of a nervous
system has been discovered; but in the Medusce faint evidences
of such have been detected.

The lowest sub-kingdom consists of the humblest members
o f the animal creatiou — the Monera — t\\Q Amoeba — the Forami-
nifera — the Sponges — and the Infusoria.

In none of these has the least trace been found of a nervous
system, and it is therefore supposed that every part of the
'' sarcode " — or jelly-like, protoplasmic stuff of which the body

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 205

is composed — must possess nerve power (as it does the power
of movement) diffused generally throughout every part of its
substance.

I may remark here in parenthesis in regard to these quali-
ties of sarcode, that the fact of the creatures made up solely
of it being able to move, and feel, although they have ap-
parently no nerves or muscles, is a striking instance of the
specialization I contend for as bestowed by God's endowment.

Clearly the Creator has ordained that these creatures shall be
able to feel, and move, by a different mode to other creatures —
and they can — not only feel, and move, — but they can even
exhibit a kind of icill and choice according to their endowed
extent of instinct, and specialized sort of mind.

Functions or Action of the Nervous System. — Having
now given a short description of the structure and position of
the nerve masses and nerves, and glanced at their uses, I will
next consider the functions of the nervous system in greater
detail.

Personally, as I have already said, I believe the nervous
system to be the servant of Mind — both conscious and uncon-
scious— and that it is the material channel by which Spirit is
made manifest, but into that question we will enter more fully
further on.

All brain and nerve action may be divided into two classes : —

1st. Voluntary, or direct, as ordered by the will.

2nd. Involuntcuy ; of which there are several kinds.

a. Involuntary, reflex, or excito-motory movements brought
about by means of nerve stimulation of the muscles.

b. The involuntary processes of secretion, digestion, nutri-
tion, &c.

c. The involuntary action of the special senses — sight,
hearing, &c., also of sensation generally.

I. Voluntary nerve action. — The act of determining, or will-
ing to think on this or that subject ; or to order this or that
voluntary movement, is undoul)tedly the great prerogative of
the brain in those animals which possess one ; but in the In-
vertehrata which have no brain, the ganglia must be endowed

2o6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

with the power of ordering such voluntary movements, or of
performing such instinctive acts of will, and thought, as the
creatures are capable of — and hence we must needs believe
that the powers of the ganglia are more extensive in the In-
vertehrata than in the Vertehrata.

II. Involuntary nerve action. — In these actions all the nervous
masses can take part — brain — spinal cord — or ganglia.

I propose now to consider separately how far these several
voluntary and involuntary powers are possessed by the dif-
ferent divisions of the nervous system.

Functions of the Brain. — That the brain is the material
organ of the conscious mind, and the conscious will, in those
animals that possess a brain there can be no possible doubt ;
for if the brain is removed with such care as not to destroy
life, the animal although it may continue to live, will be no
longer capable of exercising its conscious mind, or will, or of
performing voluntary movements. (See ^^ Heflex ActionJ^)

In man we find the brain the largest in size, and the most
developed in other respects ; and this is what we should
theoretically have been led to expect, because v/e know he has
more mental capacity than any other creature.

The brains, however, of the higher brutes are so consider-
ably developed and — roughly speaking — look so much like the
brain of man, that materialists have argued that in this cir-
cumstance we have a clear proof that the higher kinds of
brutes must have minds similar in kind to that of man ; and
differing only in being less developed.

For my own part, however, I do not grant the truth of this
deduction, because, as I shall try to prove hereafter, I believe
it is the sort of specialized and endowed spirit embodied in
any given organism which chiefly distinguishes the creature :
that is to say, that the distinctive difference between organisms
— or, on the other hand, their likeness in some ways — depends
on the kind of specialized mind they possess, more than on mere
variance, or similitude — as the case may be — of anatomical
construction. And the force of this argument may be urged,

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 207

by a consideration of the sinailarity we witness in some striking
respects between the doings, and social and other customs of
bees and ants as compared with those of man; although the
bees and ants do not possess brains anything like his, even
if they can be said to have them at all.

But to return to the higher brutes, as dogs, &c., they, it is
true, possess large brains, but this is so, as I believe, not
because they approach man in intellect, but because their pos-
session enables them the better to co-ordinate and carry out
such mental faculties and powers as they are endowed with —
which are very high in some respects though stopping short of
intellect.

Moreover the larger bodies of many of the Vertehrata, and
consequent larger development of nerves and muscles, need a
large central and co-ordinating nervous mass such as the brain.

For these reasons therefore I believe it is that dogs and
monkeys, &c., possess large brains — not because they are en-
dowed with minds like that of man — but because these large
brains enable the brutes to efficiently carry out their ordained
involuntary, and their voluntary, though intellectually-un-
reasoned instincts and actions, as distinguished from the intel-
lectually-reasoned ideas, conduct and actions of man — animal-
like though man is in some of his involuntary or instinctive
actions and doings.

Next to its being the seat of the intellect, and of conscious
will in man, and also of such powers of instinctive animal
reasoning and voluntary power of will as is possessed by him,
and by the various vertebrates, the most important functions
of the brain are as follows. It is as I have already said the
material source from whence arise and proceed along the
appropriate nerve branches those primary or direct mandates
of the will (see " Essential Nerve Action ") which cause voluntary
movements. It is also, as I shall presently show, greatly con-
cerned in some of the various involuntary reflex functions and
movements. (See " Refiex Action.''')

It is also the seat of the nerve cells concerned in the work-
ing of the special senses of smell, sight, hearing, taste, and in

2o8 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

some respects of touch and sensation; and lastly and very
importantly it is the grand centre of union of all parts of the
nervous system, and has great power by means of its commis-
sures and connexions in co-ordinating the various functions and
movements generally of the body.

Functions of the Spinal Cord. — This large tract of nervous
substance sends branches to all the muscles capable either of
voluntary motion or of spinal reflex action — branches to the skin
and all parts capable of sensation that are not supplied with
such by the brain — and it is in communication also with the
ganglia and great sympathetic nerve system.

Its modes of action are twofold. 1st. It and its nerves can
be the channel through which the mandates of the voluntary
will — as seated in the brain — can be conveyed to all parts of
the body so as to cause voluntary movements. For example,
you will to rise from your chair, and forthwith the mandate
passes down the spinal cord, and from it the fitting influence
passes along its motor fibres to the various muscles of the legs,
back, &c., and you stand upright.

2ndly. The spinal cord being composed of nerve cells as well
as nerve fibres it can itself originate nerve action hy its own
power, and this it does in the reflex actions presently to be
described — still it must be remembered that although the cord
can originate nerve energy, it is in such case, and if so arising,
solely of the involuntary kind, as I shall explain (see " Reflex
Action'').

Functions of Ganglia and the Sympathetic System of
Nerves. — These little masses of nervous substance, as already
stated, contain nerve cells as well as nerve fibres. They can
therefore originate or set in action nerve force or energy, but
it is entirely of the involuntary kind, and acts quite indepen-
dently of the will, and in a manner automatically.

The functions and powers of ganglia are most remarkable.
There are ganglia and ganglion nerves situate in close union
with the heart, lungs, and stomach, and liver, and intestines,
and all parts concerned in the vital actions of the circulation of
the blood, breathing, digestion, nutrition, growth, secretion.

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 209

&c. In fact it is the ganglia of the great sympathetic nervous
system which initiates, orders, regulates, and carries out —
partly in connexion with spinal nerves — all the processes con-
cerned in the act of living, and quite independently of the
action of the conscious will ; and that this is so can be seen in
a moment by reflecting that our breathing and beating of the
heart, digestion, growth, &c., go on without any assistance
from our voluntary minds — and indeed that they go on acting
just as well when the voluntary will is in abeyance — as during
sleep, or intoxication, or under other forms of insensibility — as
when we are conscious. I may add, however, that through
their connexions with brain and spinal nerves the ganglia and
parts they influence, may be to some degree indirectly affected
by the conscious mind, as we see in blushing, in crying, and in
other ways — such as the occurrence of indigestion, from mental
worry, &c. &c. (See " Reflex Action^)

Thus much for the functions of ganglia in the Yertebrata,
but in the Invertebrata the ganglia must have wider and more
extensive powers ; for, seeing that these creatures have no
brain proper, or spinal cord similar to a Vertebrate, and that
although a distinct sympathetic has been thought to be dis-
cerned in some Annulosa, its presence is at least doubtful; it
follows that the ganglia of the Invertebrata must probably
not only be able to perform, as in the Vertebrates, all the
vital functions necessary for carrying on the breathing,
circulation, nutrition, growth, &c. ; but must also be able
to order and control all the bodily motions and doings of
the creature in respect of all its powers, and capacities,
and instinct, as specialized according to the Creator's endow-
ment.

Thus in the Invertebrata the ganglia in the absence of brain
proper, must be able to exercise such voluntary will and''thought"
as the creature maybe capable of: also having no spinal cord the
ganglia must likewise be possessed of the power of perceiving
sensation, initiating motion, and exercising reflex action : and
lastly, in those forms in which no sympathetic is discoverable,
the ordinary ganglia apparently must be able to order all the

2IO SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

involuntary vital acts connected v^^ith respiration, digestion,
secretion, growth, &c., as already stated.

Reflex Action. — We will now consider " reflex " or " Excito-
motor action "as it occurs both inthe Vertebrata andlnvertcbrata,
and leave to a future page the description of direct nerve action
as set in motion by the will. (See " Essential Nerve Action.")
Reflex nerve action is of the automatic or unconscious kind,
and to understand it we must note that there are two kinds of
nerve fibres, the motor and the sensor?/.

Microscopically these fibres appear similar in structure,
nevertheless one can conduct sensations — as of touch, irritation,
&c., and the other can convey the power needful to make
muscle contract, and hence to cause motion. I may add that
both kinds of fibre may occur in the same nerve trunk, which
itself consists of a bundle of fibres. Indeed some persons
imagine there is only one kind of fibre, and that its difference
of action depends on its location and connexion, and that one par-
ticular fibre — like a telegraphic wire — can convey a message of
a different sort in either direction of its length as required.
Suffice it, however, for us that sensations and motor excitations
can be conducted in some manner.

Let me now recall the fact that a nerve cell has fibres pro-
ceeding from its circumference, and let us picture a nerve cell
giving off a motor fibre from one side and a sensory fibre from
the other. Now imagine this nerve cell — say one situate in
the spinal cord — to be ready for action, with all its power of
feeling sensation, or of producing motion, latent within it.

Then let us suppose that the termination of the " sensor?/" fibre
proceeding from it, is situated in the skin, and the termination
of the " ?notor ''fibre is in a muscle: — then if the skin is irritated
the sensory nerve will feel sensation, and convey an impression
or message of the fact to the nerve cell, and forthwith the
motor mandate, or force needful to produce contraction of the
muscle, will be set in action in the cell, and be conveyed along
the motor fibre to the muscle, and it will contract. It is usual,
therefore, to say the sensory nerve has a centripedal and the
motor nerve a centrifugal action.

THE NER VOUS SYSTEM. 2 1 1

One of the most striking ways of demonstrating this reflex
action is to administer an anaesthetic to a frog, and then to
emove the upper half of its brain with such precaution as
needful to prevent immediate death.

If a foot be then pinched it will be withdrawn, or if a drop
of strong vinegar be placed on the thigh a foot will be lifted
up to brush it off. The frog will go on breathing quietly, and
if thrown into water will swim, or if placed on the palm of the
hand it will remain motionless; but if the hand be tilted so as
to render the frog liable to fall, it will change its position on
the hand so as to maintain its equilibrium, and prevent itself
from falling to the ground.

It might be thought that these actions were an indication
that the animal could ^^ feeV^ and ^' knoiv'^ according to the
meaning we usually attach to those words, but in this case we
may be sure the frog cannot so " feel " or " know " because its
cerebral lobes have been removed.

The fact is the spinal cord (and the sympathetic system as
connected with it by communicating branches) is able to effect
by reflex action all these movements of the brainless frog, and
which movements take place without the presence of conscious
will — in fact, " unconsciously " or automatically.

Thus we have seen that if the skin of the frog's foot is
irritated, the necessary muscles will be set in motion by reflex
action, in order to raise the leg and unconsciously scratch the
irritated part. But this is only an example of what we may call
simple reflex action, and may occur in all animals in a thousand
other ways — e.g. tickle the palm of a child's hand during sleep
and the fingers will close, or tickle its lips and it will begin to
suck.

But the case of the frog changing his position and
balancing himself on the hand so as to avoid falling, is an
example of a reflex unconscious action so complicated and
mysterious, as to be incapable of full explanation, though
doubtless taking place on the same general principles as the
foregoing.

Yet we men, although in full possession of our faculties, act

p 2

212 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

much as does the brainless frog, often when we walk in the
street or do numbers of things. When we walk, we keep
upright — move our legs alternately — balance ourselves so as
to preserve a perpendicular position— avoid objects in our way,
&c., and we do all this without momentarily thinking about
it — indeed we may walk a long way quite abstract in mind,
and unconscious as far as the ivilling to walk is concerned.
Thus, a man abstract in thought, walks and balances himself,
&c., automatically and unconsciously as does the brainless
frog, but at any moment of course his mind and will may be
recalled from reverie.

And thus it is as to numbers of things we do, and which I
shall speak of more fully presently, and also in the Chapter
on " General Illustrations of Mind, (|-c." The infant instinc-
tively takes its mother's nipple into its mouth — it knows not
why — and sucks automatically by reflex action ; and so,
later on in age, it extends its hand for a toy to play with, or
an orange to suck, not because prompted by any intellectual
reason, but instinctively.

Even adult men also are affected in an analogous manner in
a thousand ways. We are involuntarily attracted by a pleasing
sight — a, melodious sound — a nice scent — a savoury aroma —
and our mouth verily " waters " when we see luscious food.
And in this reflex, instinctive, and involuntary way, all the
lower creatures — such as insects, &c., &c. — are doubtless princi-
pally moved to take their food and perform their various func-
tions and specialized actions and doings.
But I am rather anticipating.

I must now explain that reflex action, as already hinted, is
not a sole property of spinal nerves, because there are some
reflex actions that are brought about by nerves in connexion
with the brain, and also with the great sympathetic system; and
so marvellously are the various nerves of the body connected
throughout, that actions of the most complicated kind can be
performed by reflex excitation without the conscious will
having anything to do with them, and indeed in opposition to
the will, as I shall show presently in regard to sneezing, &c.

THE NER VO US S YSTEM. 2 1 3

Having said thus much, I will now give a formal classifica-
tion of the Reflex actions : they are —

1st. Excito-motor.

2ndly. Sensori-motor.

3rdly. Ideo-mofor.

I. Excito-motor reflex action. — Of this kind I have already
given an example in regard to the unconscious frog, also in the
case of the child's hand tickled during sleep. These reflex
movements are effected by means of the skin sensory, and
motor-nerve fibres in connexion with the spinal cord. But it
is not only the skin, as in the above cases, and the nerves
supplying external parts that are affected by excito-motor in-
fluence, but internal parts likewise are affected, and act in
similar manner.

Thus the involuntary nature of reflex excito-motor actions,
as affecting internal parts, may be familiarly noted in the un-
pleasant incident of swallowing a piece of hot potato. By an
act of carelessness you too quickly pass the potato to the back
of the throat, it is there seized in the usual way by the
" z?ivoZw?zf«r?/ " muscles, which effect the act of swallowing.
Generally you are unconscious of the action of these, but in
this case, although you are made painfully aware of your
indiscretion, no act of your " will " can arrest the progress of
the morsel — it has been taken hold of, and firmly embraced by
the involuntary muscles of deglutition (or swallowing), and no
act of " icill " can make them relax : the nerves of sensation
at the back of the throat have been excited by the presence of
the morsel, and having carried the impression to the spinal
cord, a return current of nerve force has been sent down the
motor fibre, and has compelled the muscle to act, and all you
can do is to patiently eudure the passage of the hot morsel as
the muscles of swallowing slowly, and automatically, pass it
down to the stomach.

Having arrived in the stomach, the potato, or any other
kind of food taken in the usual way, excites its interior
surface, and the result is that by reflex action the secretions
necessary to dissolve the food are poured out by the cells, and

214 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

at a fitting time the muscles of the stomach propel the con-
tents into the intestines, and they again being excited by the
contact of the food, their circular muscles contract in orderly
and rhythmical succession, and perform their ofiice of propul-
sion along the tube. And thus the marvellous process of
digestion goes on quite independent of the will, or of con-
sciousness.

In a similar way the blood flowing into the interior of the
heart, excites the sensory nerves of its lining membrane,
and they in turn exciting the motor branches in a similar
manner to the above, the contraction of the involuntary mus-
cles of the heart by reflex action is the result, and so the
heart beats. And thus digestion, and circulation, and also
breathing, nutrition, secretion of bile, growth, &c., are all
carried on without the individual ^^ imlling" it, or, in a sense,
knowing anything about it. Indeed all these functions go on
much the same during sleep as when awake : not that all
these vital actions take j)lace solely by reflex influence, for
there is no doubt that the vital force acts in a direct manner
in many ways and instances — but what I wish to convey is,
that reflex action plays a most important part in the uncon-
scious doings of the vital processes.

II. Sensori-7notor reflex action. — Simple reflex action, through
the powers of the spinal cord and its nerves, was seen in the
unconscious frog scratching its irritated skin, &c., but there
aie other excito-motor actions in which the sympathetic gan-
glia and nerves (as already partly explained), and also the
nervous apparatus of the " sj^ecial senses," take part. For
example, you take a pinch of snufl', and thus irritate the
branches of the nerve of smell (which is a cerebral nerve),
and forthwith — however much you may try to resist it —
the message having been sent to the nerve centre that
a noxious irritant is in the nose, a violent spasm of the
muscles will cause " a sneeze " to ensue, by which it is
endeavoured " involuntarily " to blow out the offending
substance.

Again — and similarly — reflex sensori-motor action takes

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 215

place when the other organs of special sense are irritated in
appropriate waj^s.

Let the eyes be suddenly exposed to a strong light, and
the lids will involuntarily close. So of the nerves of hear-
ing. A sudden noise will cause many of the muscles of
the body to spasmodically contract, and a jumj) is the
result.

In regard to taste also, and likewise in respect to other
parts than the tongue and mouth, reflex action can cause
secretions to be poured out — saliva in the mouth — tears from
the eyes from the smell of mustard, &c. — gastric juice in the
stomach — bile from the gall bladder, &c.

But there can be no doubt that the special senses by reflex
action have even more complicated powers and actions than
these. There can be no question that if the eye of a man, or
any animal, beholds eniicing food, or the nose smells savoury
meats, or if the animal be thirsty, or the ear hears running water,
— there can be no question, T say, that the spontaneous and
involuntary impulse is — unless the will be restrained by certain
motives — to move the body towards the pleasing object, to
extend the hand, and to take the coveted food, or drink.
And further, I think there can be no question of doubt that
this is really the way in which most animals — certainly all the
lower — feed and drink instinctively. They take instinctively
and automatically, or involuntarily, what their sight, and
smell, and touch, tells them is appropriate and fitting. But
I spoke just now of the interference of the will in stopping
" involuntary " feeding, and of course this may be the case,
for even in very, very low creatures " choice " may be exer-
cised, and prudential motives also may intervene so as to
cause danger to be avoided, &c. (Refer to " General Illustra-
tions " for further examples.)

III. Ideo-motor reflex action. — Of course there is a great
variety of ideo-motor actions — or actions set in motion by
ideas — which take place by the direct mandate of the will,
and which action of the will is caused by an idea arising in
the brain centrally. These actions comprise indeed all volun-

2i6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

tary movements ; but there are also many reflex ideo-motor
movements which are involuntary.

Talking, barking, the song of birds, bleating, lowing, &c.,
may all take place through a determination of the will, but yet
they may all be caused to take place through ideo-motor or
seusori-motor reflex action.

The human or animal cry of terror is involuntary, nor can
it be doubted, I think, but that the hound " gives tongue "
when he scents his game — that the lamb bleats for its dam
when it requires milk, &c., &c., not so much ■ from a decision
of the will, as from reflex action arising from sensations com-
pounded of the calls of hunger and the ideo-motor promptings
of natural instinct. And in the same way if the domestic cock
feels valiant, he crows—the hen " eludes " to call her chicken—
the kitten gambols— the thrush sings— not because they either
one of them, in either instance, know why they do it, but
because it is according to the endowed nature of their in-
stinctive minds and ^'involuntary'' mechanisms so to do.

Then of laughing, crying, watering of the mouth in man.
Laughing is a very complex series of movements set in
motion by ideas which may arise in the brain centrally: or
conversely it may be initiated objectively by something we see
or hear.

In hke way the shedding of tears, sobbing, sighing, watering
of the mouth, are other actions which take place by means of
ideas that may arise de novo in the brain; or that may, on the
contrary, be caused by what we see and hear ; hut in any case
neither of these several actions can he set going in a thoroughly
complete manner hy a mere act of will.

We cannot laugh, or cry, &c., really, unless we have real
hilarious, or deeply-sorrowful ideas — the stage laugh, &c., or
that of the hypocrite, is not the true thing — to be real, each of
these acts must be involuntary, although they may be checked
or increased by the will.

To take rather another branch of this subject I may say,
that there is even such a thing as reflex cerebration capable of
being set in action by certain smells, and sights, and sounds.

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 217

Thus if you get behind an old soldier and suddenly call out
^^ attention" he will involuntarily start and assume the military
position indicated. Or let an adult open an old box which has
some distinctive smell familiar to him in youth, and a train of
ideas and recollections will involuntarily spring up in his
mind. Similarly let iiim hear an old familiar tune ; or see an
old friend, and the impression of sound, or of form, &c.,
received by the ear or the eye, will cause a host of memories to
involuntarily arise in his conscious mind.

In like manner an idea arising in the mind itself, without
being induced by an external cause, may occasion other ideas
to recur to the mind involuntarily.

Finally, I will instance a most interesting example of ideo-
motor involuntary reflex action as witnessed in " blushing,'^
and which will occur even in opposition to the will — a most
elegant description of which has been given by Fielding: —

" Her pure and eloquent blood
Spoke in her cheeks, and so distinctly wrought
That one might almost say her body thought."

But I must desist from further illustrations, for like so
very many other subjects discussed in this work, a just treat-
ment of this particular topic in detail would require a volume
to itself.

What I have said however — imperfect as it may be — is
sufficient I hope to show the reader how much even man him-
self is a piece of mechanisvi ivorking involuntarily, for it will
have been seen that the reflex and involuntary actions govern
a large number of the processes concerned in the complex acts
of living and doing, and that although the conscious will may
assist, or may partially arrest, — as the case may be — some of
these actions, yet, that in general, the conscious will has no
power over them.

From all this, therefore, it will be seen that a right under-
standing of " reflex and involuntary action " is absolutely
essential in order to comprehend in the faintest degree the
mystery of life, and its actions, and doings ; and especially of
the doings of the lower creatures. And so all-important is

21 8 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

this subject in connexion with the doings of all animals,
and even of man himself, that without repeating anything
here as to the actually vital processes, let me for the sake of
emphasis recall attention to some of the most important facts
stated in the foregoing.

The reader has, I hope, noted that even man, with his large
and powerful brain and will, is affected, and acts in an
involuntary way in numbers of instances. A great many
things he does, or thinks of, are quite involuntary — he cannot
even laugh or cry in real manner by a mere direct act of will.
In order to laugh or cry he must verily experience true
emotion, and then the laughing or crying will occur spontane-
ously and even in opposition to his will — these and many
other actions (as the sucking of the infant) being involuntary
and instinctive, and taking Eplace according to ordained modes.

Then if it is so in the case of man, how much more must it
be so in the case of the lower animals which have smaller
brains, or none at all, and which have no minds capable of
intellectual abstract reasoning ? Must not their acts and
doings, therefore, mostly be performed in a purely animal and
instinctive manner according to ordained mode, and scope —
automatic in great degree — and only voluntary, and by choice,
within the limits as designed by the Creator of their Instinc-
tive or Organic minds, specialized according to plan for the
particular race, or species ?

Religious and Scientific Reflections. — Considering the
object of this book, I will now touch on the all-important question
of how these marvellous powers of voluntary, and of reflex and
involuntary, actions first arose and how they now work.

For myself I say at once, that nothing is clearer to my mind
than that such recondite, mysterious, and perfect actions as
these of voluntary movement, &c., taking place according to
the will, and of involuntary and reflex actions taking place
by means of certain excitations, could only in each case have
arisen, and can now only continue to work according to the
design and purpose of a Supernatural Power. (See ^^ Necessity,''
" Faculty of Fitness^' " Design,'' Vol. III.)

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 219

Materialists, however, think this view " a poetical " one, and
existent only in the fancy of very, very " goody, goody^'' but
weak, and ignorant, and misguided enthusiasts.

Materialists contend that reflex action, consciousness, the
power of voluntary movement, and even the intellect of man have
evolved themselves during the lapse of time, and arranged them-
selves spontaneously ; and that this marvellous self- creation,
has all arisen solely by, and through, the interaction and
mutual compulsion of the various kinds of haphazard, chance-
created chemico-physical forces and necessities ; and of the
" somehow-formed " different sorts of matter — aided in the
case of organisms by " acquired experience.''' (Refer to " Attrac-
tion,'' " Polarity,'' " Chemical Action," &c.)

In short, materialists believe that chemico-physics (they do
not explain how these arose) by necessity, and self-action, and
in a manner only known to materialists, and which we
believers are too dull and too ignorant to glimpse, much
more to grasp, have produced all organic phenomena, the
highest development of which is nerve force or energy, con-
sciousness, and intellect; yet they do not tell us what nerve
force, consciousness, or intellect essentially consist in; and
this abstention or inability on their part, seems to me a most
fatal flaw in their creed.

Now for myself I must declare in relation to the subject
especially under discussion, that although I can in a measure
faintly and roughly understand somewhat of how the mere
mechanism of the nervous system works — that is, as to the origin
of nerve energy in cells, and its conduction along the nerves,
&c. &c.; still at the same time I must stoutly and positively
asseverate that in my opinion what we know of the power,
and working, and effects, and interactions of the chemico-
physics, utterly fails to present to my reason any explanation
as to the fundamental causation of nerve and vital action, and
it appears to me absolutely certain that underlying all these
powers and actions — and in a measure controlling them — there
must be a force still more occult and mysterious than any mere
chemico-physical one — viz. spirit — a kind of mind designed

220 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

and created by a Supernatural Power and endowed with
special attributes and powers according to its kind.

Spirit. — To the consideration of Spirit or Mind I shall
therefore now address myself, but before entering directly on
the subject, I must caution the reader that although what I
have hitherto written in this article has been strictly accord-
ing to accepted science, we have now come to a subject on
which I shall have to diverge from the generally-adopted
strictly scientific view, and consequently I warn the reader
that he must receive my remarks on " spirit " with due
reservation — not, however, I would earnestly declare, that I
believe in " Spiritualism " as understood by some people.
(See " Spiritualism.^'' further on.)

I have already stated that I consider the brain and nervous
system to be the servants of the mind, or spirit ; both
•conscious or voluntary, and unconscious or involuntary ; and
that it is through, or by means of, the nervous system as a
chemico-physical channel, or mode of communication between
spirit and matter, that the former is capable of being made
manifest.

In speaking thus, however, of " spirit," I put myself beyond
the pale of orthodox science as generally accepted at present
by scientific men ; yet I can assure the non-scientific reader
that I shall write nothing that is not strictly reconcilable with
the most severe science ; for curiously enough, scientific men
taboo the word " Spirit " although they acknowledge " Mind.^'
But what is the difference between the two ?

There is another point also on which I would even more
strongly caution the reader, and to which I have already
alluded — " Spiritualism^

It is the fashion at present with some people to connect the
idea of " spirit " with what is called " Spiritualism ; " so I would
beg very emphatically to state that although I am going to
urge the existence of " spirit,^^ yet that I do not in the faintest
degree believe in " Spiritualism," or " Spirit-rapping," or
"writing," or " spirit flotation," &c.

All these notions are entirely repugnant to me, and have

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 221

been so ably refuted, or the pheaomena relating to them so
lucidly accounted for by Dr. Carpenter in his " Mental Pliysio-
logy^'' that I need do no more here than express my hearty con-
currence with his views; only adding that in my opinion no one
is competent to judge the question of Spiritualism, clairvoyance,
&c., unless he has studied medicine, and been practically ac-
quainted with mind as affected by natural weakness, by bodily
debility, or by disease; and in that way has got to know how,
under any one of these conditions, a clever but deluded enthu-
siast or an impostor may work on such minds in a manner so as
to produce phenomena which are likely to mislead the un-
informed.

But to return. Scientific men will not acknowledge
"spirit," because its existence they say cannot be proved.

But is it not as reasonable to assume the existence of
** spirit " as to speculate on the existence of another occult
thing — " JEther " — the universal presence of which is entirely
believed in by philosophers ?

" ^ther " is assumed to exist, because certain evident phe-
nomena cannot be accounted for otherwise than by supposing
the existence of such a sort of thing ; but yet " gether " cannot
be absolutely demonstrated — no one ever saw aether, or could
tell just what it is. So also with gravitation — you can witness
its effects but you cannot fathom its essential nature. It, like
aether, is ever present and ever acting, but its exact nature is
inscrutable ; yet no one denies that there must be a " some-
thing " we call " jether," and a " something "we call the " force
of gravitation."

Now, is it not a parallel in regard to Spirit and Mind,
and that phase of mind which I call the " Organic Mind "
or life-force ? Just the same as we do not know what lether is,
or gravitation is, so we do not know what spirit or mind is, or
what its corporeal manifestation — life-force — is. Still, al-
though we do not know what spirit, or mind, or life-force
essentially consist in, yet we know for certain there must
really be such a force or forces, because there must be a
factor or factors to produce effects different to those capable

222 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

of being produced by anything else, and which effects are
patent to all men.

Whatever we may suppose the source and quality of Spirit
or Mind (and life) to be, — whether, as the materialists imagine,
it is a quality allied to electricity (see " Nature of Nerve Force'')
or what not, that can as a correlative force be ground out of,
and set free from nerve cells by chemical actiou during the
working of the vital processes; or whether it is as I believe, a
distinct endowed and specialized immaterial force connected for
a season with matter, and consisting itself of a quality, and
working in bioplasm, or protoplasm, in a way we can never
know the exact nature and mode of, this side the grave; still
the veritable existence of this force, this " something," cannot
reasonably and scientifically be denied.

Materialists may argue and argue again against my view,
but that an energy or force (vital principle or organic mind)
different to any other kind of energy or force, has really an
objective presence and power in organisms we know as a fact,
and we are so sure of this, because during the continuance of
" life " certain chemico- physical processes take place of a kind
unknown in inanimate things, and what is more, certain chemico-
physical actions — putrefaction to wit — that would occur in the
usual order of chemico-physics, are held in check, and do
not take place during the presence of the life-force. (See
page 162.)

Then why should modern science ignore spirit ? Even
putting aside the question of life and its cause, the sceptic
must acknowledge that there is such a thing as "thought," —
" the thing that reasons, and perceives, and knows," " the Ego."
And can he deny but that it must be something in quality far
above heat or light, electricity, magnetism, or any force or
combination of forces man can produce by any instruments or
artifice whatever? Further, is it possible he can conceive that
such a force can have been originally produced by spontaneous
action and that it can now be mechanically evolved by the
sole action of the chemico-physics of brain and ganglion
cells ?

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 223

To me it is totally inconceivable that such could be. It
would require a materialist possessed — may I say — of super-
human imagination and intellect, each fertile and vast in the
extreme, to be able to imagine and account for the spontaneous
self-production of matter, and of the ordinary forces of
attraction, i-epulsion, and of the correlatives — heat, light, &c.,
and of the gradual self-evolution of matter and these forces
into living organisms; but how much greater a strain would it
be, even on such a genius, to conceive the self-origin of mind
or spirit, simply by the interactions of a blind and purposeless
and haphazard so-called mechanical evolution.

To me, therefore, it appears clear that the chemico-physical
action of nerve cells is God's way, according to His design and
purpose, of causing mind or spirit to be made manifest through
matter.

Primary or Direct Nerve Action. — For the foregoing
reasons I consequently believe that primary or direct nerve
action — that is, nerve action originating de novo, and as ex-
perienced or witnessed in the exercise of " «yz7/," " thought,'"
and ^^ voluntary movement" — is caused by the power of the
" spirit of life " working by means of its " conscious " part, and
using the nerve cells as chemico-physical instruments for the
setting free of the peculiar energy requisite for the manifesta-
tion of the various phenomena such as the above named, and
of all others within the scope of consciousness. And further,
that the setting free of nerve energy as witnessed in Reflex
action and in all " involuntary actions " is also caused by the
I presence of the Spirit of life, but working in these cases by
means of its ^^unconscious " part, attribute, or quality. (See
different qualities of Spirit in article on " Reason and In-
stinct.")

This " unconscious " quality of the Spirit of life working in
the nerve cells, endows them with the power under certain
physical conditions to compel the chemical action requisite for
setting free the amount and kind of nerve force needed for the
occasion, and producing movements and various phenomena
quite automatically.

224 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Tliei-efbre, whether the nerve force developed, be manifested
as Idea or as Will, or as sensation, or consciousness, or as
causing voluntary or involuntary movements, nutrition, respi-
ration, circulation, secretion, &c., all I contend springs from
the initial excitation and compulsion of the cells by the work-
ing in them of the Spirit or Mind in one or other of its two-
fold capacities of " conscious " or of " unconscious " action.

I may remark here that as to the origin of Ideas I believe the
Realists and the Sensationalists are both right and both wrong,
for I think some ideas arise in the brain cells by intuition, and
that others are caused by reflex sensation — Spirit can affect brain
cells de novo; and conversely matter can through sensation
impress Spirit.

To repeat therefore, I believe that the spirit of life con-
tained in the blood and bioplasm (see ^^ Blood'') can so affect
the matter and forces of pai^ticular ner ye vesicles or cells, as to
render them capable according to their locality in the system of
doing and manifesting the attributes of the particular descrip-
tion of spirit specialized for the species, and with which any
given organism is endowed, whether it be as to producing
thought, will, instinct, direct voluntary movement, reflex nerve
action, nerve perception, or sensation, as in sight, hearing,
touch, smell, &c.; or whether it be the development, growth,
and formation of the organism according to its kind, in regard
to its shape, size, kind of limbs, organs, &c. &c.; or the carry-
ing on of all the vital acts of respiration, circulation, diges-
tion, &c.

Speaking in brief, the nerve cells or grey substance of the
hrain are the material vehicles or instruments for the produc-
tion of conscious thought (ideas), will, memory, judgment, &c.,
through the intercurrent and united working of spirit and
matter; also of the perception by the special senses, of sight,
hearing, smell, and taste, and partly (in conjunction with the
spinal cord) of the faculties of touch and voluntary move-
ment.

In like manner the cells of the Spinal cord are the material

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 225

vehicles or instruments of reflex involuntary action, or of direct
voluntary action when ordered by the brain.

Similarly the cells of the sympathetic ganglia are the material
originators or inciters of digestion, nutrition, secretion, &c.,
and working with the spinal nerves the immediate cause of
the vital movements of respiration, circulation, &c.

But yet at the same time it must be specially observed that
although I have here spoken of the brain, spinal cord, and
ganglia as separate things, yet, as I have already said, they, and
all the various parts of the nervous system, are so united by
commissures and communicating branches of nerves that in
action they work together, and that what affects one part or
organ, will in greater or less degree aifect all the others, giving
rise to numerous complex effects and sympathies, and witness-
ing to the " unity in all their variety " of the constituents com-
posing the individual.

Nor must it be forgotten that this unity of action is further
secured by the fact that all parts of the nervous system work,
by means of the ever-present blood and bioplasm and spirit of
life, intereombined and continuous throughout the whole body,
and working harmoniously together, not only in the nerve
cells, but in every part, and nook, and corner of the entire
system.

And thus, the spirit of life, specialized for the particular kind
of organism or creature it vivifies, rules it in its entirety, momen-
tarily and completely.

The foregoing remarks be it noted apply particularly to the
Vertehrata, but I must repeat a few words as to analogous
functions and actions in the Invertehrata. (See ^^ Functions of
Nervous System")

These as we have seen possess no brain and spinal cord, and
yet they can in a manner think — that is, they can act appro-
priately for the occasion as directed by Instinct — they can
move voluntarily according to will, and they can carry on all
the involuntary and reflex nerve functions needful for the
particular creature.

225 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

What is the exact relation borne by the " cephalic ganglia "
of the Invertehrata to the brain of vertebrates; and of their
''chains of ganglia" to the spinal cord and the sympathetic
system of the higher creatures we really do not know. Of
this, however, we may be quite certain, that whatever thought
or voluntary will is possessed by the Invertehrata must take its
rise in their ganglia, for the very sufficient reason that they
have no brains proper. It is quite possible, however, that the
fundamental structure of the nerve vesicles and nervous sub-
stance in the Invertehrata, though looking somewhat like that
possessed by the Vertehrata, may differ in essential respects,
and in a way that is beyond the power of our dissections and
microscopes to reveal.

Suffice it, however, for us to say that whatever may be
the amount of reasoning power, or of voluntary will possessed
by the Invertehrata it must in any case proceed, as must also
all their material vital actions, from the working of the Spirit
of life in the particular kind of nerve cells, and bioplasm or
protoplasm as possessed by the Invertehrata, in a chemico-
physical manner analogous to that which takes place in the
Vertebrates.

Spirit— What is it ? — We must now return to the special

consideration of Spirit itself. Granting the existence of Spirit

or Mind, three essential questions present themselves.

1st. What is it ?

2ndly. What is its cause ?

3rdly. What does it do and how ?

1st. What is Spirit ? — I do not profess to explain what Spirit

is, further than that it is a force which can, as 1 steadfastly

maintain, effect certain things in the way of vital function,

thought, &c. But though thus ignorant as to its nature, I do

pretend to say, and to affirm, that all forms of organisms, and

all kinds of vital function we are acquainted with, must act by

some occult force, the exact nature of which we cannot fully

grasp, but which we call spirit ; and that such functions

could not be produced and act simply and solely by the un-

o-uided agency of cliemico-physics ; and that such chemico-

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM.

physics would be incompetent alone and unaided, to initiate and
accomi^lish all we positively know of in life, and in develop-
ment, growth, nutrition, secretion, function, &c., and still more
miraculously to cause thought and will to be consciously mani-
fested.

But if the materialist is dissatisfied because I cannot tell him
the essential composition of spirit, let me in turn ask him what
is the essential stuff of which matter and atoms is composed;
also what force, of all kinds, intrinsically consists in ? If he
cannot tell me what I ask him as to them, then he must not
complain at my silence, and yet the effects of the life force
are as apparent as are those of the force of gravitation, &c., &c.
2ndly. Cause of Si^rit ?

The materialistic scientist will be urgent to know what clue
we have to the essential cause of Spirit ?

I can simply say, it is a force we can only judge of by the
reality of the effects it produces ; and that as to its prime cause
and origin we can do no more than meditate in faith and
astonishment on that marvellous record which states that '' the
Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters," and caused
the wonders of Creation to spring into existence.
3rdly. What does Spirit do ?

I believe that spirit is an occult quality, which being created
by God, He has given in certain definite and specialized] forms
to different kinds of organisms — each one being endowed with
a particular sort, and which sort is strictly limited in its actions
and powers for the species of organism it vivifies — although
in some cases a certain definite amount of variation may be
possible.

It is, therefore, the spirit of life, specialized for the particular
organism it animates, u-Jiich constitutes the individual, and not
the mere collectioii of material particles — it is the spirit of life,
which constitutes the organism, and not the organism the
spirit, or life.

What spirit does, therefore, is to affect certain material
I particles — the seed or egg — in such a way as that " Hfe^'' with
all its attributes is the result, and that it is through and by

Q 2

228 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

means of the action of this Spirit of life on the Bioplasm or
protoplasm of the blood and nerve and other cells; and its
influence and control over the chemico-physics, that all mate-
rial development and all function is manifested and carried on,
even up to that highest display of the latter as witnessed in
consciousness, and in that crowning miracle — the working of
the intellect in man.

The action of the Spirit of life is seen therefore, as I hold, in
two marked phases.

1st. In tho, Intellectual mind of man. (See ^'•Intellect in
Man," also the article on ^^ Reason and Instinct^)

2ndly. In the Organic or Vital Mind. Of this also I have
i-poken in detail elsewhere (see" Organic Mind j'^ also ^^ Reason
and Instinct ") ; but I must say a few words on it again here,

I believe the " Organic Mind " is resident in, and animates
every particle of Bioplasm or Protoplasm in the system — that
is to say, that it is present in every cell, and tissue, and blood
globule ; and I believe that the nerve cells, as the highest
development of Bioplasm, are its most important agency, by
Avhich the more evident acts of life are carried on.

Thus " Organic Mind " as present in every particle of
Bioj^lasm pervades every part of the organism, and endows each
cell and tissue with the power of doing all the acts for which
it is specialized.

When we come to sj^eak of ^^ Bioplasm,^^ ^^ Blood Globules,'"
''Secretions,'' '' Nutrition,'" &c., in Volume II., we shall see that
Bioplasm and Blood must really be the material sources of life,
because it is from them that all function springs, even up to
the production of conscious thought in the brain cell.

The Nervous substance, therefore, of animals as the highest
form of Bioplasm, is the chief seat of the medium through which
the " Organic Mind,'' or " Sjnrit of life,''' manifests itself in
its most concentrated form and power.

But although the Spirit of life is concentrated in its highest
form in nerve substance, yet every ordinary cell and globule of
the organism, by means of the Spirit of life contained in its
bioplasm, can affect the special nerve cells and nerves nearest

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 229

to it; and contrariwise the nervous substance by its own con-
centrated power, and by its connexion with other nerves, can
powerfully affect all the bioplasm in the blood and cells in its
vicinity — cell affecting nerve, and nerve cell, reciprocally, the
one influencing or controlling the other with (in health) harmo-
nious completeness. And thus the Spirit of life is every-
where present and ever acting.

In plants, and the lowest animals — as the Amoeba — no nervous
system, however, has been detected, and their Organic minds
must carry on the functions of life without any such specialized
mode of telegraphic communication, &c., and in a manner we
are not acquainted with.

But in animal organisms higher than the Amoeba the nervous
system becomes, step by step, more developed, and in it, is pro-
bably concentrated a higher sort of ^^ Organic Miner' ^Ylnch,
though still acting without any intellectual capacity for reason-
ing, yet can enable the animal not only to carry on all its
inner-life processes, but to do outwardly aZZ that is necessary
for its specialized requirements according to its ordained
instinct.

Thus the highest brutes need a brain for the full develop-
ment, and concentration, and use, of the kind of Organic mind
as bestowed; but beyond its endowment it cannot go — Intellect
is denied. But no doubt in the highest brutes, as I have said
elsewhere — in the dog, fox, &c.,— acts can be done which look
like the results of intellectual reasoning, but which really
approach that faculty little more than do the qualities and
instincts shown by the Bee; such as placing the foundations
of its comb in the manner best suited to the shape of the space
it has chosen for its abode; and the display of its various other
astonishing gifts, and sort of reasoning power.

But it may be said by the materialist, in addition to many
other of his objections considered elsewhere in this book, that
if spirit, or mind, or soul, ordained of God, does really animate
and direct all creatures, how does it happen that any brute or
lower creature should ever get into difficulties ? should eat

2 33 SCIEA'CE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

poisonous herbs, or make errors in their instinctive judgment,
as to jumping across a river, &c. ; or that they should ever get
drowned, or injured by any fault of their own, or ever commit
mistakes of any kind involving death or pain, seeing that
their instincts are ordained of God ?

This mystery I cannot attempt to explain scientifically, but
the materialist, with his " chemico-physics," and " acquired
accumulated experience of ages," &c., is in a far worse position
than the believer, because the " acquired experience " of
"millions upon millions of years" ought to have resulted in
better things. And so the materialist is absolutely nonplussed
in this regard, and can only fall back on '* chance " — or
necessity arising by chance ! as explanatory of death, or
disease, or suffering.

On the contrary, the believer can look to the blight of sin,
and the malice of Satan, as the inscrutable cause of suffering,
and disease and some forms of death. (See " Death,'''' Vol. II.).

Having given this brief description of the nervous system
and its — as I believe — animating principle, I must pass on to
a fuller consideration of " the mind " in the performance of its
higher operations. Of course in the same way as it has been
impossible to enter into long anatomical and physiological de-
tails as to the nervous system, so it will also be beyond my
scope and space to attempt elaborate details in regard to such
a subject as Mind. But my object will be in considering it, as
it has been and will be in discussing every subject in this
book, to state sufficient to uphold my main argument, and at
the same time to omit nothing that may tell against it according
to the utmost extent of my judgment and hioivledge ; for what-
ever this book may be, it is an honest one, and nothing shall
be blinded or slurred over, that appears to tell against the
position I have taken.

I now propose, therefore, to consider in separate articles —
'' Jleason and TnstincV — ''The Will" — " Language''— " Ab-
stract Ideas" &c.

Before entering on these subjects, however, I will venture
on a simile in regard to the mode in which Spirit and matter,

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 231

and the chemico-meclianical forces of the nerve cells mutually
affect one another.

Mode in which Spirit works in the Nervous System. — I
believe the *' spirit" animates the Bioplasm or Protoplasm, and
rules the machinery of the nervous system, and works on, and
with them, as' a musician plays on an instrument. For ex-
ample, the spirit of a man cannot make itself intellectually
and consciously manifest in this world, except by means of the
brain cells — the musician cannot make himself heard but by
his instrument.

The mutual relations of the spirit and the nervous system
of an organism may therefore be compared to a musician and
his instrument.

The spirit by its action evolves a train of ideas in the brain
cells — the musician produces a tune by playing a succession of
notes. In each case the quality of the ideas, and the quality
of the tune depend on many factors. To think a clever
thought, or play a good tune — the players must have genius,
and the instruments (the brain or piano) must be healthy, or
well made, and in good working order, and not too old or
worn.

Thus the players and the instruments are interdependent"
the one on the other, and can each affect one another recipro-
cally in many ways. The spirit or mind thinks, and is itself
influenced by the current of thought produced by the idea
worked out from the brain cells; and the brain cells are im-
proved in quality by moderate use, or may be damaged by
overstrain.

And in the same way as the mind may improve itself, and
also the brain cells by exercise, in a similar manner the musi-
cal genius of the musician may be enhanced by hearing the
harmony of the notes mechanically produced by the instru-
ment, at the same time as the sweetness of tone of the instru-
ment itself may be improved by use up to a certain point, or
may be spoiled by improper usage. Thus mind affects matter,
and matter mind — the one is entirely dependent on the
other for its mutual production or manifestation in the in-

232 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

stances cited — of thought, or of sound, as the case may be,
and let the one or the other — the spirit or the musician — fail
in affording its, or his, quota to the complete result, and death
or silence will ensue. Let the spirit quit the organism, or
the musician the instrument, and the result will be similar ;
or if the spirit or the musician do not depart, the result short
of this, may be a debasement of mind, and an injury of brain
cells, through the fostering of vice, &c., or a spoiling of the
musical taste by playing bad tunes, and a destruction of the
tone of the instrument by rough or improper usage.

But here the materialist may interpose with an objection,
and say that as I declare spirit to be the life, it follows that
the spirit being the master, it ought not to allow the machine
to get out cf order, for an organism, being a self-renewing
machine, ought to keep itself in repair. But here we trench
on the question of Natural Death, and on the mystery of Evil,
with its contaminating influence — disease, and disorganization,
and untimely death. (See " Death,'' Vol. II.)

Finally, on this topic I would beg to repeat, and insist, that
in the working of spirit and nerve cells, mind affects matter,
and matter mind quite mechanically and reciprocally.

In proof of this we know that stress of mind injures the
brain, and that disease of nerve cells produces palsy of muscle
or mind.

Dr. Lockhart Clarke has demonstrated that some forms of
muscular palsy depend on disease of nerve cells ; and it is
probable, almost to a certainty, that palsy of mind — that is,
mental insensibility — depends on an unusual mechanical state
of the brain cells, or of the blood supplied to them ; and that
delirium, or insanity, depends on an unusual stress, or partial
palsy also of the brain cells, producing morbid phenomena
(delirium, &c.), or partial palsy of the intellect — that is,
insanity or intellectual death.

No doubt these causes of palsy may, in many instances, be
purely material (as permitted), but in other cases it is quite
possible that the prime fault may originate in the spirit of life
itself, as caused by some adverse spiritual agency, of which

THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 233

we can form no conception as to its incidence and mode of
working.

Then as to complete animal, or bodily, or organic death, we
know that violent injury of nerve tissue may produce it. And
conversely we know that in the hatching of an Qg^ it is the
spirit of life M^iich can cause development, and can order and
constrain the chemico-physics and the nerve tissue, brain, &c.

Spirit, therefore, and matter are two distinct things, and
they must work harmoniously together to produce or to carry
on life, and nerve action, and thought.

CHAPTER VII.
Reason and Instinct.

Reason and instinct — Mind ; the Intellectual, and Organic — Un-
conscious mind is the spirit of life in plants and animals — Limit
of spirit consciousness — Four qualities of Mind or Spirit — 1. Con-
scious Cerebration — 2. Unconscious Cerebration — Dreams — 3. In-
stinctive Cerebration — Benevolence — Animal language — Dog's asso-
ciation with Man — The Min(i specialized and endowed for the
particular organism — Generosity, anger, cunning, &c., explicable like
benevolence— Rats stealing eggs — Abstract ideas — Distinguish
between Instinct and Reflex action — Another instance of evasion of
difficulties — How far animals' minds are conscious — Habit —
Instinct — 4. Life causing action.

A GREAT deal has been written about the distinction between
Reason and Instinct, but after all, we can do little more than
say the difference between them consists in no more and no
less than the very important fact that Intellectual Reason — such,
as that of man — knows consciously why it concludes, or
orders this or that; and that Instinct acts on the contrary in
a partly unconscious manner, and without knowing the reason
why.

Nor is it surprising that we cannot say more than this,
because as we know nothing of the exact nature of spirit, or
mind, and few facts concerning the mode in which it works, it
is impossible we can fully unravel the mystery, but yet at the
same time I think we may make some fair surmises.

Before entering fully on the subject however, it is right I
should state that what I propose to do in this article, is to con-
sider the reasoning and instinctive powers of the mind in
ereneral in man and animals, and that I shall reserve to a future

REASON AND INSTINCT. 235

chapter a discussion of the " Special Instincts,'" such as those
shown by bees, ants, beavers, birds, &c.

1 have already stated that I believe there are two distinct
qualities or sorts of Mind,— the " Litellectual " and the
*• Organic," and that man possesses both, but that all other
creatures possess only the " Organic Mind."

It will be seen hereafter (" Evolution of Mind," Vol. IV.)
that I believe mind was created by God, and did not evolve by
self-action, and that man and all other creatures is, and are,
endowed with minds of a certain specialized nature according
to kind, being able to encompass and do so much and no more
than ordained as capable of being done ; aud therefore limited
in extent of action, according to such plan and decree.

Now speaking of mind in general, I believe each kind — the
higher and the lower— possesses two qualities, or modes of
action — the " Conscious" and the " Unconscious"

What I mean I will explain as follow^s, taking first the ^^In-
tellectual Mind,'' and then the " Organic Mind.

I. — Intellectual Mind.

This, Dr. Laycock and Dr. Carpenter have shown to possess
two modes of action.

(a) Conscious Thought, as when you ivill, or determine to
think about a particular thing or train of thought.

{h) Unconscious Thought, or Cerebration,^ as when the mind
acts " unconsciously " and independent of the conscious will,
such as we have evidence of in dreams, in reverie, and in the
sudden flashing on the mind it may be of new ideas by intuition;
or it may be of ideas connected with previously-entertained
ideas, which at the time of conception w^e had been unable to
work out to a full conclusion; or it may be the sudden flashing
on the memory of the recollection of old ideas, or past circum-
stances, which we had previously wished to recall, but had been
unable to accomplish.

1 I would beg the reader to note that the theory of the " Unconscious,"
advocated in this book, is quite different to the theory of the " Godless
Unconscious " as advocated by Schopenhauer and Hartnian and the other
disciples of Pessimism. (See" Will")

236 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

I would remark that the word '* Unconscious " is made use
of for want of a better word, and I would further state that
the mental action so indicated is doubtless a working of our
spirit thought, which lies beyond the scope of our ordinary
consciousness or will, but which in its action may and does
powerfully influence our conscious thought.

To those of my readers to whom the theory of " Unconscious
Cerebration" is new, the idea may appear farfetched, but if auy
one duly reflects on the reasons just given for belief in such a
faculty, and applies them to the action of his own mind, I
think he will see the reasonableness of the hypothesis. On
this score I will make an apt quotation.^
II. — Organic Mtnd.

I shall throughout this work call this kind of mind indif-
ferently the '' Organic Mind, '^ the ^^ Body Mind,'^ the ^^ Animal
Mind^^ or the " Instinctive Mind.'' This also must possess two
qualities — the "conscious" part, and the "unconscious" part.

(a) The " conscious " quality, in which shape it is mani-
fested as Instinct, is the capacity to ideate and to do, accord-
ing to a dim conscious will (reflex in great measure) all the
objective acts needful for the benefit of the organism, according
to endowment by God, and as limited to the kind, and is never
capable of improvement, though in the higher brutes it may be
slightly varied by man's training.

(5) " Unconscious.''^

This is the quality of the Organic Mind common (in a
specialized form in each species) to man and all animals as well

2 " Theraorel examine the workings of my own brain the less respect
I feel for the part played by consciousness. I begin with others to
doubt its use altogether as a helpful supervisor, and to think that my
bestbrainwork is wholly independent of it. The unconscious operations
of the mind frequently far transcend the conscious ones in intellectual
importance. Sudden inspirations, and those flashings out of results
which cost a great deal of conscious effort to ordinary people, but are
the natural outcome of what is known as genius, are undoubted products
of unconscious cerebration.

" Its position (consciousness) appears to be that of a helpless spectator
of but a minute fraction of a huge amount of automatic brain work." —
"Francis Qalton" "Nineteenth Century," March, 1879.

REASON AND INSTINCT. 237

as all plants, and is the power or force by which in virtue of its
endowment as " the spirit of life," the blood or the sap, the
bioplasm, the nerve cells, and all tissues and parts, whether
animal or vegetable, are influenced in such a way as to be able
— and in a mode that is not conscioushj known of to the
organism — to initiate and carry on under given physical and
chemical conditions all that is needful, first for the develop-
ment of the particular organisms, and afterwards for the main-
tenance of all its vital functions concerned in the act of living,
according to the special peculiarities of the species.

This unconscious part, then, of the Organic Mind is, as I
hold, the essential spirit of organic life, and by God's will and
pleasure the cause of life. Indeed it appears to me little less
than certain that it is, as I have just said, the action or work-
ing of this unconscious part of the organic mind, (probably in
the blood, or sap; and in the bioplasm or protoplasm of the
nerve cells of the animal or vegetable tissues generally,) that
causes life; and that it is really in the blood and sap and bio-
plasm that matter and spirit meet. But here we can go no
further — spirit must be to us a sealed problem this side of the
grave. One word more.

In speaking of one part or quality of the mind as being " un-
conscious," I mean that it is unconscious as far as mental con-
sciousness and voluntary will on the part of the organism are
concerned, but the actual state and limits of spirit conscious-
ness I cannot pretend to decide, though doubtless all forms of
" unconscious " mind are more or less under the influence of
the more exalted Conscious Spirit — the Mind of God.

Thus — to restate the case — it is my opinion that man pos-
sesses two kinds of mind, a higher and a lower, and that they
have the following attributes or qualities : —

C4_

Higher or Intel-
lectual Mind, or
o ) Spirit, which is
capable of pro-
ducing

1. Conscious Thought, or cerebration,
in man.

2. Unconscious Thought, or cerebra-
tion, in man.

23S

SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

i-l

Lower, or Organic

Mind, or soul,

which is capable

of producing

( 3. Instinct, or Instinctive cerebration
or nerve action in man and animals;
which may be, in a degree, of the con-
scious kind.

4. Unconscious life causing power,
and which bears the same relation to
the Instinctive Mind (No. 3) as the
" unconscious " power of thought above
mentioned (No. 2) bears to the Con-
scious Mind (No. 1), so far as the
prompting of ideas necessary for the
specialized needs of the Organism are
concerned ; capable also of inducing
and controlling, under definite con-
ditions, all the chemico-physical and
other actions necessary for the per-
formance of the vital functions in man,

land all animals and plants.

These four qualities, in my opinion, are all possessed by man,
and comprise the scope and endowment of his mind ; whereas,
I venture to think the mind in brutes and all lower creatures
is restricted to the qualities numbered 3 and 4 above, that is,
they possess only the lower or " Organic Mind " with its two
qualities of instinct and life-giving power.

And further, in regard to plants, I believe their organic mind
or spirit of life is limited entirely to the quality No. 4 as above
given.

I know it may be objected in regard to man, that I describe
him as possessing two distinct kinds of mind or spirit — the in-
tellectual and tlie organic : but does not every man feel that he
has two natures within him — a higher and a lower— an intel-
lectual and an animal ? For example, a man devotes himself
to coo-itation or to duty by means of his intellectual mind of
the spirit, but yields to his organic or body mind when he
gives himself up to eating and drinking, &c., or without reflec-
tion seizes pleasure as it flies.

REASON AND INSTINCT. 239

But to return to animals.

It appears to me perfectly plain, that an essential difference
between reason and instinct is, that in the case of human reason,
an act is done because the intellect knows why it gives the order
for its execution, whereas in an act caused by the Instinctive
Mind, the reason for its performance is not known to the
animal by ratiocination. It does a thing, hut it does not know
the intellectual reason why or how.

And this can be proved to be the case by the fact, that
animals do not improve in the mode and number of their
instincts, as seen in the construction of birds', and spiders',
and bees' nests, webs, combs, &c., &c.; and in the doings
of all Avild creatures. They can only do what has been
ordained they should be capable of.

I now propose to enter separately into some details concern-
ing each of the four qualities or attributes of mind, above
named.

1. Conscious Thought, or Cerebration.— One action of this
may consist, either in the using of ideas for intellectual
cogitation, ratiocination, or perception, which can be voluntarily
dn-ected by the will into any train of thought, and be exercised
in the use of the judgment — the forming of Abstract Ideas,
&c., &c.; or it may eifect commands through the will, by which
motor-nerve action may be set up, and all voluntary actions
performed. (For further remarks on the Conscious Intellect
I must refer to the special articles, ^'Intellect oj Man " in this
volume ; and ^^ Evolution of Mind ^' in the fourth Volume.)

2. Unconscious Thought, or Cerebration.— I have already
spoken of this (see p. 235), but I must say more about it.

This part or quality of the mind is ^^unconscious'' as far as
what I may call our mental consciousness, or knowing, is con-
cerned ; though doubtless it is " conscious " in the way of
spirit, in a manner, and working in a mode, we know not of,
but which is capable of carrying on a train of thought which
may, or may not, become consciously known to the individual,
according to circumstances.

And I think there can be little question also, but that this

240 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

*' unconscious " quality of the mind or spirit is the chief seat of
character : — of conscience : — and of genius ; also that it is its
flashings which suggest to conscious thought all ideas which
are not called up by voluntarily-directed effort, or are not
originated by the sense impressions of objects, and of external
experiences and impressions, such as we derive from sight,
hearing, touch, &c.; as in looking, reading, hearing various
sounds, — as the speaking of men, &c.

It is also, as I believe, this " unconscious " part of the mind
which, in man especially, is the medium through which God,
or Satan, by their angels of good, or evil, can communicate
with the individual and independent spirit of man— spirit
with spirit.

And here it is therefore as I believe, that all those ideas
of good or of evil arise, which do not take their origin in the
voluntary will ; or are not given rise to by external objects and
experiences. Here occurs the great struggle between good and
evil — the good angel suggesting in turn righteous, and the bad
angel sinful ideas to the " unconscious " mind, and on which
ideas, as communicated to the conscious mind, the conscious will
and judgment must decide on for good, or for ill.

Here then — to repeat in brief — in this " unconscious " part
of the mind, acting according to its nature and gift, arise all
ideas not given origin to by the voluntary will, or caused by
objective impressions ; and on these ideas, as soon as manifested
to the consciousness, it is the function of the conscious will,
and judgment, to determine, according to the free will and
ability of the individual.

It will be seen, then, that this "unconscious thought " is the
working of our spirit within us. It is, in common parlance,
our " innermost nature ; " our " inner consciousness ; " our
" better nature ; " or our " worse nature ; " our " heart of
hearts ; " our " soul of souls."

It is constantly at work within us — thinking according to
its natural power.

A man, let us say, may go to bed, undetermined on a
certain matter. He wakes up, decided. Another time say, he

REASON AND INSTINCT. 241

takes a walk, and suddenly — when thinking consciously ol'
some particular thing — an idea flashes on him, which decides
a question on another subject, on which he had been perhaps
thinking previously, but on which he could not then arrive at a
satisfactory conclusion.

I said, a ie,w lines back, that this " unconscious " thought
acts according to its natural individual power and free will.
By that I mean according to its endowed gift — some men
possessing larger minds than others, but of course the quality
of unconscious mind or spirit possessed by any given man,
must be greatly influenced by many factors ; by heredity, by
disease, and by its experiences as affected by conscious thought,
which in its turn must be greatly influenced by the circum-
stances that surround the individual.

For it is quite clear, that a man's conscious thought, acting
according to the direction of his conscious will, must of
course greatly affect the working of his " unconscious " mind ;
and in this way it is, that if a man by his conscious free will
accepts the good, and exalted, or ingenious promptings of his
inner mind, — conscience — talent, &c., — he will, by training,
become a better and better man, and more and more confirmed
in grace; and more and more intellectual: or on the contrary,
if he neglect its promptings, worse and worse — more animal —
the "unconscious mind" becoming dulled, seared, and degraded
by neglect; and the yielding to Satan. (See " Will,'' ''Free-
will.)

Thus the really clever and truly wise man is he, who, accord-
ing to my view, possesses at the same time an unconscious
mind of great fertility (" genius "), and a conscious mind and
will, fully equal to receiving and justly using the suggestions
of his unconscious intellectual ideation; in other words, the
clever man is he, who while possessing genius, has also a clear
judgment and will to guide the outcome of his involuntary
cerebration. As a corollary to this, we may instance the case
of a man who possesses genius, but has no sound conscious
judgment or will, to direct or profit by it.

I would add that although the theory of the "unconscious

242 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

mind" had not been proposed in the days of Bishop Butler,
still it is evident, that very powerful thinker considered there
was some part of the human mind through which God could
communicate with man, and cause new ideas to become con-
sciously manifest by way of " Supernatural Instruction "
{Analogy), as seen in " inventions," &c., made by man.
Butler says, "A man by this faculty of invention may be
made acquainted with a thing in an instant, w4ien perhaps he
is thinking of something else, which he has in vain been search-
ing after, it may be for years." Not, however, that all ideas
come from God; for in general, they arise no doubt, by the
working of the individual's own mind; or alas ! as prompted
by Satan, as explained elsewhere; but I give this quotation
from the illustrious Butler, to show that he believed that on
certain occasions God does influence man's mind on the
instant, and quite independently of man's own powers and
will.

Bishop Butler too, I may here add, considered it probaljle
that Instinct in brutes is derived from " Supernatural Instruc-
tion.''^

Dreams. — There is one other circumstance connected with
the theory of the " unconscious thought or mind," to which I
must shortly allude.

It might be said that if the theory were true, and that the
spirit of a man were always thinking, although the conscious
part of his mind might not be aware of it, it ought in such
case to be, that according to the capacity or genius of the par-
ticular spirit, the ideas during sleep, when the conscious mind
is at rest (and we cannot imagine that the inner or uncon-
scious mind ever sleeps), ought to be as reasonable at that time
as during the period of being awake; consequently that dreams
ought not to be as they often are, so incongruous.

To this I would reply that dreams — as remembered — often
are very reasonable; and when they are not, it may be pre-
sumed that the rational ideas of the spirit as perceived by the
" conscious mind," are received by it (the conscious part of
the mind) at a time when so incapacitated by the partial

REASON AND INSTINCT. 243

paralysis of sleep, as to render it incapable of forming a reason-
able interpretation ; and hence that the ideas prompted to the
partially-conscious mind, by the unconscious mind, are at such
time twisted into all kinds of fanciful shapes; and this is
augmented by the fact, that the imagination and the memory
are less blunted than are the judgment and the will ; and
hence the most extraordinary jumble of images, and ideas, and
past occurrences, &c.

Dreams are therefore, probably, thoughts of the " unconscious
mind " (which never sleeps) which if ideated during waking
hours, would have become conscious and reasonable ones, but
which occurring during sleep are contorted and twisted, and
rendered grotesque, or incongruous by the imperfectly acting,
though not quite soundly sleeping, conscious mind; completelj^
dormant, however, as may be its power of will and judgment.

Some dreams are no doubt caused in a reflex manner, through
imcomfortable bodily sensations in the sleeper; or as influenced
by noises, smells, &c., imperfectly realized as to their true
nature by the partly sleeping conscious mind.

This being an important and interesting subject, I will
repeat my meaning in different words.

During sleep the brain — the material organ of the mind —
rests according to God's plan from its conscious action, and is
rendered partially unfit for thought — but only partially, — for
however deep may be the sleep, it is always possible to awaken
the slumberer by a sudden noise, &c., showing that he must
still retain some consciousness.

As to dreams then, I hold they occur as follows. During
this partially unconscious state, the portion of the mind I have
called the, ^^ unconscious nmid" does not slumber, but carries on
its train of thought as usual; still, as the '^conscious mind^^ of
the sleeper is partially incaf)acitated for the time being, the
ideas, and images of the ''unconscious mind," are only par-
tially perceived and apprehended ; the consequence is, that they
are necessarily distorted from clearness and congruity, owing
to the material organ of conscious thought being temporarily
unfit for perfect use.

R 2 *

244. SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

That the unconscious mind or spirit is always in action, and
that its workings are distorted into dreams during sleep, is
shown in the case of persons who say they never wake without
being conscious of having been dreaming.

My own case in this respect is most marked. For some
years of my life I was frequently awakened by the " night
bell," and it was a matter of constant observation with me, that
I never remember to have been aroused — from however deep
a sleep — but that I found I had been surprised in the midst of
a dream — a dream that I should have known nothing of, con-
sciously^ if I had not been awakened so abruptly.

3. Instinct, or Instinctive Cerebration, or working of
the brain in Vertebrates ; and of the ganglia representing
the brain in Invertebrates. — This is the kind of mind — in-
stinct— which incites or compels man (as an animal), as well
as all other animals, to do, by intuition, all the acts natural to
him and them according to God's endowment.

This instinctive mind is no doubt partly conscious, but it,
like the conscious part of man's intellectual mind, receives its
ideas — which are not caused by the reflex actions, as of hunger,
&c., or the direct influence of external objects as perceived by
the sense impressions of sight, hearing, &c. — receives, I say,
its ideas from its " unconscious " part, and which in this case
I have numbered quality No. 4 in the scheme already given.
And thus, as prompted by the unconscious and specially-
endowed mind ^ arise the various acts of will, as seen in all the
true instinctive doings ; such as that of the chick pecking its way
out of its shell; also its picking up food discriminatingly from
the very first — the building of nests by different creatures —
the making of honeycombs — migration, &c.

As to instinct in man, we see it in love for children — desire
for self-preservation from death — and in various other ways,
some of which I will mention hereafter (Chap. XVIL).

Here I will speak chiefly of brutes, and lower creatures.

The momentous question as to how far animals are conscious
like man, and how far they act according to reason, of a kind,

3 As to endowed capacity for vai'iation, see " Farmtiow," Vol. IV.

REASON AND INSTINCT. 245

and in a way, such as is the prerogative of man; is of coarse
an almost inscrutable question, and one indeed on which w e
cannot determine /o?' certain.

Yet personally, T entertain a very strong opinion that animals
are not conscious in the same manner, and cannot reason and
act in the same way, and according to motives identical in kind,
to the powers and conscious intellectual motives and will of
man.

No doubt, however, animals — the higher ones especially —
have a dim sort of mental consciousness, and perception, which
are set in action by the sense impressions of sight, hearing, smell,
taste, &c., and can in a manner, reason on such sense impres-
sions; but then, as I hold, their kind of consciousness and power
of reasoning cannot be of the intellectual sort such as that of
man, for, as I believe I shall be able to show, animals act on
all occasions simply according to intuitional, and decreed, and
specialized, and limited reasoning powers; or as compelled by
their reflex automatic nerve endowments, as to all their move-
ments and doings. And I think this must be so for the fol-
lowing reason — if no other — that if their conduct and actions
were the result of intellectual ratiocination and will, such as
<:uide man, we should see other results in regard to animals
than are the fact — they would in truth be more like man in
their acts, &c., and would improve in their intellects, their
doings, the building of their habitations, and nests, &c., in a
way that Ave have no reason for believing to be the case.

Surely if animals possessed the capacity for free intellectual
reasoning, such as some people credit them with, they would
improve their respective ways and doings, &c., and would not
remain stationary — that is to say, bees, for example, would
sow seeds of thyme, &c., — Lions and hawks would make nets
to catch prey — as do spiders.

Why I as for improvement in intellect, such a marvellous
bird as the rook, with all its curious habits, and instincts, can-
not yet distinguish between the appearance of a gun and a long
stick, and are equally alarmed by the stick as by the gun.

Whatever may be the amount of reasoning power possessed

246 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

by animals, I am satisfied it is limited to providing for their
bodily requirements — the getting of food — the procurance of
pleasure — the avoidance of pain, and danger, and death. Also
the performance of all those specialized and limited instincts,
such as we see evidence of in the bee, the beaver, the ant, the
spider, and more or less in every animal according to its kind,
and species.

Animals, that is to say, have no capacity for free intellec-
tual ideation, and of acting according to abstract intellectual
motive, as is the case in man in most of his doings.

Animals can, it is true (as shown in the article on " Will "),
choose whether they will turn to the right or left, or go
straight on, choose this food or that, &c., they can judge dis-
tance, avoid danger, feel pleasure, remember, exhibit anger,
&c., and can thus make a show, as if guided by intellect.

And doubtless animals have a kind of reasoning power, but
it is strictly of an objective nature — not intellectually abstract,
nor in the manner of subjective consciousness. They can
reason as to the best way of eluding danger, or taking food,
or avoiding pain, or achieving pleasure ; but they have no
intellectual abstract ideas (see " Abstract Ideas "), or intellectual
consciousness.

They have sufficient reason to enable them to perform the
part they are intended to fulfil in Creation : but what they
can do, is done as I believe, by, and according to, a limited
and specialized endowment of mind, which can do so much,
and no more. As I have already said, if animals below man
could overstep their endowments, and even if they did possess
intellectual minds of a sort, though of a lower grade than
man's — a kind from which his had risen by self-evolution —
then in such case, and supposing that their minds were in the
least degree of the intellectual kind, we should have evidence
of it in many ways.

For example, we should have instances amongst dogs,
birds, spiders, &c., now and again, of individuals who having
minds above the average, should (as is the case among men)
rise as individuals superior to the million, and prove them-

REASON AND INSTINCT. 247

selves capable of advancing their respective races, in mental
reasoning, and constructive skill, and invention, &c. We
should have visible evidences of canine, or avine, &c., Brunels,
or Stephensons, in making innovations and improvements on
the old methods of building nests, habitations, &c. And as to
improved intellectual reasoning, and the effect such would
necessarily have on the conduct, and everything else con-
nected with the lower creatures, we could not fail to have
evidence of such advance of intellect — in the higher brutes at
least — if such advance really took place. But as is the fact,
we have not a shadow of reason for supposing that their
mental capacities do advance. And if they did, and seeing
how much greater ancestral antiquity many animals have
than is possessed by man, it surely ought to be, that if
animals' minds were intellectual, and like man's, and capable
of improvement, that we ought by this time to have proofs of
the existence of a brute Socrates — or a Locke — or a Newton —
or a Shakspeare — or of a Wilberforce, to inculcate benevolence
— a Napoleon to organize armies to wage war on, and if
possible to exterminate their great oppressor man. (See
'■^Evolution of Mind in Animals,^'' Vol. IV.)

As to alteration of natural instinct (as we see in pointers,
sheejD dogs, &c,), I do not at all deny but that oft-repeated
acts (see " Habit " at the end of this article) performed by
the individuals of successive generations from the pressure of
circumstances, may become engrained as an altered phase of
instinct of the species (as for example, the earnest desire for
the pursuit of wild animals by man, and which in my article
on " Rapacity^'' in Vol. II., I try and prove not to be natural
to him); but what I do deny is, that such acts as those of
storing honey in combs, building of nests, &c., could ever have
originated spontaneously, and been perfected as we at present
see them, solely by the unaided will and ingenuity of the
bees, birds, &c.; and this for two reasons.

First, because the first idea of storing honey against the
winter, or of providing a receptacle for the, as yet, unlaid eggs
would have been intellectual acts ; and, secondly, because

248 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

that such acts, if self-produced, would liave been intellectual;
and in that case the possessors of such minds would have
I'^one on improving, and would have shown, and would now
iehow, other and higher proofs of intellect and skill.

There is another aspect of the question of " Reason and
Instinct" which we must consider, and that is the anecdotes
related concerning extraordinary doings of dogs, &c.; from
the remarkable nature of which, it is inferred by some people,
that such actions are performed from motives, and by mental
n^odes of ratiocination, similar to those which animate and
direct men.

Persons who relate these anecdotes — many of them doubt-
less correct, but many also, I believe, highly coloured involun-
tarily by the imagination of the writers — persons, I say, who
in the fullest faith cite these, do not seem to perceive the
one overwhelmingly important fact, viz., that extraordinary as
some of these instances of action on the part of brutes may
be, and much as they may resemble those of man, and clear as it
uiay appear to the relators that they spring from intellectual
reasoning, still that they cannot really do so, because it seems
as certain as anything can be, that if animals did really per-
form these acts by means of ideas capable of being realized,
and understood, and conformed to reasonable motives, in the
same degree, and kind, as in the case of the reasoning of man;
that animals would not remain what they are (as I have
already argued), and would not continue to occupy such
humble positions as they do in the world : also that if they
])ossessed minds similar in sort or kind to that of man, they
would certainly form an articulate language.

This subject is so very important that I will now, in disregard
of literary propriety, be guilty, as I often am in this book, of
some repetition, because my sole object is to make myself
understood.

I would say therefore, that it is not that I deny the good
faith of the relators of these hosts of anecdotes of the doings
of apes, dogs, horses, &c., nor that the circumstances are
wholly incorrect as related, but what I contend is, that there

REASON AND INSTINCT. 249

is often an error of interpretation ; an error such as that
made scores of times by the most conscientious mici'oscopical
and other observers, who have thought they coukl really dis-
cern appearances, which would fit with their own theories —
the fact being, that the wish being father to the thought, a
"svrong view was taken of the real appearances presented.

Thus, for example — to cite a case ajDpropriate to this
immediate discussion — I will pick out one of as extraordinary
a nature as we have record of; it is that of a cat who suckled
some young rats. (See ''Nature,'' May 22nd, 1879.) Nor
is this case an isolated one as far as respects an animal rear-
ing offspring of a different species. What I would argue how-
ever is, that such occurrences conld only take place in animals
who had had their natural instincts perverted by captivity or
domestication ; nor can I admit that such nursing arises from
a motive of benevolence. The cat above named had had
some of her kittens taken from her ; so doubtless she was
suffering much pain from distension of the breasts with milk,
and was glad enough to have such relieved. Besides, if such
an action as this took j^lace from benevolence, we should see
animals in general more kind to one another on many occasions
— especially when ill — in bringing food to the invalid, making
them warm, &c.; but it is notorious that such is not the case,
but quite the reverse — for example, sickly fowls, and other
birds, are pecked and worried by the healthy ones.

Hosts of other instances might be related from which it
might be inferred on hasty examination, that animals possess
benevolence, &c., &c., similar to that of man; but as I have
previously said I would meet all these instances, and the false
arguments — as I consider — that are based on them, by the
following emphatic interrogative.

That if these various doings did really arise in the manner
contended for by some persons, why is it the fact, that animals
l)y general usage do not act more like men than they really do
in nature, and why do they not consequently improve in mind,
and habits, and status in the world ? And this ought to be
especially the case, if possessing even a glimmering of such

250 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF,

ideas and feelings as those of intellectual l^enevolence, &c.,
they could also, as some people imagine, talk with one another,
and communicate intellectual ideas by means of a low species
of intellectual language. This will be further discussed in the
article on " Language,'^ and I shall there show, that although
animals can undoubtedly communicate to one another ideas
connected with bodily sensations and requirements, as to safety,
&c., still that they cannot communicate intellectual ideas, for
the sufficient reason that they have none, and that they do not
possess an articulate language.

No doubt in regard to the very high quality of benevolence,
I might in opposition to my instance of unkindness by birds,
be told a hundred stories of apes, dogs, &c., that have appeared
to show benevolence; but even if they have shown acts which
have the semblance of benevolence, and sympathy, and liking
for companionship, &c., what I argue is, that such acts could
not have arisen from the motive, or intelligent abstract idea of
benevolence, &c., but was no more than the behaviour that is
usual instinctively with many animals that associate in herds
and flocks. (See " Social Instincts.")

Even with fowls there must be a certain amount of instinc-
tive reciprocity of good behaviour generally, or they, the same
as other creatures, could not live in association ; and this in-
stinctive reciprocity is greater in some species than in others.
(As to unkindness to one another, as by pecking, &c., this
probably is an outcome of evil, and will be discussed else-
where.)

Then we have to consider the curious fact of animals of dis-
similar species forming attachments through living together in
confinement or domestication.

Such has doubtless arisen from their instinctive desire for
companionship, and as they could not associate with their own
kind, they " took up " with what they could get. No doubt
this partly explains the dog's attachment to man, but there is
also in this instance the very powerful reason, that man feeds
HIM. As to the dog's general behaviour to man, and the look

REASON AND INSTINCT.

251

iug up to him and obeying him, it must always be remembered
that dogs, and apes, and all creatures that are sociable iu their
habits look naturally by intuition to a leader, and obey him ;
and there can be no doubt that man's superior intellect causes
this obedience to leadership and authority to be all the more
powerful.

There can be no doubt too, that by association with the
very superior mind of man, the natural instinctive mind of the
domesticated animals becomes in some of its traits and charac-
teristics in a degree altered and exaggerated by man's influence
and teaching, stimulated also by the faculty of imitation, such
as is natural to some animals, and so markedly shown in the
Ape in particular. I may note that this variation and exag-
geration in animals' minds maybe in a measure compared with
the alteration by variation, which the mind and hand of man
are able by training to produce in some plants — variations, be
it specially observed however, that like as in animals' charac-
teristics (and forms of animals as altered by man's contriving
and crossing) can never transcend a certain boundary and
limit — the boundary and limit as I hold — permitted by God's
law and ordainment. (See " Variation,^^ Vol. IV.)

To me these arguments appear complete and conclusive, and
show that the acts and doings which the lower animals accom-
plish, in so far as they may resemble those of man, are brought
about by other motives or impulses, or exciting causes, than
those assigned for them by the persons who hold the view that
animals do possess intellectual capacity.

From all this, as well as from the arguments on this matter
used over and over again in this book, it is my own strong
belief that all animals can only reason, act, and do, according to
minds created, endowed, and specialized for the particidar kind,
according to God's will and pleasure, but perverted, tJwugh they
may be in some instances, by Satanic influence. (See " Rapacity,''
Vol. II.) Consequently in regard to all brutes and lower
creatures, it is my distinct and emphatic opinion that all their
doings, if strictly examined and analyzed, Avill be found to be
no more than the animal action of the Instinctive mind, and iu

252 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

no way connected with intellectual reflection and reasoning,
8uch as are the sole prerogative of man.

To illustrate what I mean in regard to the power of reason-
ing in an animal, I would cite a very extreme case. It has
been many times related (see " Chamhers' Journal,^^ June 7,
1879), that a rat will steal eggs by embracing one with its fore
legs while another rat drags its fellow along the ground by the
tail. Now this, no doubt, is the result of reasoning, but it is
not intellectual but simply practical.

Do not let the scoiFer cut a joke over this, and say that I
declare that rats by ordainment can instinctively steal eggs in
this way. No ! what I mean to convey is, that animals, by a
low kind of practical reasoning, are free to use, according to
the occasion, such amount and range of reason as their Organic
Minds (Instinctive part) are endowed with.

Animals by means of their Instinctive quality of mind have
doubtless a feeble sort of consciousness and a capacity for a
dim kind of reasoning power as suited to the species, but they
can only reason as for personal benefit, and according to the
circumstances as immediately present to the senses, either out-
wardly to the organism by sight, &c., or internally : — that is,
according to outward appearances, or present internal sensa-
tions;—in nne, that they have no power of abstract intellectual
ideation. But it may be said, how can any creature reason
w^ithout abstract ideas? To answer this I must refer to " Ab-
stract ideas " in the article on " Language^

In the foregoing I selected " benevolence " for illustration,
but other traits of disposition, such as generosity, anger,
revenge, stealing, cunning, magnanimity, and other supposed
intellectual virtues and vices of dogs, &c., might be instanced
ami argued out on just the same principles as those I have used,
and with the same result as to the conclusion ; but want of
space prevents me from giving examples of such, and I think
the reader may readily work them out for himself

If a dog therefore, fetch a person out of the water, I hold that
it is not from the motive of intellectual abstract benevolence,
but because carrying things in his mouth is natural to him, he

REASON AND INSTINCT.

253

has been taught to fetch, and been rewarded for doing so. As
to teaching, see '^ Illustrations.^^) And so as to bringing your
boots to you, carrying letters, ringing bells, these acts may be
done through imitation, even without special teaching; but
they are done for a personal benefit or animal amusement
perhaps, and, as I hold, not for an intellectual reason.

I have read ('^Nature,'' June 5th, 1879,) of a dog, that if
thirsty would stand in a begging attitude in front of a wash-
stand, asking as it were thus mutely for a draught of water.

Also of a dog that it was stated could judge if his master
were at home by going to see if his hat and coat were in the
hall.

I might mention numbers of other similar cases, showing a
certain amount of reasoning and reflective power. But I have
never denied that brutes have a certain amount of that faculty;
I simply contend that it is, as already stated, specialized and
limited by design and endowment. The dog begging for water
was undoubtedly able to reason in a manner. He had observed
that water was kept in the jug, and he had been taught to beg
for what he wanted. But this is only a slight deviation from
the animal in nature — he knows where a pond is, but instead
of begging, he trots off to the pond.

And so the hare having once tasted the carnations in your
garden, returns to them night after night, till he has eaten
them all.

As to the dog above spoken of who could tell if his master
was at home by looking for his hat, this again is to my mind
nothing extraordinary, and is only a specimen of a similar kind
of reasoning which the wild animal employs, — it is no more
than such an association of ideas as it must be natural for
animals to exercise in a wild state. Thus, I have no doubt
whatever, that if a fox saw a man's hat and coat hanging on
a bush in a wood, he would look very askance at them, and
quickly depart: he would judge, by personal or inherited ex-
perience, they betokened danger. The domesticated dog, how-
ever, would associate the coat and hat of his master hanging in
the hall, with caresses, and food, and nice walks. And in

254 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

like way the fox no doubt has learnt to recognize a hen-coop,
and to associate it with delicious meals.

It is in this way, I believe, that the natural instinctive minds
of animals have been rather altered by the results of expe-
rience and observation and association with man, but only
altered according to the endowed and limited power of the
species and their capacity for variation. (See " Variation^''
Vol. IV.)

Of course brutes and the lower creatures must have a cer-
tain low kind of reasoning faculty, or they could not do in
nature the multitudes of things in which a limited amount of
reason is required. They must be able to reason whether they
can jump a certain distance; or if such a bough of a tree will
bear their weight; and they have to judge of danger and the
best way of avoiding it; or getting free from it if involved in
a catastrophe.

Doubtless the fox can determine how best to elude the
hounds — the hare how to " double " and get away if possible
from the greyhounds. Some animals indeed resort to most
remarkable stratagems ; and even insects will sham being
dead.

The bird, the bee, &c., can decide on a good site for the
nest, or comb; and arrange as to its supports and fastenings.
The caddice knows how to make its case, and what stones, &c.,
to select for its construction.

The swallow can recollect the particular house where it was
hatched, and can return to it after its annual migration. All
the various creatures can use a sort of judgment, and tact, in
pursuit of their prey; or in escaping from their enemies, or
fighting with them, &c.,but yet all is done, as I hold, by means
solely of a dim sort of instinctive reasoning, which prompts
to certain acts for the procurance of individual animal benefit,
and effects them in a generally efficient, and in great degree,
automatic manner, and without at all knowing the intellectual
abstract reason — why.

Yet hosts of things that animals might do for their great
benefit, and many of which would I think be apparent to them

REASON AND INSTINCT. 255

if they possessed intellectual reasoning faculties, they fail to
do. For example, dogs, although they are very fond of the
heat of the fire, and have seen coals put on very numerous
times, do not if left alone in the room, take a piece of coal in
their mouths now and then, and throw it on the fire, but allow
the fire to go out.

Again, rooks are very sagacious birds, yet they frequent the
same rookeries close to the residence of man, and see their
young slaughtered, just as they are fledged, year after year.
Why surely if they possessed any abstract intellectual reason-
ing power, they would copy the habit of their relative the
crow, and build their nests — not all together, and in sight of
men's houses — but singly, and in out-of-the-way, unfrequented
spots in woods, &c. (For more as to this, refer to " Illustra-
tions of Intellect^'' also ^^ LanguageJ^)

Having dwelt thus far chiefly on the mental aspect of Instinct,
we must now turn to a consideration of the involuntary reflex
acts, which simulate voluntary ones (see " Reflex action "), for
it is all-important in this context that a clear distinction should
be made between the acts which are of mental and those
which are of purely automatic origin.

Instinctive acts may arise de novo by direct mental intuition,
and cause direct and specific action, as in the making of parti-
cular kinds of nests, such as those of the harvest mouse, the
mole, the bird, the bee, &c., &c. — also acts such as those of
the storing of food for the winter, &c., &c.; but reflex ones,
whether excito-motor, or sensori-motor, can only arise by ex-
citation of the muscles, or of the organs of special sense by
appropriate objective stimuli. (See " Reflex action")

Thus the making a nest is as I hold an intuitive action; but
laying an egg a reflex one. Of the former I will speak pre-
sently, but as to the egg the facts are these. Having grown
in the body, and having become mature, and encased in its
hard shell, it so irritates the tube in which it is contained, that
reflex expulsive efforts are set up, by reflex excito-motor
action, and it is " laid." But as to the instinctive act of making

256 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

the nest — an act arising purely by intuition — that is very diffe-
rent, in its origin and causation, to the reflex one just described,
and is well illustrated by the nesting of birds. Having
selected a partner in the iwoper pairing season, and without
being apprenticed to an architect and learning design, cr the
mode of superposition, and strength, and appropriateness .of
materials, &c., the cock and hen taught by intuition — and it
may be, as one-year-old birds, and for the first time in their
lives, — proceed to build a nest which is perfect of its kind,
and special in its shape, &c., and in this, on its completion, the
hen deposits her eggs. Now it may be said, that the egg in
the bird's body may set up reflex action in the bird's mind :
but this at the least could not affect the mind of the cock
bird, nor in any case could it teach the two birds the desira-
bility of making a nest, nor how to do it. The egg having
grown in the hen's body, why should she not when the time has
arrived for laying, get rid of it anywhere as a most inconvenient
and abhorrent thing ? Why carefully deposit it in an appro-
priate receptacle made with so much instinctive aforethought,
design, skill, and labour ?

Also indeed, as I have said elsewhere. Why the egg at all
in a materialistic sense ? Then the bird's instinct is further
shown by her sitting on the eggs with great self-sacrifice for
two or three weeks; afterwards in feeding her young with
equal devotion and self-sacrifice till the young can feed them-
selves; and then occurs that marvellous instinctive reversal of
conduct, which crowns the accumulated evidence in favour of
the view that all the previous solicitude and devotion must
have been intuitive, and not intellectual; for when the young
can shift for themselves, she drives them away from her with
relentless animosity, and as is well known to the breeders of
canaries, will, under the instinctive impulse to build a new
nest, even blindly pluck the feathers from the little ones she
so lately cherished, and even to the extent of causing their
death.

But mark ! I give this extreme case to show that there is
no maternal intellectual love, but that the mother acts by a

REASON AND INSTINCT. 257

blind impulse of the instinctive mind in all her acts; for the
mother having reared her last brood according to the behests
of Instinct, now further obeys the instinct to get feathers
somehow to line the new nest — and thus this strange reversal
of conduct.

But how different is all this to the intellectual ties of love
in the human mother towards her child — ties that no time can
sever !

As to birds doing all their nesting and parental acts by
" acquired experience " and " adaptation," which I suppose the
materialists imagine to be the mode in which these " habits "
"were "acquired," I would press them to explain how these
" instinctive habits " first arose.

If they attempt to answer the question, I beg they will not
copy Mr. Darwin's mode of evasion when discussing Mr. M ivart's
objections to his theory in the instance of how milk, and
the practice of sucking first took place. Mr, Darwin says
(" Origin of Species,'^ p. 190): " There is no greater difficulty
in understanding how young animals have instinctively learnt
to suck the breast, than in understanding how unhatched chicks
have learnt to break the eggshell by tapping against it with
their beaks, or how a few hours after leaving the shell, they
have learnt to pick up grains of food." Quite so ! The one
is not a whit more -wonderful than the other, but how could
the acts have first arisen? Mr. Darwin says, " The most pro-
bable solution seems to be that the habit was first acquired by
practice at a more advanced age, and afterwards transmitted
to the offspring at an earlier age " (!). (" Origin of Species, ""
p. 190.)

But how did the first chick's morphological ancestor learn
how to break the shell and pick up food? And again, to put
an old question. How, and why came the first egg? Truly
extreme Darwinism is a wonderful conception !

For myself, I hold that the formation of the egg in the first
place, and then the instincts which lead the bird to build, sit,
feed the young till mature, and then to drive them away, have
nothing to do with "acquired experience," or "habits" — or what

258 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

ismost to the point in the article — nothing to do with mere reflex
action, or Reason, but that the egg itself and all the ways and
doings of the birds are the result of God's ordainment, and
that all the acts of breaking the shell, &c., &c., arise by the
ordained intuitive action of the Instinctive Mind.

Having thus given an illustration of the action of the In-
stinctive Mind as distinguished from reflex action, I proceed to
give some unmistakable examples of the latter.

Instinct ,then, as I contend, is the action of the Organic Mind
workins: in a direct and intuitional manner in the cells of the
nerve centres, and compelling all the multitude of special
doings we see in different creatures — whereas. Reflex action,
on the contrary, takes its origin in the extremities of the nerves
as already described (see ''■ Reflex Action^'), and produces move-
ments and functions which are entirely automatic. For example,
you take a pinch of snuff, and the nerves of the lining mem-
brane of the nose are so irritated that reflex motor action is set
up, and by a sneeze theoffending particles are, quite involuntarily
on your part, endeavoured to be blown out. But reflex action
is not always so direct in its mechanical automatic action as
this.

For example, the system needs food, and a reflex sensation
from the stomach and starved blood, and tissues, causes the
feeling of hunger ; and this by its effect on the nerve centres
causes the intuitive instinctive volition to arise, which impels
the animal to seek food. And so of cold, &c., its perception
causes the creature involuntarily to seek warmth, and there
can be no doubt that it is the power of this reflex force which
dominates all creatures below man, as tempered and guided, and
controlled hy God^s ordainment of intuition ivorking instinctively
according to the specialized organic mind ivith which the creature
is gifted.

The brute or lower creature seeks food under the impulse
of hunger, flies for shelter under the need of it, and so on as
to other requirements ; but why they feed they know not, and
why they fly for shelter they know not. Even in man too, these
feelings and actions arise by means of his lower nature — '' the

REASON AND INSTINCT. 259

Organic Mind" — but then his natural instinctive promptings
can be supplemented and assisted by his conscious Intellectual
Mind.

As to consciousness, which I have just spoken of as a part
of man's intellectual miud, I will not pretend to say how far
this is possessed by the Instinctive Mind of animals; but what
I do insist on is, that in whatever degree their minds are con-
scious, and in whatever way they act irrespective of reflex
compulsion, it must he in consequence of their possessing minds
very different in kind to that possessed by man, or we should
find that animals would oj necessity be able to reason, and hence
to act more like man, and would speak, and make tools,
&c., &c.; — in fact, that the higher brutes especially, would be
more like imperfect immature men than what they really are,
— which is simply that they are creatures highly endowed ac-
cording to their kind, though gifted only with non-intellectual
Minds. (See Chap. XYII.)

The ''Pure or Special Instincts" such as those impelling
the collection and storing of honey, the making of elaborate
nests by various creatures, &c., &c., will be fully considered
in the chapters devoted to that subject.

Habit. — Closely connected with intuitional instinctive action
is "ZTai/^," and there can be no doubt but that " Habit " is in
great measure produced or formed by the separate, or the con-
joint actions of the conscious and the unconscious mind, any
action or idea, frequently repeated having a tendency to become in
a manner reflex and automatic, and to give rise to such " habits "
as are within the powers (see " Variation,'''' Vol. IV.) and capa-
cities and limitations of the species. And that this influence of
repetition powerfully affects both the " unconscious " part of the
intellectual mind, as well as the " unconscious " part of the
organic mind — each affecting the other in many cases — is seen
in the undoubted fact that thoughts and acts frequently repeated
do glide iuto and become more or less fixed as habits.

For example, in regard to the modes of thought of the In-

s 2

26o SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

tellectual Mind becoming habitual by daily recurrence and use
(sin alas ! being one of them), we know that the longer such
habits of thought, whether good or bad, are persevered in, the
more firmly they become established.

And as to the Organic Mind getting into " habits," we see
that in a multitude of instances, but in none more evidently
than in regard to that portion which presides over digestion.
For instance, some races of men can digest blubber with
facility, and other nations rice, but if a member of one race
tried suddenly to change the habit of his stomach, the result
would probably be disastrous. (For more as to " Hahit^'" see
Vol. IV.)

Quotations from the Scriptures in proof of man having a
mind distinct in kind from that of animals. — Hitherto I have
discussed " Reason and Instinct " chiefly from a philosophical
and scientific point of view, but now I will quote some sen-
tences from the Scriptures, which, if not conclusive to sceptics,
will incontestably demonstrate to believers that the view I have
tried to enforce in the preceding is correct.

In Dan. iv. 16 it is said, " And let his heart be changed
from man's, and let a beast's heart be given unto him."
Meaning that Nebuchadnezzar's mind and feelings were to
be changed to those of a brute.

Again, Job xxxv. 11 : "Who (God) teacheth us more than
the beasts of the earth."

Or Psalm xxxii. 9 : "Be ye not as the horse or the mule,
which have no understanding." Of course intellectual under-
standing is here meant, animals only being possessed of their
endowed instincts.

But the most appropriate quotations are in 2 Pet. ii.
12. Speaking of unrighteous men, Peter says, "But these
as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed
(see " J?apac%," Vol. II.), speak evil of the things that they
understand not." Also Judc 10, where certain ungodly
men (verse 4) are being condemned. " But these speak evil
of those things which they know not ; but what they know

REASON AND INSTINCT. 261

uaturallj, us brute beasts, in those things they corrupt them-
selves." Indicating clearly that brute beasts only possess
their natural instinct, and no such understanding as that of
man.

So also people who do not strive to use their intellectual
understanding, and to cultivate wisdom, but who follow their
animal instincts and passions only, are termed " hrutish " in the
Scriptures, as see Psalm Ixxiii. 22 : " So foolish was I and
ignorant ; I was as a beast before Thee." Psalm xcii. 6 :
" A brutish man knoweth not." Also Jer. x. 8 : " They are
altogether brutish and foolish."

From these quotations I think it is quite clear that the
writers of the Old and New Testament believed that man pos-
sesses, in common with brutes, an animal mind, which we now
call "instinct ;" but that man possesses also, in addition, a dis-
tinct intellectual faculty, or higher kind of reasoning power,
not possessed by brutes, and by which man can, if he chooses,
guide and control his animal qualities and feelings.

Summary and Conclusions.— In the foregoing I consider I
have now proved the following very important facts : —

That man has, as it were, two kinds of mind; a higher and
a lower — an intellectual, and an animal — blended no doubt,
but yet in a manner distinct ; whereas, the brute and all lower
creatures have only the lower or organic mind.

That the mind of animals as compared with that of man,
much as some of the animal mental phenomena and apparent
modes of reasoning may resemble the analogous ones in man,
yet must really be of a different sort, kind, or quality, for if it
were not so, brutes would merely be deformed men, and hence
would be more like men in their ways and doings than they
really are.

Nor let the Materialist Evolutionist say, that the mental
qualities of man and animals are the same in kind, though
varying in degree of development ; and that man's mind by
self-action has evolved higher.

No ! I think I have said enough to prove that the two
minds must be really different in essential quality ; and this

262 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

difference, as I hold, could hiive occui red in no other Avny,
than by the design, constitution, and endowment of God.

4. The Unconscious life-causing qnality of the Organic
Mind. — This is the last division of the qualities and
powers of mind ; and as I have already spoken of it in several
places, (see " Organic Mind,''^ " Life,'' &c., to which I beg the
reader to refer,) I need only add here that it is a complex
faculty working quite independently of the conscious will of
the organism, and that it is active even during sleep ; or dur-
ing insensibility from accident or disease, as witnessed in the
fact of respiration, nutrition, growth, &c., being then carried
on much the same under those states as during waking or
conscious hours.

Of course this " Spirit of life " like the other kind of
^^unconscious " mind (that belonging to the intellectual mind),
although our conscious mind does not perceive the working of,
is, and must be '" conscious to itself,''^ and must feel and think,
and act ; but if it be asked how this is, one can only reply,
that, evident as it is that there must be such a kind of mind,
still as we know nothing of the constitution of Spirit, we can-
not in this case, as in any other concerning spirit, understand
exactly all about it, although we may feel quite certain, that
there really is such a kind of force or power in existence.

CHAPTER VIII.
Will.

Conscious will — Unconscious will.

I NOW pass to the consideration of Will ; or the determining
power in man, and animals.

In the same way as I have already explained that there are,
in my opinion, two distinct kinds of mind — the Intellectual —
and the Organic — so I believe each of these kinds of mind
possesses two descriptions of will, the one conscious, and the
other unconscious. This may be tabulated thus.

/. Will of Intellectual Mind.
This is a part of the intellectual mind of man
(See ^^ Reason and Instinct "), and has two qualities,
(a.) Conscious will.
(h.) Unconscious will.
Will ( //. Will of Organic Mind.

, This is a part of the Organic Mind, and also
has two qualities,

(a.) Instinctive will.

{h.) Life-causing " unconscious will."

All these descriptions of will are limited by endowment ;
yet all are free within these endowed limits. This is seen
especially in diiferences of character, and in " variation." (See
Vol. IV.)

Man possesses both kinds of will — the Intellectual Will, and
the Organic Will — but the brute and all creatures below man
only possess the Organic kind. The man in his conscious acts
— especially the higher ones — knoAvs intellectually the reason

264 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

why he determines, or wills, this or that ; but the animal,
insect, &c., &c., does not know why it " wills " to do " this "
or " that " — it is intellectually unconscious of the why and the
wherefore, and acts spontaneously and intuitively, according to
its limited endowment of mind — automatically it may be in
most respects, but still with a degree of choice in some things,
within certain prescribed ranges.

I. Will of Intellectual Mind,

{a.) Intellectual conscious will of man. — This is man's free-
will, which I shall consider in Vol. V. Within the bounds as
placed by God's ordainment, and as affected by God's law of
heredity ; this kind of will in man is in my opinion absolutely
free. (See ''Heredity;' Yol. IV.)

(6.) Intellectual unconscious ivill of man. — This is the kind
of will which is part and parcel of the quality of mind in man,
called " unconscious cerebration." It is that part of man's
mind which in my opinion is the cause of genius, character,
and tastes, &c. ; and is so much affected by heredity, and has
such an enormous influence on the individual for good or for
evil. (See " Reason and Instinct.''^)

According to the choice made by his freewill, of directing
his thoughts towards good, or evil — to the useful or the
useless — so will this "unconscious will" work within him for
good, or for ill.

If, by the freewill of his conscious mind, a man directs his
thoughts to the good, the honest, and the true ; to the
intellectual, the useful, or the industrious ; so will this inner
will of the " unconscious mind or spirit " work within him,
and grow in det elimination and strength, and continually aid his
conscious will and intellect by suggesting good or clever ideas
according to natural capacity. But on the contrary, let his
freewill habitually choose the bad, the dishonest, the false, or
the foolish, the useless and the idle ; so will his mind become
degraded or evil.

//. Will of Organic Mind.

(a.) Instinctive Will. — This is the will of that part of the

WILL. 265

crgauic mind of the animal which directs the doings of the
creature in all things other than the life-causing actions, which
latter I shall consider presently, under the title of " Life-
causing will."

It is in my opinion the Instinctive Avill which, according to
endowed intuition, is able to effect all those particular doings
in animals that are peculiar to their kind. (It is powerful
even in man, as will be shown further on, as see *' Illustra-
tions y) It impels the creature to do all those acts which
are peculiar to the species, as to its mode of existence — rearing
its young, or nesting — living in pairs, or flocks, &c. It
causes the little partridge to run and pick up food directly it
quits the shell — it teaches the young mammal to suck — it
causes the mother to tend her young with solicitous care — it
guides the bee to make its comb — it teaches the bird to build
its nest — in fine, it guides and compels the creature in all its
instinctive ways.

No doubt in all these acts there is a certain freedom of"
choice as to non-essentials ; the creature is free to turn this way
or that, to make its nest, or comb, here or there, &c. ; but it is
the instinctive will Avhich determines that a nest shall be
made, and of a definite kind, and in a situation common to the
species. The creature cannot invent a new way of making a
comb, or nest, as can a man a new kind of house.

To my mind it appears that no view could be more erro-
neous than to accept the argument of the Materialistic Evolu-
tionists, that " Instinct " is nothing more than a combination of
inherited " habits " and "acquired experiences," conditioned
and fixed by self-made secondary causes acting by necessity;
because if it were so, and these qualities had been acquired in
consequence of the mind being capable of perceiving fitness, and
adapting its power of choice and resources tothe pressureof such
necessary secondary causes, and doing this or that, as the best
thing under the circumstances ; why, then, if there w^ere free
choice in ever so slight a degree, we should not see such
uniformity in habits and ways, &c., in given races, now and
during all past time, as is the fact according to evidence.

266 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

If bees, for example, had acquired their habits and faculties
by self-evolutioD, there is not the slightest reason why, by
necessity, they should, for as long a period as we know of,
have remained just the same. It is idle to say there can be
finality in such a complex arrangement as that of a community
of bees, and that their plans cannot of necessity change any
further. They must, according to self- evolution, have changed,
and changed again and again, by necessity or habit — or both
combined — till they got to be what they are. But why stop
there ? It seems a very curious plan only to have one queen,
and that all the drones (males) should be killed. It seems an
extraordinary arrangement of Evolution, that so many females
should be barren, and that all the males should, after a certain
period, be massacred by their kindred. It seems an evolution
downwards. Then how did the ancestral bees find out how
to collect honey, and how to make cells, and how to feed some
grubs, so as to produce barren females, and others so as to
grow into fertile queens ? Or how did the workers get the
necessity pressed on them of killing the drones at a certain
season ? How could any secondary causes, acting by necessity,
have produced these anomalous and extraordinary circum-
stances ? What self-acting necessity could have caused wax
to be secreted by the bee's body, or have caused barren
females, or impelled the massacre of the drones ? And if
these things did not come by materialistic necessity, it is not
conceivable, surely, that they came to pass by intellectual
ratiocination on the part of the bees ! Not only because we can-
not conceive that wax pockets could have come through mental
ratiocination, but because one cannot realize that bees can
possess intellects sufficient to direct them to store honey
against the time the flowers fail, &c., &c. And farther,
because, I think, an intellectual bee-mind of such a kind, and
capable of such powers and reasonings, and of establishing such
a kind of community as a bee's, would not be content with the
system as it is. That is to say, if bees had sufficient intellect
to collect honey, build combs, and order and arrange the com-
munity, simply by their reason as conformed to the circum-

WILL. 267

stances presented, by secondary causes, then, I say, that having
arrived at the present state of things, other things would come
to pass, such as that the drones would not tacitly submit to be
killed, but would, on evolution principles, acquire stings for
defence, &c. ; nor would the neuter females be content to
drudge for others all their lives, &c. If bee intellect effected
all we see in bee life and ways, then we should have, by this
time, bee reformers standing up for the " male's rights," and
the " single female's rights." To use the Evolutionist's own
kind of argumentation, there uwuld, of 7iecessiti/, arise revolu-
tion, hy evolution of the mind. But not so : all is ruled in the
bee life, and will, and ways, by Instinct, and organic construc-
tion, as endowed and ruled by God.

I have taken the case of the bee as an extreme instance of
Instinct, but, in my humble opinion, it is just the same with all
other creatures; they do all the acts of which they are capable,
according to the dictates, and power, of a mind, and a will, en-
dowed with a capacity (which is often perverted by the Evil One,
see " Bapacity,"" Vol. II.,) to perform so much and no more ;
and although the performance of these acts have such a show
of reason in them as to deceive the casual observer, that they
really do not spring from intelligence generated in the mind of
the animal or its ancestors by self-action and experience. (See
^^ Reason and Instinct,^' also ^^ Acquired Experienced^ in
Vol. IV.)

So I hold that all judgment, choice, will, &c.,in animals, are
the outcome of a mind so gifted by God as to be able to per-
form all that is needful for it to the extent decreed by Him,
and that although animals have a species of ideation, and
which, to a certain extent, may be of the conscious kind, it is
not intellectual as in man, but only sufficient for the perform-
ance of what God created it to effect.

No doubt in the lowest creatures, the action of the will is
mostly reflex, though in matters of choice it may be in a
manner free, according to the limited capacity of the Instinc-
tive Mind.

Anyhow, it is not free and intellectual, but simply regulates

268 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

the acts of the organism, according to its animal wants : but
in the ascending scale of organization, as the brain is found
bigger, the power and scope of the will increases.

But yet in the highest brutes all the acts are either instinc-
tive or reflex.

The will acts, it is true, and affects judgment, choice, me-
mory, &c., according to the wants and surroundings of the
creature, but yet not through intellectual freewill and ideation.

The fox knows where to get a chicken ; but the act of will
which causes the fox to seek and take, is not an act of intelli-
gence, as in man, and cannot spring from the same kind of will
and reasoning power. It is no more than the working of the
Instinctive Mind, in a ivay ive cannot understand, and is no
higher an act than that of the bee in collecting and storing
honey, and knowing how and where to get it.

In each case, if the fox, or the bee reasoned on the matter
in the same way as man can, they would be no longer foxes
and bees — but deformed men.

It is a great mystery, but there is the fact. Their minds
and mode of mind must differ radically from that of man, for
if they did all the wonderful things they can do, by means of
intellect, then it would seem that in some respects, they must
be cleverer than he is, for some creatures seem to have facul-
ties that man does not possess. And this being the case, if
animals' minds were similar in kind to man's, they ought, by
free evolution, to have got qualities they do not possess, but
which man has ; especially as many of such creatures are far
more ancient than man.

Then again, if animals had found out by their own minds, as
conditioned by necessity, how to will, and to do, all the acts
that we call instinctive, it is quite clear to me, we should in
such case, see many more " Instincts " in various creatures
than we do ; and that those we do see would not be so fixed
and limited in their mode and action.

But it may be asked if " Instincts " exist simply as endowed
by God, how is it that animals, under domestication, can have
their Instinctive wills altered ?

WILL. 269

Take the case of the Pointer, which may be taught to
"stand and point" partridges, &c., instead of following his
Instinct to capture the game for himself. The reply is, that
the Instinctive mind of the Pointer may be perverted and
bent to man's uses by man, just the same as he is able to bend
to his use thousands of other things in the world. God
endowed man with dominion over the things of the earth,
within certain limits. (See " Variation^'' Vol. IV.) But
beyond those limits, man cannot go. Nor can any creature as
instructed by him transcend these limits. Why, if the
Pointer did what man has taught him to do in any other way
than as a somewhat altered mode of performing his natural
instinct — that is to say ; if the dog did what man has
instructed him to do, in consequence of his — the dog's — reason
being impressed intellectually — why then, in such case the dog
would be a dog no longer. He would be simply a deformed
man, — or a man in dog-like form.

h. Life-causing will.

This is that part of the Organic Mind which is really
the Vital Force, and causes matter to obey its life-giving
behests in an " unconscious " manner. (Refer to " Organic
Mind.")

270 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELT Eh.

CHAPTER IX.

Memory — Imagination — Conscience and the Moral
Sense — Intuition — Innate Ideas — Invention.

Memory — Imaojination — Conscience and the Moral Sense — Other
qualities of Mind supposed to be possessed bj animals — Intuition,
or Innate Ideas — Faculty of Invention.

Memory, I believe, is a quality or function possessed by each
of the four descriptions of mind I have ventured to distinguish,
in the article on " Reason and Instinct^'' as being essentially
different. Its powers of course vary very much in different
species, and even in individuals of the same species.

To illustrate my meaning I will give examples of memory, as
occurring in all four of what I consider as the fundamental sorts
of mind.

1st. The Memory of the Conscious Intellectual Mind: as when
we voluntarily recall any previously- known idea, or fact, or
circumstance.

2ndly. TJte Memory of the " Unconscious " Intellectual
Mind.

We have instances of this in cases where we have in vain
voluntarily tried to remember a name or fact, and having given
it up in despair, the wished-for remembrance suddenly reveals
itself to, or flashes on the consciousness, even though we may
at the time be voluntarily thinking of or doing something that
has no connexion with the idea that had been forgotten.

3rdly. Tlie Memory of the Instinctive Mind.

This kind of memory I believe is that by which in both man
and animals the remembrance of effects or circumstances that

MEMORY. 271

have on previous occasions ministered or conduced to pleasure
or to pain, are involuntarily or automatically recalled to the
mind by means of sense impressions, and the working of asso-
ciated ideas as set in action by the sight, the hearing, the
taste, the smell, or the touch. Thus, to instance an old
proverb, "A dog that has once burnt his tail shuns the fire;"
or the man who has once had a tooth out gives an involuntary
shudder at the sight of the dentist's front door.

Conversely, the hungry hare recollects the luscious field of
swedes half a mile off. And so on, as to a thousand other
instances that might be cited.

4tlily. The Memory of the " Unconscious''^ part of the Organic
Mind.

This form of memory is, I have no doubt, ever active in a
multitude of ways, and frequently manifests itself consciously.
For example, you sit "in a draught," and immediately the
memory of your "body mind" reveals to your conscious mind
by certain sensations identical with similar sensations expe-
rienced at a previous time, that you are " catching cold," and
had better move.

Or there is the case of surfeit. In youth you may on a
certain occasion have eaten too much " treacle " or "mock-
turtle soup," and been made ill, the consequence being that
perhaps for years afterwards the very sight or even naming of
such things will occasion an involuntary qualm — the fact being
that the part of the " Unconscious Mind " ministering to the
stomach and its parts and functions, remembers the upset. This
assertion may be derided, but how else can you explain the
fact of involuntai^y i-epulsion to certain kinds of food which
have previously disagreed w^ith you, and which on a given
I'uture occasion you may fiud it convenient and desirable to
partake of but cannot, for the very rebellion of your involuntarily-
arising sensations.

This subject might be much enlarged on by further illus-
tration, suffice it, the lower you go in the scale of creation, the
more, doubtless, the "memory of the unconscious part of the
Organic Mind " comes into play.

272 SCIENCE A STROXGHOLD OF BELIEF.

I may remark, however, before quite leaving the subject,
that it is doubtless the action of " Unconscious Memory " of all
kinds which powerfully influences "habit." (See ^' Habit,''
Vol. IV.)

Imagination. — This is a faculty which mostly is peculiar
to man, or if possessed in any degree by animals must be in
them of a diiferent sort or quality to that of man. It is, I
believe, resident in the " unconscious " part of the mind, giving
flashings of its working to the conscious mind, and capable in
some individuals of being enormously enhanced in its range
and direction by the behests of the voluntary mind.

But this faculty of imagination which is possessed by man
to such a marvellous degree, must be very feeble in animals ;
although I cannot quite see how they could forecast danger,
&c., unless they had some slight amount of imagination ; still
it might be said that forecasting danger is only a result of
animal reasoning, concerning certain present facts that memory
and experience tell the creature may lead on to other things
of a dangerous or painful nature. Nevertheless, and however
this may be, it is quite certain that even if animals do possess
a feeble kind of imagination it must be of a different sort and
quality to that of man, or they would imagine how to make
improvements in their various dwellings, and in their habits
and doings, and would make tools, and invent articulate lan-
guage, and do a host of things which they do not do, so as to
exalt and better their positions in the world. (See " Faculty of
l7ivejition.'")

In short, animals if they possessed a faculty of imagination
anything like man's in sort or quality, would be more like men
than they really are.

In expressing this opinion I know many stories have been
told in regard to dogs' " imaginations " in respect to their
dreams, and modes of play, &c. ; but as to dogs' dreams if they
occur at all, I believe they are only reflex, as caused by
bodily sensations, or as set up by sensori-motor animal
ideas.

As to imagination as influencing their gambols, &c., these in

CONSCIENCE AND THE MORAL SENSE. 273

1117 opiuioii are set up by sense impressions, and act in
an automatic manner for the securing of pleasure, or other
advantages according to the endowed instinctive faculty re-
sident in the organism for the suitable procurance of
such.

Conscience and the Moral Sense. — I shall say a few words
here on this score, in regard to their possession or non-posses-
i^ion by animals ; but in reference to their occurrence in man,
I must defer such discussion till we come to " Freewill, " in
Vol. V.

Those persons who would exalt the dog to a place little
inferior to man in regard to his mental powers, tell no end of
stories to prove, as they think, that dogs possess conscience and
a sense of duty.

A dog, for example, is dirty in a room; or he quarrels with
a dog you wish him to beat peace with; or he steals a mutton-
chop, &c. &c. The next time he sees his master he hangs his
head, and drops his tail, instead of showing joy as usual. And
this, the dog enthusiast says, is evidence of conscience and
remorse at lapse of duty ! I say. Not a bit of it — it is all the
result of fear and memory acting together. On previous occa-
sions he has been beaten, or scolded, or looked angry at for
doing such things, and so when he has transgressed he fears a
recurrence of punishment or reproval.

It is then merely the actiofl of the dog's Instinctive Mind,
which produces the conduct which the dog admirer looks on
as intellectual action. The dog dreads the bodily pain of
beating, or of receiving your black looks, instead of enjoying
your smiles and caresses, and the dog has a keen appreciation
of pleasure.

Then again, it has been thought the dog has some sense of
moral responsibility ; but, in my opinion, I think all apparent
evidences of such may be explained away in the same manner
as above. What are thought to be indications of a sense of
moral responsibility, are, in fact, but manifestations of fear, or
joy, after having done a thing, Avhich memory tells the animal
through its Instinctive Mind, has on previous occasions been

274 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

visited by castigation, or reproof ; or, on the contrary, by
caresses.

No ! conscience ; and the sense of duty ; and of moral re-
sponsibility cannot be felt by the dog, because they are the
result of the workings of " Intellectual Mind " — a form of
mind which the dog has not got.

They are possessed by man alone, and even by him more
and more, as his mind is cultured and spiritualized by religion.
Savage men even, in some cases, do not appear to possess them
to any marked degree : but this is in my opinion, because they
are deo-raded, and dearenerated men : hut he it noted most
importantly, that in all men these faculties if deficient, are al-
ways caj)able of being cultivated and enhanced ; and, like the
other intellectual faculties in man, may be more and more
developed if fostered and trained aright, and are then capable
of becoming more and more intellectual and spiritualized up
to the limit possible as by ordainment.

Other qualities of mind possessed, or supposed to be
possessed by Animals, such as jealousy, patience, hope, in-
dustry.

No doubt these are possessed more or less by some animals
and creatures, but then, as I hold, they cannot he felt in an
intellectual sense — they are the feelings and ideas of the " Body''"'
or ^'^ Instinctive Mind :^'' and when they are not distinctly innate,
as industry is, for example, in the Ant and Bee, and as seen
in the laborious feeding of the young by many birds, &c. — I
say, when they are not unmistakably innate, they spring from
that faculty o^ policy, for the benefit of the individual animal's
welfare, which is a part of the faculty of the Instinctive Mind
common to all creatures, and especially to those that associate
in bands, and flocks, and societies. (See ^'Illustrations of In-
stinct,'''' &c.)

Intuition, or Innate Ideas. — It has often been discussed
whether Infants, or the young of any creatures, are born with
" Innate ideas " — that is, with certain ideas latent in them.

Now it appears to me that this old bone of contention has
been quarrelled over more than it need have been, for it seems

INNATE IDEAS IN MAN 275

quite certain that there must be an inherent, inborn, faculty
for producing ideas of a certain kind and quality (see
*■' Unconscious Mind "), or we should not see such remark-
able differences in disposition, genius, tastes, &c., in man
— and such marked, and particular, and fixed instincts,
as are shown by hosts of creatures even from the moment
of birth.

Innate Ideas in Man — Any one who has been a parent, or
a nurse, knows how remarkably the children of the same
family are seen as their minds gradually develope, to differ in
dispositions and various traits, and ways, even although always
with the same friends and attendants, and reared just in the
same manner. Then how different their talents may be : and
how vastly their tastes may A^ary. No amount of education
will turn a dull child into a clever one ; and no training, how-
ever persevered in, will give a child a taste that it has no
natural inclination for. Nor, on the contrary, can genius, or
alas I sin !— or tastes, or natural bent of mind — be crushed out
entirely : all the natural innate powers " will out " in some
way, or other (see " Heredity^'' " iSm," " Freewill,'" in suc-
ceeding volumes). No doubt some of these innate mental
tendencies may be checked and modified, and in great measure
suppressed if so avilled by the individual; and even genius will
languish if neglected.

But conversely all these natural tendencies may be developed
and increased in power, by cultivating them either for good or
for evil.

Yet no man can entirely alter his disposition, or his genius
— no man can make himself a genius in Literature, in Science,
or in Art — no man can make himself a Shakespeare — a Newton
— or a Murillo — nor can any man by his own will make him-
self a Joseph or a Paul in purity and religion.

In regard to natural tastes, I may mention a personal
anecdote.

My late brother and myself had identical surroundings in
our childhood, yet he loved books and learning, and as a boy
became a capital classic by voluntary application and industry.

T 2

276 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

But a further trait was, that he had no taste for Natural His-
tory, or sport.

On the contrary, I hated books of all kinds, yet, different
from my brother, I had an innate taste for Natural History
and especially for wild birds, whose names and habits I very
early in life became intimately acquainted with — indeed, it was
a passion with me. Also (unlike my brother who never fired
off a gun) I, from my earliest recollection, was always ar-
dently interested in guns and gunpowder, and at thirteen was
'•' a shot."

Innate Ideas in Animals. — There can be no doubt as to the
possession by animals of " Innate Ideas T

How, otherwise could the chick know what food to pick up
soon after it is hatched, and how to do it, even to the snatch-
ing up of insects with certainty of aim ? And how, other-
wise, could it be in regard to all the multiplicity of special
Instincts (see " Tlie Pure Instincts'),''^ and ways, and doings dis-
played specifically, by the hosts of animated creatures — each
according to its kind — and each witliout teaching?

No doubt, too, the higher brutes have different dispositions,
and slightly-differing habits and ways ; but this is not so
jnarked as in man, and strictly limited in extent, even when
man brings to bear on them his influence and teaching ; for
we see, even with the dog and cat, they are not vastly changed
from their natural promptings and ways.

But here the Materialist may interpose and say, " You are
giving yourself a great deal of trouble to prove what I do not
dispute, but then I believe all these differences depend simply
on the kind of material brain structure inherited by man or
any creature from his or its parents."

I answer, this might be so, Materialist, and would certainly
be so, if you could prove that there is no such thing as
" Spirit :" but as the Materialist cannot disprove its existence,
and as in my opinion life and mind and their doings cannot be
reasonably explained and accounted for unless by granting its
existence, why then I think it becomes abundantly clear that
" Innate Ideas " and the power of making them manifest, arises

''FACULTY OF INVENTION:' 277

Dot simply aDcI solely from the particular construction of brain
cells (important as that is) and their number, &c., but chiefly
from the constitution and endowment by God, and the working
by His laws- of the kind of " Spirit or Mind " which animates
the creature, specialized for such animal, but varying in dif-
ferent species according to that limited capacity for variation
which God has ordained. (See " Variation,''^ Vol. IV.)

It is not, I would observe, that I deny altogether the influence
of brain structure, but that I hold that the primary and essen-
tial factor in the differences of mind in man and animals depends
on the sort of spirit or specialized mind possessed by the species.

" Faculty of Invention." — This is the sole prerogative of
man, as will most clearly be seen when we come to the chapter
on " The Pure Instincts:^

Indeed if animals did possess it there would be no end to
their devices, and we should not see the definite sameness in
regard to their specific actions, habits, sorts of habitations,
nests, &c., each of wdiich is at present so fixed that you can
tell the species of creature that made a certain nest, &c., simply
by looking at it.

And so as to habits, gait, gestures, cries, &c. &c.

Oh! but the Materialistic Evoluitonist may say, " the' Facultt/
of Invention' is one that has evolved in man by a late and
high development, and would not be expected to be found in
creatures evolutionally lower than man." Then let me ask if
" Invention " came by evolution, how is it that such low crea-
tures as even " caddice worms " have a semblance of it — fixed
though it be and invariable — and are enabled thereby to make
their wonderful cases of minute stones, &c. And so of all
creatures that make nests, habitations, &c.

No ! no ! Evolutionist, " the free faculty of Invention " is an
endowed power, and possessed only by man; for all other ani-
mated creatures than he of God's creation, only construct and
do according to their specialized and limited and particular
instincts.

For example, the Weaver and Tailor birds make their nests,
the Bower bird its bower, the Mole its fortress, the Beaver its

278 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

habitation, and the White Ant its wondrous city, — all not
because these several creatures themselves invented the way
to construct such amazing works, but because God endowed
them with the special Instincts necessary to effect the same : —
nor, I may add, are these several works, according to the species,
ever altered or improved on.

I may add that the absence of the faculty of invention in
animals is a strong proof of their not possessing '■^Imagination,''''
as I have already argued in my article on that subject, for in
order to invent there must be present the power of definitely
imaginins;.

CHAPTER X.
Language.

Language — Abstract ideas — Signs, notes, cries, and vocal language —
Parrot and dog talk — Animals have a language — Human language ;
Avords, ideas — Common terms — Words arise in the mind in two
ways — Simple ideas — Abstract ideas — Conscious thought impossible
without abstraction — Forgetting of words — Abstract ideas in
animals — An animal's abstract ideas not so vivid as to form a word
— Animals must have a sort of abstract reasoning faculty — Sceptic
cannot agree to essential dissimilarity of mind in men and animals
— Summary as to abstract ideas — Thoughts and actions that can be
effected without words — Inward talking to oneself — Sportsman
climbing — Consciousness in animals — Infants' thoughts without
words — Origin of Language in Man — Naming — Max Miiller
" roots " — Peason why men can talk.

In no respect is the difference more clearly shown in the
quality and kind of mind possessed by man and by aniixa]s
respectively, than in the faculty of vocal articulate speech.
The very fact alone that man only possesses this faculty, in the
capability of being able to convey intellechicd ideas to his
fellows by means of vocal sounds, is, I hold, a proof that what-
ever degree of mind a brute may possess, its quality and kind
must be different to that of man. And I ihink so for this
reason, that as we know many animals can communicate with
their kind by vocal sounds, such as the cluck-cluck of the hen,
bleating, barking, neighing, &c. ; it follows that if fowls, sheep,
dogs, and horses did form ideas of a similar qncdity to those of
man — that is, intellectual ideas — they would be able to express
them in the same way as man does, by vocal sounds, and would
not confine their calls and notes merely to the limited uses of

28o SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

calliDg their kind, giving indications of alarm or pleasure, &c.,
but would form an articulate language.

To me it appears little less than a necessity that if a hen
called her brood in consequence of an intellectual idea arising
in her mind similar to what a human mother miijht think
under like circumstances, then that other ideas needful to
be conveyed to the chicks would be expressed by other
sounds.

But it may be said that this is the case, and that hens have
cries of alarm, endearment, &c. But whatever may be the
extent of the fowl language we have no reason to believe that
it extends beyond the range of giving utterance to a few signs
of animal sensations, instincts, wants and warnings, and that
it does not reach as far as the intellectual. To prove this,
and to show that the hen's vocal soundings do not extend
beyond a few significations, I think it will be sufficient to
draw attention to the fact that the chick understands them all
ly intuition directly it is hatched, and has not to be taught
their meanings as a child has to be taught intellectual word
ideas. To me it is clear that the hen utters her cries by
endowed intuition, and the chick comprehends them in the
same way, and that whatever mental action there is, is chiefly
of an automatic and not intellectual kind.

And this same argument extends to all creatures capable of
making " signs," " notes," or " cries."

If animals thought in the same way as man thinks, they
would of necessity have a language, and that language would
of necessity be vocal in all creatures capable of making sounds
by the voice, if their ideas were of similar quality and kind to
those of man. I say " of necessity vocal," because if animals
can communicate such important ideas as we know they do, as
to the finding of food, of danger, &c., by means of vocal sounds,
it follows that they would communicate other ideas also in a
similar way if they formed any. Like causes (evolutionally
certainly) ought to produce like effects, and therefore if dogs,
apes, elephants, and hens, can think like man, and as we know
they can give expression to their animal ideas — such as calling

LANGUAGE. 281

their young, &c. — by means of vocal sounds, why it follows as a
matter of necessity that they ought to express all their thoughts
by a vocal language, supposing they possessed intellectual
ideas such as those of man. But we have no evidence of
animals possessing such an articulate language; and surely if
it existed, man must, in his close association with the above-
named animals, and with his keen powers of observation,
have detected and interpreted some of their words long ere
this.

Moreover, if man has "evolved" from a brute by self-action,
and got his language by improved evolution, and not by new
creation, then it logically follows that all creatures in such case
l)elow him and capable of vocalization ought to possess an
articulate language, imperfect though it might be in its range
and flexions.

But logical though it may be that if animals could express
some " intelligible " ideas by sounds, that they would express
all they possessed by that same channel, — yet for the sake of
argument we will suppose that they can express some ideas by
sounds, and others by minute differences of gesture, or eye-
glance, or smell, or touch (as by antennae), or other signs or
modes we cannot divine.

Well, if we admit that, still we cannot nevertheless arrive at
the conclusion that animals, although they can communicate
certain animal ideas connected with bodily sensations and
requirements, have any intellectual ideas or language.

And we may be sure of this ; for if otherwise, as argued
over and over aorain in this book, animals would act differentlv
to what they do, and would improve.

It has been said that apes and dogs do not talk because their
vocal organs and mouths and tongues are differently shaped to
those of man. But the apes are not very ditfeient, and in
regard to dogs it is stated by Youatt (" CasselVs Natural
History,''^ Vol. IT. p. 113) that a dog was once " taught to articu-
late no fewer than thirty words," but it was necessary that the
words should be repeated to him each time, and then he
repeated them after his preceptor. (See ^^ Imitation")

282 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

This shows at once that the dog though he has the mechanical
faculty of pronouncing words cannot understand them intel-
lectually, or he would from his long association with man have
learnt man's language, and would be able to converse with
him.

As to his obeying man when he says " Go fetch !" " Rats !''
&c., those words are understood and obeyed, not from intel-
lectual comprehension but from association of ideas (see further
on), by the action of the Instinctive Mind, and the dim kind of
reason with which it is endowed. The do^ acts partly by his
dim kind of reasoning faculty, but doubtless in great part
automatically, and what he does is not for intellectual reasons,
but for his own benefit (viz., pats and other modes of approval,
productive of canine pleasure).

In my opinion all the acts that dogs can accomplish that are
not strictly natural to them, are but distortions of natural acts,
and powers and habits brought about by teaching, or imitation,
and for the relief or avoidance of pain and danger, or for the
procurance of gratification of natural body sensations or animal
emotions.

Then the parrot too can articulate human words, but we
know it cannot understand them intellectually, or it, like the
dog, would learn man's language by living wath him, and be
able to converse intellectually — in at least a simple manner.

In each of the above cases, however, it is quite clear, the
words are only articulated mechanically by imitation, and
though the parrot and the dog may learn to associate certain
words with certain objective impressions, still we may be certain
they do not cotnprehend intellectually.

And yet, notwithstanding all this, I am quite ready to
admit, as must every person who has observed the lower crea-
tures closely, that from the highest brute perhaps to the very
lowest form of creature, there is a mode of communicating
certain ideas or bodily wants to one another.

How this is executed I will not say for certain ; whether it
be by sound, or touch, or smell, or look, or gesture, or sign of
any kind, and it may vary in mode in different creatures. All

HUMAN LANGUAGE. 283

I contend is, that for the reasons I have given in many parts
of this book, such ideas cannot be of the intellectual kind.

One thing, however, we may be certain of in the case of the
ape and dog, that it cannot be vocal in any considerable degree,
or man by his close observation of those creatures would have
learnt their language by this time, as a man can learn any
liuman language by associating with its users, even although
on first joining them he did not know a word of their lan-
guage. And we may say even farther, that supposing animals
conversed by any physical signs, as by movements of paws, or
tail, &c., or eye-glances, or other signals, it is impossible to
conceive but that man with his acute powers of observation
would have detected such by this time, if they could by such
means express anything further than bodily sensations. And
thus man would be able to comprehend their language and per-
ceive more meaning in the wagging of the tail, &c. &c., than is
now apf)arent; and at present we cannot say that the wagging
of the tail, or its depression, or the bark, or the whine, or the
sparkling glance, or the fierce scowl, mean anything more than
the expression of the animal's bodily sensations or the ideas of
the animal mind.

No ! in my opinion animals can do no more than communi-
cate ideas connected with bodily sensations and animal
requirements, according to the limit of their animal non-intel-
lectual reasoning powers.

Having made these general remarks on this most important
subject, let us now consider the matter in detail.

Human language is the outcome of simple or abstract ideas
Ibrmulated into words and given utterance to by vocal sounds.

A word then is a sign for an idea, and may be considered as
being an idea crystallized, as it were, into a concrete and
definite form. This word may be figured in the mind as an
image of the thing signified, or it may be notified and conveyed
to other men by sound, and vocal inflections ; or be communi-
cated by arbitrary signs (letters) made on paper, &c., by
writing, or printing; or may even be rendered cognizant by

284 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

signals and signs of a multiform kind, such as the electric
and other telegraphs ; sun-flashings ; different-coloured flags,
^c, &c.^

" A loord " then is essentially but a synonymous term for
what we call an " idea," and it is the fundamental radicle from
which springs all the phenomena of thinking by the conscious
mind — at least in man — with one exception, to be dwelt on
hereafter. (See " Thinking without Wordsy)

A man, then, with the exception just notified, thinks by
words — the idea and the word are inseparable, and arise con-
sentaneously in the mind. Words in fact are the mental tools
with which the work of thinking in man is executed. If
sight, or hearing, or memory, or the imagination, &c., pre-
sents an object, or a conception, to the mind in man, a name
for it arises ; or if you first think of a word, the image of the
thing, or the meaning of the word, springs to your conscious
thoughts.

Intellectual ideation and language are then inextricably
bound up together — the one is absolutely dependent on the
other. It follows, therefore, that if an animal thought as man
thinks, and possessed such qualities, let us say, as those of in-
tellectual affection, generosity, and such-like exalted ideas and
feelings — it would follow, I say, in my opinion, that it would
of necessity be compelled to form a word, and be capable of
expressing it by some sign : in other words, that it would be
impossible to form a mental conception of intellectual love and
to carry such an idea into practice, unless the mind had the
power of forming a concrete embodiment of the thought — that
is, of forming or thinking of a word signifying the idea — such
as the words "affection," " love," "darling," &c., which words
we have learnt to connect with, and to indicate these
emotions.

But the objector may argue that the bird feeds its young
and gives them all requisite attention, without possibly having
any abstract idea of love in so strong a form as to embody

^ The reader is advised to consult Archbishop Thomson's " Latos of
Thought."

HUMAN LANGUAGE. 285

it.self ill a word. Exactly so, but this attention of the parent
is animal and intuitive, just as it is in the case of the human
mother with her yearning after her child; but then the human
mother has superadded to her instinctive aflPection, all those
beautiful traits of duty and intellectual devotion which are
found only in the human race — ideas, and acts, which could
only be conceived and wrought into acts by means of conscious
intellectual word-reasoning. Then, to give another example,
there is the case of " generosity." It would not be possible to
do a generous act unless you had leasoued on it ; and you
could not reason on it unless you had formed a mental concep-
tion of disinterestedness ; and you could not do this without
reasoning by mental symbols — words — and any creature that
could do this could speak.

And, therefore, in order to reason like man, I think it must
1)6 granted that words, or signs, are a necessary part and
jjarcel of the faculty of intellectual reasoning.

But an objector may argue, " Although you say brutes do
not form intellectual words, how is it they can exhibit auger,
l^jeasure, revenge, &c. ? " I reply, that these in the case of
the dog and other brutes are mere reflex actions, automatic
through his animal sensations and instincts, and not arising by
intellectual ideation. A dog may recollect an offence and fly
at a person weeks after the reception of an injury ; or it may,
after separation, retam a remembrance of its owner, or of its
iellow, for months, and manifest joy at again meeting; but still
they are only instinctive animal sensations. If the dog acted
through the prompting of ratiocination, then it would be able
to conceive the abstract idea of " revenge " or " love ; " and if
it could form these abstractions, it would be compelled (if dogs
think like men) as a necessity to connect such ideas with a
word. Now if this were so, then speech of some sort would
Ibllow also as a necessity. But it may be said, perhaps, dogs
have a language of articulation or signs that we cannot under-
stand. But surely if so, as I have already said, it could not
quite escape our observation ; antl the interpretation of it, if it
existed, would prove easy work to a Rawlinson, or a Smith,

2S6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

who have deciphered the symbolic language of lifeless Assyrian
bricks, and slabs of stone.

Or conversely, if dogs were so gifted as to have an intel-
lectual language of their own, they ought to have been able,
long ere this, to learn our language, and by the evolution of
organs, consequent on "requirement" and "acquired expe-
rience," to have been able to talk like man.

Common Terms. — Let us now say a few words as to these.
They are such words as " black," " white," " fly," " dog," &c.
No doubt very low creatures — such even as bees, for
example — can perceive colour, and be guided in their instinct
accordingly. No doubt also a spider recognizes a fly by sight;
a dog distinguishes a cat, and a cat a dog, &c., and so on
for all creatures throughout creation : and Instinct, and
memory, tell each respectively whether what is seen or smelt,
&c., is harmful, or desirable ; but as to knowing the object
by a name, that I think cannot be the case, or a word, or
mental symbol, and ideation, and intellectual language by signs
or sounds would arise as a matter of course.

But then we know that a word or intellectual sign could
not be coined without the possession of intellectual ideation —
and conversely Ave know that intellectual ideation could not
be carried on without words or signs, the result of wdiich
would be that all creatures capable of forming such ideas and
signs would possess an intellectual language ! !

We will now for a short space confine our attention to
human language.

A word, as a concrete idea, may arise in the mind in
either of two ways. First, it may originate de novo as a
" true mental conception ;" or it may arise as a " perception "
or an " impression " made on the mind by one or more of the
senses, that is, by seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, or tasting
anything.

Thus you may conceive the idea, " I will write a book,"
and forthwith the image of a book rises to the mind ; or
you may see a dog, and its appearance will be indissolubly
connected with the word "dog" — or you may hear a

ABSTRACT IDEAS. 287

cock crow, and you will only be able to realize what the sound
means by thinking of the word " cock " or fowl.

But this leads us to a most difficult branch of the subject.
The mere sight of an object, or a smell, &c. has been called
" a simple idea," as originating from a sense Impression ; but
then comes the almost overwhelming question, how is it that
the sense impression is only consciously perceived and intellec-
tually realized in maji, by forming a word ? and that this word
must moreover be a mental abstraction, or abstract idea ?
That is to say, although you may see a horse, you cannot
realize to the conscious mind what it is, unless you think of
the word " horse ; " and we know that all words are abstract
ideas — artificially invented signs — this very word '' horse,"
for example, being " horse " in one language, " equus " in
another, or " cheval, " &c.

Abstract Ideas. — The question then that next arises is,
" What is an abstract idea?''"'

Why every word is an " abstract idea,^^ not only whether it
expresses such ideas as hope, or fear, or affection ; but also if
it signifies a physical thing that can be perceived by the eye —
as a house: — or the scent of — say — otto of rose as perceived
by the smell.

True! in the case of the "house" and the particles of otto
of rose, you have physical realities to deal with, but it is none
the less certain, that the conscious mind of man could not
definitely and intellectually realize them any more than the
conception of hope, or affection, unless connected with the
mental embodiment of the idea or sensation in the form of a
word, which is in itself an abstraction, and not the real
physical object or feeling that it signifies.

What result then have we now arrived at ? Why, no other
than the most highly-important fact that no mind, whether of
man or animal, can consciously carry on a ti'ain of thought
unless it be capable of the power of abstraction.

Considering therefore that the especial object of this chapter
is to try and prove that the mind in man, and the mind in all
brutes and lower creatures are fundamentally different in qua-

288 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

lity as desjigiied and endowed by God, the next thing to be
done is to try and determine if any brute is capable of forming
" abstract ideas'

Before we enter on that question however, we must go back
a little. I said just now that words arise in two ways, and
that if we think consciously of an idea, or perceive by our
senses an object with which we have had previous acquaintance,
the word for it will spring into our minds through the action
of our power of association of ideas, and of memory — that is,
through memory we recollect to associate a certain idea or
tiling with a certain abstract sign — that is a word. But me-
mory sometimes is treacherous, " we elaborate ideas sometimes
but cannot express them in words ; we think of persons or
things ; we have the conception in our minds, but the names
or the words will not come." ^

In this state of wordlessness, it appears to me that we are
in some measure in the same position as the animal ; for
although we partly conceive the idea (not, however, that an
animal can ever conceive an intellectual idea like a man), or
perceive the object, we cannot name it. Now this state of
mind, which is only exceptional in man, is the constant con-
dition of the animal. The animal recognizes an object, but
cannot name it, or signify it by a symbol, or sign, of an intel-
lectual kind. True ! it can utter sounds indicative of sense-
feelings, and ideas, but these sounds or cries are intuitive, and
are never forgotten, for, unlike man's words, they were never
learnt ; the capacity to utter them having been born with the
creature as a part and parcel of its intuitional and instinctive
endowments. A hen does not forget how to " cluck," or a lamb
how to bleat.

Of course in man, the fact that he may not be able in a given
instance to connect one particular idea with an appropriate
word ; or that he may forget a name or word signifying a
])articular object or thing, may not much matter if it occurs
only occasionally ; but fancy if he could never connect an idea
or a sense impression with a word ! ! Why in such case,
2 Dr. Ireland, "Journal of Mental Science," Jan. 1879.

ABSTRACT IDEAS IN ANIMALS. 2S9

intellectual thought and intellectual conscious reasoning would
be impossible — the man could then only think, and be guided,
by his sense impressions in the same manner as a mere animal,
whatever that mode of animal-thought may be. (See " Deaf
and Du7?ibJ')

Abstract Ideas in Animals. — It has been said generally of
animals that they think only by simple ideas or " trains of
mere feelings," (Huxley's '^ Hume,*^ p. 114) but in my opinion,
the actions and doings of animals betray something more than
this. For example, their actions often require a certain amount
of reflection, and judgment; and in some cases apparently of
aforethought ; and these processes of the mind would appear
to me to require necessarily the possession and exercise of a
kind of abstract ideation, and ratiocination.

The reader knows that I believe to the fullest extent in the
conviction, that the mind is what it is in animals according to
endowment, and as gifted with certain general and special
powers and instincts peculiar often to the species ; but yet in
all animals there are hosts of instances in which the creature
must exercise a certain amount and kind of reasoning faculty,
and which in many instances it is difficult to account for
unless the animal possessed a power of abstract reasoning of
some sort. As an example, we may cite the case of the rats
carrying eggs as already related ; and all the stratagems and
resorts adopted by all animals in different kinds and degrees
to avoid danger, and death ; and in many cases in order to
procure food, &c. — stratagems and devices which it is hard to
believe are in all cases automatic, but which must result from
such species of abstract reasoning as is possessed by the In-
stinctive Mind.

A man, with his Intellectual Mind can form a free intellec-
tual abstract idea of the highest quality, and express it in a
word : hut an animal can only form a limited or instinctive ani-
mal abstract idea, of a low hind and not sufficiently vivid, defi-
nite, or realizable by its feeble consciousness and mental power oj
conception, as to be cajjable of being expressed as a word. The

290 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

dog must have a dim abstract idea of danger, or of impending
punishment, or reward, though he cannot formulate the ideas
in his mind with sufficient vividness and power so as to form
a concrete mental conception — a word.

And yet animals must be able to form mental conceptions of
some kind, and in some way ; and be able to judge, and to act
on such, or it seems impossible to account for many of their
doings. (See pp. 251, 252, 298.) Animals therefore, in my
opinion, must be able to reason to the limited extent they are
capable of, by a sort of abstract ideation, and be able as a result
of such process to determine how they shall act. No doubt,
as I have said over and over again, much of what the animal
does is effected by automatism, set in action by the sense im-
pressions of sight, touch, smell, &c. ; still there are acts which
certainly indicate a sort of reasoning — a kind of reasoning
which one cannot but conjecture must be effected by a species
of dim, semi-conscious abstract ideation, carried on as far as
we can judge without concrete word ideas, and in much the
same way probably as man does himself reason, and judge,
and do, when he acts through the impulses of his instinctive
mind, and without word reasoning ; as in an accident, or under
occasions of excitement, and concentrated animal attention of
various kinds ; and on such occasions man probably does act
instinctively and without word reasoning, in a way similar pro-
bably to that of an animal — (see " Thoughts without TFbrf/s")
what is done being effected partly involuntarily and automically,
and partly through a semi-conscious species of intuitive and
instinctive reasoning.

This is so important a subject that I will give some illustra-
tions of what I mean in regard to animals.

Take the case of a dog wishing to cross a rapid river. It
has been observed that under such a circumstance, some dogs
appear to be aware that if they jump in just opposite the spot
where the landing on the other side is wished to be effected,
failure will result ; as the force of the stream will carry them
to a point too far down. What is done, therefore, by a

ABS TRA C T IDEAS IN ANIMAIS. 29 1

sagacious dog is to run to a spot higher up the stream, and
then by plunging in, and swimming actively, he will pass
diagonally across the river, and be able to land where he
wished.

Again, take the case of a bird building a nest — granted it
builds the nest as I contend, strictly according to intuition, yet
it must use some choice and judgment, in fastening this part of
the nest to a convenient bough, and fitting another part to a
certain projection, or making a projj beneath at another part ;
reasoning apparently that if it does not do so the nest will
be liable to ftxll. All this, and numbers of other things, as
effected by different animals must, as it appears to me, be done
by a species of abstract ideation — a species of abstract reason-
ing which, although as I hold, not of the intellectual kind, is
nevertheless a form of direct practical reasoning which it is
difficult to imagine could be effected unless by the use of a
certain sort of abstract ideas ; but what may be the fashion
or quality of such sort of animal ideas I will not pretend to
guess ; it is one of the many things of which we have proof
of their existing and of their acting somehow, but we cannot
tell exactly by what modes. This, however, I will stoutly
maintain, that such ideas cannot be of the same sort and quality
as those of the *' abstract ideas " of man ; for if the animal
did reason by a similar kind or species of mental faculty to
that of man (even though of an inferior degree) it would
necessarily — if conscious — form a concrete idea, like that of a
man; and this idea would by necessity — if the animal's mind
resembled man's — assume such a kind of concrete shape as to
formulate itself into, and become, a word.

And then this concrete idea, or word, or symbol, would also
of necessity (if the animal's mind was like man's) be capable
of expression by vocal or other signs.

And we may say again further, that if such vocal, or other
signs and signals were used by animals like the dog, or horse,
or cat, or ape, in the mode of an articulate language, or by any
system of signals, equivalent to such in practical application,
then, and in such case, it seems impossible but that man

u 2

292 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

by this time would have learnt the rudiments of such a
language.

I hold, therefore, that the animal's power and mode
of reasoning must he quite different in sort to that of
man's; and consequently, I beg the reader particularly to
note, it cannot he related to that of man in the manner oj an
evolutional development hy degrees of a lower grade of mind
into a higher, for the reason that the fundamental construc-
tion of the animal and the human minds must be radically
different.

In fine, I would say, that as to the very difl^icult question of
"abstract ideation" in animals, compared with that of man,
that they do possess a sort of power of abstract reasoning,
although this power is limited in its range, special in its endow-
ment, and strictly practical in its application.

If I am asked the exact nature of it, I can only say that as
no man can enter into the workings of an animal's mind, such
must ever remain to us an inscrutable question. But neverthe-
less, I think we may be certain, that whatever may be the
quality of abstract ideas possessed by animals, they must be
very different to those of man, and that each animal must pos-
sess a certain sort of abstract reasoning power, appropriate
and sufficient as to quality, quantity, and range, to the needs
of the particular kind of creature as endowed by God ; but
quite incapable to rising to the degree and kind of ideation
possessed by man.

For the last few pages I have had all the argument to my-
self; so now I must let the scientific sceptic put in a word.
I can imagine that he will especially demur against my state-
ment that there is an essential dissimilarity between the
fundamental constitution of the mind in man, and in animals.
He may argue that " he cannot conceive but that minds so
similar in some of their phenomena as those of man and
animals, must bear some intimate relationship, the one to the
other." Well ! likeness no doubt there is, because the mind
in each case is but a different quality and manifestation of
spirit — but not of relationship, as of the one having evolved or

SUMMARY AS TO ABSTRACT IDEAS. 293

sprung from the other in an evolutional sense of parentage, or
development ; and this for the reasons given above.

But the Materialist may still urge that he cannot see how
two qualities of mind (such as I contend for) can possibly
work so similarly as they do in many instances in man and
animals, and yet not be directly related to one another by
descent, or ascent.

Again he may say as an opposite mode of argument ; " if,
as you contend, both sorts of mind are essentially constituted
of spirit, why should it be that the reasoning power in man
and in animals should be so fundamentally different as you say
it is ? Surely the constitution and modes of action of the two
(as you say) sorts of mind must, on your hypothesis, be similar,
essentially, even although different in degree of development."

I say, in reply, that the Materialist is the last person who
should make use of such arguments as these, for (to argue by
analogy) does he not know — no one better — that heat and
light, electricity and magnetism, are very similar, respectively,
in some of their phenomena, yet marvellously different in
others ; and yet each seems to consist of the same essential
quality — call it aether or w^hat not — vibrating probably in
different, yet strictly definite modes. And let the rationalist
say how these different sorts of vibration began, and how they
got to differ ; which was the first to vibrate ; and what the
parentage of the others ?

Oh ! surely it must be that all the physical, as well as all
the spiritual and mental phenomena with which we are ac-
quainted, are specifically constituted by design, and endowment,
by God, and have not sprung out of one another by mere self action.

Summary as to Abstract Ideas. — I must now return for
a moment to " Abstract Ideas," so as to sum up the subject
thus far in regard to them.

Either an animal has the power of intellectual abstract idea-
tion, or it has not. If it has, why does it not speak like a man,
however imperfect such language might be ? But if it has
not the power of abstract ideation and speech, similar in sort

294 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

to that of roau, then does it not become clearly evident from
our knowledge of animals that they must think and act by a
different hind of mental process to that of man, so far as his
conscious and intellectual word-thinking power is concerned.

Thoug^hts and Actions that can be effected without Words. ^
— I have hitherto insisted that a most important distinction
exists between the action of the mind in man and in that of
the animal, in the apparent fact that the one thinks by words
and the other does not ; and yet on full examination this state
ment has to be qualified, for it seems, that man himself in two
phases or states of his mind thinks — as does the animal — with-
out words.

This qualification and admission on my part would at first
sight seem to destroy the foundation of my general argument ;
but I think on full consideration, we shall find that it does
not ; for whereas animals, we may fairly assume, when they
think at all, always think without words ; it is only on two
occasions or states of mind that man does so — at least only two
during adult age, though a third will be spoken of at the end
of this article as occurring in infancy.

What are these two occasions ?

Well ! curious to say it is either when his intellectual mind
is engaged in its highest function — that of profound reverie —
in which it doubtless communes with, and touches the quality
termed " Unconscious Cerebration''^ (as see), the seat of genius,
and of innate ideas : or it is, on the contrary, when he performs
acts, on certain occasions, which depend on the working of his
lower or Instinctive Mind, as, for example, when eating or
drinking, &c. ; or in the presence of danger ; and there can be
no doubt but that in this latter exigency especially, man can
carry on a kind of reasoning, and exercise a kind of will, and
perform very elaborate actions (apparently like an animal
under similar circumstances), and yet though in a manner con-
scious, not use word-reasoning at all.

3 For some excellent observations on tins subject, consult papers by
Dr. \V. W. Ireland, ''Journal of Mental Science," Jul}', 1878 and
Jan. 1879.

WORDLESS THOUGHT, ETC. 295

Wordless Thought during Exercise of the Intellectual
Mind. — I will first speak of this, but I shall not dwell ou it,
because I have already considered the subject in the article on
" Unconscious Cerebration.^^ Suffice it to state here that I
think every one must admit if he will analyze the action of his
own mind, that during wrapt meditation, and when he is un-
conscious of everything but the one subject which engrosses
his whole attention, he does not think by words, and only
thinks by words when having arrived at a conclusion, or being
aroused by some sudden noise, &c., emerges from abstraction
to a state of complete consciousness. Personally, I feel quite
clear that the account above applies to my own case during
reverie; whereas my ordinary thought is carried on by a sort of
inward, silent, word-talking to, and often discussion with,
myself — and at the time being fully conscious: — whereas
during profound reverie one is oblivious of all things around
one, though of course capable of being aroused.

"Wordless Thought during actions carried on by means of
the Instinctive Mind. — I have already said that I believe
ordinary thinking in man, during full consciousness, is carried
on by a kind of inward and silent word-talking to oneself, and
that profound reverie is conducted without words: yet in addi-
tion to this wordless reverie I believe (not to speak here of
the acts of eating, drinking, &c.) that under the occurrence of
violent excitement, and other emotions producing instinctive or
semi-instinctive acts, man also thinks, and wills, and does,
without uwrd ideas. As an illustration of what I mean I will
mention the following : —

Twice I have had the happiness of being instrumental in
saving human lives from almost certain death through acci-
dents. Once I rescued from drowning two children who had
fallen into the river Itchen, and on another occasion I stopped
a carriage and pair in Albemarle-street, containing two ladies
inside, the coachman of which had been thrown from his box
by collision with another carriage, and was being dragged
along the ground on his back in consequence of the reins being
entangled round his legs.

296 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

On the first occasion I perfectly well remember hesitating
for a moment and thinking of my own risk, and though as it
happened in the end I never was really out of my depth, still I
did not know before I went in that would be the case; foi'
although I was aware the river was not in general very deep
at that part, I knew also that it was full of deep holes, and it
was at the time much swollen and rapid through having just
descended from some large hatchways. During this momentary
hesitation I possibly may have thought by words — (though of
course I cannot say for certain) — but the hesitation was but
for a moment, and the feelings of intellectual benevolence
having triumphed I went in, and having saved the first child,
eight years old, and placed it on the bank (she was quite in-
sensible), I then saw the other child, six months old, floating
on the surface further down the stream, and spinning round
and round in the most curious manner from the force of the
current. I ran along the bank and went in again, and having
saved that child also, was astonished to observe that I had
somehow (say by clasping one finger over it) retained in my
hand a small walking-stick that I was carrying previous to
my arrival at the scene of the accident.

Now in regard to thought, I have said that at the river acci-
dent I may for a moment have thought by words, but after
that I am satisfied I acted entirely without thought by words
— instinctively — and went through all the very complicated
acts (hindered as they must have been in some respects by my
clutched stick), and executed with accurate and successful
judgment all the complex movements needful for the rescue,
and for my own safety, and yet without, I feel quite sure, for-
mulating word-thoughts in my mind.

On the occasion of the carriage accident I feel equally
certain that I thought and acted without word ideas. I saw
the man thrown from his box, and being dragged along the
ground. The sympathy of my intellectual mind was excited,
and this set in action my Instinctive or lower mind, and I
instantly rushed to try and save him from his extreme peril. I
feel sure I did not think of the words " danger," '•' horses,"

WORDLESS THOUGHT, ETC. 297

"man," "death," "risk to myself," "humanity," "duty,"
" praise," &c., but without word ideas I ran and caught hokl
of the horse nearest to me, and put out all my strength to arrest
him.

Now it is my distinct and emphatic opinion that in these
two instances I acted in the double capacity of an intellectual
beiae:, and as an animal :— that is to say, that I was prompted
by my higher (intellectual) mind to do what a mere animal
never does — (attempt to save life by intentional action set in
motion by intellectual motive, and benevolence, &c.) and that
the performance of the needful acts was (after the Instinctive,
or lower mind was once put in action by the Intellectual) car-
ried out by the lower mind, in a manner, and by a mode of
wordless reasoning, and acting, such as is common to man, and
to animals. (As to dogs fetching people out of the water, see
further on.)

But if instead of an accident to others, danger had occurred
to myself, then I should have acted intuitively by the lower
mind, and tried to save myself, just as a brute does if placed
in peril. I should have performed all the kinds of acts requi-
site for my preservation without the employment of intellec-
tual word-reasoning, and it is thus that brutes act when thej''
fight, and struggle, for liberty and for life. They do it, but
they do not know why, or how !

To illustrate still further how a man, though quite conscious,
may act without words, I will quote from Dr. Ireland.*
He says, " A sportsman, for example, may go through a great
deal without using words. He chmbs, he jumps, he balances
himself, he takes aim, he fires, and all without words. When
his observations and thoughts are busiest, and his feelings
most intense, they will be most actively employed in guiding
his motions. No doubt his actions may now and then be
associated in his mind with words, but not necessarily so, and
often words must be absent."

To make myself quite clear to the general reader, I shall

now be guilty of some tautology, but as I have before said in

'« See " Journal of Mental Science," July, 1878, slightly condensing his text.

298 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

this book, I do not regard breaking the rules of literary pro-
priety, if I can make myself comprehended by the patient
reader. And I make this repetition because I wish it to be
clearly understood what I meant just now by saying that I
acted in the above accidents, partly as an intellectual being,
and partly as an animal.

To explain what I mean, we must return for a few moments
to "abstract ideas." It has been general with writers to say
that animals have no abstract ideas, — nor, I believe, have they
as far as intellectual and word ideas are concerned; but I
must confess, that for myself, I cannot see how animals could
reason at all, even in their non-intellectual way, unless they
could form a dim kind of abstract idea (see p. 290). For ex-
ample, animals must be able to think of death in an intuitive and
dimly abstract way, as when on occasions of danger they run
away to avoid harm, or fight, or use all kinds of devices to
defend themselves, or to escape. Surely, on such occasions the
animal must be able to reason in its own — the wordless — man-
ner, '•' If I don't fight, &c., or run away, I shall be killed."

Yet all the thoughts, and plans, and acts devised, and carried
into execution by animals, although done by a kind of reason-
ing, are not effected by such a process as that of the free in-
tellectual reasoning of man. It is all done by intuition — and
by an intuition of the animal mind that is analogically some-
what similar to that action of the intellectual mind of man,
mentioned by the greatest portrayer of the human mind when
speaking of the remarkable intellectual perception of women —
a perception arrived at often without a reasoning by words.
Lucetta says, —

" I have no other but a woman's reason ;
I think so, because I think so."

" Tioo Gentlemen of Vero7ia," Act I., Scene 2.

which words clearly show that Shakespeare considered that woman
must sometimes use a kind of intuitive perception quite inde-
pendent of logical, abstract word-reasoning. I beg that ladies
will not think I mention this as in anyway derogatory to them.
On the contrary, I simply show they have a faculty which is

WORDLESS THOUGHT, ETC. 299

uot possessed by the mau (or rather, I should say, in less de-
gree by him), and I have merely spoken of the above to show
that as a woman — and sometimes a man — may, by an action of
the intellectual mind, arrive at a just conclusion without elabo-
rate reasoning; so I believe an animal — with its special kind of
mind, and limited amount of animal-reason — can instinctively
arrive at conclusions without a string of roundabout " reasons
why."

To return to the reasoning of an animal.

I was standing one day at the window of a house in an old
street, the kitchen windows of which were partially above the
pavement, and protected by dwarf perpendicular railings. I
noticed a cat, pursued by a dog ; and she ran and got inside
one of these railings ; but the space between the rails and the
window was so limited that it scarcely admitted her body.
She felt, therefore, not safe, and the dog stood in front of her
barking, &c., and she clawing at him. This went on for two
or three minutes, when I noticed him turn his head and look
down the street. On the instant she seized her opportunity,
bolted out, and ran with swiftness to some other railings two
doors off, which had a greater space between them and the
window. There she was safe, and there she sat within these
rails, looking complacently at the dog, who had quickly fol-
lowed her.

Now there can be no doubt, I think, but that when she was
in her first retreat, she reflected, and thought that if she could
get to the other railings, of which she bore a remembrance, she
should be safe ; and she therefore seized her first opportunity
to get to them when her persecutor turned his head.

This circumstance occurred many years ago, but it made a
great impression on my mind, and showed me clearly that
animals must have a sort of reasoning faculty. At the same
time, however, I am satisfied that it is not intellectual reason-
ing as in man — abstract in a manner, nevertheless, as it must
be in some of its phases ; that is to say, it is a dim kind of
non-intellectual reasoning, acting intuitively, and instinctively
in an animal sense, just as the intellectual mind of man

300 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

can on occasions act intuitively and correctly ; the mind in
both instances acting according to gift, and without any dis-
tinct appreciation of the reason why.

And, in my opinion, this must he so, for if the cat above
spoken of reasoned so cleverly as she did hy the same method,
and by the same sort of intellectual reasoning power as that
possessed, and used by man, then why should cats remain
cats, and not do other things than they do; for if the cat I
saw, did whf\t she effected by a reasoning process similar in
kind to that of man, then why do not cats, and dogs, and apes
do hosts of things more like man? No ! no ! Their minds
are sufficient for their animal uses according to endowment,
but there is a line beyond which their minds cannot pass.

Consciousness in Animals. — But here starts up the difficult
question of consciousness in animals.

The advocate, who presses the view that animals reason by
a similar sort of mind to that possessed by man, may say,
" Surely the cat above spoken of must have been fully con-
iscious, and have reasoned as she did by clear ideas just as a
man can reason." Yes, she was conscious, no doubt; but con-
sciousness in an animal cannot be the same kind of thing as in
man, or, as I have argued elsewhere, the animal would neces-
sarily form words, and be a very different creature in many
ways to what it is.

It would be able to say, for example, by some word signs,
" I am a dog," or "I am a cat." These word signs might
not be the same as in our language ; they might in dog or cat
language be " wow," or " felis," or what not : but whatever
an animal might call itself, man would soon be able to recog-
nize the sound. No ! no ! an animal though conscious in a
manner, is not conscious, depend on it, in the same sort of
way as a man, or it would be a very different creature. They,
in my opinion, possess a wordless consciousness similar to that
of man when he is intellectually unconscious and acting only in
an animal manner ; as when he is riding to the hounds, or
playing at cricket, &c. The man may be conscious he is
going through all sorts of complicated movements, but yet his

CONSCIOUSNESS IN ANIMALS. 301

consciousness is only of an animal sort, although, of course, his
mind may at any moment make a jumj) into intellectual con-
sciousness.

Again, I will mention a good example of where a man can
carry on trains of thought simultaneously in his two hinds of
mind. He can — say at a dinner party — carry on a highly-
intellectual conversation by means of his higher mind, and be
fully conscious of what he is saying ; yet at the same time by
his lower or instinctive mind — and in great part unconsciouslv
— he feeds himself, and goes through the very complicated
acts of eating and drinking without voluntarily '^ ivilling''
every moment to chew or swallow, &c.; and yet at the same
time he enjoys his dinner in an animal sense. Now shut out,
or abolish, his intellectual mind as he sits at dinner, and there
you have the animal taking his food with relish, and choosincr
what he will have, &c., &c.

The animal, therefore, I believe is conscious; though not
so in an intellectual manner. It knows how to enjoy itself;
it knows how to accept this, and reject that; and to choose,
and do, as to hosts of things in an animal manner, and accord-
ing to the limit of its endowed sort of mind and reasonino-
power.

Who indeed that has seen a dog with his eyes sparkling
with bright vivacity, and ready to run after the ball you make
feint to throw, but must acknowledge that the dog possesses
consciousness ; yet we may be sure, for the reasons already
given, that it must only be of an animal-like kind, and not
the intellectual sort experienced by man.

I know this will be demurred at by some persons; and they
may say, that true as my arguments may be to a certain degree
as to eating and drinking, &c. — which may be carried on in
great measure automatically — still that some animal acts —
such, for example, as that of the cat above spoken of — must
be eflfected by a higher kind of mind and consciousness than I
grant to the animal.

And yet — if I may be allowed to press my argument as to
the working of my own mind in the accidents above nar-

-,02 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

rated, and if I have succeeded in convincing the reader of
the truth of the view I take of the working of my mind on
those occasions — I think he will admit that although perhaps
an animal may be conscious, and be able to do all kinds of
things which look like the offspring of intellectual thoughts,
yet that they may really only be instinctive animal ones.

Thus, in the accidents in which I was a participator, I
am satisfied, as I have before related, that I acted without
intellectual abstract reasoning. Yet I must have acted by
a kind of abstract animal-like reasoning as to danger, in
avoiding being struck by the horse's legs, &c. Also in
violently seizing and holding the reins, and restraining with
all my might. Likewise in the river accident, the doing of acts
suitable for the occasion. And yet after I had commenced
each endeavour to rescue, I am satisfied I acted only by the
dim sort of abstract reasoning which ig common to man and
the brutes ; and not by the higher sort peculiar to man in his
intellectual acts. At the same time I must have been conscious
in an animal sense, for though I am certain I did not will to do
this, that, and the other, by conscious iiitellectiial reasoning ; yet
I remember the rapidly passing scenes, and many of the
incidents in them, with great distinctness.

What I argue, therefore, is that animals at all times act as I
did on those occasions, instinctively, and intuitively ; although
with a certain degree of consciousness, yet quite without
intellectual reasoning, and solely according to their respective
endowed capacities and powers.

Infants' Thoughts without Words. — I now pass on to the
consideration of the third kind of thinking without words
by man which I mentioned cursorily at the beginning of
this article.

It is a process of thought which occurs to man in his
infancy, and leads on to that marvellous faculty of word in-
vention or " naming," which I shall speak of in the next article.
A young infant cannot speak intuitively — it cannot even call
its mother by an articulate sound as can a chick, or a lamb,
but it has to be taught the word signifying such in the language

INFANTS' THOUGHTS WITHOUT WORDS. 303

of its nnrse. But yet there can be no question (see the paper
by Dr. Ireland, previously mentioned) that infants form ideas
as to such things as distance, colour, relative solidity, taste,
smell, heat and cold, pleasant and unpleasant, &c., before
they know the names for such : that is to say, that some simple
ideas are formed in the mind before the mind is acquainted
with a word for the particular idea or phenomenon.

But now comes into action man's peculiar prerogative.
Very soon by the repeated teaching of the nurse — " Oh ! how
nice"— "Oh ! so cold "— " Oh ! so hard," &c. the child learns
to connect a word with the idea, and if it does not learn the
ivord, for certain things it ivill invent one itself, as we shall
■presently see.

Yes ! there can be no doubt but that in regard to many
familiar objects, and sensations, the infant forms an idea of it
first, and the word comes after.

And here, let me say, stands out in bold relief one of the
essential differences between the mind in man, and the mind in
the animal. The animal can form an idea, and recognize
objects, and can act on such ideas by a mode of reasoning
peculiar to itself ; hut it cannot name the idea in an intellectual
manner ; and here consists one of the fundamental differences
between the endoivment of the mind in man and in the
animal respectively.

And I think we may consider this as absolutely certain — it
is not that the animal has no ideas, and cannot realize them in
the mind in some sort of ivay, so as to be able to reason upon
them, and even to remember them in some cases ; but that it
cannot give names to such ideas.

I do not pretend to offer any explanation as to how ideas in
animals may be entertained ; I simply say that according to
endowment they cannot associate them with words, or signs, in
such a manner as to make an articulate intellectual languat^e in
any way like that of man. The intimate nature of the animal's
ideas then must be totally different to that of man's, for if not
animals would certainly speak or have a language of sio-ns
which we could not fail to detect. But I have spoken of this

304 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

elsewhere. As to the cries of animals see " Language of
Animals^

To return to the infant. I will now pass on to consider in
detail the "faculty of naming " and origin of language.

Origin of Language^Faculty of Naming. — There has been
a great amount of elaborate investigation and learned discus-
sion concerning the origin of language, but I venture to think
that the following reasons are amply sufficient for the solution
of this momentous question.

It appears to me that the marvellous circumstance of man
alone being the earthly creature that can communicate his
thoughts by an articulate intellectual language depends on the
fact that God, at the creation of man, endowed his mind with
" the faculty of naming" — that is, the power of inventing words.

Thus : " And God brought them unto Adam to see what he
would call them : and whatsoever Adam called every living
creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names,"
&c. {Genesis ii. 19, 20.)

Now the scoffer may laugh at this ; but I think I shall be
able to show, on strictly scientific and philosophical principles,
that howsoever man got the faculty, it is really the possession
of the " power of naming" that forms the very root and founda-
tion of the human languages.

This is a strong assertion, but I make it very confidently,
for the following reasons.

The ultra-scientific men of the f)resent day are ever talking
of ''acquired experience," (see Vol. IV.) and "inherited
memory ;" and attribute every faculty of animals to the
accumulation of such mental or instinctive thoughts, actions,
habits, &c., as have been beneficial to the race ; and used, and
improved on by successive generations.

Nor do I dispute but that " acquired experience " and " in-
herited memory " have an influence in modifying the habits,
&c., of some animals within those bounds — as I hold — laid
down by the Creator as being capable of being effected by
variation. (See " Variation,''^ Vol. IV.)

ORIGIN OF LANGUAGE— FACULTY OF NAMING. 305

But however that may be, it is clear that man does not
participate in such to any marked degree as compared with
animals ; for if lie did, he would he able to speah the language
of his parents, without being taught words, and their meanings,
and mode of use in sequence. And surely if man is the highest
production of a blind materialistic evolution, he of all animals
ought to benefit by the most elaborate and perfect factors
possessed by that marvellous quality, and thus be able amongst
other perfections to talk spontaneously.

And could any mental " acquisition " of man's be more
important than that of speech ?

Yet although the lamb, almost as soon as born, can call its
mother by uttering "Ba!" and the chick do the same by
" chirping ;" the baby can utter no articulate sound and can
only cry, and is months before it can say "Ma" and " Pa,"
and even then has to be taught.

But it is not only that children have to be taught words,
and that they have the innate faculty for learning such, and
comprehending their conventional meaning in an intellectual
abstract sense so as to be able to apply them in reasoning, and
in acting ; but there exists also the leading and great central
fact that the child itself possesses an original and innate
^''faculty of naming " — that faculty I dwelt on so strongly
above — a faculty by means of which the child will often invent
a vocabulary of its own; and use such, until it has learnt that
of its mother, or nurse, whatever language that may be.

Now this is not hypothesis ; for the truth of what I have
just stated is within the range of every nurse's experience ;
for all persons who have had to do with young children are
aware, that most of them do, at a certain period of their mental
development, invent some names or words of their own
imagining, and use them in a very practical manner ; and this
is especially the case, I think, with those who are backward in
talking with facility in the nurse's language.

In case my reader does not happen to have had experience
of young children I will give some examples of what I mean.

My brother, who grew up to be a very intelligent man, was

3o6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

late ill speaking ordinary words, and invented a limited
vocabulary of his own. For example, he called bread and
butter " Nim-na^'' milk and water he termed " Tuhhityj'*
and sugar he named " Tuh-i-ta."

Another child at two years of age called *' powders "
*' Bi-lr/," and would cry, and say, " no more Bi-ly ! no more
Bi-ly I" She also called fing'ers " Pid-litz ,-" and one day,
when about three years of age, and she feared I should hurt
her sister's fingers, she called out "mind pidlitz."

She also named bread and butter "il/«?z-a," and a doll
" oo-de-lyr

Another child, for a long time, called her nurse " Belew,''^
although her proper name was Matilda : and a man, or boy,
she called " aa-poo.'" Another child, that I knew intimately,
instead of saying anything was in the " middle," said it was in
" the cooTca ;" also for topsy-turvy, she always said " ho-hy —
ho-hyr

These are a few examples : but every nurse could give
others. But besides entire creations such as the above, there are
the very numerous words made use of by children which some-
what resemble in sound those they are taught, or hear others
use ; such as " da-dee too hot^'' rather too hot ; ^^ forkey " for
coffee ; " lichle,'^ for little ; or " Papa no tecka me, me no
dike !" cried one in anguish during a bout of tickling.

I would particularly draw attention to the fact that the use
of these half-formed words shows the difficulty that is ex-
perienced by some children in learning the established words,
notwithstanding all their " inherited experience " and " inherited
memory J^

And thus it is that man can speak, for the reason that he is
endowed with the " faculty of naming ;" and there can be no
doubt that if you placed a number of children together of one
year old, and never spoke to them, they would very soon
invent a language of their own ; and would after a time agree
to the use of a specific word for each particular thing.

For myself, I am as clear of this as of anything not actually
proved ; and I venture to think that the matter viewed in this

DEAF MUTISM, AND APHASIA. 307

light is a substantial corroboration of the exceedingly important
opinion expressed by Professor Max Muller that words have
arisen from " roots ;" (invented, as I hold, by the mind, as in
the above instances;) and that they have not, in general, arisen
as imitations of sounds heard from without— no doubt, how-
ever some words have arisen in the latter way, as " ding dong"
for the sound of two bells— and " boom " for the report of
cannon, &c. : but I think that root-words in general are pure
inventions of the mind, and adopted in use by general consent
by a given people.

In the foregoing I have spoken only of the naming of things
you can see, or hear, &c. ; but no doubt it was the " faculty of
naming " that led to the invention of names for such abstract
ideas as "hope," "generosity," "ambition," &c., and the
formation of root- words in all languages for the expression of
the most recondite abstract ideas.

And thus, in my opinion, it is that man can talk intellec-
tually, and that animals cannot : and this for the very sufficient
reason that the latter are not endowed by God, as man is, with
a kind of mind which is not only superior to the animals in a
great many ways, but most importantly because, as in the case
under discussion, man's mind is gifted with the " faculty of
naming ;" or the power of being able to invent, remember, and
express a word, sound, or sign for a particular thing, or
idea, in a manner that animals cannot.

As to what extent language is possessed by animals I must
refer to the article on " Language in Animals^

Deaf Mutism, and Aphasia.— Considering my profession,
it may be proper that I should say something as to these
states of complete, or partial, speechlessness in man; but I
shall not say very much, for neither condition affords any real
help in regard to the comprehension of the human intellect,
and of the faculty of intellectual speech.

And this is so, for the reason, that if a person is dumb (and
is not at the same time an idiot) the sole cause why he cannot
speak is because he cannot hear his own voice sufficiently to

X 2

3o8 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

be able to modulate it in such manner as to utter the proper
vocal intonations.

And in regard to the person who is suffering from a disease
of the brain (aphasia) in which speechlessness is present; he
is dumb as to certain words for the reason that the portion of
brain which in health is concerned with the ideation and utter-
ance of such words, or ideas, is damaged by change of func-
tion, or structure, brought about by the disease.

Therefore any comparison between a deaf mute (who is not
also an idiot) and an animal, is fallacious as to any argument
concerning the intellectual mind ; because the (otherwise
healthy) deaf mute is still a man, and possesses an intellec-
tual mind; and can be taught to think, and converse, by means
of signs — such as " finger," or " lip-speaking."

And as to " Aphasia," or speechlessness from disease of the
brain, it is idle to make any comparison between the diseased
brain of a man, and the healthy brain of an animal.

And, lastly, as to deaf mutes who are not idiots, I have
not a shadow of doubt that if henceforth all men were born
deaf, and were vocally mute in consequence, they would — God
willing — if their brains were healthy, soon find out a language
of signs for themselves, for the reason that their brains are
capable of intellectual abstraction, and reasoning; and that
they possess the ^^ faculty of naming. ^^

CHAPTER XI.

Language in Animals.

Modes of language in animals — Deviations from nature by animals as
to language, &c. — Imitation of vocal and other sounds by animals
and birds — Recapitulatory and Explanatory — Analogical method —
Animal immunity from certain poisons.

Language in Animals. — I have already said a few words
on this at the beginning of the preceding article on language,
but we must now consider it in detail.

No one who has closely observed animals, birds, bees, and
other creatures, can possibly deny their possession of a faculty
of communicating ideas to one another.

Admitting this fully, my object therefore will be, while
elicitating some of the facts concerning animal language, to
maintain the consistency of my general argument in regard to
man, as contrasted with animals, by showing that such animal
language is not of an intellectual kind, but only such as is
necessary for the conduct, and use, of the highest phases ot
the animal " instinctive mind," according to its ordained capa-
city in each species.

In my opinion, every kind of animal possesses a different
sort of language; and which is peculiar to its genus; just as
in the case of different races of man, a language which though
capable of interpretation by a member of the group which
speaks it, cannot be generally understood by other races in
minute detail ; although among both men and animals there are
a few cries, &c., that can be generally understood; as those of
alarm communicated by screams, stamping of the gi'ound, &c.

110 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

But we must note that whatever may be the kind and extent
of language in animals, it is in them always expressive only of
animal sensations and sense impressions and reasonings.

Particular animals, birds, insects, &c., &c., bark, gibber,
bray, sing, crow, grunt, rub their wing-cases (crickets), &c.,
&c., showing that each has a different language, and different
modes of expressing emotion : showing, too, by these diffe-
rences that their sorts of minds must vary much more from
one another, than do the minds of men in their different
human varieties; for men do not employ such immensely
different modes of conveying their ideas and feelings by
sounds as is the case in animals with their lowing, snorting,
barking, &c.

The making of these very different sounds by different
animals is therefore to me the clearest possible proof that
different animals possess different sorts of mind; yet of course
there is some general resemblance, as is the case in so many
of God's works made diversely in specific instances, yet on the
same general plan in the main. I said just now that, while
fully admitting the possession of a kind of language by
animals, I should maintain strictly that it is not of an
intellectual character, and I may be asked what I mean by
this assertion.

My answer is that I believe the language of the animal is
limited chiefly to the expression of animal needs ; and animal
sensations ; and the conveyance of such requirements, and
feelings to their kind; although it can doubtless be used also
for communicating in some slight degree such ideas concerning
animal experiences and feelings as their feeble reasoning powers
enable them to arrive at ; such as the devices for protection,
and escape from danger; and the manifestation and interpre-
tation of the sort of questionings, and answerings which occur
when two dogs meet, as shown by the wagging of tails, and
pleased looks, or the reverse ; and which seem to indicate as
if the dogs could by gesture, &c., ask, and reply to one
another, whether it is to be peace, or war.

My belief is that the mind of the mere animal is in no case

MODES OF EXPRESSING LANGUAGE IN ANIMALS. 311

able to reach beyond the limit of simple ministration to the
animal needs, and animal feelings, and instincts of the creature
according to its kind ; and that it can never form pure intellec-
tual ideas, such as those of intellectual love ; intellectual
hatred ; intellectual ideas as to time ; space ; God, &c. Nor
can it form the mental abstractions — words — and by the use
of these arrive at the intellectual operation of mind which
their employment renders possible.

Modes of expressing Language in Animals. — These may
take place —

1st. By vocal intonations (as in man) in brutes and birds :
and I may remark that all brutes possess a tongue, larynx, and
vocal cords ; and that birds have these also, with the excep-
tion that the bird's larynx (Syrinx) is rather modified from
that of man and the mammalia ; still we know its perfection ;
and we know how the parrot can use it.

2ndly. By gesture and visual regard, as seen in dogs, and
in birds.

3rdly. By means of sounds other than vocal, as is witnessed
in the stamping on the ground by various animals to intimate
danger. Also the noises of insects made by rubbing their
wing-cases (elytra) together, as in the cricket, &c.

4thly. By means of touch, as in the cases of ants, bees,
and other insects, which can convey meanings by crossing
their antennae.

5thly. Other signs, &c., perhaps, with which we have no
acquaintance, and can form no conjecture.

6thly. Information can also probably be ascertained by smell.

By any one of these means separately, or together, it doubt
less is possible for very numerous species of creatures to com-
municate with their kind by means of a language, — little
articulate it may be — but still more or less articulate, accord-
ing to endowment.

Let us now consider animal language by whatever mode
effected ; and to do so I propose to divide the subject into two
sections.

312 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

1st. The language of the Sensations.

2ndly. The language of the Instinctive Mind.

1st. The language expressive of the bodily Sensations.

This I have no doubt is in great measure, if not entirely,
automatic, for like as when you tread on a man's toe, or give
him a thump on the back, he involuntarily cries out — Oh!
So when you tread on a cat's tail, she gives utterance to her
characteristic scream.

But it is not only bodily pain that can be proclaimed aloud,
but hosts of other sensations can also be expressed in various
ways. The lamb, or the kitten, feels the sensation of hunger,
and it doubtless involuntarily bleats, or mews, for its mother ;
although it does not in the least know the meaning of " 5«,"
or " Mew,^^ or why it gives utterance to such sounds.

And so of the notes of the crowing cock, the " gobbling "
turkey, and the sibilant cricket, &c. &c.

And then as to numbers of other cries, &c., too numerous to
mention; such as the chirping of sparrows on the approach of
rain, the moaning and whining of animals in pain, the
cackling of the hen after laying an egg, &c. ; — all these arise
doubtless fi-om bodily sensations, and may be termed the
language of the involuntary or automatic part of the Organic
Mind.

2ndly. The language of the Instinctive Mind.

I have above briefly spoken of the language expressive of
the bodily sensations, and have termed it really the automatic
language of what I call the " Organic Mind," or " Vital
Force." Now we must speak of the language capable of being
used by the ^^ Instinctive Mind ^^ — a language, I believe, that is
sometimes involuntary or automatic, but which at other times
is under the voluntary control of such kind of will, judgment,
and choice as is capable of being exercised by the creature
according to its mental endowment as decreed and spe-
cialized.

Thus, by sounds or gestures, or other modes, animals, birds,
insects, &c., can express fear of danger, friendliness, hatred,
anger, triumph, &c.; and in some instances, as in the bee, can

MODES OF EXPRESSING LANGUAGE IN ANIMALS. 313

communicate such special information as that the " Queen is
dead," &c.

See two dogs meet : they evidently quite understand one
another, and by wagging of tails and bright glances, or the
reverse; and a cheerful bark or a savage snarl, can quickly
intimate whether a gambol or a fight is to result. No doubt,
as in man, this result will be greatly guided by the state of the
bodily sensations (digestion, &c.), and as to age and natural
character; but yet the dogs' communications, we maybe sure,
are only concerning pure animal sensations or concerns, and
never assume an intellectual character, such as, " How is your
beloved mistress ?" &c. &c.

Then look at the watchful bird on the tree-top, or the sen-
tinel bull on the hillock ; each can sound the alarm, because its
intuition or its experience tells of danger. And then look at
a party of rooks holding a palaver ; who can doubt but that
in some way they communicate certain feelings and perhaps
ideas ? And so as to hosts of other birds and beasts ; but then
their mental processes cannot possibly — for reasons which I
have repeatedly given — be considered as of an intellectual
sort like that of man, indeed it very prohahly may he of so
different a kind to ours that we cannot even guess at the nature
of it.

I have not space to illustrate all the visible manifestations of
the different phases of mind in animals, but to mention only
one other, who can doubt but that in regard to triumph after a
victory, the cock when he gets on an elevation and crows must
experience some of the pride of conquest, and must have a sort
of conception of the abstract idea of exultation in regard to his
courage and prowess ?

And yet although, as in my opinion, we must not delude our-
selves by thinking that the foregoing are simply produced by
reflex actions arising only from bodily sensations ; so we must
not equally be misled by supposing that such results arise
from intellectual reasoning. No ! in my opinion, although all
these acts and sounds are performed, and produced, in some
measure — and in some measure only — according to the dictates

314 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

of a 8ort of conscious will ; and a sort of abstract reasoning (iu
some cases), yet they can only occur, or be done, strictly accord-
ing to the calibre, and quality, and specific endowment of the
kind of 7ion-intellectual mind with which the creature has been
gifted by God — a calibre, and quality, and specific sort of mind
which I will not pretend to be able, in any way, to explain the
nature of, or essential mode of working.

Deviations by Animals from their natural " Sound-
ings : " " Notes ; " or " Language ; " and their compre-
hension, OR imitation of the Language of Man, and
OF THE " Soundings," or Notes of Species other than

THEIR OWN.

Examples of these deviations are seen in the coming of the
dog to the whistler ; the dog's obedience to the word com-
mands of his master ; and by the articulation of man's words
by dogs, parrots, ravens, &c. ; and by the imitation by birds
of the notes of other birds.

The power to effect such acts as these is so curious that we
must — in view of the object of this book — investigate it pretty
closely, for there can be no question that these faculties of
animals have led many persons astray in their estimation of the
kind of mind possessed by brutes and lower creatures, and have
induced them to believe that the minds of animals are more
like man's than is really the case. Now, that animals can
associate certain sounds that are not natural to them, with cer-
tain actions that also are not natural to them, is positive. A
dog will come to the whistle. Again a pointer *' stands " his
game: and if he is too eager, your word " To-lio " restrains him.
So too after you have fired, you call out '^ Down-cha?ye,'' and
lie will lie down.

This is a familiar illustration, but we have plenty of other
evidences in the tricks, and unnatural modes of action and be-
haviour that dogs can be taught by patient training, to show
that their apprehension of man's language, or gestures, can be
extended beyond even the violent disruption of their natural
instincts, such as that shown in the case of the pointer just

DE VIA TIONS B V ANIMALS, ETC. 315

Eipoken of, in " standing " the partridge that had been scented,
instead of rushing in to catch it.

To go a step beyond this interference with a natural instinct,
and to approach the intellectual still further, I have no doubt
but that with great pains a dog might even be taught such a
high act as that of numeration, of a sort, by teaching him to
bark once when you said " one " — twice when you called out
" two," &c.

This, like the conduct of the pointer, might be thought to
look like an exercise of intellectual reason. Not a bit of it in
my oiDinion ! This seeming evidence of intellectual capacity
would be apparent only, and not real, and take place simply
by the mere association of ideas as accomplished by the only
kind of conscious mind the dog possesses — the Instinctive — and
which kind of mind acts — not by intellectual ideation and
ratiocination — but chiefly automatically (as guided by the
senses of sight, hearing, smell, &c.), or as influenced by such
low kind of reasoning power as is possessed by the animal, and
which is capable only of being exercised for the animal's own
welfare, safety, and pleasure.

The apparent intellectual intelligence exhibited in the above
instances out of a multitude that might be given, are but high
examples of what may occur to you any day in a walk with
your dog. You say, " Go fetch ! " or " Cats ! " Away he
bounds, and it might be said he understands your words.
And so he does in a manner; but yet it cannot be an intellec-
tual comprehension, or, as I have argued over and over again,
he would be able to talk, &c. The fact is you have taught
him to associate the words " one," " two " (as above), or
"To-ho," or "Down-charge," or "Go fetch," &c., with
certain actions, and from these actions his memory tells
him he may derive pleasure; and conversely his memory
tells him also that if he does not perform the act associated
with the particular words, he will have to suffer pain. Let
him do as he has been taught, and he knows he will receive
caresses ; or if disobedient, chastisement, or black looks, which
latter are so associated with pain as to be almost as unendur-

3i6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

able. Besides in chasing cats, and running after the ball to
secure it (the equivalent of prey to the wild dog), he is doing
things very like natural acts, and hence pleasurable.

Thus these actions of the dog are purely animal, and selfish;
and hence it comes to pass, that when domesticated, he by
association of ideas gets to understand, in an animal way,
many of man's words (sounds) that experience has taught him
to associate with pleasure and bodily benefit, or the reverse,
just as by association of ideas when wild he associates the
sound " Ba-a " with a nice meal off a lamb ; or conversely
connects the sound of the angry snarl of a bigger dog with
pain, and danger.

The wild dog, therefore, like his domesticated brother, acts
as he does, not because he can intellectually connect certain
sounds with certain intellectual meanings, but because by
means of his non-intellectual instinctive mind he is by nature,
and intuition (or, when under domestication, by the slight
variation his mind is capable of being bent to by human
teaching), able to associate certain sounds with the animal
gratification of nice food ; or (when under domestication)
with feeding by man, or his caresses — man's caresses, or
bright looks, being equivalent to the natural *' licking," or the
"sparkling glances" of his own kind.

Imitation of Vocal and other Sounds by Animals and
Birds. — It is a very remarkable circumstance that some crea-
tures— notably birds — can, when they come under the domi-
nion of man, so alter their natural vocal '• soundings " as to
be able to imitate man's words; or, in the case of birds, to
copy the notes of other species of birds. And this is all the
more extraordinary because in the wild state, with the excep-
tion of the mocking-bird, and perhaps a very few other birds,
each species keeps to its own cries, or song.

I have already, on the authority of Youatt, spoken of a dog
which could repeat thii'ty human words in a mechanical way,
pronouncing each one after his master in the manner of strict
imitation. In regard to this, I may remark in parenthesis
that I never heard of an ape who could do such a feat as this,

ASSOCIATION OF IDEAS.

iiy

though the mechanical evolutionists say the ape is nearer in
relationship to man than is the dog, and therefore ought to
have a greater facility for pronouncing man's words.

The cases of the parrot, raven, starling, &c., are still more
remarkable in regard to their pronunciation of man's words than
even that of the dog; for whereas I do not understand that the
dog above spoken of could associate the words pronounced
with any appropriate ideas in connexion with them, yet the
bird can undoubtedly do so, as I will show presently.

The first thing that strikes one in regard to these lower
creatures being able to imitate man's words, is, that the argu-
ment maintained by some people that dogs, &c., do not speak
because their vocal organs are differently shaped to those of
man, is fallacious ; for the fact is that dogs, apes, and birds
have each a vocal apparatus that in essentials does not differ
much from that of man anatomically, and physiologically,
inasmuch as each has vocal cords, or vibrating membranes,
laryngjeal muscles, laryngasal and "recurrent" nerves, &c.
But even putting aside anatomy there is the fact that some
creatures can really articulate man's words.

Association of Ideas. — And now let us consider how far
animals and birds can understand man's words. We have seen
that the dog can obey man on his uttering certain words, and
we know that the horse and other creatures can do the same.
But as regards the apparent comprehension of words, parrots
are even more likely to mislead the enthusiast who argues in
support of a belief in animals possessing an intellect similar
in sort to that of man, though inferior in degree of develop-
ment.

Thus I knew a parrot who would remove her feeding can,
and throw it on the floor of the cage, and then exclaim
" naughty polly," " naughty bird."

So too Dr. S. Wilks narrates (see Journal of Mental Science,
July, 1879), that when his coachman comes for orders his
parrot calls out " half-past two ;" the fact being that the bird
has often on the coachman's appearance heard that time men-

31 8 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OE BELIE E.

tioned, and lias got to associate those words with the coach-
man.

Now how is this ? Does the dog, and do birds intellectually
understand words ? Certainly not ! True, in some cases they
can repeat the words — and true in some instances they can
associate the word with an object ; or conv^ersely, the object
with the word, as in the case of Dr. Wilks' coachman.

But it is nothing more than the association of ideas — there
can be no intellectual comprehension — for if there were, the
dog or the bird would soon learn — like a young child — to talk
imperfectly.

When the parrot above spoken of threw down its " can "
and exclaimed " naughty bird," it of course did not under-
stand the true meaning of " naughty ;" but it had heard the
word repeated so many times when its mistress rebuked it for
throwing down the " can," that it learnt to associate the word
" naughty " with the act.

And thus it is also with English horses ; they learn by
association of ideas to obey the words " Gee-up," " Whoa,"
&c., in horse-English (and French horses the equivalent words
in French, &c.). They will also learn to stop, or go on, by
the hearing of other sounds than words, as a whistle, the
slamming of an omnibus-door, &c.; but in all cases there is no
intellectual comprehension of the true meaning of the words,
&c. : the horse has simply learnt to associate certain sounds with
certain movements ; and memory tells him that when he hears
a certain sound, and does not go on, or does not stop, as the
case may be, he will have a cut with the Avhip, or a jerk with
the reins.

And so as to all the doings, or " sayings," of the lower
creatures in which they obey or imitate man — what they do_
being done partly by association of ideas, and partly through
their power of imitation which so strongly becomes manifest
under domestication, and partly to secure approval from man
in the way of food, caresses, &c., and to avoid castigation.

As we have just seen, the power of vocal imitation possessed
by some lower creatures — mostly birds — is very remarkable.

ASSOCIATION OF IDEAS. 319

and it is the more extraordinary inasmuch as it is in almost
every case brought into action, only when the creatures are
under the control of man. That is to say, with the exception
of the mocking-bird, and perhaps the starling, and may be a
few other creatures, all wild animals and birds adhere closely
10 the cries, notes, and song of their species ; and, just as
every animal and bird has its specific gestures, gait in walk-
ing, and particular mode of flight, so it strictly observes its
natural vocal soundings. And, if it were not so ordained,
fancy the jumble we should have of heterogeneous cries,
songs, &c. Fancy, if every bird could do what the mocking-
bird does in a wild state, and the parrot, &c., in confinement ! !

Let me draw especial attention, then, to the fact that though
many birds in confinement can imitate others, they do not, as a
rule, exercise their latent faculty as long as they are wild ;
and I w^ould emphasize the exception as to the mocking-bird
as a clear case of ordainment, and not a chance habit; for if it
were so, it is scarcely conceivable but that many other birds
should mock likewise.

As to parrots then, and poor little birds that are boxed up
in cages, and placed within hearing of other species, thev
clearly get to imitate man's words, &C.5 and songs other than
their own, simply because their natural Instinctive mind is
altered in some way from its natural w^orking by the unnatural
circumstances in which it is placed.

But what about this faculty of imitation essentially? And
why should the lower creatures that possess it manifest it as a
rule only when placed in unnatural surroundings?

I cannot answer the question, and can only say as a matter
of interest, that even man possesses it, and often exercises it
in an involuntary way.

Thus I have known persons who live together, who — thougji
not related to one another — have got to speak in the same tone,
&c. Also every one knows how you may quite unconsciously
copy a person you see or hear. A man stands talking to you
with one of his arms resting on the mantelpiece; and if you
are in deep conversation with him, so that the mind is abstract.

320 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

ten to one but you, if standing at the other end of the mantel-
piece, will instinctively copy him, and will put up your arm
also, like his.

To return, however, to birds and dogs.

The dog I mentioned above, that could utter thirty words,
could only say them one by one after his master. Dr. Wilks
tells us also that his parrot could only retain a word for a few
months, unless kept in practice. This, I think, is another
proof that animals do not understand words intellectually, for
if they did, they would retain for a longer time the association
of ideas between the word and the object, for we know that
objective sense ideas can be retained by them for a long time.
The dog remembers the appearance and voice of his master;
and the migrating swallow its place of birth; but then these
sense remembrances are according to the instinctive gift of
the creature.

Finally, on this head, I will repeat that though some crea-
tures can in confinement imitate the sounds of man's words,
and the songs of other birds, and sounds of various kinds, still,
with very rare exceptions (mocking-bird chiefly), that crea-
tures when wild, strictly retain their own notes, &c., and what
is more, wild creatures can " cheep ! " like the chick, and
" Ba !" like the lamb, almost as soon as born, and without
teaching. Also observe that the lower creature in confinement
— and in regard to the making of sounds not natural to it —
must, like the baby, be taught to utter such sounds, or to copy
them, by the repeated hearing of such. Mark too, that though
there is this curious resemblance, that it only tends to make
manifest the more clearly the distinct difference between the
intellect of the babe and that of the brute, in the fact that the
former not only quickly learns to associate the sound with the
object, but also gets the abstract idea of the word fixed in its
intellectual mind, and understands intellectually; whereas, the
poor brute can never get further than an objective sense im-
pression, and non-intellectual association of ideas.

Summary as to Vocal Sounds. — My argument, therefore,
in regard to all animals that make sounds by means of a vocal

SUMMARY AS TO VOCAL SOUNDS. 321

apparatus similar in structure to that of man, or so similar
that they are able, at any rate in some cases {harring the
Ape), to imitate his words — and which animals can com-
municate naturally to one another certain definite vocal
sounds that they instinctively understand, such as " Ba I"
or other certain cry, or note— my argument, I say, is shortly

this —

That as many creatures can undoubtedly communicate to
one another certain definite animal meanings by means of
vocal sounds, therefore it follows that they would also convey
by the same vocal channel all other meanings and thoughts
that might arise of an intellectual character, if they really pos-
sessed any intellectual ideas; and that such language would
necessarily consist, as in man, of varied and modulated sounds
(words) such as man would certainly have perceived and learnt
the meaning of long ere this if such animal intellectual language
had really had any existence.

Further, that if animals did possess any intellectual ideas
like those of man, it would follow not only of necessity {if
their minds icere evolutionally kindred to man's) that they would
express such ideas by means of a modulated language — even
though it might be less perfect than that of man's— ^'w^ also,
and most importantly, that being able as they can in some
cases to associate man's words with certain meanings, and even
to (mechanically) utter man's words, it would follow neces-
sarily that they would be able to learn man's language in an
intellectual manner, and be able to talk with him intellectually
in his own tongue. And yet what is the fact ? Why ! that a
dog cannot even speak the simple words Yes ! or No ! nor
express affirmation or negation in an intellectual sense by a
nod or a shake of the head, although he must have heard
these words, or seen man make these motions over and over
again, and even understood their meaning in a mechanical
way.

To complete this argument let me add that if a man, how-
ever savage, were cast on an island among people whose lan-
guage he did not know, he would very soon acquire it. First

322 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

by signs, and learning the names of objects, and then going on
to words of greater abstraction.

My axiom therefore still holds good, viz., that if an animal
exercised such reason as it possesses by means of a mind at all
kindred to that of man, the natural outcome would be *' words ;"
consequently that as we have no evidence that animals possess
words of anything like the quality of those of man, we may be
sure that such reasoning faculty as they possess is carried on
in a different mode to that of man, and that the constitution of
their minds is of a different sort to that with which man is
endowed.

Recapitulatory and Explanatory. — It may be thought by
some persons that in the foregoing I have conceded too much
to the unbelievers, and depicted the animal as possessing a
higher kind of mind than is really the case, but I have only
stated what I believe is borne out by strict observation and
reasoning, and I have no fear in advancing an estimation of
God's truth of an injurious effect being likely to be wrought by
candour.

What I have laboured to prove is not that animals possess
no reasoning power — no power of ideation, and even of a sort of
abstract ideation — no power of exercising judgment — no lan-
guage of any sort — no rules of propriety and policy as to beha-
viour to their kind, or to animals they may be associated with —
no emotions as to pleasure and pain, and many other attributes
of mind — hut that the hind of minds possessed by animals is
diferent in sort to that of man. There is resemblance between
many of the mental phases of man and the brute it is true, but
the resemblance arises solely from their having been made by
the same Maker on the same general plan as far as the mere
animal instinctive Mind is concerned — differently constituted
and endowed as that may be according to the kind. And in
regard to man, the difference being all the more marked, in
the fact of his being gifted with an intellectual mind m addition
to his animal instinctive mind.

The resemblance, therefore, as I hold, is dependent on a
primary plan, modified in its details according to the will of

AN ANALOGY.

the Designer and Maker, and not depending, as the mate-
rialistic evolutionists and Darwinists contend, on mere heredi-
tary transmission, with modifications according to chance
surroundings.

It is with the mind in man and in animals as with their
bodies, and limbs, organs, tissues, and functions — they re-
semble one another much, in some respects, but differ vastly
in others.

An Analogy. — Let us then examine the question of mind
in man, and in animals, by the method of analogy.

The difference as to limbs, &c., will be spoken of in Vol.
IV. on Evolution, but I will mention here some of the chemical
differences in different animals, showing that although they
may each have a head, eyes, ears, legs, a brain, stomach, &c.,
yet that tlie essential differences of the chemical physiological
working in the creatures is quite as various as are their
different- shaped bodies, limbs, &c.; and w^hich shows further,
as I hold, that they are not kindred in the sense the Darwinists
woidd make us believe. Thus the digestive organs of the
cow, sheep, and goat, and the kind of food they take, are very
similar; and yet consider the extremely different nature of the
quality and taste of their flesh; the difference of their body
odour; the difference of their milk — of their excreta, &c.

Again, the food and digestive apparatus of the dog and
cat are very similar, and yet how different are their excretions.
It is a disagreeable subject to dwell on, but I must draw^
attention to the fact that if you go into a human being's bed-
room, and then into a monkey -house, you will perceive by the
odour that, although the ape may have a body, head, legs, and
so-called arms, all of which somewhat resemble man's, still
that its vital chemistry must be greatly different to that of
man's. And so of the horse, cow, and sheep, &c., how
different is the smell of a stable, a cow-house, and a fold.

Again, with regard to function, look at the fact that the
dog perspires chiefly through his tongue — how different
therefore must be his physiological constitution to that of
man.

Y 2

324 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OE BELIEF.

And so of the senses, and of the mind, in man and animals;
you can only compare them roughly, so difterent are they in
many essential respects.

Think of the dog's sense of smell as especially noticeable in
the bloodhound, the foxhound, the pointer ! Think of the
bird's perfection of vision ! Then consider how many brutes —
not to speak of bees, &c. — that have faculties such as man
knows nothing of — the sense of direction — the instinct of
migration — the pre-knowledge of rain, of storm, &c., and the
result is, that in the same way as it is really far-fetched to
compare animals' bodies, and their functional chemistry, seeing
how greatly they diiFer; so equally is it next to impossible to
justly compare man's mind with the animal's, for when we
come to the ultimate analysis of each, we find them differing
in fundamental framework — and differing in a way as regards
many of their powers and instincts which to us is quite
inscrutable.

I repeat, then, that a comparison between the minds and
bodies of man, and of animals, each, and all, respectively to
one another in the sense of relationship through descent, and
family likeness— the difference, it is argued, being of degree
and not of essential constitution— is as likely to be mislead-
ino- as I believe it is in the case of organisms much lower in
the scale of creation, viz., plants.

Thus animals, it is true, have their resemblances: but so have
plants. The oak — the cinchona — the belladonna — the aloes
— the sugar-cane each have a stem, leaves and blossoms, but
how different are the specific forms of such; and how different
must be the vital chemistry which renders them respectively
able to elaborate tannin, quinine, atropine, aloes, and sugar :
surely there can be no kindred between these plants by
descent ! Thus, although different kinds of organisms may
resemble one another in appearance, yet their essential natures
may be quite different, in consequence, as I hold, of the
" oro'anic mind" that vitalizes each being differently endowed
by God.

Finally, as showing how delusive it is to attempt to exactly

SUMMAR V. 325

ancalyze the animal mind in comparison with that of man,
differing as they do in a way past our comprehension, I will
give a further illustration of how the vital chemistry of
animals must differ amongst themselves; and if such differences
occur of a iihysical nature, and which we cannot understand,
how certain it is that it must be more difficult for us to be able
to trace, and determine the differences, and exact nature, and
mode of working of the mental phenomena in animals.

The illustration is this. How remarkable is it that different
animals can live and thrive on such different articles of diet,
and that one by choice will select and enjoy what would be
rejected, and be repulsive to another.
Then as to poisons.

The rabbit, the guinea-pig, the rat can eat the — tc man
deadly— poisons of the belladonna, the stramonium, and the
hellebore, without injury ; and successive generations of these
animals have been reared on a diet constantly including some
of these alkaloids. Further, a goat can eat an ounce of shag
tobacco with impunity; a much less quantity than which
would be quickly fatal to man if eaten by him. Again, Blaine
states that ten grains of calomel have been known to kill a dog;
whereas a horse will take 500 grains with impunity.

Hedge-hogs can eat Spanish flies without harm; a diet that
would be quickly flital to man. Pigeons and fowls are stated
to be unaffected by opium. But I need not give more
instances.

Summary.— Thus we have seen that it is not simply that
animals differ in their outward forms, and internal organs, and
kind of flesh, &c., but that they differ very vastly in their vital
chemistry, as coarsely evidenced, amongst other indications, by
the characteristic smell emanating from their bodies; by the
difference of their excreta ; and by the fact that some animals
can eat with impunity — and even benefit, as we may suppose
—substances which, if taken by man or by some other animals,
would be quickly fatal.

What then maybe gathered in brief from all this in support
of the analogical argument we have in hand in regard to

326 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

mind ? Why ! First, that the vital chemical powers, pro-
cesses, and products are extremely various in animals ; and
that although the general operations of life, such as eating,
drinking, digesting, &c., may be very similar, still that the
ultimate chemical results vary greatly according to the natural
constitution of the animal as Jormulated and directed hy some
internal force — a force which, although we can know nothing
about it intrinsically, we may be sure from the result is certainly
there — viz., the organic mind specialized for the kind — and
acting in each species of creature according to its endowed
powers and limitations.

Secondly. That it consequently is quite legitimate to infer
that if the life-causing part of the Organic Mind, which guides
the chemical vital processes, varies so much in diiferent
creatures, so in the same way it is fair to suj)pose that the
Instinctive part of the mind of animals may vary in its faculty
of reasoning according to its endowment. There may, it is
true, be a general resemblance between the minds of animals
amongst themselves, and even in some phases approaching a
similitude to that of man ; but, like their special vital pro-
cesses, there will be essential and particular differences accord-
ing to God's will and endowment.

The qualities of mind and reasoning power and kind of
language in animals differ therefore as much as do their
bodies, and functions, and secretions, &c.

CHAPTER XII.

Facial Expression, and the various Modes of showing
THE Mental Emotions and Bodily Sensations in Man
AND Animals.

Facial expression — Laughter — Weeping — Anger, joy, fear, pain —
Astonishment — Blushing— Self-evolution theory — Dogthe top twig !
Sneezing and snarling— Kecapitulatory and Explanatory — Differ-
ences in exhibition of emotions in animals.

Mr. Darwin, with his usual ingenuity — and I must add one-
sidedness — has in his book on the '^Expression of the Emotions "
endeavoui'ed to trace a kindred connexion between the expres-
sion of the emotions in man and in animals.

But in this case, as well as m so many other instances,
I venture to think Mr. Darwin has erred in his belief that
"resemblance" necessarily means hereditary relationship by
transmission.

Granted that dogs and monkeys can show some emotions
and gestures, which in a certain degree resemble those of man,
yet may we not be certain from the arguments made lise of in
previous articles that it can be nothing more than mere resem-
blance, for have I not proved that the mind of man and the
minds of brutes must differ in essential quality ? Indeed, in
endeavouring to trace the differences between the kind of
mind as possessed respectively by man and animals, there is
nothing which more visibly demonstrates the vast difference
there must be between the origination and quality of the two,
than the fact of animals not possessing the faculty of facial
expression similar to that uf man — a faculty, or a condition, so
strongly marked in man that his ideation and emotions are

323 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

naturally indicated by it as by a telegraph; and so intimate is
this connexion between thought and facial expression in man,
that it is beyond the control of most men, even the most gifted
and experienced, to prevent on some occasions their facial
expression indicating or betraying their ideas, however much
they may struggle to conceal them.

True, the dog's eyes may sparkle with joy, or be lustreless
in pain, he may bark from elation, or howl from distress, but
he cannot smile or laugh, or show the play of feature which is
peculiar to man alone. It may be argued that the muzzle of
the dog is covered with hair, but this fact would only in a
slight degree interfere with expression and play of feature,
and would be no impediment to smiling or laughing if his ideas
were kindred to those of man.

Laughter. — This is so very marked an emotion, and is so
characteristic of man, that I will now examine pretty closely
into the fact of its absence in brutes.

The dog does not laugh, although he possesses a diaphragm
or midriif like that of man (and without which he could not
laugh); just in the same way as no dog speaks or hums tunes,
although his vocal orojans are like those of man, and
although dogs have associated with man for such a very long
period.

Again, as to gesture ; no dog shakes his head to express
dissent, or ever gives a nod for assent, although he has seen
man do so for thousands of years, and although he knows the
direct practical meaning of shaking or nodding the head by
man. No ! the dog's ideas are not sufficiently abstract or in-
tellectual for him to be able to adopt these gestures and use
them himself: moreover, what the dog and the ape can do in
regard to facial expression and gesture towards man is no
more than they do towards t Leir own kind in expressing anger,
joy, distrust, &c. The dog barks, and whines, and snaps, or
licks, or looks bright, or wags, or lowers his tail, &c., when in
association with his fellows, but he can do no more than evince
his emotions according to his specially-endowed quality of
instinctive mind.

LA UGHTER.

329

But in regard to laughing, a materialistic evolutionist might
argue, that laughing is an intellectual act; and that dogs have
not arrived at quite that point of development, at which laughing
comes into action. If he did urge this view, however, he
would be wrong, for although laughing is often caused by in-
tellectual pleasure, still, we know that it is also a faculty that
is in connexion with the lower or instinctive, or body-mind of
man, for tickling will cause laughter of a purely animal kind.
But the dog does not laugh if tickled.

Besides, in regard to dogs, they can understand man so won-
derfully in some respects, that they certainly would laugh, as
well as talk, if laughter and speech had been things which had
evolved hy necessity in man ; for, if the dog's mind were like
man's in essential quality, he could not, owing to his long
association with man, have failed to evolve laughter and speech.
Laughing and talking by the dog would, I say, have come
necessarily, if the mind of the dog, and the mind of man, had
got to be what they are in each case, by materialistic or self-
acting evolution as conditioned by surroundings.

No ! they are differently endowed, and although the dog
with his instinctive mind can understand man in some respects,
still the very limitations we know of are proofs of the essential
differences between the mind of man and his emotions, and
the mind and emotions of the dog.

And now a few words as to monkeys. Mr. Darwin thinks he
has detected (" Ex2')ression of the Emotions ") some movements
and sounds that are made by Apes on being tickled or pleased,
which somewhat resemble laughter in man, " a noise which,"
Mr. Darwin says, "the keepers call a laugh" (p. 132), but
which in another place (p. 362) Mr. Darwin himself only
ventures to call " a reiterated sound clearly analogous to our
laughter."

But surely (even putting aside the question of intellect) if the
ape were so near a relative to man as Mr. Darwin would make
out, it would be seen, that so purely animal a faculty as is
laughter, in some of its phases, would be more certainly shown
in the ape than it really is.

330 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Again, if "the barking" (p. 132), or chuckling noise,
monkeys make on some occasions, is a rudimentary kind of
laughter, and the parent, as it were, of man's faculty of
laughter, how is it that the monkey has not more marked traits
of a mind resembling that of man ? And how is it that in
this respect of mind the ape is excelled by the dog ? And
this being the case, how is it again, the dog cannot laugh if it
be supposed that his mind has evolved higher than the ape's?
Oh ! no ! no ! each animal has its special endowments, and if
the ape were really the parent of man in a strictly materialistic
evolutional sense, then, of course, in intellect as well as in the
expression of the emotions, he would most unmistakably stand
before the dog.

As it is, we know that in all respects as concerns mind,
and the expression of the emotions (barring possibly the
noise by an overstrained simile called " laughing " in apes),
the dog stands far away above the ape.

Weeping. — Mr. Darwin says (p. 362, op. cit.) that " our
nearest allies, the anthropomorphous apes do not weep ;
but, at p. 135 of the same work, Mr. Darwin states that a
Borneo monkey has been known to weep, though other
specimens of the same species have not been seen to do so.
Weeping, however, with monkeys is not general. But mark !
the Borneo monkey is lower in the evolutional ladder than
" our allies " the apes. How is this to be accounted for,
Darwinist ? Has the ape risen superior to crying, and lo8t
that evidence of weakness; while poor man, less stoical, or less
high-minded, has " reverted " to tears ?

As to dogs weeping, I believe some lovers of dogs think
they can form tears. But however this may be, we need not
attach much importance to it, because crying with brutes, if
it occurs at all, comes about doubtless in the same animal
way as many other resemblances between man and brutes,
and simply because they are — as animals — made on the same
general plan, as to their bodies, and animal functions, and in-
stinctive minds — e. g. the tears of the infant are simply reflex.

Anger ; joy ; fear ; pain, &c., are expressed by apes,

THE EXPRESSION OF THE EMOTIONS, ETC. 331

monkeys, and dogs, in ways that in some respects resemble
similar demonstrations in man.

They frown; retract the lips; make threatening gestures,
&c. Or they look bright, and fawn, &c,, and give vent to
various vocal sounds, &c.; but all these acts in my opinion
count, in any estimation of their genetic origin, and as being
kindred with the emotions of man, for no more than do hosts
of other acts of the instinctive animal mind which are common
to that form of mind both in man and animals, specialized as
it is in certain respects for each species.

Astonishment. — In the expression of this emotion there is a
very marked diiFerence between its exhibition in man, and in
apes, and dogs. Man opens his mouth under the sense of
astonishment ; but the ape and the dog do not. Mr. Darwin
himself admits that in regard to apes especially, " this fact is
surprising " (p. 145, op. cit.).

Blushing. — In regard to this, as it is the result of purely
intellectual ideation, it is of course not met with in brutes.
As to flushing with anger, &c., that of course must not be
confounded with true blushing.

The expression of the Emotions, and Evolution. — Let us
now examine this question strictly in regard to the application
to it of the self-evolution theory.

If dogs and apes had evolved minds similar in sort to that
of man, and of which man's is simply a superior development,
then it appears as plainly as possible to me, that we should
certainly witness very different facts to what we decidedly do.
Apes would be mentally more like men than are dogs; and the
dog would undoubtedly have become a higher creature than
he is, and would do a host of human-like things which he does
not do.

I will for the present put aside the ape, as he is certainly
less like man mentally than is the dog. Now in regard to the
" evolution " of the facial muscles in man. If dogs had the
same hind of mind as we have, though of less development, yet
working broadly in the same manner, then it would follow as
a matter of necessity — materialistically — that if the facial

332 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

muscles have evolved by self-action in man, in such manner as
to express his emotions as they really do ; then the face
muscles of the dog ought to have evolved likewise — pari
passu with the dog's mental growth, and ought to exhibit in
the same mode — though in less degree — a like play of feature
to that of man. Like, in such a case, ought of necessity to
have produced like; and if the ideas of man, and the dog, are
similar in sort, then the dog's facial muscles ought to have got
to visibly telegraph and indicate those ideas in the same mode
as in man. But it is not so. Just the same kind of argument
will apply to the other modes of expressing the emotions,
besides those capable of manifestation by the muscles of the
face.

If the minds of man and of the brutes were alike as to sort,
and genetically related, then we should expect — materialisti-
cally and evolutionally — to see that the dog's mind, and its
emotions, — as well as his body, — would have grown more and
more like that of man during the lapse of time.

But it may be said, the ape and man are very much alike
in bodily build; yet they are not so alike in mind as is man
and the dog.

How is this, materialistic evolutionist? Don't tell me that
the reason is that the dog and the ape are the respective top
twigs of two evolutional branches, and man of another. This
will not do, even on the evolutionist's own showing; for Mr.
Darwin believes, that although the ai3e is our immediate pro-
genitor, still, he must believe also we have kindred with the
dog; because he says, " we show hate like him in our jeering
and sneering, by retracting the upper lip and displaying the
canine tooth, as the dog does in snarling," and this Mr. Dar-
win says, " reveals man's animal descent." (Darwin, ^'Emo-
tions" pp. 251 and 253.)

And yet, as I shall note further on, the ape, as Mr. Darwin
admits, never shows the canine tooth alone on one side, as does
the dog and man. Here, therefore, is another lapse in man's
evolutional pedigree of the emotions.

Again, if man and the dog are related, how is it that

RECAPITULA TOR Y AND EXPLANA TOR Y. 333

the dog has managed to surpass the monkey in the power
of expressing some of its emotions; and in its capacity for
mental communion with man? How is it if he thinks and
feels like man, and has a similar sort of mind — (even though
it be of less development) — how is it, I say, that he exhibits
no rudiments of laughter, or of speech like that of man?
Surely here is a fault in clever self-acting-evolution-thi'ough-
necessity — here is a lapse, or a halting of evolution ! And I
suppose no evolutionist, however enthusiastic, will venture to
say that the dog or the ape have got beyond man in the mental
power of controlling their facial expressions, and emotions;
and have in consequence " lost " their facial muscles in con-
siderable degree through non-use and degeneration; or that
in the same way they have "lost" their faculty of laughter! I

No ! dogs' minds and emotions are dogs' minds and emo-
tions ; and apes' minds and emotions are apes' minds and
emotions ; and man's mind and its emotions, is man's mind and
emotions — and each is specialized according to God's will and
pleasure — they may be similar in some things and different
in others, but no one of them can depart from, or go beyond,
its particular endowment.

Recapitulatory and Explanatory. — From the foregoing,
therefore, it may be seen, that w^hat I contend for is, that
although some of the higher brutes do express some of their
emotions in a manner partially resembling the expression of
the emotions in man, by means of various manifestations and
gestures indicative of pleasure, pain, &c., yet that there is no
more than a resemblance; and that each kind of creature,
whether a brute, a frog, or a bee, &c., has a specialized mode
of evincing its emotions, by gestures and cries, &c., just as
each has a specialized kind of animal language, &c. : and that
this is so, for the reason as contended for elsewhere, that eacli
kind of creature has a different and specialized kind of Instinctive
Mind. Therefore I hold, that emotions in different animals,
which to us look similar in appearance to our own, must be
differently felt by animals to what they are by man ; for if
they were felt internally in the mind, as he feels them, and if

334 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

man and animals are evolutiouallj kindred ; then animals
ought to express outwardly all the emotions, facial expression,
laughter, &c., as man does : and less marked though they
might he in animals than in man, still " like cause should pro-
duce like effect."

Consequently, I hold that the resemblance between the
expressions of the emotions in man and the brutes is no more,
and signifies no more, than do the very many resemblances
between him, and them, in regard to bodily structure ; limbs,
organs, functions, &c. e%c. : and even mental attributes, such
as anger, joy, industry of the bee, &c. — they are resemblances
not necessarily springing from genetic affinity, but present,
because they are all designed and made by the same Creator ;
each according to kind ; different in some things, and like in
others.

Having thus considered resemblances and put them as I
believe at their proper value, let us glance at the differences of
some of the emotions as shown by animals, as distinct from
those of man.

What can be more different than the modes of expressing
joy or auger as seen in the wagging, or lowering of the tail of
the dog — and the rigid elevation, or lashing and erection of the
hairs of the tail of the cat — must not their mode of feeling
similar emotions be very different ? and must not this be so
because their minds are different ?

And then look at the strutting turkey, — the flirting cock, —
the love-sick blackbird with drooping wings — each with per-
fectly different gestures, though all are birds. Then look at
the astonishing variety of gestures and cries too numerous to
mention, that are special and peculiar to hosts of creatures ; and
which though expressive apparently of similar emotions, are so
very different often in sound or mode ; and this even although
the creatures may resemble one another in anatomical construc-
tion— such as the braying of the donkey, and the neighing of the
horse; the roaring of the lion, and mewing of the cat, &c. &c.

Seeing these differences therefore, does it not appear certain
that the minds of the various creatures must be different ; for

RECAPITULA TOR V AND EXPLANA TOR Y. 335

their emotions must be experienced in a ditferent manner, or
they could not be expressed in such different modes ? If man
and animals individually and collectively, had the same sort of
minds — different though they might be in each species in
degree of development — would they not all express their ideas
and emotions in a manner more nearly showing kindred than
is the case as to language, facial expression, cries, gestures,
&c. ? Surely, yes ! surely if they had the same sort of mind
they would express their ideas and emotions by the same
modes.

Granted, different races of men speak different tongues; but
it is always an articulate intellectual language, and his gestures
show no such violent differences throughout the world, as the
differences between the gestures of the various races of
animals.

To repeat, I maintain therefore that in my opinion Mr.
Darwin's great mistake in regard to his theory of the ex-
pression of the emotions in man, and animals being kindred,
is, that he has concluded that because certain of such expres-
sions resemble one another in man and in the brute, that such
resemblance is a sign of genetic affinity. For example, as I
have already stated, Mr. Darwin thinks that because man and
the dog both show the canine tooth (Darwin, " Emotions,''
251 — 253), in sneering, or in snarling, therefore that man
" reveals his animal descent," and shows thereby he is con-
nected by heredity with the dog, forgetting that resemblance
does not necessarily mean genetic relationship.

For example, the crystal of one salt may identically re-
semble the crystal of another salt in figure, but yet be totally
different in essential quality — there is resemblance, but no
kindred connexion — the fact being that the two crystals like
the two minds, and the two faces (man's and dog's each with
eyes, nose, mouth, &c.), have both been made by the same
Maker, and each fall under some phase of Divine Will, De-
sign, or Law similar in genesis and developing power in some
respects, but yet in others producing different effects.

But to return to Mr. Darwin and his explanation of the

-^-,6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

j)j

sneer in man, let me again ask him how it is that if the sneer
of man is kindred to the snarl in the dog, that the monkey has
not got such a mode of expressing defiance, contempt, &c. ?
Why Mr. Darwin himself says, " Mr. Sutton has never noticed
a snarling action in our nearest allies, namely, the monkeys,
and he is positive that the baboons, though furnished with
great canines, never act thus." ('' Emotions,^^ p. 253.)

If man therefore is the offspring of the ape, how strange a
thing is it that man should have " retained,^' on Mr. Darwin's
explanation, a mode of expression which has been " lost " by
his ferocious parents the gorilla and the baboon ! !

But putting aside the evolutionallij remarkable fact that the
ape has " lost " an animal mode of expression, let me say
further, that if man's sneer is kindred to the dog's snarl, how
strange it is, that under great excitement, man never growls
like a dog, or yells like an ape !

In conclusion, I would say that if the materialistic evolution
theory is true, it is strange that another very marked mode of
giving expression should be so singularly partial. How is
it, namely, that the bird is so musical, and even excels man in
its faculty of innately giving utterance to song ; whereas the
dog and " man's living parent " (the ape) have not an atom of
music in them ?

As a last word on this subject on which but for want of
space so much more might be said, I would venture to remark
that I think Sir E. Landseer and other artists have helped to
mislead in regard to " mind " and expression in brutes ; for by
their consummate art they have so idealized the expression in
the eyes, muzzles, limbs, and attitudes of dogs and other
animals, and so humanized them, as to endue the pictures of
them with a false and sentimental aspect.

Summary. — As a summary, therefore, I maintain, that the
expression of the emotions in man, is special to him as to sort
and mode, as it is likewise special to every kind of creature ;
and dependent in each, on the description of specialized mind
as bestowed, according to God's ordainment and gift.

CHAPTER Xni.
Pleasure and Pain.

Pleasure and pain — Pleasure and pain may be reflex in animals.

The procurance of pleasure, or of benefit, is of course in all
creatures the great incentive towards voluntary action ; as
pain, or disadvantage, is the great deterrent. And this applies
to the spiritual intellectual mind of man, as well as to the
organic mind of brutes, and of lower creatures ; for man, of
course, can feel pleasure and pain, both by his intellectual as
well as by his body, or organic mind. But here is one of the
great differences between man and all other creatures, for they
cannot feel pleasure or pain intellectually, because they can-
not form intellectual abstract ideas. Consequently all their
actions are directed by the " Organic Mind," so as to procure
bodily or animal pleasure, or to avoid pain ; though of course
as neither are felt intellectually, they can neither be felt with
the keenness appreciable by man, nor can they know intellec-
tually why they seek pleasure, or avoid pain.

But nevertheless, although from possessing no intellect, the
brute and lower creature does not know why it seeks pleasure,
or avoids pain ; it does so instinctively by intuition, and by the
reflex action of its organic mind. It gives the animal pleasure
to seek food, and take it ; and it derives pleasure from the
exercise of all those faculties it is endowed with for procuring
its food, or circumventing its prey. Pleasure from seeing,
smelling, tasting its food, — seeing, hearing, smelling its prey,
&c. Also from seeing, hearing, or smelling the mate or the
young. Likewise from using the various senses and powers

338 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

of muscular movement, not only when employed in their
necessary uses of taking food, &c., but also in frisking, jump-
ing, running, swimming — playing with the mate, or young,
barking, neighing, crowing, just as a young child runs and
gambols and shouts, for the mere pleasure of it ; hut ivliy it
does these various things, it knows not.

But in all these cases, all arises by endowment — it is
natural — that is, it is endowed in some animals to derive plea-
sure from being still — as in the sloth, the crocodile, &c.;
others, as the dog and pigeon, derive the greatest pleasure
from activity.

In all this, there can be no intellectual enjoyment, for no
pleasure could be felt as intellectual pleasure unless the crea-
ture could form an abstract ideal of enjoyment, and we may
be sure none can do that but man. (See " Language.'^)

But pleasure is derived, not only from muscular movements,
and sense acts, as above, but also in getting rid of secretions
and excretions. The bee doubtless feels bodily comfort, and
hence pleasure, by getting rid of its wax from the surface of
the body — the silkworm its silk. And in like way the higher
creature is gratified, both as to bodily comfort, as well as by
instinctive joy, at having the milk sucked from the tumid
breast by the young.

Yet all this is animal — it all results from endowed instinct,
the animal knows not why, or how it is. Man only can
appreciate this by his intellect; which while it tells him the
" why and the wherefore," also magnifies all his joys, as alas !
it intensifies all his pains and sorrows.

And now of pain. Fain is the reverse of all this, and the
creature avoids it instinctively, though he does not know why.
He avoids pain not simply because his natural endowment is
opposed to it, as shrinking from suffering; but because pain
is often one of the forerunners, or concomitants of death,
which all creatures instinctively shun.

But the pain as felt by a creature not possessed of an intd-
lectual mind must be as nothing compared with pain as felt by
man.

PLEASURE AND PAIN.

His intellectual mind magnifies pain by ten thousand
imaginary — it may be — doubts, fears, and terrors; and pain
and death, which are shunned by man, as well as the
brute, by mere instinct, are felt and thought of far more
acutely, and apprehensively, by man, of course, than by the
animal; because the mind of the animal is so very differently
constituted. (See " Pain and Cruelty in Aniinah,'' Vol. II.)

It is man alone, who has fear of loss of health ; loss of
capacity to earn, as well as intellectual dread of suffering.

He alone, too, has doubts as to the future — as to what may
come after death — the great '^perhaps" '^that puzzles the
will."

Yet he alone, too, by his spiritual mind, may ride triumphant
over the natural man, and may learn to bring his judgment,
and will, not only to regard death without fear, but even in
many instances to welcome its advent with joy.

As to pain felt by animals in consequence of acts of cruelty
by man, or by another animal; or by the rapacity of carni-
vorous creatures : also as to the pain of disease, and pain of
mind in man as caused by sorrow ; I must refer to the articles
on ''Cruelty and Pain,'' Vol. II.; also ''Disease" Vol. 11. ;
and " Probation,'' Vol. V.

In conclusion, I would particularly remark that we must
always draw a sharp line of distinction between the pain of
disease, and the pain arising as a warning and protection to
the individual and his bodily parts, so that ease and health
may be secured and maintained.

Thus, for example, if a dog treads on a burning hot hearth-
stone, it will withdraw; and so on as to all animals when
placed under various adverse conditions; nor is this withdrawal
from pain necessarily voluntary, as when you instinctively close
your eyes in a cloud of dust, or as when the frog pulls up his leg
on the toes being pinched. (See "Reflex Action.'')

z 2

CHAPTER XIV.

The Pure Instincts.

The Pure Instincts — Self-preservation — Maternal instinct — Selection
of site, &c., for nests — Questions for Materialistic Evolutionist —
Birds' nests — Insects' sites for placing eggs— Inhabitants^ of the
land who lay tlieir eggs in water — Questions for Materialistic Evo-
lutionist—Maternal care of eggs— Questions for Materialistic
Evolutionist — Care of the young — Pipe fish — Questions for Mate-
rialistic Evolutionist — Believer's view — Instinct of the young —
Questions for Materialistic Evolutionist — Mr. Darwin.

In the article on ^^ Reason and Instinct " I have endeavoured
to distinguish between those two qualities of mind, but it is
needful that I should devote some special consideration to the
Pure Instincts and the wonderful doings of creatures under
their influence, because the materialists and unbelieving evolu-
tionists try to prove that they like all other faculties are self-
acquired. In fact the Materialists say " Instinct " is nothing
more than a combination of " experience " and " hahit " acquired
by the ancestors of any creature, and handed down by heredity
to the descendants in such degree and so far as it may be bene-
ficial to the kind in " the struggle for existence." That is to
say, materialistic evolutionists believe that inorganic matter
having by spontaneous action come somehow to form a living
organism, and such creature having been compelled by chemico-
mechanics to assume a certain form and acquired more or less
mind, it then exists, and moves about, and does, according also
to chemico-mechanical internal causes, and according as these
may be conditioned by external secondary — it may be chance-
happening — factors or causes. Further, these gentlemen who
have such faith in materialistic self-action and in their own

THE PURE INSTINCTS. 341

capacities for understanding all about the working of creation,
believe that a creature thus constituted acquires habits and
instincts by self-development, and though these philosophers do
not tell us how and by what necessity bioplasm or protoplasm
becomes differentiated into blood vessels, muscles, nerves, brain,
so as to constitute an animal, or how mind evolved, yet they
say there can be no question but that self-improvement, as
ruled by secondary causes (that is, self-evolution), does give
the key to the solution of the whole question as to the
origin of structure, organs, and mind. Instinct therefore,
they say, is nothing more than the accumulated observation,
acquired practical experience, and adopted habit, of past
generations, as inherited in all its useful developments by
the living.

This is the view I shall contest. Now no one can deny but
that the higher brutes can form habits, and can profit by ex-
perience and perhaps hand down such in some measure to their
descendants, but what however, I maintain is, that such power
is very partial, and prevails to a very slight degree, and never
goes beyond ci certain boundary as laid down by God's endow-
ment of " limited capacity for variation."

Further, the doctrine of evolution gives no clue as to how
instincts j'lrs^ arose, nor why it is they do not progress as expe-
rience accumulates. How it is, for example, that bees' combs,
and birds' nests, and caterpillars' cocoons, are (as far as we have
any knowledge) just the same now as they have ever been in
given species. (For more as to this see " Acquired Experience,"^
Vol. IV.)

Now as one of the chief objects of this book is to endeavour
to prove that there is a radical difference between the mind of
man and those of animals, and to show that there is no creature
below him in the scale of creation that can reason by intellec-
tual ideas, it is necessary to examine the question of Instinct
very closely.

As will have been seen in the article on " Reason and
Instinct'''' man himself possesses Instinct, and in so far as he is
guided by it is an animal; but I hold that he possesses — super-

342 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

added to his instinctive or organic animal mind — a further kind
of mind — the intellectual.

I hold also that this kind of mind — the intellectual, — appeared
in the world suddenly, and that there is no gradation of mind
between man and the brutes such as there would be if it had
arisen by evolution, and if evolution was still working; also
that there is an abrupt and complete difference between the
instinctive mind of the animal and the intellectual mind of the
man. Indeed that by close analysis man can himself distin-
guish in his own person that there is a complete difference
between his own animal or instinctive, and his intellectual
feelings and ideas. (See " Illustrations of Intellect and In-
stinct.'^)

In the article on " Reason and Instinct " I have tried to prove
the complete difference between the two, and what I wish to
say here is to offer more evidence, and to urge still further the
proof that all the acts of all creatures below man are effected
by an " Instinctive Mind" capable of ordering and directing
and bringing about certain things for which it was designed,
and which it moreover comj^els the organism it animates to
carry out and do, although at the same time the animal is in-
capable of knowing intellectually why it does so and so, or for
what purpose.

In short, as I have explained in the last-mentioned article,
I believe all acts in all creatures below man are effected
without intellectual ratiocination by means of the instinc-
tive part of the organic mind, which (with certain ordained
powers of variation) is able to effect all that is sufficient for
the needs of the creature, according to and as endowed by
God.

This being the case, therefore, the different sorts of instinct
are almost as abundant as the different sorts of creatures — may
I add plants — in the world. So numerous indeed are they
that it is difficult to select the most appropriate for description
and illustration in the following slight sketch of them, and I
particularly beg the reader to observe that I shall only be able
to give an example or two in explanation of a few of the most

THE MATERNAL OR PARENTAL LNSTINCT. 343

important kinds of instinct, and that to treat of all in detail and
exhaustively would require volumes.

Instinct of Self-preservation. — This as we know is common
to all creatures, and during their waking hours ceaselessly
urges them to avoid the danger of personal injury or death,
prompts them to take food, and to observe such doings as may
tend to secure proper warmth and all other needs requisite for
the maintenance of life and health.

And here, before proceeding further, I would remark that
the fact of the existence of this universal instinct is completely
contradictory to the theory of" materialistic evolution," because
what power or cause could have initiated and established such
an instinct unless one capable of intelligent design, and of -per-
ceiving fitness, and there is no materialistic fitness-by-necessity in
avoiding death ?

The Maternal or Parental Instinct. — This most extraor-
dinary instinct we will consider under three headings: — first.
Selection of site, or of medium for deposit of the young, or of
eggs, and in many instances the provision of a nest or other
receptacle ; secondly, The maternal care of the eggs ; thirdly.
Care of the young.

Selection of Site, Provision of Nest, &c. — Apes, and
Monkeys, and the higher quadrupeds do not as a rule make
any particular selection, or provide a nest, receptacle, &c.,
and if they do, it is of a rude kind in comparision with the
elaborate and beautiful structures fabricated by birds, insects,
&c., for such purpose. From this general rule however
as regards quadrupeds, certain of them must be ex-
cepted, and especially those belonging to the order of gnaw-
ing animals — (Rodentia) — as the Rabbit— the Beaver — the
Mouse. Moles too make nests for their young, separate from
their general habitations. The Hedgehog also, previous to
bringing forth her progeny, constructs a nest of moss and
leaves to receive them on their arrival. The pigmy harvest
mouse too ! what frequenter of the country can have failed to
see and admire its skill, and care, and assiduity in providing

344 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

the very beautiful and snug nest for its young which we see
perched in the bushes, or on grass stems, round and trig as a
cricket ball.

To describe the nests, or to mention other quadrupeds who
make receptacles though less elaborate, would take too much
space ; but I would draw particular attention to the fact that
these nests, &c., are made with great care, and in many cases
with great labour, according to the behests of an all-powerful
instinct which bids the animal prepare by anticipation for the
birth of her young ones.

The Rabbit, and the Mole particularly, expend much labour
in forming special excavations in the earth for the purpose,
and distinct from their ordinary habitations, and the rabbit
lines her bed with fur pulled from her own body.

Quest{o7is for the Unbelieving 3Iaterialistic Evoluiionist to
answer as to the foregoing.

By what materialistic necessity is it that the rabbit, &c.,
makes a nest beforehand in which to place her young on their
birth ? If it is a " derived habit," gradually acquired by the
experience of ancestral rabbits on witnessing the death of
their young from exposure ; then we must grant to the rabbit
the faculty of an intellectual reasoning power in designing
and making the nest for shelter ; and if we did grant this,
then we should have to account for the fact of the rabbit being
generally such a very stupid creature ; for if it did first make
its nest by intellectual reasoning, how is it the animal has not
become more clever in its general habits, and doings ?

Again, supposing that young rabbits had died in primitive
ages from exposure to cold, why did they not become
gradually hardened to such ; and why should they require a
protection which their relative the infant hare never has, it
being born on the bare ground, or in a rude " form " ?

Let the materialist say, whether or no, the most rational
conclusion is not, that the above Instincts of making, or not
making nests, are endowed in the different creatures according
to God's will ?

Leaving the quadrupeds, we will next consider the egg-

BIRDS' NESTS. 345

depositing, and nest-making instincts of birds, and insects ;
and which, strange to say, are even far more complex and
wonderful.

Birds' Nests. — Every one has seen a bird's nest, and admired
in many cases its singular beauty and ingenuity of construc-
tion ; but every one does not know that each species has not
only a fixed rule as to shape, and materials, but also as to
situation. Some nests — as the Wood pigeon's— are a mere
platform of twigs : some an elaborate nest made of moss and
lichen, as that of the Chaffinch : — others are made of mud, as
the Martin's : others of fish-bones, as the Kingfisher's, &c.
Again some nests are open ; and others domed.

Then as to situation, some are placed in holes beneath the
ground, as the Sand Martin's — some on the surface of the
earth, as the Partridge's — some are in bushes a few feet from
the ground — others in tall trees, &c. &c. But I must desist
from further examples for want of space,^ only adding that
every kind of bird adheres closely to the Instinct of its species
as to the form of nest ; its kind of materials ; and its sort of
location.

All this is sufficiently wonderful, but the .greatest marvel
even of all is, that the pair of birds (the cock bird often helps)
make the nest in anticij^ation of the eggs, and finish it previous to
their heing laid.

Now as to the question of how it is birds know how to
choose the situation ; and how to weave the nest ; and how
to select the materials ; I will state that some persons have
imagined that birds build nests by imitating their fellows, and
even I believe have thought they may be taught by others of
their species.

All conjecture, however, has been set aside by the following
most interesting observation of Mr. Lowne," which I will quote
in brief.

Mr. Lowne possessed some Doves which had been bred in
confinement ; and which had themselves also reared young

1 See Wood's admirable book " Home xoitliout hands " for more details.

2 See " Popidar Science Review," July, 1879.

346 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

ones in a cage, using for their reception the usual straw or
hay nest provided in cages.

To test the nest-making Instinct, however, Mr. Lowne had
an enclosure of netting made in his garden, taking care that
the branch of a tree was inckided in it. In this tree after a
few faihn-es these doves built a nest of sticks of a kind special
to their species ; and laid eggs, and reared young in it ;
although, as the narration shows, they had never seen the nest
of a wild dove ; and although they had no wild dove to teach
them. This case is most deeply interesting, and clearly proves
the existence of an innate nest-making Instinct.

With this hasty survey as to birds' nests I must for want of
space be content.

Insects' sites, &c., for placing eggs.— The instincts of bees,
wasps, ants, &c., in this respect we will discuss under the
headings of " Social Instincts " and " Habitations : " here we
will only consider a few examples of this instinct as shown by
insects that do not associate in communities.

If possible our narrative will now become more and more

startling.

First as to situation, some insects place their nests and eggs
beneath the ground — as do many Beetles; others bore holes in
wood and there deposit their eggs, as the Carpenter Bee, &c. :
others lay their eggs on leaves, as the Butterflies : but in respect
to these it is a most astonishing fact that particular butterflies
select the leaves of particular plants, and lay their eggs on
such species of plant, and as a rule on no other. For example,
of the common genus "Vanessa," the beautiful Peacock Butter-
fly (Vanessa lo) deposits its eggs on the stinging-nettle, and
its young (the larva or caterpillar) when hatched feed on its
leaves. The Painted Lady butterfly (Vanessa Cardui)
lays its eggs on the " thistle " or " burdock," and its larvas
feed on them. The common White Butterfly uses the cabbage,
and so on for other butterflies. The reason of this selection
by the female of particular plants for her deposition of eggs
is clearly the fact, that her instinct leads her to choose those

THE LA YING OF INSECTS' EGGS. 347

plants on which it is proper for her larvae to feed when they
are hatched.

Insects that lay their eggs in, or on, the bodies of other
living creatures. — I must next mention the ^^ Ichneumons^''
the different species of which are very numerous, and the
instincts of which are surprisingly remarkable.

The ichneumons pierce the bodies of larvue of other insects
by means of a special egg depositor, and in these living
bodies the eggs so laid are hatched, and the progeny feed on
their unwilling host's flesh and blood. As to this, one would
naturally think that as soon as the young grub ichneumons
began their repast, the creature (often a caterpillar) in whose
body they fed, would die ; but careful observation shows that
this is not so, for by a remarkable instinct the little grubs
avoid injuring the vital parts, until the time arrives when they
themselves are to undergo a change, and will require the food
no longer, then they eat up the last remaining parts, and the
host perishes. I would refer the interested reader to Kirby
and Spence's ^^ Entomology, ^^ p. 194, for details as to the above,
and only add that the female ichneumon does not lay her
eggs indiscriminately in any kind of larvie, but selects, as a
victim, one whose flesh is fitted to aflbrd proper nourishment
to her young, and, moreover, apiwrtions the number of eggs laid
in each to the size of the caterpillar chosen. Also that by
some extraordinary instinct two ichneumons do not lay eggs
in the same creature.

Another insect which shows a most remarkable description
of instinct is the Gad, or Bot fly {Oestrus). There are several
species of this two-winged fly, and the mode of each is to
deposit its eggs on the hair or wool of living creatures, such
as the horse, ox, sheep, &c. : which eggs, in due time, are
hatched, and the young resulting therefrom, live like those of
the ichneumons on the flesh and juices of the victims.

Each species, extraordinary to relate, can, when the time
comes for depositing its eggs, select the appropriate sort of
animal, and what is more marvellous still can fix en the part
of the animal best suited for the hatching of its eggs. I will

348 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

speak first of the Gad^ or Bot fly, that frequents the horse.
The grub of this flj finds its appropriate food and temporary
dwelling-place in the stomach of the horse, and must therefore
in some mode be conveyed there. This occurs as follows : —
The female Gad fly guided by her instinct, lays her eggs only
on those parts of the horse which can be easily reached by the
horse, such as the knees or shoulder ; and thus when the horse
licks these parts the little grubs are readily conveyed to the
horse's mouth, and thence to the stomach (Westwood's " Ento-
mology,^^ Vol. II. p. 579), where they affix themselves by means
of strong mouth-hooks.

On the other hand, the Ox Bot fly lays its eggs on the back
of the ox, for there the young are destined to burrow and form
large tumours. The Sheep Bot lays its eggs in the nostrils of
that animal.

This selection of the knee or shoulder of the horse, the back
of the ox, or the nostrils of the sheep, for the laying of eggs by
the appropriate species of Gad fly, appears to me as wonderful
an act as that arising from any instinct I have described.

I will next name the Nut weevil, which is a little beetle
that can pierce nuts while they are green, and lay its eggs
therein, the maggots resulting from which we have all dis-
agreeably discovered in eating ripe nuts. I shall speak further
of this weevil in ^^ Instincts of the Young^

Inhabitants of the land and air which lay their eggs in
the water. — We now come to another most extraordinary
maternal instinct — an instinct so remarkable and irresistible, as
to lead creatures living on land, breathing air, and the majority
of whom can fly, to lay their eggs in or near the ivater, in which
medium the young when hatched can swim about and breathe
the air dissolved in the water in a similar manner to the fish.
The "Frog,'' the "Dragon fly,'' the " Caddice," &c., are
examples of such. The young, or larvce of these and other
creatures thus born in the water, live there for a time, but ulti-
mately undergo changes which fit them for breathing air. The
tadpole of the frog gradually alters its breathing apparatus,
grows legs, and one day hops out on to the land. The Dragon

INHABITANTS OF THE lAND AND AIR, ETC. 349

fly larvce produces four enormous wings, and quits the water
to become a denizen of the air. possessed moreover, for its size,
of powers of flight superior to that of any other creature.
These perfected dragon flies again after a season lay their eggs
in the water, and so the miraculous round is continued.

The same may be said of the " Caddicer The perfect full-
grown " Caddicefly " possesses four wings. At certain times
the females may, like those of the Dragon fly, be seen crawling
down the stems of aquatic plants and depositing their eggs as
much as a foot beneath the surface of the water. ( See West-
wood's ''Entomology,'' Vol. II. p. 62.) Fancy this ! why to
imagine such a thing as a mere figment of the imagination
would appear simply ridiculous; but it is a certainty, that
insects that can fly do in some cases pass beneath the water to
lay their eggs !

Truly such a fact surpasses fiction. Of the caddice larvas I
shall speak further in '^ Instincts of the Young."

One more inhabitant of the air I am tempted to mention as
laying its eggs in the water, and then for want of space I must
desist. I allude to the too well-known " Gnat.'' The female
gnats have the remarkable instinct of depositing their eggs, by
the assistance of their back legs, in a small boat-like mass or
raft, which when formed floats on the surface of the water.
The eggs are hatched by the heat of the sun, and the larvae
inhabit the water till they change into the perfect-winged
insect.

I must now leave this very large and interesting branch of
our inquiry, and beg the reader to believe that it is pressure of
space alone that compels me to pass on.

Questions for the Unbelieving Materialistic Evolutionist.

The same questions may be repeated in respect to the mar-
vellous insdncts and doings just related, that I have previously
put in regard to quadrupeds, nests, burrows, &c. ; and I would
reiterate the statement that if animals, birds, insects, &c., con-
struct nests and make other provision for their expected young
in consequence of intellectual reasoning and in anticipatio7i of
future needs, they really show their possession not only of as

350 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

high a power of intellectual reasoning faculty as is possessed
by man, but show also that they have a faculty wanting in
him — the power — though untaught — to construct the most
beautiful and elaborate nests, cocoons, &c. Why ! the pro-
vision of a nest beforehand is as reasonable an act (if you do
not grant a Grod-instructed instinct) as that of the human
mother who when "expecting" provides the "baby clothes"
and cradle, in preparation for the partly-dreaded but fondly-
looked-for event. Yet it must be emphatically noted that
whereas the human mother buys her cradle and its soft mat-
tress because she does not herself know how to make such, the
bird, the gnat, the weevil, the bee, caterpillar, &c., &c., do
know, though untaught, how to make their equivalents of the
cradle and mattress, and even in the case of the two latter
can secrete from their own bodies the material, wax (as we
shall see) or silk wherewith to construct the cell or spin the
cocoon.

Then as to the air-breathing creatures that seem so com-
pletely to violate all propriety by laying their eggs in the
water, and of those which follow the extraordinary practice of
laying their eggs in living creatures. Let the materialistic un-
believer explain all these instincts, and how they could have
jirst arisen, and let him remember they could not have arisen by
^^ acquired maternal experience,^'' as transmitted by their ancestors,
because hosts of insects die long before their young are hatched.
Maternal Care of Eggs. — We have seen in the previous
article a few illustrations as to some of the modes by which
various creatures are taught by their innate instincts to make
provision for the deposit of their eggs, and at the same time
in many cases to provide by an apparently prescient, yet really
blind foresight, for the food and welfare of their future progeny.
I now propose to consider how, in many instances, the
parent, or parents, after the laying of the eggs, take personal
care of them.

This is seen most familiarly in birds; and every cue knows
the solicitude and devotion with which the hen bird, and in
some species the cock also, watches over and tends the eggs

MATERNAL CARE OF EGGS. 351

even at great personal sacrifice. Let an intruder of a size she
is able to cope with come near, and the sitting bird will
vigorously defend her treasure ; but let a human being
approach her nest and she will keep quite quiet till your
hand almost touches her, and then she noiselessly glides from
the nest, her instinct evidently teaching her that silence and
stealth are desirable for concealment. No sooner, however,
is she driven from the nest, than she shows her solicitude in
cries and agitated movements.

Then what a remarkable instinct is that of brooding the eggs,
and keeping them constantly warm for two or more weeks —
according to the species — until the young are hatched, never
leaving her nest but for brief periods in order to procure food,
unless relieved in the " sitting " by the cock, or fed by him !
Think of this, and of the personal sacrifice ! And as to this
sacrifice, we all know that the usual life of a bird is one of
almost incessant motion; and its taking of food almost con-
stant; and yet here it sits on the eggs, voluntarily and quietly,
for two, or three, or four weeks; and thus must suffer not
only from enforced inaction, but also from partial starvation,
for under ordinary circumstances the hen gets thin during
incubation; and why should she take such care and suffer so
much inconvenience in order to guard, and tend, some inani-
mate round things that are not good for her to eat, and of no
personal benefit to her ? And why has she taken the trouble
to make a nest to receive them? and why should she deposit
each egg carefully in such receptacle instead of casting it off any -
ivhere and at any time as a most inconvenient thing that has
grown in her, and which the getting rid of must be a great
bodily relief ?

The next instance I will speak of is the case of that most
pugnacious and savagely carnivorous creature, the spider.
" Nearly all the different species of spiders envelope their eggs
in a covering of silk. These cocoons, as they may be called,
are in some speeies formed as a little bag, and carried about
by the female beneath her body, and the care with which these
cocoons are guarded is quite astonishing, and if deprived of

352 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

her treasure she wanders about, evincing the greatest solici-
tude." (VYestwood's ^'Introduction to Entomologij,''^ p. 138.)

These, I think, are sufficient examples to give of the Instinct
under description, but as subsidiary to the main subject of
*' Care of the Eggs," yet, most importantly bound up with it,
is the fact that the male bird, in some species, shows his
interest in the process of incubation, by feeding the female
on the nest, as well as by sometimes relieving her in sitting.
(See Yarrell's " British Birds.'')

Questions for the Unhelieving Materialistic Evolutionist.

Briefly. How, on materialistic principles, did this Instinct
first arise? and why — as it is no personal benefit to the indi-
vidual— does it continue to act so persistently, generation after
generation? For the present I leave this, but the question
will be again pressed further on.

Parental Care of the Young. — The care taken by many
creatures of their eggs, as above briefly narrated, is very great;
but the patience, the courage, and the devotion shown therein,
is even exceeded by the watchful and laborious solicitude many
creatures evince towards their young.

The examples that might be given of this remarkable instinct
are of course extremely numerous, but I must be content with
briefly describing a few only of the most familiar.

Of these, who that has been a spectator can ever forget the
manner and conduct of the cow towards her recently-born
calf. The calf itself — with legs widely spread, so as to secure
its equilibrium during the repeated hard licking of it by its
mother — stands quietly by her side. The cow is in a state of
the greatest excitement, first looking this way, and then that,
for any threatened danger, her gaze constantly reverting to her
calf; uttering at the same time frequent low meanings, and
showing by the expression of her eyes, and by her whole
manner, how profoundly she is experiencing the feelings
inherent in the " Instinct of Maternal care of the Young."

Then the domestic cat ; see her lying patiently with her
little ones; watch her cleansing them, and purring to them;

CARE OF THE YOUNG. 353

and if danger threatens observe her daring courage exhibited
in their defence ! Think, too, of her frequent practice of
removing her kittens from one nest, or place of retreat, to
another more concealed, if circumstances seem to render such
change desirable.

As to the care taken by birds of their young, we all have
seen the domestic hen leading about her brood with her
anxious " cluck, cluck," — scratching the ground for them in
search of food — denying herself the eating of it — hovering over
them for warmth, or protection, and if danger was urgent even
flying at and bravely pecking in anger such a large creature
as an intruding cow.

I may add that the birds who feed their young while in the
nest — as blackbirds, hetlge-sparrows, swallows, &c. — go through
almost incredible labour in their incessant flying backwards
and forwards to the nest in the procurance of worms, flies, &c.,
and which, instead of eating themselves, they carry to their
young.

Then as to the Maternal Instinct of Insects. This is in
many species very strong, as we shall see in the article on
" Social Instincts,''^ and I will only name here one example
that most persons have witnessed.

If, in a pasture where ants abound, you raise a stone that
has laid a long time unmoved, you will at once see ants running
here and there, carrying in their front legs large white masses.
What are these masses? They are their larvae, or young; and
the first thing the ants have done, therefore, is not simply to
seek their own safety by immediate flight on the occurrence of
danger, but to look anxiously and laboriously to the care of
their young.

Of course the above examples could be added to immensely;
but I think I have given enough for our purpose.

We now come to consider a curious phase in the history of
Maternal Instinct.

Up to a certain period — that is, till the young creature is
able to shift for itself — the mother especially continues her
assiduous attentions to her offspring; but as soon as they are

A a

354 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

strong, and do not need further care, an entire reversal of
conduct takes place.

This may be noticed in the different domestic animals, but
it is especially marked in the common fowl, who at the proper
time not only ceases to call, and to tend her chickens, but
even drives them from her Avith angry demonstrations; — she,
who a short time before would with pertinacious courage
have endangered herself in defending her yoang, now not only
will have nothing to do with them but even runs after and
spitefully tries to peck them !

How strange is this 1 Why after all her devotion should she
suddenly alter her conduct ? To me it clearly appears that
such a complete change can only have occurred in one of two
ways ; either it must have taken place by an intuitive instinct
implanted in the mind of the bird by a Supernatural power, or
it must have taken place by a high act of intellectual reasoning.
If the Materialist will not accept the first explanation, then he
must believe that the hen full of love and devotion as she had
previously shown herself, must be a very Spartan in regard to
maternal love and duty, and that having perceived that the
fledglings could now feed and shift for themselves, she suddenly
resolves that it will be best she should suppress her own feel-
ings of ardent love, and turn the young ones out in the world
to do their duty in life as she has done ! But if she does
really act thus by intellectual reasoning, I would remind a
certain section of " advanced " human thinkers that one of her
motives must be decidedly opposed to Malthus, and if any of
them think the hen is intellectually wise in casting off her
progeny, w^hat can they think of her for driving away one
family in order that she may undertake the duties and cares of
another !

We now come to another branch of this remarkable subject,
and must consider the case of those creatures who do not as a
rule possess any maternal promptings to tend their young, or
to look to them in any respect.

To name two only amid this numerous class, I will specify
the frog and the fish.

CAKE OF THE YOUNG. 355

The frog lays her eggs in the water, and takes no further
heed of them or of the future of her little tadpoles.

And so likewise of the great majority of reptiles, very few
look to the hatching of their eggs or after-care of their young,
but leave them to themselves. But yet there are a few ex-
ceptions to this general rule amongst reptiles, and these stand
out as the more remarkable on account of their infrequency in
this class of creatures. One of these exceptions is the great
snake — the Python — which " sits " on her eggs.

And so too of the female fish, she as a rule casts her eggs
in the water, scratching a hole perhaps with her tail in the
gravel to receive them, and then leaving them to their fate and
never seeing her fry, and even if she does happen to do so,
gobbling them up if she can ; for most fish act on the rule
" that all is fish that comes to the net," and the majority devour
any fish they can catch that is smaller than themselves, even to
the eating of their own species.

To this rule, however, of indifference towards the young as
shown by fish there are (as we have seen amongst the reptiles)
a few extraordinary exceptions. For example, the little
sticklebat and a very few other fish make a nest of weeds to
receive the eggs, and tend the young after hatching!

But more extraordinary still is the case of a very humble
fish, the " Pipe Fish,'" the male of which has a kind of mar-
supium, or pouch, beneath the tail, in which the female places
the eggs. In due course the fry are hatched and quit the
pouch, but they follow their father about, and if danger
threatens return to his pouch in the same way that the young
kangaroo returns to its motJie/s pouch.

Lastly, I will say a few words as to a reversal which occa-
sionally takes place of the usual Maternal Instinct, even in an
animal that possesses it and exercises it as a rule most
markedly. An instance of this strange reversal is seen in the
rabbit, and every boy who keeps rabbits can tell you by sad
experience that some "does" will kill their little ones if he looks
at them too soon after their birth. Whether wild rabbits will
kill their young if disturbed I cannot say, and it may be that

A a 2

;56 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

it is a thing that only takes place bj one of those alterations
of natural instinct which is apt to occur to animals under
domestication. Anyhow it is very mysterious and inexplicable
even to the believer, and it appears to me must be even more
so to the Materialistic Evolutionist. The only conjecture that
I can make as a believer is that it must be an instance of one
of those perversions brought about in some way by the blight
and influence of evil, of which I shall have so much to say in
the article on " Derdh " in the second volume.

As to the killing of their grubs by wasps I shall speak in the
article on " Social Instincts. ^^

Questions for the Unbelieving Materialistic Evolutionist.
In offering any explanation as to the origin of the foregoing
remarkable instincts, the Materialist is again at fault, and is on
the horns of a triple dilemma ; for it seems equally impossible
in each case that the Instincts as to " Selection of site for
deposit of Eggs,'' " Care of Eggs,'^ or ^' Care of the Young,'"
could have arisen by the action of reason and " acquired ex-
perience " fixed or concreted into " instincts " by " habit," or
that they arose by " necessity," or by "chance."

I ask then of the Materialist how did these Instincts begin?
His reply I can well imagine ; he will tell me I am blundering
asfain as usual, and that in this case I do not reflect — indeed
have not the wit to perceive — that the instincts spoken of
above, must have begun very low down in the evolution ladder
and gradually ascended and become perfected during as many
millions of millions of years as his theory requires.

But nevertheless, and notwithstanding such a reply, I would
repeat my question . How did these instincts begin ? I care
not how long ago they began, or in what creature; the salient
fact we have to explain, is why any creature should to its own
detriment devote itself to the i^atient and often laborious and
dangerous care-taking of something {the egg or the young^ outside
itself, and from which it could individually derive no benefit, either
directly or remotely.

" Oh ! but " (some one may say) " the parent derives mental

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 357

pleasure from tending the eggs and the young." True, un-
believer ! but how did the pleasure first come ? Certainly not
by self-made materialistic necessity; and besides this, previous
to the possibility of the pleasure there must have occurred, in
the material structure of the female, the power and qualities
necessary to form an ovisac, and finally to produce the egg in
all its marvellousness.

And the egg after much discomfort, being laid, why should
the female regard it with pleasure ? why should she not rather
— as one might certainly expect according to rationalistic argu-
ments—why should she not rather look on it with repugnance,
as a thing that had caused her so much inconvenience, and
destroy it in anger?

Yet the Materialist may argue again and say that this applies
only to creatures that lay eggs, and that those which have
breasts, do derive pleasure and relief from their young ones
sucking.

This is true. Materialist ! but before we dwell on this
pleasure of maternity we must account for the origin of the
breast and the milk; and this I think the unbelieving Scientist
cannot do, notwithstanding Mr. Darwin's attempt in his " Origin
of Species^ (See strictures thereon at the end of my article
" Instincts of the Young.'")

But to return to the question of the origin of the egg, I
challenge the Scientific Unbeliever to give a reasonable sur-
mise on materialistic principles as to how the first egg of
Avhatever creature, and however humble, was first formed ?
He could not say, as is his wont, it was by " habit " and
" acquired experience " accumulated during ages and handed
down by heredity : he could not say it was by undesigned
chemico-physical necessity : he could not say it was by reason,
and I dare him to expose himself to the ridicule of saying it
Avas by chance.

In discussing this, I will remind the reader that I said just
now that the Materialistic Evolutionist might accuse me of
not considering that the Maternal, and other allied Instincts,
may have taken their origin very low down in the organic

358 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

scale, and become perfected gradually by evolutional improve-
ment.

To examine this charge against my assumed ignorance, or
carelessness, let us go back even beyond what I believe the
Evolutionist considers the era of the primitive egg, and ponder
on the genesis of those plants and animals that increase by
subdivision.

I will not enter on the question here as to whether any
humble plant or simple animal perpetually increases by sub-
division, and does not {as is the fact), after a certain number of
generations, adopt a different process, and by conjugation, &c.,
form eggs and germs; but we will for the occasion imagine
that according to a materialistic view the first plant and the
first simple animal did propagate simply by subdivision.
Now, Materialistic Evolutionist ! assuming that the first
humble plant did divide into two parts, each one of which was
capable of growing to be an exact counterpart of the original
parent plant, and assuming that you might consider therefore
a divided part to represent what by evolution and improvement
and difterentiation of ages has got finally to be produced (the
egg or seed) by a certain specialized part (the ovi — or embryo sac)
only. Assuming I say all this, then I must fall back on, and
urge the question, why did the plant divide, and how did
each division acquire the power of growing like the parent ?
And then as to the conjugation of cells (which I have
glanced at, and which the Scientist will understand, and which
I shall explain in a future volume), why should the cells of a
humble plant join and blend together in order to perpetuate
the species ?

Tell rae, Sceptic ! Tell me if you know of any chemico-
physical necessity, or of any necessity, that could unaided, and
during as long a lapse of ages as you please to imagine, mami-
facture simply by those forces, and bring about, such a kind of
process, or necessity, as that of subdivision; or of the forma-
tion of an egg, or germ, or seed, in any simply materialistic
manner whatever ?

And failing to be able to give a satisfactory reply to that

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 359

question ia respect of a chemico-physical view, let me ask
further if you can name any Anatomical, Physiological, or
Psychological self-arising necessity which could cause the
humblest plant, or humblest animal, to divide into two, each
of which should grow like the parent in all respects as to size,
shape, qualities, and attributes.

In fine, and to sum up this argument as to the egg, and its
bearing on the origin of the Maternal Instinct, we may say for
certain that the egg, or germ, must have existed prior to the
formation of the Maternal Instinct, and that consequently it
is idle, and a mere waste of time to speculate as to the possible
materialistic origin of this Instinct by self-acting causes,
unless the Materialist can first of all show on his principles hoiv
the egg or germ arose. But perhaps the Materialist may not
be satisfied with this, so let us look further.

I have said that prior to the origin, on materialistic prin-
ciples, of the Maternal Instinct, an egg or germ must have
been formed by some cause; and just as we must grant that a
plant would not divide into two without an efiicient cause, so
must we grant that no part of the structure of an organism
would be differentiated into an ovisac in which the egg could
be produced, unless compelled likewise by some efficient
cause.

The further we go back, then, the more clear it is that we
require to presuppose a ^^ Prime Cause,''^ capable of Design, in
order to account in a reasonable manner for the existence of
things as they are, whether we consider they w^ere created
perfect on the instant, or whether we suppose that ovisacs
and other special organs came by gradual differentiation and
setting apart for particular purposes.

I have then to press the Materialistic Evolutionist to tell
me how came the ovisac or egg-producer ?

Now it is argued by some persons that it is the presence of
this ovisac as a part of the body, together with the possession
of mammre by the higher animals, that give rise to the feel-
ings and doings of the " Maternal Instinct.'" But this is con-
fusing the matter; the prime question is how came the ovisac ?

36o SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Although, however, the Materialistic Evolutionist cannot
explain how the ovisac came, there it is, and it must be an
inscrutable puzzle to him.

Granted, the ovisac, however — and that materialistically it
came somehow — we will next inquire did the " 31aternal
Instinct " come by ^' habit " and " acquired experience," or as
conditioned by reason.

The Godless Evolutionist will tell me, I suppose — as I have
already said — that the " 3Iaternal Instinct " must have begun
first very low down in the scale; but however low down, and
however humble may have been the first creature that laid an
egg, and tended it, and hatched it. and then took care of the
young in however simple a manner, I must ask the Scientist
who is an unbeliever, why the parent tended the eg^, and
hatched it out, and then fed and protected the offspring ?
What were the internal motives and promptings — nay, the
irresistible impulse which compelled this eccentric behaviour ?
In the absence of any material benefit to the parent why did
it act so ? As for saying then that the Maternal Instincts
may have arisen by a gradually-acquired habit would be to
argue on very unstable premises, because as there must have
been a first egg that required sitting on, so there must have
been a first helpless young creature that required feeding.
Then how could the feeding Instinct by the parent bird have
arisen ? It could not be by hereditary habit, because in
order to benefit by heredity, an ancestor must have commenced
the practice at some time.

I can offer the Materialist no glimpse of an idea by which
to help him to answer these questions in a materialistic sense,
so must pass on. Seeing then that unless you can account
for the egg, the Maternal Instinct could not have arisen by
*' habit " and "acquired experience," because every habit must
have had a beginning, and must have had something to work
on — material or immaterial — and seeing that no experience
can be acquired without something tangible to profit by — and
seeing that an ovisac or an Qgg could not materialistically
have produced itself {and I cannot believe the Materialist can

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 361

thinh it came by chance), we must needs — failing to account
for its origin — look in vain for any basis, or motive, or circum-
stance by which "habit" or "experience," could in a materialis-
tic sense have formed the Maternal Instinct. In fine, I repeat,
you must account for the ovisac or the egg before you can
account for the origin of the Maternal Instinct by " habit or
experience."

If, however, the Materialist could, on his principles, account
for the origin of the ovisac, and the egg, then the question as
to the origin of the " Maternal Instincts " would possibly be
comparatively easy after receiving such a flood of light as such
a discovery would reveal.

The same ai-guments as the foregoing apply in regard to
the origin of the Maternal Instinct through the exercise
of reason. The origin of the egg must be accounted for
before it would be possible for the young one to be born,
and to require reasonable attention. Besides, if this Instinct
did originate in " reason," why are not brutes more reason-
able in other respects?

Does the Materialist think the cow, or the bird, knows why
it is attentive to its calf or its fledglings? or the bird know
why it sits on its eggs? or does the hedge sparrow know why
it feeds the young cuckoo? Clearly not in my opinion. The
hedge sparrow's case is a good illustrative one of the absence
of reason from her doings. She cannot know why she feeds
the young cuckoo, or if she does, then I say her reason and
her benevolence transcend the same qualities in man ! The
young cuckoo is an usurper in the nest — it has murdered the
hedge sparrow's own offspring, which are lying dead beneath
the nest, and yet the old bird goes on feeding the intruder as
if it were her own nestling. Is this an example of reason con-
strained and directed by the highest motives of charity, and
forgiveness, and love to your neighbour; or is it blind instinct?
— an instinct even so blind — as I hold — that the mother does
not appear to recognize, that the young monster cuckoo does
not a bit resemble her own offspring. Explain this. Materialist!

362 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Having now, as I consider, proved the untenable nature of
the Materialist's position, it remains only for me as a very
strong believer to express my decided conviction that the
ovisac, the ^^^^, and the Maternal Instincts, have all arisen as
part of a vast plan designed, and carried out, by the Will and
Power of God. At the same time, however, as I asseverate
this, I must, in concluding this article, make a few remarks as
to the very mysterious irregularity of the occurrence of the
Maternal Instincts in the various races of creatures. This
irregularity will, I think, be best exemplified by considering
the Maternal Instinct under three aspects: —

First. In its full perfection.

Secondly. In its cessation, or reversal, on the young becom-
ing adults.

Thirdly. In its complete absence in some races of creatures.

First, as to its existence in perfection. This we witness in
the highest degree in the mammals and birds; and, as will have
been seen in the foregoing, is so marvellous in its manifesta-
tions as to mimic the doings of human reason, and human
aifection. And yet that it does not spring from causes, and
motives, and feelings, similar to those of man, has, I think, been
sufficiently demonstrated in various ways; and which proof, I
venture to say, is clenched by the fact, that the Instinct which
compelled the animal — be it cow, cat, bird, &c. — to devotedly
tend its young for a certain period, suddenly ceases at a given
time.

But why does it cease ? and how different is this cessation
to the parental devotion, duty, and affection of the intellectual
love of offspring displayed by human parents towards their
children. Granted man is an animal, and has animal instincts;
and that part of what he feels towards his child is, doubtless,
as much caused by instinct as in the brute. But there is more
than this in man.

The human intellectual love for the child lasts through life,
and is not obliterated by time, or by absence. How different
to the action of mind and conduct of the brute ! This fact
alone, in my o]3inion, proves not only the Divine ordering of

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 363

the Maternal Instinct, but presents also one of the many proofs
of the gulf that exists between the intellectual nature of the
mind of man and that of the mere instinctive mind of the
brute. I can well imagine that an enthusiastic Materialist
may here suddenly exclaim, " Oh ! the hen drives away her
brood that she may ' sit ' again," But does the human mother
drive away her eldest children even if she has a family of
twenty ? Does she not love them all ?

We will now consider the absence of the Maternal Instinct
in some creatures, and its irregularity of occurrence in some
races.

Fish, I have previously shown, as a very preponderating
rule (see an exception presently), have not got it. The same
may be said of Reptiles ; also it is generally absent in Insects,
and all creatures below them in the Zoological classification;
and yet although absent in Insects generally, as far as tending
the young, or grubs is concerned, still in the cases of Bees,
Wasps, and Ants — extraordinary to say — it is present in a
most marked form. Also as to Fish and Reptiles — as I just
said — although non-attention to the young is the rule, still
there are the remarkable exceptions of the little " SticJdebat,^^
and the " Pipe Fish,'' which I spoke of a few pages back.

Now how is this ? If the Maternal Instinct came in the
first place, and continues now to act through any form of
materialistic self-arising and self-acting necessity^ it ought to be
present in all creatures. Given an ovisac, and an egg, then
the " hatching " and " care-taking " instincts ought to follow
as a matter of necessity. But we know that this is not so, and
that fish, and reptiles, and insects, &c., all, as a rule, cast their
eggs in the water, or deposit them in various sites (carefully
in many insects) and then take no farther heed of them, or of
what will grow from them.

" Oh !" but the Materialist may exclaim, " the eggs of fish,
and of frogs, &c., are hatched naturally by the heat contained
in the watery or by the heat from the sun, and the young when
hatched are so constituted that they do not require attention."

Exactly so, Materialist ! but I thought, according to your

364 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

creed, that all thiugs acted according to regular chemico-phy-
sical and other evolutional necessities. Whence then this
abrupt difference, and irregularity between difFi^rent creatures
— a difference that is so exceedingly marked in one division —
the Insects ? And why is there the reraarkable exception
amongst the fish of the sticklebat making a nest and tending
its young while the great majority of other fish do nothing of
the kind?

Also why does a bird's ^g'^ require the heat of the parent's
body to hatch it ? and why does the fish's egg hatch in what
we habitually call " coM water''"^. Why does the young calf,
or the young robin, require to be fed by the parents, while the
young fish or the young partridge can feed itself? Why does
the bee grub require to be fed by its " nurse," and why does
the little maggot of the nut weevil know how, in its solitary
confinement, to feed itself ?

How is all this. Materialist ? You cannot think, I suppose,
that some creatures have become so wise or selfish as to give up
the worry and trouble of tending the young ? But you will be
offended with me, and say I am trifling. — Then seriously ; tell
me how all this is ? You are silent ! Then can you con-
tradict me when I say that all this wondrous irregularity as to
the presence, or absence, of the " Maternal Instinct," must be,
and must act, or must be absent — and if absent, be substituted
by other arrangements — all according to the design and will
of God.

If God had willed it so, there is no reason why the eggs of
the bird should not have hatched spontaneously like those of
hosts of other creatures ; or why the grubs of the Bee, and all
other young creatures, should not have fed themselves as do
young fish, and tadpoles, and caterpillars, &c.

Instincts of the Young. — The Instincts I have already de-
scribed are sufficiently wonderful, but those I am about to relate
are if possible still more extraordinary, inasmuch as they occur
in, and are actively exhibited by, the immature individual —
young as it may be.

INSTINCTS OF THE YOUNG. 365

Thus, to show the innate quality of the " Instincts of the
Young," I will instance the chick of the bird, which palpably
manifests a strong instinct even before it quits the egg^ and in
this manifestation I think gives a striking proof of the action
of the " Organic Mind," on which I have dwelt so much in
previous pages.

And pray what is this instinct ? Why ! it is that on the pro-
per day for quitting the egg, the chick pecks a line of breakage
throuo-h the eg-sr, all round, so that on the completion of the
circuit the little one can raise one end of the shell — which will
then open like the lid of a box — and walk out ! Marvellous
instinct ! Marvellous plan !

It used to be thought the parent broke the shell ; but this
is now proved not to be the case. As to the plan and process,
it is as follows. The Embryo bird has (by design I venture to
say) formed in the egg in such a way that its head is tucked
under one of its wings, with the bill next the shell : the point
of the bill too, it must be specially noted, being armed with a
hard, horny scale (which scale, be it observed, falls off a few
days after the bird is hatched). The little chick being thus
placed in the egg, and having its soft bill thus tipped, the con-
sequence is, that when the proper day arrives, the little bird
guided by its instinct, begins to peck, and having broken
through one spot it then (probably by means of its feet)
revolves, or turns its body slowly round within the shell —
pecking as it goes — till the circular fracture is complete !

Timly this may be called a miracle in the course of Nature I
How and Avhy is all this. Materialist, and how did it first take
place ? How and why the position in the egg — how and why
the breaking out on the proper day — how and why the hard
point on the bill which tip falls off when it is no longer needed ?
The next instance I shall give is that of the "iA^«^ Weeml^ I
stated some pages back that the " Nut Weevil " is a small beetle
the female of which deposits her egg in a nut, or filbert, by
piercing the shell while it is young, and soft. This egg after
a time hatches and becomes the white grub or maggot you are
often disgusted to find in a nut when you have cracked it.

366 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Now the instincts of this grub to which I would allude are
these. In the first place the little creature knows how to eat ;
and then miraculous to say it knows how to avoid the germ, or
life-spot of the nut by which the kernel grows. (Westwood's
^^ Entomology, ''''Yo\. I. p. 340), and to destroy which would be
starvation. Finally, however, when it is ready to quit the egg it
eats this vital part, and then it displays a fresh instinct — it drills
that circular hole through the shell which every one has seen
examples of in an empty nut ; and then, passing through this
way of exit, drops to the ground ; into which it then bur-
rows, and dwells, previous to the final change into a perfect
full grown " Weevil Beetle " in the following summer.

I will not dilate on this, but pass on to my next example — the
Caddice. (See Westwood's '^Entomology,'' p. 62.) The " Caddice
fly," or "water moth"of the angler, is, as I have previously stated,
an insect with four large wings, and one of those creatures
which, although inhabiting, and breathing the air, and possessed
of great powers of flight, has nevertheless the strange instinct
of laying its eggs in the water.

It is with the young or larvaB when hatched from these eggs
we now have to do.

Any one who has walked in chalk districts by the bright
clear silvery streams of that formation, can scarcely fail to have
noticed that many of the stones on the river bed in shallow
places are covered with little knobs or masses, and which are
not mere irregularities of the stones themselves. Examined
closely, and even with the naked eye, these little knobs or
masses are found to consist of small oblong tubes or cases
which are fastened on to the stones by a glutinous stuff", each
case itself being a short tube, the walls of which are built up
of little fragments of sand or morsels of various kinds of
material.

Inside each case will be found a living larva, and the asto-
nishing fact we now learn is that each little case is a habitation
that the larva has made for itself. Here is indeed a marvellous
example of instinct ! Think of these little creatures having
the fiiculty of making snug dwellings for themselves ! Each

INSTINCTS OF THE YOUNG. 367

case is made of silken threads which the larva spins from its
mouth, and on the exterior of this case are fastened by means
of threads of silk aided by a glutinous material, the various Ijits
of sand, or stick, or straw, &c., such as we see.

Think of this marvellous instinct. Materialist ! and think of
the little creature's power of design and its power of choice in
regard to the selection of materials with which to cover the
exterior of its house. But consider further, it is not merely
instinct that is concerned in the matter, for the larva is provided
Avith the power and the organs necessary for spinning the
silk and secreting the glutinous material.

In this "case " then the larva lives for a season, and if it
becomes too small through the growth of the inhabitant, the
larva quits it and makes another, in which it dwells till that
time when having become a pupa and grown wings, it by a
mysterious instinct quits its residence in the waters and flies
into the air a perfect insect !

I will next speak of caterpillars, which most persons know
are the young of butterflies and moths.

Every person too, who as a child has kept ^'silkworms,"
knows how voracious the caterpillar is, and how at a certain
period it ceases to grow and to eat, and spins for itself a cocoon
by means of silken threads, secreted from spinnerets, the orifices
of which are situate at its mouth (quite different and dif-
ferently placed, be it noted, to those of the spider). In this
beautiful cocoon it then ensconces itself, becomes torpid, and
is as a dead thing — and yet after a season its animation
is renewed, and it bursts forth a perfect moth capable of
flight !

Now what an extraordinary instinct is this ; the caterpillar
knowing when and how to spin the cocoon in all its wondrous
beauty and perfection ! Then think of the provision it has in
the possession of the power of forming that wondrous fibre —
silk — a fibre which, when woven by man, the ladies so rejoice to
wear as their most prized dress.

Marvellous, however, as is the instinct that compels some
caterpillars to spin cocoons, it is a curious fact that other

368 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

species, as the common cabbage butterfly, do not spin such
preparatory to passing into the pupa, or chrysalis stage, but
simply suspend themselves by the tail on the under side of a
leaf.

With these examples of the above class of instincts I must
be content, and pass on to consider the more general instincts
of the young.

Thus the young calf knows how to stand and to walk as
soon as born, the young partridge knows how to run, the
growing caterpillar knows how to wriggle out of its old skin
that has become too small for it, and to cast it off, &c.

And in the same way the young mammal knows how to suck,
the chick how to select and unerringly pick up its proper food,
the young blackbird knows how to open its capacious mouth to
have food put into it by the parent, and the young pigeon
knows how to insert its bill within that of the mother in order
to obtain its nourishment, and so on as to all other young crea-
tures: they know, without teaching, how to take food, and what
sort, directly they are born.

Questions for the Unbelieving Materialistic Evolutionist.

Brief as I have been obliged to be in my enumeration o-f a
few of the ^^ Instincts of the Young,^'' I think I have given
sufficient to illustrate the subject, and to form a basis on which
to argue with the Materialist in proof of Design, &c. The
questions I would especially wish to put concerning the fore-
going are : — How the Instincts such as those I have described
first arose ? Also how the organs and substances (e.g. milk and
silk, &c.) needful in many instances for the carrying out of
such Instincts, took their origin in the first place ?

In this discussion we will direct our attention chiefly to the
Instinct of taking milk and food by the young, and to save
space will consider this Instinct as a representative one of the
whole, and I do so the more willingly because it is a subject
which has been dilated on in the " Origin of Species^

Mr. Darwin there states, in reply to some strictures that had
been made on his opinions by Mr. Mivart, that " there is no

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 369

greater difficulty in understanding how young mammals havo
instinctively learnt to suck the breast, than in understanding
howunhatched chickens have learnt to break the egg-shell by
tapping against it with their specially-adapted beaks, or how
a few hours after leaving the shell they have learnt to pick up
grains of food. In such cases the most probable solution seems
to be that the habit was first acquired by practice at a more
advanced age, and afterwards transmitted to the offspring at
an earlier age." (As to this extract see also p. 257.)

Now I give this quotation not simply to found an argument
on, but also because it is a striking example of what may be
termed Biological Special Pleading,— an obscure kind of plead-
ing which is now much in fashion.

Mr. Darwin, I grant, has done splendid and lasting service
to Science by his genius and life-long labour; but yet I would
venture to say that he has by such intricate yet dangerously
seductive sentences as those I have just quoted, done much
harm in mystifying some men's minds, and unsettling them as
to their belief in God, and in His Power, and Design.

I shall be deemed by some a heretic in science for thus
speaking, and shall be asked to justify my statements.

Well ! what I mean is this ; that Mr. Darwin in such kind
of obscure argument as that above, tries — as I read it — to
account for things as coming entirely by self-action ; and in
this, as in most of his speculations, ignores all mention of God's
name, and power, and design. And this is the more remark-
able and inconsistent inasmuch as Mr. Darwin in a very few
jjlaces in his writings acknowledges God : and yet by the
nnfrequent use of His name keeps the fact of His Fotuer, and
Design, so much out of sight as to lead many persons to forget
God altogether in the argument.

Indeed from the materialistic manner in which Mr. Darwin
argues generally, one might perhaps be pardoned for saying
that even he himself appears to forget God's Power and De-
sign, so eager is he to account for all things by means of the
working of " secondary causes.'' And thus in avoiding God's
name and not frequently recurring to Him as a ''First Cause

B b

370 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

— as one would have expected him as a believer to do — God's
power and initial design are allowed to drop out of sight, and
everything is endeavoured to be accounted for on self-acting,
self-evolutionary materialistic principles — a process Mr. Darwin
evidently in his innermost mind, does not himself entirely
believe in, or he would not however charily or infrequently
acknowledge a Creator. He is, however, apparently led away
by enthusiasm in endeavouring to establish his brilliant theory.
Let us hope that he may one day see fit to explain himself on
this point, and thus curb such of his followers as are really
atheistic.

To return now to the meaning of Mr. Darwin in the above
quotation, I imagine he means that according to evolution
principles it was the primeval predecessors of the mammals, and
the chickens who, though different in form to mammals, or
birds as we know them, first learnt to suck something nice —
to take proper food, or to break out of eggs, &c.

And this kind of argument forj^ooth is called " advanced
science,''^ and we are told our children will laugh at such
persons as myself who have not accepted such views.

I do not think this will be so, and I believe the laughing
will be the other way.

Why surely as to the above, it does not matter when the
Instinct of sucking, and eating, and breaking out of shells
began ; each Instinct must have begun somehow, and each
Instinct can only — even if we grant it began in an evolutional
manner and gradually improved — can only I say, have com-
menced either according to a preordained plan by God's
ordering ; or by what may be termed a sense of fitness springing
from self-constituted necessity.

If Instincts, however, began in the latter way, it is urgent
that the Materialist should explain his view as to the origin
of such a quality as that of " FitnessJ" (See p. 375).

Now I have talked so often as to chemico-physical and
other processes and necessities assumed by the Materialist to
be self-acting, that I will not go into those questions on this
occasion ; and as to *' Fitness " I must ask the reader to wait

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. -,71

for the third volume, ia which it will be discussed in a detail I
have not space for here.

Suffice it then, in conclusion, on this occasion to finally ask
the Materialist —

1st. How came the first cutaneous gland which Mr. Darwin
imagines was the precursor of the breast (see " Origin of
Species ") : and how came it to secrete a sweet and nutritious
fluid ? and this too, a most marvellously-complex liquid, and
containing all the elements needful for nutrition. Was it by
chance ?

2ndly. Where the young one came from that first chanced to
taste this secretion ?

3rdly. How the first creature — however rudimentary it may
have been — acquired the Instinct to break out of the egg ?
Also to select and pick up morsels of food, and eat such ?

But the questions might be almost endless, including my old
one of how came the first seed, or egg; plant, or animal ?

Space, however, bids me desist, and I conclude this article by
firmly declaring, that to me — and I think to common-sense
people in general — it appears positively necessary to admit that
the Instincts of the young must have come either by God's
direct creation, or by His having — with design — originally
endowed matter and mind with a sense capable of appreciating
and working out fitness — during time — in various forms. If
this is not admitted, then you can only fall back on " chance ;"
and I must leave that for the Materialist to account for, and
explain.

B b 2

CHAPTER XV.

The Pure Instincts {continued).

Instinct as to kind of food — Questions for the Materialistic Evolu-
tionist— Variation — Fitness — Instinct as to cries and song —
Instinct as to movements — Questions for Materialistic Evolutionist
— Instinct for making habitations — The Social Instincts — Beavers.

Instincts as to Kind of Food. — These again are very re-
markable instincts, and we all know how strictly some creatures
adhere to the taking of one kind of food only. Indeed certain
caterpillars, and numerous other insects, as well as many ani-
mals, perish unless they can obtain a special description of
nourishment ; and this natural propension — or as I may say,
enforced choice — is manifested from the moment the young
creature takes its first meal, and if it did not know hy innate
instinct what to select, it would die ; either from starvation, or
from inability to digest a food that might be wrongly taken.
And as to this selection it must be remembered that hosts of
creatures — for example, most young fish — young reptiles —
young insects, &c. &c., — have no mother with them to afford
any instruction.

All this is very remarkable, and we must remember more-
over that the creatures that undergo metamorphosis eat quite
different sorts of things in their different states. The butterfly,
for example, in its caterpillar stage eats enormous quantities of
leaves ; but as a perfect butterfly consumes only infinitesimal
drops of honey.

And so even of many creatures that do not undergo meta-
/norphosis.

The calf, or colt, for example, first — as guided by its innate

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 373

choice, and taste, and powers — is content to take milk only :
but in a short time it instinctively begins to toy with soft pieces
of hay, or straw, or tender grass, and very soon gets to eat such.
And how different is milk, and grass !

I think I need not give any further illustrations as to this
instinct, for the facts are familiar to us all as to different crea-
tures selecting, and taking, different kinds of food. I shall
therefore proceed at once to put my usual questions.

Questions for the Unbelieving Materialistic Evolutionist.
I would first ask what is the cause of this choice as shown
above, and how the power of selection first acts in the young
individual ?

In putting this question I can well imagine that the Material-
ist will think he has an easy task set him, and will thus early
in the discussion experience the advent of the pleasant feelings
consequent on the expectation — and indeed sure conviction— of
a quick and complete triumph. But 1 bid him beware ; his
task is not an easy one.

Of course he will start by saying I am " ignorant as usual ;'*
and I can easily conceive the long dissertation he would give
me — if sitting by my side — as to the power of " heredity," and
" habit," and " acquired experience ;'* and of the necessity, in
some cases, as compelled by geographical, climatal, and other
circumstances for the taking a new kind of food in the absence
of any other sort.

I will not, however, detain the reader by narrating his argu-
ment in full, but only dilate on the most important points in it.
Now I am quite prepared to admit, that the influences just
named may have had an important effect in many cases in
causing certain degrees of change to occur in an animal's
instinct as to description of diet, such as might be possible
within the creature's usual power of digestion, or of its innate
endowed capacity for effecting such orrjanic variation as to the
changes needed in its digestive secretions, or as to the altera-
tions requisite as to shape of stomach in order to assimilate
the new kind of food.

Now this admission seems going a long way towards ac-

374 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

ceptance of the Materialist's views, and his hopes will rise
accordingly at the belief that I have fallen into a trap of my
own setting. But let him not be elated, for I would draw
particular attention to the fact that I only admitted above that
au animal could alter its diet within such bounds as was pos-
sible according to its inherent capacity for " organic Varia-
tion^'' or alteration of the form, and functions, and secretions,
of its parts, and organs. In this case, such powers of " varia-
tion " would be those, therefore, that could cause an alteration,
not simply as to the taste, but as to the shape of teeth, form
of stomach, form of mouth, form of proboscis, &c., also the
qualities of the gastric juice, &c.

Having arrived at this point of my argument, it seems
desirable that I should here go deeply into the question of
" Variation-,'''' but one of the many difficulties in writing a
work of such large scope as this book embraces, is, that it is
impossible in any one article to go into details on every im-
portant topic connected with the particular subject under
consideration.

The consequence of this is, that I must defer to the fourth
volume any lengthened discussion of " Variation^'' and merely
state shortly that in the article alluded to, I grant that many
creatures have a capacity for a certain latitude of " Varia-
tion^'' but that such can only occur according to limits as set
by the Creator. In the article in question I think I shall be
able to prove that statement, but for the present I must ask
the reader to accept it simply as a thing I strictly believe, but
have not at present space to prove.

Having said thus much let us gather up the argu-
ment,

I say then that if an animal be gradually exposed to certain
changes of climate, or of location, or of insufficiency of its
usual kind of food, &c., it may get its natural instinct as food
so altered by necessity, in being forced to adopt an altered
diet, that the laws of '^ Habit ^' and ^'Acquired Exj)erience^^
will be brought into action, and the natural instinct, as altered,
will, by Heredity, be transmitted to its descendants.

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 375

For example, we see an instance of this in dogs and cats.
Dogs have, under domestication, got to be very fond of barley
meal made into a kind of porridge; and cats are very fond of
"■'boiled cabbage ]'' and yet as these animals are of a carnivorous
nature, I can imagine that a wild dog, or cat, would refuse
such articles.

Now, if wild dogs and cats would instinctively refuse
to eat farinaceous food, it follows that the natural instinct
of domesticated dogs and cats must have changed; and
physiological chemistry tells us that it cannot be a mere
change of taste, or of fancy, but that there must be a
change in the quality of their salivary, gastric, and other
secretions; for the starch, &c., of vegetable food re-
quires a different process of digestive solution to that of
flesh.

It follows then that before the Instinct of an animal can
change, radically, there must also be a correlated change in
its organic secretions, or even in the structure and shape of
its digestive organs.

Now, let the Materialist say how^ this organic change could
take place ? I say it could only take place in consequence of
a given creature being gifted with the power of organic and
other descriptions of variation according to original endowed
powers and limits; and which variation could likewise only
take place in consequence of the action of the great organic
law or faculty of the " Sense of Perceiving Fitness,'' which, as
I hold, is a part, or one of the qualities, of the " Organic
Mind'' (see p. 164), which "Mind" has the power, not only
of ordering all ordinary functions, but has also the faculty of
perceiving, and appreciating, and moreover of carrying into
execution all such Instinctive and Organic changes as may be
needed, in consequence of the springing up of new conditions
— changes, however, which are possible only to the extent
permissible by the range and limit of God's original endow-
ment for the species.

And here acrain I am obliged to remark that, as to this
question of " Fitness," I am constrained in the same manner

376 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

as I have above stated in regard to " Variation,''^ and failing
to be able here to go fully into the question must refer the
reader to the article on " Fitness,'' in Vol. III.

I will, however, give an example here so as to aid the
reader a little. Take the case of the dog. The first dog that,
through being kept in confinement, was by the pressure of
hunger under the necessity of eating the barley-meal, as given
him by his master, did not like it I dare say, and his instinct
rebelled against it. His stomach, too, must have done the
same. Gradually, however, in the absence of flesh, and being
gifted as the dog is with a wonderful capacity for organic and
other variations — the organs secreting saliva, and gastric
juice, as well as the digestive powers generally, must have got
to perceive the necessity for change, and they must gradually
have altered, until at last the dog's natural Instinct for flesh
slowly changed, and eventually the dog has got to like barley-
meal. Nevertheless, if given a choice, I believe it will select
the flesh in preference.

Now how came this Faculty of perceiving and appreciating
" Fitness,'' and the capacity of producing radical change in
organic structure, and formation, and secretions accordingly.
Must it not be a God-endowed faculty ?

The Materialistic Evolutionist will, however, shake his
head, and say I am " ignorant" or "poetical," &c.; but never-
theless I call on him to give some tangible explanation on
pure mechanical cliemico-phifsical self-acting principles, how
the functions and secretions get to perceive the necessity for
change, and how the changes needed in the organs, and secre-
tions, are carried into effect ? Mark ! the cells, <|'C., of the
organs affected must take on new functions, so as to produce
secretions somewhat differing from the previous ones in
chemical constitution.

Before, therefore, the Materialistic Evolutionist talks about
change of Instinct, as brought about by change of habit, &c.,
he must account for the power some creatures have of alter-
ing their kind of digestion, and the organs and secretions con-
cerned in it. This applies also, I may add, to all changes of

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 377

organic structure, and organs, and functions as brought about
by change of " Hahit^

I will now mention another stumbling-block for the Evolu-
tionist.

According to his views, all things work by blind necessities
that came " somehow." Now the first animal that found out
how to digest must have come to do so, therefore, by chemico-
physical necessity. If this be so, then it follows that in order
to digest a certain kind of food, the best form of organs,
and the best kind of digestive secretions, would gradually evolve
themselves until they got to the most perfect sort of digestion.

Concurrently with this, and going hand in hand with it
(which would be the greater factor I don't know), would be
the Sense of Instinct for the particular kind of food that neces-
sity had pressed on the creature.

Consequently there would be a complete triple correlation
between the Instinct, and the kind of food taken, and the sort
of digestive apparatus.

In short, as the form of stomach and sort of digestion in
any given creature had come by necessity, it ivould of necessity
he the best.

Now this apparent truth is the stumbling-block I alluded to
just now; and I call on the Materialistic Evolutionist (if my
statement is correct) to say liow it is there are such different
forms of stomach for digesting the same kind of food ? For
example, the grain-eating bird has a crop in which to soften
the grain preliminary to its being ground — as in a mill— in its
powerful muscular gizzard; while the horse has no crop, and
only a thin membraneous stomach.

Then there is the striking case of the cow and other crea-
tures that eat grass, chew the cud, and possess four stomachs;
while the horse also can live on grass, although it does not
chew the cud, and has only one stomach!

The instincts of the above animals are similar then as to
feeding on grass, and yet their digestive processes and appa-
ratus are as different the one from the other as it is possible
almost to conceive.

378 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

It is of no use the Evolutionist in this case talking about
heredity, &c.; and the ancestors of the ox, and of the horse,
being different; for surely if digestion began by necessity, it
ought not to have been so aberrant in its modes of doing the
same thing, or if by some strange process the mode of digest-
ing the same thing got somehow to vary, it ought to be that by
this time the cow or the horse should have acquired the
best hind of digestive apparatus, and which, one would have
thought would be the same in each.

So much as to the digestion of similar food, by dissimilar
processes.

Now, I must ask the Materialist how it is there are other
creatures who, although their food is very different, yet have
their stomachs alike in shape and general anatomical constitu-
tion. As an example of sameness of shape of stomach as pos-
sessed by diiFerent creatures although their Instincts compel
them to take different sorts of food, I will instance the case of
the Marsupials.

Prof. Owen, in his great work on these, has pointed out that
although some are carnivorous, and others herbivorous, yet
that the shape of stomach is the same in all, notwithstanding,
of course, that the different stomachs must have different func-
tions and secretions.

Now the Marsupials — or animals with pouches, such as the
Kangaroo — are, we are told, the oldest mammals, and are the
ancestors, according to the doctrine of Evolution, of all other
Mammals.

Let me then ask the Materialist if this be so, how it is that
although the ancient Marsupials " found out," if I may so say
materialistically that one shape of stomach would digest all
kinds of things — how it came about, that cows, sheep, and
deer have resorted to so complicated a mode of digestion as
that involved in the possession (as they now have) of four
stomachs?

If the Kangaroo coidd and can do without such an elaborate
apparatus for digesting grass, why should the ox, &c., have
evolved such? and why should the horse, on the contrary, bo

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC.

SI'

able to digest grass with one stomach, and without chewino-
the cud?

Surely, Materialist ! all organic, and physical, and chemical
necessities should work alike according to their respective
qualities, and powers. Let him explain this.

It will not do for him to resort to his favourite " Heredity;''''
because, as we have seen, the cow's original mammalian ancestor
(according to the Materialists) had not four stomachs; and if he
takes refuge in " Habit " for an explanation, I meet him by ask-
ing him to explain the origin and working of the ^^ Fitness of
things ;" and to indicate — however faintly — how any organism
acquired by self-action the spontaneous power to cause
changes of Organic structure and function — that is, how
^^ Hahit^^ could cause structure to change in a fitting manner?

Then again I would say as another woi-d in regard to
^^ Heredity.'' If this quality prevented the Kangaroo's
stomach from changing, why did it not prevent the Cow's from
changing ? If the cow's stomach changed by necessity because
materialistic self-action found that such change was needed,
according to mechanical and chemical necessities ; and if the
cow could break through the rule and dominion of " Heredity,""
why were not the Kangaroo and the Horse compelled equally
to break through the sway of Heredity ?

Surely then, Materialist, after all this, we may fairly conclude
that the different kinds of Instinct as to food, and the different
kinds of apparatus for digestion, must be all according to God's
ordainment, and law, and a striking instance of the "Variety
in Unity " as shown in so many of His Works ? And if an
animal changes its natural instinct for food, and correlative and
necessary changes take place in the digestive apparatus, all
change of structure must occur according to God's laws and
permission.

I must now close this, I fear, too prolix article, but before
doing so inust allude to one most strange and most mysterious
phase of the Instinct, as to taking food, which leads numbers
of creatures to kill, and to eat the flesh of others ; or to torture
living creatures as do the various parasites by sucking the

38o SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

blood of their victim ; or, as in the case of the Ichneumon, by
laying eggs in the very body of their living host.

Why it is that such horrible and seemingly unnatural
instincts should be so common, it is impossible for us to deter-
mine. I expect the Materialist would say that it was brought
about by the pressure of '' necessity " (say in consequence of
scarcity of other food), and that a " liahit " being gradually
formed, this " hahit " was by the " Heredity " of generations
slowly rivetted into a fresh Instinct — the Carnivorous !

I do not deny that some such process may have had some
influence in producing so strange an Instinct ; indeed, it seems
the only probable explanation we can offer for the occurrence
of such an extraordinary taste and practice ; but then for
myself I can scarcely believe but that such an instinct can only
have arisen (as have so many other repulsive things) by way
0^ 'perversion from original law and constitution, through the
influence of the Evil One.

This mystery I cannot — for want of space — discuss here in
detail ; but a full consideration will be given to it in the article
on " Death and Rapacity " in the second volume. I fear, how-
many Believers who may have agreed with my arguments
generally, will be frightened at the boldness of the above sur-
mise as to the possible origin of the Carnivorous Instinct, for
they may say that the prevalence of Rapacity is so extremely
wide and frequent, that such an idea seems preposterous.
However, I must defer what I have to say on this most
momentous question, calming those however who are alarmed,
by the assurance that I shall offer them an alternative
hypothesis.

Leaving this particular branch of our subject I would now
say in conclusion that in regard to the Instinct for Food, as
well as of the Instincts generally, I beg the reader to bear
fully in mind that although I grant the influence of habit,
&c., may have had some eflTect in altering and modifying some
original instincts, yet such admission by no means grants in the
least degree that such change could have taken place solely in
a materialistic manner by self-action, and without the incidence

INSTINCT AS TO ANIMAL CRIES, SONGS, ETC. 381

of God's laws. Nor do I admit that any other " instincts " can
have arisen in purely self-acting ways, because as I have
already explained, there are many instincts that must have had
a direct beginning, and which it is impossible to account for as
coming in a haphazard way, or in any other way than is
caused by the Design and Law of a Supernatural Power.

Instinct as to Animal Cries, Songs, and various Modes of
Communication. — This again is an enormous subject which I
must briefly touch on.

The extraordinary number of different sounds made by
different creatures is marvellous. The question may be asked
why do they make these sounds ? No doubt they are employed
in great measure — if not solely — as the mode of giving expres-
sion to the ^^ sense language" of animals as distinguished from
'' the intellectual language " of man (see " Language in
Animals.'' But how is it they differ so vastly ?

If as we are told by sceptics, all creatures have come by a
materialistic gradual evolution, from a few types that formed
themselves someliow hy self-action as conditioned by surrounding
factors — how is it, I say, that the cries are so very different in
species that are apparently kindred in anatomical conformation.
What has heredity been about to allow such extraordinary diver-
gencies as to cries, till we see that almost every species has a dif-
ferent cry, or language ? If it had been that certain creatures
adopted, or were compelled by necessity to assume different
habits to those of their ancestors, still why should they change
their language ?

Listen to the turkey Avith its " Gobble — Gobble — Gobble,"
and the cock with its " Cockadoodledoo." Yet the turkey, and
the cock are — speaking scientifically — near relations. Why
then do their cries differ so vastly ? So too of the horse, and
the ass, how close they are to one another apparently in genetic
affinity, and yet although their vocal organs (mouth, tongue,
larynx, and lungs) are so similar — how very different is the
" neigh " from the *' bray."

Then let us take the case of animals whose relationship (in

3S2 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

all instances) is not so near — the ox with its " low," the sheep
with its *' bleat," the lion with its "roar," the elephant with
its "trumpeting," the frog with its "croak," the hawk with
its " scream," the thrush with its "song:" — how marvellously
different are all these !

Questions for the Unbelieving Materialistic Evolutionist.

How came all these differences ? Now before the un-
believer answers this question, I must again draw his attention
to the fact that according to his theory a certain conditioning
thing called '^ necessity ^^ (which came "somehow" according
to him) rules all things with inexorable sway.

Now if it became a necessity for animated creatures to com-
municate ideas or sense feelings to one another, how is it that
one form or mode only, of making such communication is not
paramount ? Of course Materialistic necessity would go the
nearest and best way to work.

And yet what is the fact ? Why that one set of creatures,
called the higher, communicate by vocal sounds, while other
creatures, called the lower, are able to communicate with one
another by touch, &c.; for example the Bee and the Ant can
convey information by crossing their anteunse. Now let the
Materialist explain this.

Further, I must ask, " did the Instinct for making sounds,
or did the apparatus for producing them, come first ? Oh ! the
Materialist will say, the merest tyro of course knows they must
have developed concurrently. Very well ! then how is it we
get such very different sounds proceeding from such similar
apparatus ?

For example, the man's, the monkey's, the dog's, the horse's,
the ass's, the cow's, the lion's, &c., vocal organs do not differ
very much in anatomical construction, yet how different the
sounds that are made by them. Oh! may say the Materialist,
" it is all ' habit,' the horse got the habit of neighing, and the
lion of roaring. How so, and why so ? This is not a case
like that of considering the possibility of a limb changing shape
from change of use, for in the instance under discussion the

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 3S3

vocal organs are very similar, yet the sounds produced from
them strikingly different.

And if " habit " has caused the Instinct as to making sounds
to alter, let me ask what was the Materialist's pet " heredity "
about ? Even if we granted that limbs, &c., could be altered in
shape by the pressure of circumstances, and that " heredity "
would permit it in the struggle for existence, how can we
account for the alterations of the kind of vocalization or other
mode of language by animals during their evolution, when
we can imagine no cause for such alteration, and when we see
that the mechanical apparatus is the same. Was it then
caprice or chance ? Oh ! Materialist, you play fast and loose
with '■'Heredity'''' according to your requirements.

Then, again, — let me ask, — if, as the Materialist supposes,
the animal's mind is the same in sort as that of man, though
less developed, how is it, supposing animals do possess some
amount of intellectual reason similar in kind to that of man, that
by this time they have wotle^vnt intelligently something of each
other's language? For example, the parrot though having a
very different larynx (syrinx) to that possessed by man, or the
cat, or the dog, &c., yet can imitate many of the sounds of
each. Nevertheless, I never heard that the lion or other pre-
dacious creature, although possessed of a vocal apparatus like
that of the ox, sheep, &c., had learnt how to " bellow," or
'' bleat," so as to decoy their prey, which they certainly would
have done if capable of intellectual reasoning.

No ! no ! Materialist, the lion has no reason, and the parrot
has no reason ; each make their cries according to a Natural
Instinct, and the latter is endowed like the mocking bird with
the power of imitation, but why it imitates it knows not.

This of course is a subject on which a vast deal more might
be written, but my space presses.

Finally, therefore, I would say that I consider I have stated

sufficient to prove that the " Instincts as to Cries, ^'C," must

be as endowed by God, according to the species, and I think

this is particularly apparent when we reflect on the near

kindred affinity and like anatomical construction of some of the

38| SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

creatures I have mentioned, such as the cock and the turkey,
and the horse and the ass, how similar are they in very many
respects, yet how extremely different their cries.

This opinion will I know amuse the unbeliever vastly, and
he will say with a laugh, and a merry gesture, ''your Great
God you talk so much about must be a carious kind of Being
to ordain such ludicrous cries as the turkey's " Gobble, gobble "
and the ass's " E-haw."

In reply to this I would simply say, that the believer is
taught, Isaiah Iv. 8, " For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways My ways, saith the Lord."

Instincts as to Movements. — Here again we are confronted
with an enormous subject, and one we must for the sake of
space be content with glancing at only as to its most salient
points.

When we observe the various animated creatures, the very
remarkable fact is conspicuous that some species of them are
active and seem to rejoice in movement — while others are
sluggish, and prefer slow, sedate movements.

Then as to progression, different creatures have different
modes, some prefer to walk or crawl, others to run, or jump, or
climb, or fly, or swim.

These diverse movements however in their broad features
we must discuss separately hereafter. (See " Modes of Pro-
gression,'' Vol. II.) Here I propose to deal only with lesser
differences than those just named, and to dwell simply on gait,
manner, modes of flight, &c., indicative of fine shades of dis-
tinction between the Instincts which rule the movements of
animals, distinctions which are especially remarkable when
they occur, as they so often do, in closely allied species.

The case of birds will afford apt illustrations of what I wish
to speak.

Take the robin, and the hedge-sparrow, for example, they
both advance on the ground by hopping it is true, but how
different the manner and style ! The robin takes bold, long,
rapid hops forward, accompanied by an indescribable spright-

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 385

liness of gesture; while the hedge-sparrow hops deliberately
along in a gentle, demure manner. The one, too, loves to hop
about in his lively manner in the open, often some little dis-
tance from the shrubs; while the other prefers to pursue its
quiet way close by the side of the most secluded hedge, &c.

Then how strange it is that hosts of birds like the above
always hop, keeping both legs together at the moment of the
spring from the ground, and at the alightment; while others,
like the lark, and the starling, always walk, and run, by put-
ting one leg before the other at each step.

Then the rooks and magpies do both ; they walk sedately,
or they hop sidelong in a curious and very characteristic
manner.

Again, as to gestures and ways, we all know the strut of
the turkey, the "curtseying" of the pigeon; and those who
are acquainted with the country are familiar with the bobbing
up and down of the tail of the wagtail — the swaying of the
tail from side to side of the redstart, and numbers of other
peculiar movements of birds, but all of which movements are
quite typical of the species.

Next as to flying. Most birds fly in a straight line like
the swallow and the partridge, by means of a rapid succession
of strokes of the wing; while a great many others fly in an un-
dulating manner, opening and closing their wings — now rising
and now falling — and advancing through the air by a series of
— as it were — aerial leaps.

With these illustrations, I must, for the sake of space, be
content; but hosts of other peculiarities of the movements
and ways of various creatures will occur to the reader, and I
may add that I have drawn all my examples above from birds,
because they are familiar, and striking.

Questions for the Unbelieving Materialistic Evolutionist.

How came these remarkable differences and peculiarities,
Materialist ?

Do you say they came by " Necessity " ? Then I ask what
" Necessity " ?

c c

386 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Do you say they came by " Habit " ? Tlieu I ask again, If
they did not come by " Necessity," but simply by habit, or
caprice, how did they get fixed by " Heredity " in the species;
because I should have thought no such habits, or tricks, as
those above named, would have become so definitely fixed as
they are in certain species unless such movements had been
useful in " the struggle for existence " ?

And let me ask what use many of these characteristic
movements could be, so as to be worth preservation in the
struggle of " Natural Selection." Indeed I am prepared to
show that, as to the flight of birds, the " Instinct " or " Hahit "
some birds have of flying in an undulatory line must — in a
utilitarian and materialistic sense — be positively injurious to
the welfare of those birds that practise it. Take the case of
the shortwinged birds — of the songsters, for example, which
cross the seas and come to us for the summer; and then when
the cold approaches migrate to a more congenial climate.
Surely, Materialist, a direct flight and longer wings v^rould
be the most useful to them in migration. Then why have
they not acquired such ?

Must not thousands and thousands of these delicate little
birds that we see during the summer Jlitting onhj from branch
to branch, perish on the broad ocean through want of longer
wings, and a direct flight ?

Have we not here one of the examples, of which I shall
adduce so many hereafter, of the faltering, and bungling, of
mere Materialistic Evolution ?

With examples of this kind before his eyes can the
believer then doubt but that all these different modes of flying,
walking, peculiar gestures, &c., must have come, and must
continue, according to ordainment for the species ; and that
such a catastrophe as the perishing of small birds by reason
of their short wings, &c., is but one among the many mysteries
of Creation which it is difiicult to account for, though not
perhaps quite impossible, as we shall see in the article on
'' Death;' Yol. 11,

If these various kinds of movement were not bv ordain-

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 3S7

ment, but came by the power of self-action, as ruled by
"Materialistic necessity," then I cannot conceive that any
bird would fly by undulations ; for speed must have been
needed by such birds over and over again a myriad of times
in various ways, and especially in escaping from a hawk, or
an angry mate, &c., and therefore — speaking materialistically
— the means of producing speed ought to have arisen.

I may add here that, notwithstanding the above observa-
tions in regard to shortwinged birds and the drawbacks of
undulatory flight, there are very many birds who possess short
wings and fly direct, although not needing long flights. Of
these the partridge is a good example, which on rising passes
away from the astonished gaze of the embryo sportsman,
with the direct course and almost the rapidity of a meteor.

If the partridge has ^^ acquired" this, why have not the
" Birds of Passage " acquired the same directness and quick-
ness ?

Puzzling questions might be put too in regard to the com-
parative advantage of hopping, and walking, by birds; and
how each method of movement got fixed in particular species;
and why some walk on one occasion and hop on another; I
should have thought one mode or the other as the best for
all birds ought by preference to have been " selected " and
*' acquired " by this time.

This is a tempting theme, and I might go on to cite a
thousand examples. Why has the deer " acquired " longer
legs with which to run away from its pursuer than has the
sheep ? Why can the rabbit hide itself in its burrow, while
its congener, the hare, cannot ?

Why do some animals hide themselves, and jump unawares
on their prey, while others give themselves the trouble and
fatigue of pursuit. Even the fleet fox conceals himself in
ambush, and springs on his prey, although he possesses the
power of great speed.

But I must desist, and ask again finally, Why many of
these Instincts ? How did they come ? And how especially
did the movements, mentioned above, that are apparently use-

c c 2

388 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

less, such as the bobbing of the tail of the wagtail, &c., get
fixed into a transmissible Instinct ?

Some readers who may not be acquainted with the theory
of Materialistic Development may think that in some of my
latter examples I have wandered from my proper subject of
" Instinct." He may say, for example, the deer runs away
rapidly because he has long legs. Just so ! but the Mate-
rialist would tell him that " requirement," and " organic de-
velopment," and ''Instinct ;'' all, in a Materialistic sense, go
hand in hand, and if there be needs for change in shape of
limbs, or alteration in Instinct, the changes will come by
materialistic necessity as acting in the way of " Development,"
" Variation," " Adaptation," and the Preservation of useful
qualities during the countless ages in which the " struggle for
existence," as the Darwinist says, has been carried on.

In concluding this article it is proper I should admit that it
is within the bounds of possibility that the " Instinct as to
Movements," as well as some other instincts (as that of
" Food "), may have been influenced in some degree by " habit,"
or ordinary necessity, or both; and if either of these instincts
stood alone, we might be in some doubt as to whether those
factors may not have played a dominant part in forming some
of the minor phases at any rate of these instincts ; but when
we consider the existence of other Instincts which by no con-
ceivable process could have so arisen, such as the " Nesting
Instinct,'' and the " Care of Eggs," and "0/ the Young,'" then
we cannot fail to see that according to all laws of logic, and
analogy, and probability, and common sense, the Instinct as to
" Movements,'' as well as that as to " Food," &c., must have
primarily arisen in the same manner as the other Instincts did
— by design, and endowment — even although during time they
may have become somewhat modified in some cases according
to the working of God's laws of variation.

As to the " oddity " of some of the gestures of birds and
other creatures, and the incongruity, as the Unbeliever might
say, of their being ordained by a Great God, I would refer the
reader to the end of the article on the ''Instinct as to Cries'^

THE INSTINCT FOR MAKING HABITATIONS. 389

The Instinct for making Habitations. — I have ah-eady
spoken of the kind of habitations such as are made and used
solely for the reception of eggs, and of the young; but now I
propose to speak of those that are constructed as dwelling-
places for the adults. Of these, I shall only speak here of
such as are made by solitary creatures, and shall reserve men-
tion of the dwelling-places of those that live in communities,
till we come to speak of the " Social Instincts."

The dwellings made by the solitary — or comparatively soli-
tary— creatures vary extremely in kind, from the complex
" fortress " of the mole, to the simple " form " of the hare.

A description of the former may be found in any book on
natural historj--, but I will say briefly that it consists of com-
plicated tunnels excavated in the earth, two of which tunnels
are formed in circles, one above another, with passages con-
necting each, and communicating with a large central chamber.

From this elaborate dwelling we will pass abruptly for
brevity's sake to the simplest of habitations — the ^^ form " of
the hare.

This is no more than a slight excavation scratched in the
earth, the shape of the animal when lying crouched at ease —
or it may even only be an impression, as it were, of the animal's
body indented in the grass by the weight of the body — which
impression will be in the "/o?77i," or shape of the animal as it
squats.

In these *' forms " situate in the field or the wood, the hare
sits all day, exposed to all the dangers of such a position, while
its congener — the rabbit — rests with its fellows securely in its
burrows. I may remark in passing — though I shall enlarge on
it elsewhere — that this extraordinary difference between the
building instincts of the hare, and rabbit, is very remarkable,
seeing how very much they resemble one another in many
respects, and how nearly they must be " i^elated^^ to one an-
other in an evolutional sense.

I had intended to dilate more on the special subject of the
" Habitations " of solitary creatures, but I am so pressed for
space that I must be content with the mention of the above two

390 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

animals and defer what further I have to say on " Habitations "
and the " Questions that may be put to the Materialist " con-
cerning them, to the next article.

The Social Instincts. — The first of these I shall name is
that all-important one which leads various animals, birds, fish,
insects, &c., to associate together in herds, flocks, shoals, or
societies. It is a most curious fact that some creatures or
pairs always remain solitary, and that others should always
flock, or herd together, and still more curious is it that some
— as the lark and chafiinch — should band together in the win-
ter and separate in the spring.

As above remarked- it is not one sub-kingdom of creatures
that alone has this Instinct, but in each one there are examples
more or less. I think it is a habit with some people to think
only of bees and ants, as living in societies, but full considera-
tion shows us that it is not these only, that show their instincts
in united actions for the common weal, but that very many of
the higher animals associate together in bands, as elephants,
dogs, rooks, herrings, &c., &c.

The question why some creatures should associate, and
others not, must be a very puzzling enigma to the Materialist,
who so burns to explain everything as arising and working in
a mechanical and strictly utilitarian manner.

He may say that they associate together for company sake
only; or for afibrding mutual warmth by huddling together;
or that it may be to afford the safety Avhich their union in some
degree secures; or for some benefit in feeding together, or for
undertaking some common work — -as the building of compound
nests, burrows, &c.

Then he may say that those which flock at one time and
separate at another, do so for the purpose of nesting, &c., or
because food is scarce, and so on. But this does not meet the
case, for if the above were the determining factors, then how
strange is it that there should be so many solitary creatures,
for — speaking materialistically — these ought by this time to
have found out the many benefits of association.

BRIEF TABULATION OF THE SOCIAL INSTINCTS. 391

It will not do for the Materialist to say the solitary creature
remains alone for the benefit of getting more food, "because
what is enough for two is starvation for a thousand " — but this
argument, I say again, will not do, for we know that rooks,
and blackbirds — for example — feed on much the same kind of
food, yet the one flocks, and the other does not.

We may instance also amongst quadrupeds, the wolf ; and
the fox : both live on flesh, yet the one lives in flocks, and the
other is solitary.

It cannot therefore be established by the Materialist that the
respective advantages above mentioned are ijeculiar to the par-
ticular species following such, and that they would not apply
to other creatures ? The food question then, cannot I think as
shown above, be the determining utilitarian factor, because we
know that creatures that live on similar kinds of food — whether
animal or vegetable — have different instincts as to association,
or non-association. And as to the other advantages named
above they would seem applicable to almost all creatures.

We will now consider separately a few of the more con-
spicuous "Social Instincts;'' but so numerous are they that I
shall of course in a work of this kind be able to do little more
than name the most important, and which I will do in the fol-
lowing sketch.

Brief Tabulation of the Social Instincts.

1st. The instinct which apparently secures the good behaviour
of one member of the community toivards the others, and without
which association would he impossible.

2ndly. The instinct which it would seem every member must
jwssess, ivhich tells it instinctively what is for the good or ill of the
society in common.

3rdly. The instinct which leads the various creatures to band
together Jor mutual protection^ and other advantages ; and incites
them to place sentinels, and to follow, and obey, leaders.

4thly. The instinct that guides some creatures to hunt to-
gether in order by united action to circumvent and secure their
prey.

392 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

5thly. The instinct which compels various creatures to build
complex dwellings ; and tells them how to do it.

6thly. The special instincts of the Bee, the Ant, and the
Termites.

Under these broad divisions we will now examine our sub-
ject.

The first one I have named is very remarkable, and any one
who has watched flocks, and packs, and herds, or read about
them, and has reflected on the subject, can I think have no
doubt but that by a certain kind of intuition, the members of
the community know that they must behave themselves
according to rules, and a law — which though unwritten — is
paramount. The Materialist may say that the good behaviour
I speak of is arrived at by fighting, and that the weaker have
to make way for, and obey the stronger ; but can there be a
doubt of there being some more powerful factor, or motive,
than this, and which underlies all ?

Of the 2nd division, as above, I would say that it appears
to me absolutely necessary to grant that every member must
be able to appreciate what is for the common good, or the
united action of the whole body could not go on so har-
moniously, and secure so perfectly the designed end. To wit,
take the case of the making of habitations by the beaver ; or
the construction of a honey-comb. Or the capture by wolves
of their prey. Or on the contrary the securance of safety by
the united action of a troop of — say wild horses — in resisting a
pack of wolves — and in which, and similiar instances to be
observed amongst other animals, the stronger horses (or oxen,
&c.) act in concert to protect the weaker ones, and the young.

Of the 3rd division I must niake a few remarks. This
instinct which compels some creatures to associate together for
mutual protection ; or for warmth in huddling together at
night ; or for the more easy procurance of food ; as well as for
other probable motives, is a very mysterious one, because, as I
have previously said, if flocking together and united action is
good for those creatures who do so flock, it seems impossible
for us to discern why it should not be for the advantage of other

BRIEF TABULATION OF THE SOCIAL INSTINCTS. 393

creatures — similar in sort to those who do band — to them-
selves associate like their congeners.

For example. Why should the fieldfare flock, and not the
blackbird ; both prefer the same kind of food ? Why should
starlings flock, and not magpies ?

Then under the heading we are now considering, there is the
Avonderful Instinct to be accounted for which teaches the
members of herds, flocks, &c., to place sentinels, and to select
and obey leaders. Who that has seen a large flock of rooks,
fieldfares, or larks feeding, but knows that on the trees or
on the ground away from, but near the flock, certain solitary
members of the flock are to be observed, and who on the ap-
proach of supposed danger fly off and give the signal of alarm ;
when the entire flock take to wing ?

And so of leaders, and of obedience to them. To cite a
familiar example, who has not seen the importance of the gan-
der in leading the geese to the pond, or to the wheat stubble.

And on a larger scale who has not seen, or read of the
royal stag of a herd of deer ; or the old bull of a herd of
oxen ; or the emperor horse of a troop of horses ? Each in
his sphere leads, and is obeyed. So too of birds. Who has
not seen a large flock of geese or wild ducks flying high over
head, each member of which is so placed that the whole num-
ber are arranged in the form of a V, the apex of which is
directed forward ? At this apex flies the senior gander, or
drake, and it is he who directs the course of the flight, and it
is he whom the rest follow, and obey.

How is all this, Materialist ?

You may say the supremacy of the leader in all these cases
is acquired by strength and fighting ; but must there not be
something more than this ? Must there not be an innate in-
stinct which guides the leader, and influences the followers ?

Surely some hidden power and endowed faculty underlies all
we can see and understand in the matter ?

Under the 4th division we have to consider the Instinct that
guides some creatures to hunt together in order the better by
their united action to secure their r)rey. This instinct is es-

394 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

pecially marked in wolves and dogs, and is a very curious one,
and to those persons who reflect on the subject, the question
must immediately present itself. '' If it is beneficial for wolves
and dogs, &c. to hunt together, why do not other predacious
creatures do the same?" What could not a flock of twenty
magpies do in the way of depredations if they banded to-
gether and worked with concerted action like a pack of
liounds ? Certainly they could as a flock secure a larger sum
total of food than by acting singly.

And fancy what a flight of twenty peregrine falcons could
do acting in concert ! Why they could circumvent, and destroy
a whole covey of partridges at once, each falcon getting his
quarry more easily than if he had acted alone. By a pro-
vidential arrangement however falcons and tigers, and venom-
ous snakes, &c., do not hunt in concert.

We now come to the consideration of the 5th section of the
rough classification made above, viz : the Instinct which com-
pels various creatures to build complex dwelVmgs for use in
common.

The first example I shall give is that of the Beaver. These
animals live together in large societies, and build elaborate
dwellings in the water for use in common. These dwellings
consist of " lodges " or hollow-domed chambers each forming a
mound of seven feet in diameter, and several feet high, and large
enough to contain ten or twelve inmates. Around the interior
of the lodge are arranged the sleeping-places of the inhabitants,
each one formed of a little grass, or tender bark. A great
many of these lodges are grouped together in the water near
the bank of the river, and the domes may be seen standing up
above the water. Each " lodge " has a passage that passes
from its lowest part into the water, and another that com-
municates with the land. These habitations are made of
branches of trees matted and plastered together with mud,
grass, moss, &c., and in the construction of which it is said the
animal uses its broad tail as a kind of trowel.

Now, as it is most important that these lodges should never
be left dry by the stream sinking in depth, or below a certain

BRIEF TABULATION OF THE SOCIAL INSTINCTS. 395

level, it is a well-ascertained fact that the beavers, bj united
action, can fell trees by gnawing them through the base,
and then after cutting them into pieces of convenient lengths,
and dragging such to a certain appropriate spot in the river,
can make dams — even of a length of 300 yards — so as to
obstruct the flow of water, and thus regulate the depth of the
stream.

I cannot give further details as to these dams, and must
refer the reader to the books on zoology, but I repeat that it
is quite certain these little animals do possess the faculty of
constructing dams that will arrest the flow of the stream, and
even alter the material features of a river and a district ! I may
add that they form stores of food beneath the water for use in
winter.

The next example I shall give of a compound dwelling-
place is the construction fabricated by the Sociable Weaver
Bird of South Africa. These birds make a kind of umbrella-
like roof of grass woven together, and beneath it suspend 800
to 1000 nests arranged with wonderful regularity, like the
cells of a honeycomb.

But wonderful as are the habitations I have just described,
we need not go abroad in order to find animals and birds
dwelling together ; for we have the rabbit and the rook in
every county of England. The former dig elaborate burrows
with an entrance and various exits, in which they securely
squat in company with one another during the day. And as
to rooks, every one has seen a rookery composed of nests built
— in general — near one another, but with here and there, three
or four nests joined together.

With these examples I must be content, but they are quite
sufficient to afford evidence — which I shall dilate on more
fully by-and-by — of the fact, that the several creatures men-
tioned above, must possess certain extraordinary instincts which
direct them as to association — as to behaving properly to one
another — as to working together for the common weal, &c., &c.,
in fact instincts that tell them what it is desirable for them to
do and how to do it.

CHAPTER XVI.

The Pure Instincts {continued).

Bees — Killing drones — Honey storing — Ants — Termites — Questions
for Materialistic Evolutionist — Instinct of hibernation — Instinct
for storing food — Instinct of migration — Enumeration of a few
other special Instincts — Instincts in Man — Cause and origin of
Instincts — Instinct an ordained gift— Action of mind in animals —
Variation of Instinct.

The Social Instincts of Bees, Ants, and the Termites of
the Tropics. — A society of bees consists of one fertile female
or Queen; several hundreds of males or drones; and many
thousands of workers which are neuters or imperfect females.
It is of these latter I shall speak chiefly, for it will be im-
possible to go into details concerning all. Of these workers
then there are two kinds, the " wax-maJcers,'" and the " nurses,'^
the former secrete the wax, and build the cells in the rough,
while the latter finish the cells, and feed the young when
hatched. Both wax-makers and nurses collect honey, and each
can secrete wax from some special organs called " iDax-'pockets^''
situate on either side of the body, though the ^^ ivax-makers^^
can form the most.

Each of these kinds of individuals, be it observed, must know
what is its fitting employment; some stay at home and fulfil
the duties of the hive, in building cells, feeding the grubs, or
ventilating the hive, &c.; while others go in search of honey
and pollen — yet all is order, and united action for the common
good.

Truly these Instincts are most remarkable; let us look a
little more closely at them. Messrs. Kirby and Spence

THE SOCIAL INSTINCTS OF BEES, ANTS, ETC. 397

{^^ Entomology^' p. 554) say that bees have "at least thirty-
distinct instincts," and that number is within the full estimate.
I have not space here to enumerate them all, but will instance
a few. But before doing so, I would specially request the
reader to note that a bee's natural life does not exceed two
years, yet that a young bee (Kirby says, of one or two days
old, p. 554) can exercise its instincts at once, and perfectly
without going to school.

To name a few instincts of the bee. At swarming time a
young Queen rushes forth from the hive, and immediately
a number of other bees follow her, and be it noted, though
some of these are drones (males), the great majority are neuters,
and therefore have not matrimony in view. They " swarm,"
and collectively determine on a fitting place for a residence,
and thenceforth each one takes instinctively to a duty. Some
cleanse the hole, or hive; others go out to collect ^^ propolis '^
(a viscid gum-resin collected from trees, and buds, and used
for mixing with wax to make the cells more firm and adherent);
others to ventilate the hive; others to keep guard at the door.
Then others go out to collect honey, and " hee bread " (pollen of
flowers), and know how to get it; and know, after their wander-
ings, how to fly back to the hive — as Huber tells us — " straight
as a ball from a musket." Then there is the cell-making
instinct, in all its wondrousness, an instinct, be it marked, which
is enabled to be satisfied, and supplied by a secretion — wax —
provided by, and excreted from the bee's own body (how different
to man's wood, and bricks, and mortar). I shall give no
description of " a comb,'' for it is familiar to all. Then there
is the instinct as to feeding the young. Under this instinct
the nurse " swallows pollen, not, be it observed, to satisfy its
own hunger, but that it may be elaborated in its stomach into
proper food for the grub," for it regurgitates this food and
with it feeds its nursling. Next, let us note the singular love
the bees have of monarchical rule, and the ardent devotion with
which they tend the Queen, and should she die they at once
bring into action one of their most remarkable and inexplicable
instincts. They at once pull down some ordinary cells, and

398 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

convert them into one large royal cell, and selecting an ordinary
''brood grub of a worker," feed it with food " appropriate for
royalty," and in about sixteen days a new Queen is thus pro-
duced, or one may say made.

As Kirby and Spence remark in substance Q^ Entomology, ^^
p. 557), Can this be reason? Can bees know ivhy they do this,
and know how to rear a common grub into a Queen? If so,
they show "a depth of reason to which Prometheus, when he
made his clay man, had no pretensions."

We have no other alternative then but to refer the extra-
ordinary phenomenon of Queen-making to an endowed instinct.
I will next mention the remarkable display of quite an opposite
quality of instinct, in the fact that soon after a new colony has
been established, and the Queen has laid eggs, the neuters
sting the males or drones to death, as (apparently) being no
longer needed. This ruthless slaughter is most remarkable,
and the question may be asked, why the drones do not die
naturally — but the mystery of venom and stings I must defer
the consideration of, to the article on *' Death,^^ Vol, II.

Then there is the " honey storing instinct,^^ — and the question
why some bees stay at home and attend to cell-making, feed-
ing grubs, and other duties, while their companions seek
nectar afar. Many more bee instincts might be named; but I
think I have adduced sufficient to prove that many of them
are so extraordinary that we cannot believe that they are the
result of pure ratiocination, especially as they may be put in
action by individuals only two days old. Not but what bees
can observe, and act accordingly. Therefore it is clear to me
that bees possess minds endowed for their particular use with
certain faculties, but which are limited in their action by God's
will. I shall return to this further on.

Ants. — Ants, like bees, live in large societies composed of
males, females, and neuters. The latter are divisible into two
classes, the workers, and the soldiers; these have no wings,
but the males, and the perfect females, or " Queens," have
powerful wings with which they can fly away from the old
nest, and form a new community.

THE SOCIAL INSTINCTS OF BEES, ANTS, ETC. 399

The males die after living a very short time; but the Queens
survive, and, unlike the bee, several Queens are resident in a
nest. But now I must relate a most remarkable fact, which
is, that soon after a female has settled down in a new home she
bites off her own wings, or is denuded of them by the workers,
either as being no longer required, or if done by the latter,
perhaps to prevent her escape. The Queens are fed by the
neuters, and treated with apparent respect.

The next extraordinary fact in regard to ants is the instinct
which leads them to make war on the inmates of neighbour-
ing nests, and teaches them to carry off any larvae that they
may capture from them. I said above, that of the working
neuters, there were two kinds, the ordinary worker, and the
soldier, and it is these latter whose duty it is to engage in
these forays. After they have secured any larvse or pupse
they convey them to their own nest, and rear, and employ
them as slaves in the work of the nest.

This fact, I believe, is unique in the whole range of zoolo-
gical wonders; but there is yet another wonderful thing
practised by the ants, which is the carrying out of an instinct
as remarkable as the foregoing. It is this. Ants are ex-
tremely fond of a saccharine fluid emitted by Aphides (plant
lice) and called " honey dew^ This secretion, ants may be
seen collecting from the Aphides by pressing their bodies first
one side and then the other, and the process is so analogous
to what man does in the case of the cow, that it has been
fancifully called " milking." Ants are so fond of this food
that they climb plants, and search about for the plant-lice in
order to milk them; but they can do more than this as stated
by Westwood, and other entomologists — tliey even imprison
A2')h,ides in their nests, in order to have them always at hand.

Of the habitations of ants I shall not speak, for although
they are very remarkable I prefer to describe presently the
still more wonderful dwellings of the Termites.

There are also many instincts (see article on " Storing of
Food ") and wonderful doings of ants besides those 1 have
mentioned, which I must leave the student to search out in

400 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

books specially devoted to Insects. I will, however, say a
few words on the general mode in which ants work, and com-
municate with one another.

In regard to the latter, they seem able, like bees, to convey
information to one another by means of touching one
another's antennas; and thus, as it appears, they are able to
communicate information which is necessary to them in their
ordinary operations, as well as in their predatory, and warlike
excursions.

As to the mode in which they v/ork by concerted methodical
plan, I will give an instance of what I once witnessed myself.

I saw numerous ants coming out of, and going into, a
small hole in a gravel path, near the turf. I laid down and
watched them by the aid of a large pocket lens. Each ant
on its exit bore a small nodule of earth between its two fore-
legs, which it carried a certain distance from the hole, and
having deposited it, returned down the hole. After watching
a short time, I observed an ant similar in appearance to the
others, come out bearing no burden; it ran all round, and with
its forelegs every now and then patted down the nodules of
earth near the mouth of the hole, and here and there, where
he apparently observed one that was not secure, took up
and carried it far away from the hole. This he did appa-
rently to prevent loose nodules falling down into the hole, or
tunnel that was being excavated. He then— having appa-
rently satisfied himself — returned down the hole. After a
short time, however, he reappeared and went through the same
operations as before. This action was repeated again and
again at regular intervals, and gave me the strong conviction
that this ant was an overlooker, or planner of the work.

And thus, no doubt, it is with ants, bees, and other crea-
tures that work for associated, and common benefit; there
must be some of the members of the community endowed
with the power not only of individual constructive skill, but
possessing an Instinct for general planning. But attractive
as it is to study these Instincts, I must desist, for I think I
have now said sufficient for my purpose of demonstrating

TERMITES. 401

what wonderful instincts are possessed bv these humble
creatures.

Before, however, I quite quit them and their marvellous
doings, I must impressively say that perhaps some persons
who are not versed in Entomology may think that I have been
^^ romancing ''^ and that some of the statements I have just
made are hypothetical, or fabulous; but I can only assure the
reader that I have narrated no doings of ants which have not
been well authenticated by skilled observers, and that I have
stated nothing but what may be found described in detail in
the wi'itings of such Entomologists as Sir John Lubbock,
Westwood, Kirby and Spence, and others.

Termites. — I will next speak of this, which although not
a true ant is popularly classed as one. The " Termites^'' or
" White Ant8 " of the Tropics, dwell in association in a some-
what similar mode to that of bees and ants. Each community,
however, possesses five kinds of members, viz., males,
females, workers, neuters, and soldiers.

The males and females have each four wings, but the others
are wingless. The males and females shed their wings (for
which there is a special provision in a natural seam that
crosses the wing).^

The Termites have many extraordinary instincts similar in
many respects to those of Bees and Ants of which I have
given a few examples in my observations on those Insects.
Space however presses me so much that I cannot go into
detail concerning the Instincts specially of the Termites, suffice
it that they are analogous to those of the Bee and Ant, and
I must content myself with enlarging on one only — their
Building Instinct.

This is very marked in the Termites, and leads them to
construct the most elaborate dwellings made by any creature
other than man. Some of the species build nests as big as
sugar-casks, of pieces of gnawed wood cemented together, and
which they suspend in trees; but the species I shall most
enlarge on is that which constructs habitations on the ground,
1 See Nicholson's " Zoology" p. 335.

D d

402 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

of a conical or turret-shaped form, and made mostly of clay,
such nests being from twelve to thirty feet high, and placed in
groups like a little village. So strong are these nests, " that
it is the practice of the wild bulls to mount them as sentinels
while the rest of the herd is feeding."

The structure contains " royal chambers for the king and
queen, nurseries for the young, store-houses for food, and in-
numerable galleries, passages, and empty rooms, all arranged
according to a plan " which the reader will find described
at length in Kirhy and Spends '■''Entomology^' 7th ed.
1^. 285—287.

As is said in the above work, " that such diminutive insects
(for they are scarcely a fourth of an inch in length) should,
however numerous, be able to erect a building twelve feet or
more high, and of proportionate bulk, covered by a vast dome,
and sheltering under its ample arch, myriads of vaulted apart-
ments of various dimensions, and constructed of different mate-
rials; that they should moreover be able to excavate innumerable
subterranean roads or tunnels some twelve or thirteen inches
in diameter, or throw an arch over roads leading from the
metropolis into the adjoining country to the distance of several
hundred feet; that they should project and finish the, for them,
vast interior staircases and bridges lately described, and finally
that the millions necessary to execute such Herculean labours
perpetually passing to and fro should never interrupt or inter-
fere with each other is a miracle of nature far exceeding the
most boasted work of man ; for did these creatures equal him
in size — retaining their usual instincts and activity — their
buildings would soar to the astonishing height of more than
half a mile."

I would fain say more on this absorbingly interesting subject
but must pass on.

Questions for the Unbelieving Materialistic Evolutionist to
answer as to the foregoing.

I am first of all anxious to inquire of the Materialist what
factor on his theory he considers has been the most powerful

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 403

in producing the " Building Instinct,''^ whether " Necessity"
" Variation,'' " Heredity" '■^ Habit" and " Acquired Experience "
or " Reason " ?

To me it appears this Instinct cannot have arisen by mere
MateriaUstic " Necessity" or all animals would make habita-
tions either to contain their eggs or young, or as a shelter for
themselves. This we know is not the case, and a conspicuous
example is seen in the different instinct of the allied animals,
the hare and the rabbit, the former making no nest for its
young or shelter for itself, whereas the latter makes a separate
warm and secure nest for its young, and an elaborate retreat
underground for itself.

As to " Variation " and " Heredity " I cannot see that these
can have had any connexion with the origin of the " Building
Instinct" Creatures may have " varied " it is true, as pressed
by circumstances, but if so, it must have occurred according to
the provision and order of the supernatural " laws of varia-
tion;" but " Variation " could not by materialistic self-action
have itself invented in the first place how to make a nest any
more than how to make an egg, and " Heredity " could not
therefore have handed down the Instinct in either case.

Then as to '' Habit " and " Acquired Experience" I cannot
see either how these could have had any effect in causing the
'^Building Instinct," because a " habit," &c., for making a nest
must have had an origin, and how could the habit have com-
menced ? Was it by chance ?

Then as to " Reason" If reason caused the origin and
development of the " Building Instinct" then how is it — as
remarked above in regard to " necessity " — how is it all crea-
tures do not make nests, &c. ? and I am not aware that those
creatures which do not make nests, &c., are more stupid than
those which do. In other words I do not know that the
" builders " are more clever in things in general, than the
"non-builders."

Again, if " reason " entered at all into the matter of making
habitations, nests, &c., by animals, we should surely see
according to the Evolutionist's own pet factor, " Variation,'^

D d 2

404 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF,

more differences than we do in plan, and style, and mode of
construction of their dwellings, &c., the same as we do in the
shape, &c., of men^s houses; yet so dominant is the ^^ building
instinct,'''' that much as the nests, &c., of different species vary,
you always see the same sjjecies building just like its fellows,
or making just the same variation as they do under certain
circumstances. For instance, a sparrow in the open, always
puts a dome to its nest; but never if it builds in an outhouse,
or a hole in the thatch.

The next question I would put is in regard to the origin of
the " Social Instincts." How did they begin ? In attempting
to answer this question, the Materialist must bear in mind that
just the same arguments apply to this Instinct in regard to
^^ Necessity,'' ^'Variation,'' '^Heredity,'' '^ Hah it,'' '^Acquired
Experience," and ^^ Reason;" and of their being — hypothetically
' — factors of the ^'^ Social Instincts,'"^ as I have just used in
regard to the possibility of their being factors of the " Building
Instiiict." Clearly neither of these factors appear to be accep-
table as origrinators of the ^'Social Instincts," for even if the
Materialist argued that any animals took to associating together
through materialistic " necessity " arising in any way, or
through the promptings of " reason," we are met by the very
cogent reflection, that if association is good for many species
of creatures, why is it not good also, and why has it not been
pressed by necessity, or reason, on the congeners of those crea-
tures that do associate ?

For example, if it is advantageous for rooks to associate
together, why not for magpies, or for blackbirds, or for
robins, &c.

But now I must put a more perplexing question to the
Materialist than even the foregoing. I would ask, " How did
the marvellous Instincts of the neuters of Bees, and Ants, and
the Termites originate? "

Now before we discuss this, I must recall the reader^s
attention to the fact that only the " Queens *' of the above
Insects are fertile, and that, therefore, as the neuters cannot
propagate their kind it is impossible for them to transmit their

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 405

Instincts — Instincts which are completely and totally different
to those of the Queen's, or the Drone's, or the King's ; and
which individuals alone could by any possibility influence their
progeny by " Heredity.^'' The neuter workers (wax-makers
and nurses) of the Bee we know are possessed of various mar-
vellous instincts — and so are the workers and soldiers of Ants
— and so, too, of those of the Termites; and it is most impor-
tant for us to bear in mind that the question is not simply,
how did the neuters arise ? but further, how did the " castes "
among these originate — of wax-makers, nurses, soldiers, &c.?
So the question is, " Seeing that the neuters cannot have
acquired, and cannot transmit their Instincts by Heredity, how
did these instincts originate ; and further, how did the neuters
become divided into castes ?"

In speculating on what the Materialist might say on this
momentous question, and cautioning him as to what he must
not say, I would draw attention to the fact that even Mr.
Darwin has acknowledged its difliculty — a diflaculty that he
says " at first appeared to me insuperable, and actually fatal
to the whole theory of * Natural Selection.^ "

But Mr. Darwin was not to be daunted, so he attempts to
explain away the difficulty by what I would venture to desig-
nate as another example of his most ingenious "biological
special pleading " which though it may satisfy himself, and his
followers, cannot be accepted in my humble opinion as in any
way affording a true explanation. (See 0. Species, p. 228.)

As far as I can understand him, his argument is in brief as
follows —

That Queen bees, like other females, have ages ago pro-
duced young ones which varied from themselves in different
ways — for example in this case in being sterile, and having no
wings (as the neuters of ants), and different jaws, &;c., and
that these neuters by " natural selection " gradually got formed
into " castes," and that the Queens which produced most
neuters having the advantageous modifications, were the most
successful in the struggle for existence, and so in the end all
Queens got to produce neuters, and castes of neuters of the

4o6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

most advantageous kinds. I think this is a fair summary of
his argument. For myself I cannot see for a moment how it
can stand the test of strict investigation. Granted the
"Queens" may have had varieties — monstrosities— amongst
their progeny, but as these neuter varieties could not propagate
themselves I cannot see how they could have been perpetuated.
Surely, all the marvels of Bees did not arise from the
" chance " production of monstrosities ! But the question as
to sterility, winglessness, &c., difficult as it is to account for on
Mr. Darwin's theory, sinks into insignificance by the side of
the far more difficult question, how did these neuter bees get
their " wax-pockets," and their function for secreting wax, and
their instinct for making cells of it, and then collecting nectar,
and pollen from plants and storing in them. Also how they
*' acquired " the practice of nursing and feeding the young
bees, and knowing how to do it ; and why they did this,
because not being mothers they could have no maternal affection ;
and because the doing of such could be of no benefit to them-
selves. Also how it came about that some of the neuter Ants
and Termites made themselves into soldiers, with big jaws, and
the propensity to fight with their neighbours, and carry off
their larvae to rear as slaves. And how it came that the
neuters of ants acquired the practice of keeping Aphides
captive, and milking them ?

Now let us look farther into this. Suppose for argument
sake a certain Queen bee a hundred millions of years ago had
a young one — that happened to be without wings ; and
happened to have wax-pockets ; and happened to make a rude
cell ; and then happened to tend the grub from the egg which
the Queen had happened to lay in the cell ; and farther that it
happened that this wonderful neuter collected honey, and
stored it in the cells ; still even if all these extraordinary
things partly happened hy chance, or were partly invented, and
done, by this wonderful monstrosity during its two years of
existence, still as it could not as a neuter transmit all its
structural peculiarities and various acquirements, they would
come to an end with its life.

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 407

Oh ! but the Materialist may say if a Queen once had a
variety or monstrosity of this kind she might have others.
Granted, Materiahst ; but can you by the utmost stretch of
fancy think this could all happen by chance ?

To this the Darwinist probably would answer that he does
not believe in chance, and he would point out to you that these
perfections of the neuters in regard to organic structure, and
caste, and wonderful instinct, did not come all at once but came
by slow degrees, and became perfected gradually, because it
was advantageous to the " Queen " to produce " workers," and
"nurses," and "soldiers," &c. In reply I would remark that
this argument really amounts to nothing. I care not how
rudimentary and immature may have been the first inklings of
the perfections of the neuters according to the materialistic
evolution idea, and how slowly they developed. Granted it is
advantageous to the Queen to have workers, and nurses, and
soldiers, and slaves, but how would it be possible, however
clever the first born neuters of a certain Queen might be, and
supposing each one lived two years (a bee's span of life) and
became more and more clever by " acquired experience " — how
would it be possible I say even although the individually
fortunate Queen did derive advantage from having such clever
progeny — how would it be possible for them — being sexless —
to transmit their self-acquired haphazard cleverness ; and how
would it be possible for the Queen, by any self-power or
faculty, to secure that succeeding neuters should possess not
only the cleverness of their predecessors, but should transmit
the " improvements " the neuters had themselves achieved
through " acquired experience " generation after generation, till
the perfection we see was attained ? Why the thing is im-
possible in a materialistic sense. Even if the Queen did
derive benefit, and even though she might (I don't say she
could) perceive the advantage, how could she impress on her
future progeny the perfection of her neuters? — because it must
be remembered that when the Queen has laid the egg that will
produce a neuter, she has no more organic connexion with it,
and any perfection this neuter may attain to, must cease

4o8 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

with its life because it cannot hand them down by here-
dity.

Therefore, even if we supposed the Queen's " reason " could
23erceive the benefit she derives from neuters, she could not aifect
her bodily organization in such a way as to lay eggs that would
produce more and more clever neuters. If the Materialist
thinks this possible let him explain himself; but I would
caution him that if he enters on the question of ^^ perception of
the fitting^'' and the co-ordinate creation and development of
new organic structure and functions through the capability of
the bodily parts in being able also to appreciate and yield to
the new requirements — and whether this '''■perception of the
fitting " was initiated by " necessity," or by reason, separately,
or conjointly — yet either way, I will engage to say, he will get
entangled in an argument which will be sure to land him in
the conclusion that a sense of ^' the fitting, ^^ and the power to
produce such in respect to alteration of structure, function, and
instinct, can only have arisen, and ca-n only work, by Super-
natural causation, and design. (See " Fitness,''^ Vol. III.)

In the foregoing I believe I have given a correct interpreta-
tion of Mr. Darwin's hypothesis concerning the origin of
neuters, and " castes," as far as a common-sense person can
understand such erudite arguments; and I believe also that
whether I have rightly understood Mr. Darwin, or not, on
this particular question, I have reasoned on such interpretation
strictly in the method of the Materialists.

I will next speak of some further facts in regard to the
doings and instincts of Bees and Ants, which, I think, even a
Darwinist will find it difficult to attribute to any other cause
than that of Supernatural arrangement.

What I allude to is this. When a bee collects nectar it
swallows it, and it is conveyed into the first stomach, called
a " honey bag," where the nectar is altered by contact with
the secretion of the stomach and is turned into honey. This
honey, when the bee arrives home, she regurgitates, and casts
forth into a cell, where it is secured for future use. How is
this. Materialist ? how came the honey-bag ? how came the

THE INSTINCT AND FACULTY OF HIBERNATION. 409

curious instinct to cast out from the stomach what had once
been swallowed, and to store such ? Did this come about by
chance ?

Again, Bees collect pollen from flowers; carry it home and
knead it into " hee hread^'' and store it as food for the young.
When this bee bread is required for the larvae, it is swallowed
by the adult "nurse," and "after it has undergone conversion
into a sort of whitish jelly in her stomach, where it is probably
mixed with honey, it is regurgitated and the larvae fed with
it," with the greatest devotion and assiduity. (See Kirhij and
Spence's ^^ Entomology ^^^ p. 212.)

How came this remarkable Instinct, Materialist ?

Further, in regard to Ants; these feed their young by them-
selves swallowing (like bees) appropriate food, which, after a
sort of digestion in their own stomachs, they then disgorge
into the mouths of the larvae.

My final question therefore on this score is, How did bees
and ants " acquire " the practice of swallowing food, and then
of casting it up again and feeding their young therewith ?

For myself, in a materialistic sense, I can only see one hypo-
thesis it is possible for the Materialist to advance; which is,
that some of the ancestral bees and ants were afflicted with
sickness, and that they and their progeny found the ejecta so
nice that by Natural Selection those bees survived which had
this tendency to sickness, but which proved so advantageous
that it was preserved in the " struggle for existence."

This will oifend a Darwinist, and he will say I am trifling
with, and laughing at him. Then let him tell us seriously,
how such extraordinary instincts arose as those I have last
named.

The Instinct and Faculty of Hibernation. — This remark-
able instinct and faculty is possessed by many creatures, but is
restricted to those which, in consequence of the particular nature
of their food, are unable to procure during the winter their
fitting nourishment. Thus bats, and hedgehogs which live on
insects; and dormice, squirrels, &c., which feed mostly on
fruit; and bees, and many other insects that live on a diet

4IO SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

they can only get in the summer, have the instinct and faculty
to pass into a state of complete — or it may be partial — torpidity
during the winter.

The bat and the hedgehog are the best examples of those
that hibernate completely, and sleep the whole winter through;
and this is so ordained in consequence of the fact that as they
live during the summer on live insects, they can form no store
for the winter.

This is not the case, however, with dormice, squirrels, bees,
and ants, &c., which, as their diet will keep, can, and do form
stores of nuts, honey, corn, &c., for winter use. Hence these
creatures become only partially torpid during the winter, and
wake up occasionally on warm days and partake of some of
their store; and then relapse into sleep.

A large number of insects pass the winter in the egg, or the
larva, or pupa condition, but others in the perfect form are
completely torpid the entire winter — a few butterflies to wit.
Of the insects that do hibernate some form nests or hibernacula,
others merely secrete themselves in some sheltered retreat.

As to the physical condition of animals when in a state of
complete hibernation, I may make the following brief remarks.
The condition is not one of ordinary sleep — it is something
more. During its continuance the respiration is almost entirely
suspended, and the circulation reduced to a rate of extreme
slowness. When the creature revives, the return to its usual
rate of breathing and its normal heat is very gradual.

As to this remarkable Instinct of Hibernation, and its exer-
cise, I gather the following from Kirhy and Spence's " Entomo-
logy,^^ in regard to its manifestation in Insects, but these
remarks are equally applicable to bats, and other animals.

In that work it is stated in substance that to refer hibernation
to the mere direct influence of cold, is to suppose one of the most
important acts of the hibernating creature's existence to be
given up to the blind guidance of feelings which in the variable
climate of Europe would be leading them into perpetual and
fatal errors, they would be coming out on a fine warm winter's
day when there was no food for them, and when a sudden

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 411

change of temperature would kill them, or supposing they had
come out in early spring, a cold May ensuing would induce
them wrongly to seek winter quarters. Depend on it, the
Creator has not entrusted the safety of so important a part of
His creatures to so fallacious a guide as their own mere sensa-
tions of cold or warmth. Then what is the regulator that tells
them when to retire for the winter and when to wake in the
spring ? Why, Instinct as endowed by God. As the cater-
pillar does not know why it spins a cocoon in which it shall
change into a moth, so in like manner the insect, or the hedge-
hog, or dormouse, does not know why it makes its nest or
hibernaculum in which to pass the winter, or why it enters it
and goes to sleep.

Questions for the Unbelieving Materialistic Evolutionist.

These must be few and brief, as my space presses me.

1st. How did the Instinct arise ?

2nd. How did the physical powers of the system " acquire "
the faculty of continuing to act, so as to carry on life, although
not supplied with food as usual ? Food being withheld why
does not the animal die of starvation as it would under usual
circumstances ?

It may be said by the Materialist that many insects show
great tenacity of life, and that we have heard of " specimens "
transfixed by pins and placed in the drawers of cabinets being
found to be still alive a long time after being impaled.

But this argument will not apply to warm blooded animals
like bats and hedgehogs. How did they then ^^ gradually
acquire " the power of going without food for six months
without death occurring ? And it must be remembered that
according to the theory of the Materialistic Evolutionists all
changes or new acquirements have been very gradual in their
growth and perfect establishment. Then let me ask how did
the first bat that hibernated manage to live straight off for six
months ? Because even if it had acquired a partial power of
abstinence which would enable it to exist say for three months,
it would not have done for it to wake in the middle of winter

412 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

when there was no food, and when it would, certainly die, and
so be unable to transmit its iiartially " acquired " powers.
The first bat then that hibernated, must have " acquired" all
at once the perfect faculty of hibernating for six months, for
if not " all at once " a partial acquisition would have been use-
less and even fatal. Perhaps the Materialist will explain this.

3rdly. As some insects hibernate during the winter, while
the majority die at its approach, how is it all have not on
materialistic principles got to know how to hibernate ? why do
certain species live and certain other species die ? Are
not these latter " materialistically " clever enough to have
found out how to do it ? or do they happen not to have hit on
the plan ?

4thly. Of those creatures that form a winter store I should
be glad to hear from the Materialist how he thinks they
" acquired " the practice ? (See " Storing Instinct.^'*)

With these questions I must leave the subject for want of
space, and ask the reader to himself apply to this instinct the
arguments such as I have used in preceding pages, in respect
to other Instincts in reference to the causative powers of
^^ Necessity, ^^ " Hahit^'' the ^^ Faculty of perceiving and securing
Fitness" &c., the arguments concerning which supposed factors
may be made use of in regard to this Instinct just as power-
fully to refute the theory of the power of inere self-action in its
case, just as in the case of those Instincts, and to prove the
necessity of referring the act and power of hibernation to the
design of a Supernatural Power, just as such a factor must be
granted in their respective cases.

Instinct for Storing of Food. — All those creatures who do not
hibernate completely, but wake occasionally during the winter,
are in the practice of forming a store of food, from which to
eat on these occasions. Of these, familiar instances occur in
the case of the bee, the ant, the squirrel, and the dormouse.
The bee stores honey in a marvellous comb ; the tropical ant
lays up food in its wonderful granaries : and the other crea-

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 413

tures make some appropriate collections of food against the
time of winter when they could not collect any, and when the
plants — by reason too of their ordained Instinct — pass into
clumber, and cease to actively vegetate, and produce seeds, &c.
I have not space to describe these combs and other store-
houses (see " Habitations y') but must proceed at once to put
my question to the Materialist as to the cause and action of the
instinct which leads to their formation and filling.

Questions for the Unbelieving Materialist Evolutionist.

Why should some creatures form these stores and thus be
enabled to live through the winter ? Why should others fail-
ing to provide stores die in consequence ? Why again should
another class of creatures be able to pass the whole winter
without food at all and yet not die ? I will take the last
question first.

Bats and hedgehogs as I have previously stated do not wake
in the winter ; nor could they form stores as their food is of a
perishable kind — that of the former specially as it consists ex-
clusively of live insects. Then how did the instinct form in
their case to seek a warm shelter, and go to sleep for months,
and how did the creature acquire the power to survive without
food. What amount of *' experience " and " habit " could have
led to this, and have given the structural and physiological self-
made jjower of survival ?

Unless by God's ordainment and plan, must not the crea-
ture so placed have surely died ?

Then in the same way, why should some creatures that do
not hibernate completely, form stores, and so obtain food when
they occasionally wake, and are thus enabled to live through the
winter ; whilst others die because they have failed to make
such provision for the future?

I will take the cases of the Bee and the Wasp. The Bee
as is so well known, makes its store of honey for winter con-
sumption, and so survives. Then as the general economy
of the wasp is so similar to that of the bee, why should it not
do the same as the bee, but in consequence of such neglect

414 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

perish by millions on the approach of winter? It will not do
for the Materialistic Evolutionist to say that wasps by reason
of their rather different mouths are not adapted for it, and
generally live by eating insects and fruit, &c.y because they are
the last persons who should object to alteration of parts by
adaptation to requirement ; and also because it is a fact that
wasps do make combs, and cells (though not of wax) and do
exceptionally collect a store of honey {Kirhy).

Then according to the evolution principles why do they not
store more, and so save their lives ? But not only do they fail
to do this, but wonderful to say, they, who all through the
summer have been so devotedly affectionate to their young,
suddenly change their conduct on the first occurence of cold in
October — and then, by a strange reversal of conduct, they
drag the grubs out of the cells and ruthlessly destroy them ?
(^Kirhy).

How is this materialistically ? Have not the wasps' minds
evolved quite so far as the bees, or do they happen not to have
thought of the storing of honey ? And why the sudden
reversal of conduct ? Will the Materialist invent a theory ?

Perhaps he will say this destruction of the grubs takes
place from the parental horror at thinking the grubs must die
of starvation after they — the adults — are killed by the au-
tumnal cold. Or will he say that perhaps wasps think one
summer in this sublunary sphere is enough, and that with
their experience of the cares of life, together with their strong
affection for their young, they prefer to destroy their young to
save them from trouble before they die themselves. Or I sup-
pose the Materialist wdll not go so far as to say that wasps
benevolently foresee that too numerous a survival of their kind
would be destructive to other creatures ? The Unbeliever
will say this is a mere satirical rodomontade which is beneath
his notice.

Then let him explain these instincts in a reasonable way ;
but I warn him that if he attempts to do so, he will find that
before he has got far he will be compelled to acknowledge one
of two things ; either that the lower creatures act by the kind

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 415

of ordained and limited mind (Instinct) mj argument contends
for ; or that in many respects even despised wasps and bees
are more intellectually clever than man — especially as to archi-
tecture, economy, foresight, industry, social loyalty, faculty of
location, &c., &c.

Between these alternatives, I must leave him to take his
choice.

After this slight digression we must return to our special
subject of " storing,''^ and I propose to do so by putting one
selected question to the Materialist, and for the sake of
brevity, one only out of a host that might be asked. I
would ask him how came the Ant in forming its store to
" acquire " the practice of gnawing out the radicle of each
seed before storing it, so as to prevent its germinating in
the underground granaries? This instinct has been denied,
but its existence has now been well ascertained. (See
Nicholson's " Zoology,'" 343).

Now how did this Instinct arise ? If it came by the action
of reason, then we must acknowledge that the reasoning faculty
of the Ant must be as powerful as that of man, consequently it
may be asked how is it, as far as we can judge, that the Ant is
not more like man in other respects, as to its intellect and its
doings ? Yet the fact is that ants, unless following their
routine Instincts, are really very stupid, as has been shown by
Sir J. Lubbock {^^ Scientific Lectures,'" p, 79). In order to
test the intelligence of Ants in respect to circumstances other
than those immediately connected with their instinctive
routine, duties, and actions. Sir J. Lubbock thought the
simplest method would be to interpose some obstacles in their
way which a little ingenuity would have enabled them to
overcome. Thus he placed food in a porcelain cup which was
surrounded with water, but accessible to the ants by a piece
(bridge) of straw. When about twenty-five ants were engaged in
carrying off the food, Sir John moved the straw slightly, so as to
leave a very slight chasm that the ants could not cross. They
came to the edge, and tried hard to get over, but failing to do
so it never occurred to them to push the straw into its original

4i6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

position, which they might easily have done, as the distance
was only one-third of an inch.

He also employed other devices which are detailed in his
interesting book. For instance, he placed some honey on a
slip of glass, which he suspended. He then made a small heap
of earth near the glass, and touching its edge, so that the ants
could run up it, and get at the honey. His next step was to
remove a little of the earth, so that there was a space of one-
third of an inch between the earth and the glass. The result
was, that the ants already on the glass slip, would not jump
down this short distance so as to get away, nor did it occur to
those on the heap of earth to pile up a few grains so as to
restore the hillock, and thus enable them to again get access
to the honey. This latter failure of intelligence is the more
remarkable as we know that ants can do such wonderful things
with earth in piling it up into habitations many feet high.

I will now add a few words as to the possible influence of
" Necessity^'' " Habit,'" " Faculty of Fitness,'' &c., in forming the
" Storing Instinct,'' as far as explicable on Materialistic princi-
ples. As to these supposed factors, I shall not enter however
into details, as I have already done so in regard to the question
of their influence on Instincts already discussed.

For myself I think the arguments I have used in respect to
these supposed materialistic factors in regard to other Instincts,
are just as applicable to this one. For example, how could
any amount of " necessity," " habit," &c., have taught the first
creatures who " stored " to adopt so remarkable a resource ?

And as to " reason," if animals " stored " in consequence of
" reason " having told the ancestors of our present storing
creatures that it was wise to do so — how is it I say such crea-
tures do not show a similar amount of sagacity and foresight as
to other things ?

The Instinct of Migration. — This is another vast subject
that I must touch on briefly.

It is one of the most remarkable and one of the most power-
fully acting of the Instincts which irresistibly lead various

THE INSTINCT OF MIGRATION. 41 7

creatures to effect wonderful things quite independent as far
as we can judge of intellectual reasoning. The instinct is not
confined to one class of creatures, for we find a few mammals —
many birds — many fishes — and some insects under its domina-
tion.

The best example of the migrating mammal is the lemming.
Of birds there are many which are familiarly known as
migrants — the swallow — the cuckoo — the nightingale, &c. Of
fishes, the salmon and the herring are well-known instances,
and of insects the locust is too well-known as suddenly
appearing and devastating whole districts ; likewise vast swarms
of butterflies, and other insects are sometimes seen passing from
one part to another. Other creatures might be named, but
these are sufiicient for my purpose.

I will now make a few general remarks on the practice of
migration, confining my observations chiefly to birds and
fishes.

As to the mere physical act of migration, when we take the
case of the swallow — the cuckoo — the pigeon, the transit
from one country to another, across the sea, does not seem in
itself so very wonderful, as they are birds of such very powerful
flight, but it is in their case the cause, and action of the
instinct that chiefly puzzles us ; yet when we consider the case
of tender short-winged warblers like the nightingale, the
blackcap, and the woodwren — birds which we see just flitting
by fits and starts from bush to bush in the summer, and unable
apparently to maintain a continuous flight, why then in their
case, and that of many other little birds, it seems astounding
how it should be possible, physically, that every spring and
autumn they can pass and repass over the wide ocean.

Then as to fish. Their migration seems even more wonder-
ful than that of birds — though from a different cause. Birds
can in a measure be guided by sight, and flying high can see a
long way, but the fish cannot possibly see far under water ;
and yet the salmon, and the herring (as examples) pass with
unerring certainty from the sea to their spawning grounds.

We will take the case of the salmon as a type. The young

£ e

41 S SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

salmon, after being hatched on the gravel bed of some river,
descends to the sea. How far it passes into the ocean is not
known, bnt we do know that when a given fish ha.s arrived at
adult age and requires to spawn, or lay its q%^^ it returns to
the river ivhere it was itself bred. And this is known because
fish have been marked so as to be capable of future recogni-
tion.

NoAV this return to the same river after its wanderings in
the ocean is exceedingly remarkable ; and so earnest is the
fish in its object of reaching its old home, that in ascending the
chosen river, it will in the most undaunted and persevering
manner make leaps over obstacles such as weirs, and cataracts,
even to a perpendicular height of twelve or fourteen feet, so
as to get beyond them, and be able to pursue its course to its
longed-for goal.

How they find their way from the sea to the particular river
is a profound mystery. Of course if a7i7/ river would suit
them, the explanation might be simple, and we may suppose
that by swimming along near the land it might be, that when
the salmon found itself in fresh water it would follow its tract,
and so ascend the river. But this will not meet the difficulty,
and the mystery is that a particular salmon should know how
to select its native river.

Now as to the cause of the Instinct of Migration.
I will speak first of birds ; especially emphasizing the case
of the small and feeble ones.

What is ihe irresistible impulse which leads such weakly
little creatures to undertake such an enterprise ?

It cannot be the mere accession of heat, or cold ; or we
should find them committing great mistakes in the very
changeable climates of Europe. They would leave a given
spot too soon, or too late. And it is not simply the question
of going at all, but the question of what leads them to con-
gregate on the sea shore at a particular time, and then by an
act of will to set out on their adventurous flight. If a swallow
migrated through cold acting in a reflex manner on its sensa-
tions, and volition, what power could determine the proper

QL'ES'riOA-'S FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 419

time for starting ? A swallow at Brighton skims over the edge
of the sea daily ; but he does not cross the channel on the first
cold day, or he might start wrongly in May or June. Then
as to the faculty of location ; a swallow bred in the centre of
England will go away to the South of France, or Africa, and
return the following year to the same chimney ! Doubtless
it is the same with other migrating birds.

It might be said that it is scarcity of food (insects) which
causes the swallow, &c., to leave England; but conversely I
am not aware that the insect food gets scarce in Africa before
they quit that country; and as to scarcity here, we know that
in wet and cold weather in summer, insects may be difficult to
get for many days in succession, yet the swallows do not
depart. Anyhow if food does get short in supply, and under
whatever conditions their food should fail them, how, and
why, is it they know where to go to find more, and to return
— after their thousands of miles wanderings — to the identical
spot where they were bred ?

Then as to heat. Do they leave Africa to avoid excessive
heat ? Why then do they prefer to live in chimneys hert ?

What power can determine these remarkable doings ^
Either it must be, that migrating birds, and fishes, &c., possess
intellectual minds and act by intellectual reasons; or that they
are endowed with faculties fixed for the kind, and which are
different to any possessed by man. As to their depending on
" acquired experience," that I will consider further on.

I fear I must now for want of room, desist from giving
further examples, and must omit any direct mention here of
the lemming, insects, &c., though I may allude to them pre-
sently. I think, however, I have given sufficient illustrations
on which to build my main argument.

Questions Jor the Unbelieving Materialistic Evolutionist.
The most important questions on which to seek informa-
tion from the Materialist in regard to this subject are —
1st. Hoiv did the Instinct of Migration fii^st arise?
2ndly. Why do some creatures migrate and others hibernate ?

E e 2

420 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

3rdly. If certain creatures have been forced hy self-acting
materialistic necessity to adopt migration ; or have found out
hy their own reason the desirability of the practice, and how to do
it ; how is it that hosts of other creatures do not do the same ?

As to the first question we may well ask how the Instinct
of Migration first arose ?

The Materiahst no doubt will say it was given rise to by
Bcarcity of food; or the desire to avoid excessive heat, or be-
numbing cold. No doubt these would be powerful factors, but
there are many objections to accepting them as the sole causes.
A page or two back I have briefly glanced at some of the ob-
jections that might be raised against the argument that heat,
or cold, or scarcity of food, originated the practice of migra-
tion, and caused its perpetuation.

But there are other objections. If heat, &c., were the factors,
then how came it— as I shall enlarge on more fully in the
third question — that more creatures do not now follow the
practice of migration ? But above all, how and why is it,
that hosts of creatures in the past, lived and died in certain
areas, and that their respective species thereby became
extinct ?

Why did they not migrate ? We are told over and over
again that geological, and climatal changes have mostly been
very, very gradual; and believers are therefore entitled to press
the Materialist to say why many extinct creatures are found
fossilized in certain districts only ? If cold, or heat, or scar-
city of food; or the dangers occurring through the rising of
water consequent on the subsidence of land, slowly and
gradually pressed them, why did they not migrate ? And
this question particularly applies to birds and fish which have
great powers of locomotion. No doubt some areas may have
been rather suddenly overwhelmed by floods of water, and
subsidence, &c., but this will not generally apply. Therefore
we may say in brief that if Materialistic necessity was a chief
factor in causing migration, why has it not acted more
universally ?

As to *' Habity' and ^'Acquired Experience,'' and '• Reason "

QUESTIONS FOR THE UNBELIEVING, ETC. 421

as factors of the Instinct of Migration, I cannot, for similar
reasons to the above, see how they could have been sole, or
combined causes in producing it, for if some creatures during
the Materialist's millions and millions of years found out
how to do it by self-action, why should not more have learnt
to practise it, but have instead of that died in their homes.
Is it all chanco, Materialist ?

If " Necessity,''^ or " Reason,^* have acted in such a way as
to produce the " Hahit^^ by ^^ Acquired Experience" of migra-
tion, why, I repeat, did they not save many species in the
past from perishing ? and why do not one or more of such
supposed factors also compel, or lead, other creatures whose
species are still extant, to adopt migration instead of dying in
large quantities in Northern Europe on the approach of
winter — many insects for example ?

We now come to my second question as above. Why do
some creatures migrate, and others hibernate ?

In regard to answering this question I can offer no sug-
gestion to the Materialist, but must leave him to puzzle it
out to the best of his own fancy. How it will be possible,
however, for him to tell us why it is the swallow migrates,
and the bat instead of doing so, falls asleep and hibernates, I
cannot in the least conjecture, but let him go over his string
of factors — " Necessity" — '''Habit " — " Reason" and " Acquired
Experience" {not forgetting the ^^ Facidty of producing jP?^-
n^S5 " in organization and function in regard to hibernation),
and let him tell us which one, or more, have acted to produce
migration in the swallow, and hibernation in the bat; and
not only to tell us the how ? but to tell us the why ? Why
it was not just the reverse, and Avhy the swallow did not hiber-
nate (as our fathers thought it did) and the bat migrate ?
And as to the latter, any one who watches a bat will see that
its marvellous powers of flight are quite equal to those of the
swallow.

Let us now deal with the third question as above. This
I have already partly discussed in the previous two question-
ings, but I will give a concise repetition as follows : —

422 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Seeing that locusts, and some butterflies, occasionally
migrate in vast swarms, wliy is it — speaking in a materialistic
sense — that all the other winged insects in general do not
migrate at the end of summer instead of dying of starvation and
cold, as do 7nyriads of loasps, flies, butterflies, moths, ^'C. ?

Have they not thought of the plan, Materialist ? And
you cannot say they have not been pressed by necessity.
Then is it all chance why some creatures migrate — others
hibernate — and others die ?

In conchiding this article I will now make a remark on the
subject of migration which, though it may be rather out of
place, it has not been convenient to speak of before.

It is that some persons dwell very much on the possibility
that the lines of direction now taken by birds crossing the sea,
and lemmings swimming into the water and drowning by
thousands, may have originated when parts that are now
covered by water were dry land. Well, that is quite possible,
but it does not help the Materialist in the least, for it would be
more easy to be guided as to direction by viewing the contour
and other features of land, than to see only the trackless ocean ;
consequently the instinct which guides the migrant in flying,
or swimming across the open sea, as at present, is all the more
remarkable, and the ^'^ Sense of Direction^' (see article on), all
the more extraordinary. (Migration will be furthei* considered
in Vol. IV.)

An Enumeration of a few Special and Exceptional In-
stincts.— I now propose to narrate in as few words as possible
a few other instincts, such as I have mostly not mentioned in
the foregoing.

The Kangaroo. — The young of this animal is always born in
a very rudimentary, and helpless condition; so much so as to
be quite unable to help itself. The instinct of the mother,
however, impels her to place the young one, immediately after
its birth, in her pouch, and attach it to a teat.

Why is this? Why does she do so, Materialist? And yet
we are told the Marsupials, of which the Kangaroo is one, are
the oldest of all mammals 5 nevertheless, they show as much, or

A FEW SPECIAL AND EXCEPTIONAL INSTINCTS. 423

more maternal instinct in this act, than the evolutionalhj-
h'Kjlier ape or tlog, show in the appropriate treatment of their
young.

The Dipper. — This is an English land bird allied to the
thrush, and has the singular instinct of descending into the
water in search of aquatic insects and their larvae, which it
captures beneath the surface, and even at the bottom of
streams.

Pigeons. — These birds have the instinct and necessary organic
arrangements^ whereby they are all able to feed their young in
a way different, I believe, to any other bird. Thus, the old
pigeon eats appropriate food, and this is prepared in the crop
into fitting nourishment for the fledgling; or it may be the
lining membrane of the crop itself secretes a fitting kind of
juice (I believe it is not known which is really the fact). When
the young one needs food it places its bill within the partially-
opened bill of the parent, and then the latter, by a visible and
strong effort, regurgitates the nourishment into its mouth, and
from whence the young one sucks it.

The Brush Turkey, or Tallegalla. — A number of these birds
combine and collect a heap of decaying vegetable substances,
in which they lay their eggs, and where they are hatched by
the heat produced by the fermentation of the rotting vegeta-
tion. This turkey therefore does not " sit " on its eggs.

The Cuckoo. — The remarkable instinct of this bird I have
already mentioned, but I venture to repeat it. The female
saves herself all the trouble of incubation by laying her eggs
in the nests of other birds — mostly only one in each. When
the young cuckoo is hatched, it has the instinct to tumbie the
proper fledglings of the nest over its edge, on to the ground,
where they die. Nevertheless the instinct of the foster parents
for feeding the young is so strong, and so blind, that they go
on feeding the intruding murderer with laborious assiduity as
if it were their own chick. Mark ! the adult cuckoo therefore
does not make a nest; does not sit on her eggs; and never sees
lier young.

The Hornhill. — This is a bird of the tropics. It makes its

424 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

nest in the holes of decaying trees, and it is a thoroughly
ascertained fact that when the female has laid her proper num-
ber of eggs, the male imprisons her in the hole by plastering
it up with mud, leaving only a small hole through which he
can feed her. And there he keeps her captive until the
incubation is completed, and the young ones ready to come

forth.

The Bower i^zVcZ.— This Australian bird makes " bowers,"
or "runs," or "avenues," of twigs, ornamented with feathers,
shells, &c., and in such, plays with its companions by running
to and fro.

The Burying Beetle. — These beetles excavate the earth
around, and from beneath, dead mice, birds, &c., and in that
way cause the carcase to gradually sink lower and lower till
finally they can quite cover over and conceal it. They lay
their eggs in this buried body, and when these hatch the larvae
feed on it.

The Mason Wasp. — This insect is of the solitary kind, and
with great labour the pair form a burrow in the sand several
inches deep, the grains of sand in the walls of the tunnel being
agglutinated together by a fluid secreted by the wasp. In this
burrow the eggs are deposited, together with a store of green
caterpillars ivhich are destined to serve as food for the young
larvce when hatched !

The Water Spider. — This, although an air-breathing insect,
frequents the water, and has a remarkable instinct which leads
it to follow a very singular practice. It will rise to the surface
of the water and there by an adroit movement entangles some
air in the hairs which cover the underneath part of its body,
and with this bubble it descends to its dome-shaped web be-
neath the water, and there — retained within its silken covering

the spider by repeated visits to the surface forms quite a

store of air, and in this " diving bell " when completed, it
ensconces itself when at rest, and breathes securely.

The Trap-door Spider. — This spider, which is an inhabitant
of hot climates, excavates a burrow in the ground and lines it
with eilk, and makes the entrance secure by means of an

THE INSTINCT OF DIRECTION, ETC. 425

elaborate trap-door with a silken hinge, which door it opens
and shuts on passing in or out of its abode. The door is of the
most perfect kind. Specimens may be seen at the British
Museum.

I will now name in the briefest manner a few other curious
instincts. There is that of the Stag, which during the time his
antlers are growing, and " the velvet " is on them, will not fight
because they would be injured thereby.

The Kingfisher, and other birds that live on fish, take care
to swallow their prey head first, or the fins might be pushed
open in the transit, and stick in the throat, and choke the eater.

Then there is the Nuthatch, which carries a nut to the cleft
of a tree, fixes it there, and hammers on it with its bill till it
breaks the shell.

The Thrush, which carries snails to a stone, and dashing them
against it, so destroys the shell as to be able to get at the
luscious contents.

Lastly I will call attention to the remarkable fact that larvae,
caterpillars, and grubs in these several states, and in their
final condition of perfect insects — although each one is a dis-
tinct and continuous individual throughout its varied career —
have entirely different instincts in each condition, as to food ;
as to habits ; and as to modes of progressing— crawling,
swimming, burrowing, or flying ; also as to gnawing, or
sucking, &c., as the case may be according to the kind and
species.

Here I must end this promiscuous category ; but every
naturalist knows it might be very greatly extended.

The Instinct of Direction, or Faculty of Location. — This
seems to be a sense possessed by dogs, cats, bees, &c., by the
prompting of which, the various creatures who possess it (and
possibly all do more or less) are able to find their way straight
home from long distances. This faculty is especially shown by
bees.

For instance, it is the practice of bee-keepers on the Mis-
sissippi, and the Nile, to place their hives in barges and float

4^6 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

them to a spot where there are plenty of flowers. The bees
gather honey and return to theh- proper hives, and then after a
longer or shorter stay the barge is moved on. In Scotland the
hives are placed in carts and drawn about to places where
heather is in full bloom. In these instances the " Faculty of
location " is shown in a more remarkable manner than when
the hives are stationary as is usually the case.

Instincts in Man.— In the Chapter XVII. I shall speak of
some of these which man has in common with many other
creatures : but I wish to mention here some Instincts which he
does not 2)088688, but which he, in my opinion, ought to have,
if Materialistic evolution were a true explanation of man's
origin. For instance, why has he not — like the bee— the in-
born and invariable faculties of absolute devotion to the young ;
of foresight, industry, loyalty ?

Then why can he not build a habitation w^ithout being
taught ? and why does he not with unerring certainty provide
a store of food (property) against the time when work will be
no longer available through cold weather, or age, or what not?
Why are so many, — so very many men — just the reverse as to
the possession of the above qualities ? Many other similar
illustrations wW\ occur to the mind of the reader, and what I
contend is, that if instinct, and reason are identical ; and if
man has evolved to what he is by self-action as j^f'^ssed hy
secondary causes and as aided hy " acquired experience'^ then man
ought to possess by "heredity " all the perfections of the lower
creatures ; and these developed moreover to an exalted degree.
It is idle to say that he does not possess all perfections because
he and all creatures living now, are but top twigs of ancestral
family trees, and that the twigs differ both in consequence of
their divergence, and their different experiences : and that his
ancestors have not been subjected to all kinds of experience.
For man, if he has evolved, has had a line of ancestors of some
sort ; and surely some of them — whatever they were — built
habitations ; possibly stored food ; and were devoted to their
young ; and were persevering, and industrious, and cautious,

CAUSE AND ORIGIN OF INSTINCTS. 427

&c. ; also loyal to their Chief, or Queen ; aud their fellows, if
living in association.

It will be idle then to say that man has lost (in the language
of the Evolutionists) such faculties as those I have named
through non-use, because surely, such useful Instincts as those
above named would never have been lost, the fact of their use-
fulness would have 2)r evented that. Then why have we in the
world so many bad, cruel parents, and hosts of men with no
foresight, industry, loyalty, regard for the w^elfare of their
fellows, unthrifty, idle and foolish ; also unable to build a
dwelling unless taught, and also incapable of doing other things
that even insects accomplish with unerring certainty ?

Let the Materialist explain all this. (The Instincts of man
will be further spoken of in " General Illustrations of Reason
and Instinct y)

Cause and Origin of Instincts. — It is contended by the
Materialistic Evolutionist that all the various instincts have
arisen simply by " heredity,'' by " habit,'' by " acquired expe-
rience," and by various " necessities " as to the nature of food,
climate, &c., and which several factors have arisen from, or at
least w^orked with, the primary necessities imposed by
the ever-present and dominating chemico-physics of the
Universe.

Now this view it is one of the objects of this book to contest,
not only as it bears on the subject of Instinct, but also as to
all things connected with organisms ; and I maintain that
neither by mere chemico-physical necessity, nor by the nature
of food, climate, habit, &c., did the various creatures arise with
their multitudinous structures, qualities, and instincts, nor
further, that any organisms could have found out intellectually
for themselves how to adopt fitting instincts, and to do all the
various acts springing therefrom ; least of all that instincts
came by what one may call a chance necessity arising from the
mere self-made materialistic interactions of matter and forces
and mind working without designed law. For to me it appears
absurd to attempt to conceive it possible, that matter and forces

428 ■ SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

and their power to act on one another in definite ways, and as
we know they do, could have come by chance self-action and
haphazard, and that they could unaided and unguided have pro-
duced finally such qualities even as those of Mind, and its
faculties of Reason, Instinct, &c.

No ! according to my judgment, Instincts — and to speak
here only of Instincts — are clearly faculties of the mind con-
nected with the working of the " Unconscious 3Iind" (see
" Unconscious Mind'') — itself a designed thing — and that the
differences we see in the kinds of Instinct are ordained gifts,
each one of which is specially suited to the kind of creature
possessing it; and I hold moreover that the Instinct was made
for the creature (allowing for the action of a limited capacity
for variation) and that it was not the creature and its mere cir-
cumstances that made the Instinct. And I maintain further not
only that this existence of the Instincts by ordainment is proved
by many arguments in this book, but especially that the very
fact of the limitation of the quality and range of the various
Instincts is proof of their being designed and ordained
qualities, for if animals did evolve their own minds and
instincts, and have arrived at many of their wonderful ways
and doings, either by simple materialistic necessity or by intel-
lectual reasoning ; that in such case they would necessarily
have gone further and have evolved higher than they have
done, and that man consequently would not occupy the com-
manding position he does intellectually, and as having dominion
over " all fish of the sea and fowl of the air."

I have just said that in my opinion Instincts are ordained
gifts. To this the Materialist may say " Then why do Instincts
vary in the same kind of animal ? "

I reply, " Certainly ! Instincts may, and do vary," that is, a
given creature under unusual conditions will depart from
usual practices, and so, by adopting fresh procedures give the
appearance of being guided by free intellectual reasoning
power. Seeing therefore that animals are able to depart from
their general practice in order to accommodate their actions to
uncommon circumstances, the Materialist may say, " If instincts

CAUSE AND ORIGIN OF INSTINCTS. 429

are but endowed gifts fixed for the race, why then do they ever
vary : " For example, why do sparrows living near thatched
buildings or other places where there are suitable holes, &c.,
why do they build therein nests without domes ? But if there
are no such holes, and they have to build in trees, how is it
they then make nests with domes ? Or again, in regard to
bees, how is it they can alter the usual shape of their combs
and in other ways adapt their doings to difficult or unusual
circumstances ? The answer is simple. The instinctive part
of the " Organic mind " is able to adapt itself within certain
bounds to certain altered or unusual circumstances, just as the
life-causing part of the organic mind can also in various crea-
tures adapt itself to changed conditions as to food, climate,
&c., but in both cases — that is in the life-causing as well as in
the instinctive part of the organic mind — the amount of varia-
tion cannot, for reasons given over and over again in this work,
be greater than is possible according to any given creature's
endowed powers for variation.

I cannot too often repeat what I have already said more
than once, that I think we have ample proof that all acts
of all animals are effected by means of a kind of mind en-
dowed with the capacity to will, to judge, to remember, to
enjoy, to do, all that is needful for the imrticular creature^
according to its needs as ordained by God, and as these needs
and the means for meeting them could not always be per-
fectly definite (as in the case of the formation of a crystal,
or a chemical compound), there is necessarily a certain or-
dained " play " of instinct this way or that. (1 make use of
the word " play " here in an engineering, mechanical sense,
as signifying a motion to and fro).

I mean that it is not rigidly fixed in many cases. But
yet that although the "play" or capacity for variation is
greater in some creatures than others, still that it is always
limited and cannot overpass a certain boundary. Indeed, if
the instincts of brutes could overstep this boundary, and if
they were possessed of intellect, the whole state of things
in regard to animal life in the world, and the position of

430 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

man, would be changed. Man, as I have ah'eady said,
would lose his present undoubted supremacy in many ways —
in ways too numerous to mention here. One very obvious
one, however, I will name, and that is, if animals acted by
intellectual reason and could communicate intellectual ideas
to one another, it is not simply that they would cease to
keep — each one — to the instincts of its race — for there would
be innovators on established practices and customs — but that
some of them would become dangerous rivals even to man ;
not only intellectually, but in physical acts and ways. Sup-
pose, as to the latter, for example, that bees, or serpents, or
vultures, or polecats, or elephants, or lions, or apes con-
certed each with its kind to make raids on man ! Why, man
would then have to make war against the creatures that are
now by ordainment in subjection to hira. (I shall recur to
this presently). Then as to intellect I may repeat what I
have before asserted, that if the lower creatures possessed
intellectual minds, they would be more like, and would rea-
son more like man than is really the case. Take the bee
for example; if bees built cells and stored honey as a result
of intellectual reasoning, they would not then be the humble
insects they really are, but would, in fact, be diminutive,
deformed men; much more clever in some respects, and
thoughtful, far-seeing, loyal, prudent, and industrious, than
the large, two-legged man, though more foolish than he in
some other respects !

Oh, no ! it cannot be so, bees cannot accomplish what
they really do through intellectual reasoning such as that of
man, or they would act more like man in other ways.

Notwithstanding all I have said, however, I have no
doubt some persons will still hold out, and not agree with
me, and will point to the apparently intelligent doings of many
animals other than those I have just named ; especially to
the very visible actions and conduct of herds of cattle, flocks
of birds, and other creatures that form social communities.
And, certainly in those creatures especially, we do see remark-
able acts which look very much as if the result of intellectual

CAUSE AND ORIGIN OF INSTINCTS. 431

reasoning, as witnessed in the placing of sentinels to guard the
main body, and the fact that one old member is selected as
chief and guide, &c. And yet these instances, though lookino-
so much like the effects of a reasoning power of such kind as
man possesses, are, as I hold, proofs in themselves that the
acts are really only the outcome of their instinctive minds as
endowed with a capacity to do so much for the benefit of the
animal, and no more ; for if wolves, dogs, horses, bulls, ele-
phants, and even serpents and bees had themselves created
their ways, and customs, by free intellectual reasoning ; and
acquired their faculties by mere " inherited experience," then
it is clear that having come by materialistic self-acting causes
to possess so much cleverness, they would surely have got —
as already urged— to perceive (amongst other things) that they
had only to band together, each with its kind, to oppose their
enemy, man— and why not with the aid, perhaps, of the lions
and bears, &c., to exterminate him ? And this argument
especially applies to the times antecedent to the use of fire-
arms. No ! happily for man, animals do not possess free
intellect. And this line of argument can be capped in this
way. I have already said that ants do make war on their
neighbours in order to capture slaves. Then, if they do this
by intellectual ratiocination, and not by ordained and limited
instinct as I maintain ; it follows that there is no reason why
higher animals, with larger hrains than the ants, should not
be able to do more wonderful things than even ants in the
Avay of organized warfare ; and amongst other things why
they should not make war against man, or resist his autho-
rity by other forcible and concerted means. Bat as these
larger animals do not in any case act so, is it not a further
proof of providential arrangement, and of each creature
being endowed with a limited mind capable of doing so
much and no more ?

And to urge still further— though by a slightly different
mode of argument — the high probability of each animal havino-
a specially endowed and limited kind of Instinct, I would finally
point out, that if a given creature can exhibit what has the

432 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

look of sagacity, and foresight, and power of invention, &c., in
one thing (such as honey-storing, &c.), why has it not shown
other phases of sagacity in other matters, if such (assumed
intellectual) sagacity and ingenuity as aforesaid are self-manu-
factured qualities ? But it is notorious that many creatures, as
bees, and ants, and beavers, although they can do many won-
derful things in some respects, yet in other simple and obvious
things are very stupid and remiss.

To take the case only of the beaver, we may note, that
although it shows what some people would call sagacity (but
which I call Instinct) in the making of its most surprising
habitations, and water-dams ; and in so doing, executes the
most wonderful things capable of achievement by any mammal
below man, yet in many respects that it is inferior to other
creatures in stratagem, and various resources, and does not
show the same cleverness as many other animals do in various

ways.

Summary and Conclusion. — After what has been said in
the foreo^oing, I think any one who has perused my statements,
and examples, and arguments carefully, and who has kept his
mind free from the pseudo-philosophical conceit of Materialistic
doubt, can come to no other conclusion than that the origin
and working of " Instinct " must depend on the Design and
Will of a Supernatural Cause.

And not only does modern science — as I hold — show this,
but such conclusion is greatly strengthened by the fact that
many very clever men in past times held that opinion. For
example — and to mention two names only — Sir Isaac Newton
urgently expresses himself to that effect (see Newton^s
" Optics "); also Bishop Butler — who certainly, by reason of his
splendid intellect was, at the least, inferior in capacity to no
man now living — distinctly held the opinion that the Instincts
of brute creatures arise and work by " Supernatural instruction "
{Butlers '■^Analogy,'' p. 183); for how otherwise, he argues,
could it be " that brutes (without reason) should act, in many
respects, with a sagacity and foresight vastly greater than what
men have in those respects ? "

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. 433

I know the Materialist may object to this, on the score
that Bishop Butler ^' assumes ^^ (he may say) that brutes
are " without reason." But I make bold to argue that
this objection would be of no avail, because I consider I
have proved that brute creatures are not possessed of
intellectual reason.

F {

CHAPTER XVII.

General Illustrations of Intellect, Animal Reason,
AND Pure Instinct in Man and Animals.

No brute is aware it is an individual— Animals in a manner Automata —
Sight, hearing, smelling, &c. — Unconscious action of mind— Walking
—Dressing — Animals swim, crawl, fly, all by Organic mind — Do not
know why or how— Pleasure, memory, judgment, &c.— Acts of
flying, spinning, &c.— Playing with young— Sporting— Bird sen-
tinels— Doings of bees — Chicken have no schools — But though no
intellect, animals have senses and faculties we are ignorant of—
Summary — Consciousness in animals — Animals do not improve —
Spiritualized Mind — Evolutionists say difference in mind of man
and brute only one of degree— Spirituahzed love— Pet dogs supposed
to understand— Horses, &c., not remain in lowly state, rebel— Dog
and responsibility, honour, duty— Utilized and "Performing"
animals.

Disregarding repetition, and aiming solely at making myself
understood, I now propose to give some general illustrations of
life and mind; and the various phases of mind as witnessed in
man and animals.

Of course, the main object I have had in view in the fore-
going articles on " Reason,'' ''Language,'' and "Instinct," &g.,
has been to point out, that whereas man is possessed of such a
kind of mental power, and consciousness, as to know that he
can think intellectually; and that he can do this, or that, be-
cause his will and judgment determine that by choice he
should, or should not, do so and so; on the contrary that all
animals, are either devoid of mental consciousness, or experience
it in a different mode to what man does. That is, they do so
and so, not because they can reason intellectually on the sub-
ject in the same mode as can man; but that they act as they

GENERAL ILLUSTRATIONS OF INTELLECT, ETC. 435

do by intuitive instiactive judgmeat, and will, and choice, and
not by intellectual judgment, will, and choice — doing what
they do without knowing the reason why, or being con-
sciously aware that they are individuals, and free to do as
they please.

Indeed, no brute can be aware of its having a personal
existence — that it is an independent thing, which can be
designated as "I" — " Ego "— " a dog "—or by any other
symbol, and free to act as it pleases, according to choice— for
if it could realize this, then it would possess an intellectual
mind. Not but what animals have dim ideas, and can, accord-
ing to a limited endowment, in a manner, choose or decide,
cDJoy, &c., but I think it is quite clear that all such ideas in
their origiu, are mainly o&;'ec^/ye in animals, and arise according
to sense impressions — as those of seeing, hearing, smelling, &c. ;
and that w^hen their ideas are suhjective—^-^^ in so far as it is
possible for them to be so — that they are not intellectual —
that is to say, that subjective ideas do not probably arise de
novo in animals' minds by intellectual ideation, but can only
be occasioned by internal sensations (as of hunger, &c.) : or by
the working of their instinctive ideas according to ordained
intuition.

Also that ideas (however arising) are not felt and reasoned
upon in animal's minds as in man's intellectual mind, but
only experienced in a purely animal and automatic manner, by
the instinctive organic mind ; giving rise to pleasure or pain,
as the case may be, and occasioning an impression on the will
to do this or that, according to the creature's limited powers of
instinct, will, judgment, choice, and capacity for executing the
particular movements or doings peculiar to the species, and
desirable for the occasion.

Thus, in my opinion, animals are in the main living automata
as endowed by God; though at the same time endued with
certain limited and specialized powers of choice and discretion.
They possess minds, it is true, but not minds conscious that
they are a personal possession and belong to the individual,
and that within certain bounds and according to circumstances,

F f 2

436 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OE BELIEF.

the individual can do as it pleases. Man on the contrary does
know this.

An animal can see, hear, smell, &c., and he can judge
accordingly as to what kind of food &c., is fitting, also as to
height, distance, colour, danger; and he can decide as to what
conduct, or action is politic; and in thus deciding on certain
actions the animal undoubtedly uses a kind of reasoning; but
in a high, abstract, intellectual sense, it does not know why it
decides in this way or that; the cause of this being — as I have
described in '* Reason and Instinct " — that the animal only
possesses an " organic mind " acting in, and ruling the animal
by its two qualities, or phases, of " Instinctive Ideation^'' and
of ^^ Life Governing Power. ""^ What I maintain therefore is;
not that animals in acting — in great measure as automata — ■
have no i^artially free ideas, but that they don't hnow that
fact; and that consequently their mental consciousness must be
very different in kind to that of man. Man knows in many
cases why he does this, and that; but they do not know, and
their freedom of choice is strictly guided by intuition, and
limited by endowment.

Thus dogs, monkeys, horses, elephants, birds, reptiles, fishes
insects, &c., certainly have a species of reasoning and choosing
power, according to the respective endowed qualities and range
of their instinctive minds. This endowment and limited range
being sufficient for the creature in each species, but not going
beyond its ordained powers; and we must constantly bear in
mind that in all creatures below man, the whole of their doings
are governed by this Instinctive, or animal, or body, or Organic
Mind; which, even in its highest phases, never reaches to the
Intellectual.

As I have just said, and explained more fully elsewhere (see
" Reason and Instinct ") animals do what is fitting according
to their kind; 1st, by means of their " Instinctive Mind^'' which
is the highest mental quality they j^ossess ; and, 2ndly, as
influenced by their life-governing power, or Spirit of Life.
These two qualities act strictly together: and so, by Instinct,
and by seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, and their

GENERAL ILLUSTRATIONS OF INTELLECT, ETC. 437

reflexes (see ^^ Reflex ActioJi,''^ p. 210), and all the various body
sensations they give rise to, the animal is guided, and ruled —
and conscious, though the animal may be in a manner, yet it is
not in the same way as is man. Moreover, the animal having
no intellectual mind, the whole of its doings are — as I have pre-
viously said — governed more entirely by objective ijerceptions
and subjective sensations than in the case of man.

What they mentally perceive, and what they consequently
do, is all ruled by a specialized kind of instinct ; and the con-
duct and actions of the creature are more completely governed
involuntarily by the body sensations than in man. For
instance, a man is not merely guided by his instinctive mind
to do this, or that, so as to secure the greatest amount of
animal benefit in the shape of food, or warmth, or pleasure, or
any other form of animal enjoyment ; but he is often con-
strained by various workings of his intellectual mind, to check
maybe the impulses of his animul mind. And the most pro-
minent and distinctive of these restraints in man is his moral
sense of duty, and of responsibility. On the contrary, an
animal being scarcely more than an automaton, has no sense of
moral responsibility because it has no capacity for intellectual
ratiocination, and choice.

How different then is man to the mere animal automaton.
A right thinking man is guided more by his intellectual, than
by his instinctive mind ; and feels, not only an enormous sense
of his moral duty, and responsibility, but knows also that it is
his highest privilege to be able — if he chooses — to over-ride and
subordinate to a very considerable degree, the automatic action
of his animal nature to the higher behests of his intellectual
judgment, will, and conscience. But in the highest of the
brutes, even although they possess large brains, how different
is all this ; for in them there is an entire absence of the moral
sense ; and although there is no question but that they can in
a manner think, and choose, and remember, and judge, and
show cunning, and have a capacity even for mental pleasure
and pain, still that in them, all is felt, and thought, and done,
strictly according to the sort of mind bestowed on the particular

438 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

species of creature by God ; and tliey are not influenced by
any other and higher motives than those of a purely animal
nature. They jump, or fly, or bite, or wag the tail, or cat, or
spin, or build, or sing, or bellow, or bark, all for a bodily
reason, and pleasure, or use, as produced either by involuntary
reflex action ; or as set in motion by a low animal perception,
according to a limited and endowed species of faculty and judg-
ment which enables all acts to be effected in so far as they are
voluntary ; but they don't know the why and the wherefore.
The fox, with his cunning, creeps towards his prey and
suddenly, having circumvented it, makes the final leap. He
knows where to go to find a pheasant, or a rabbit, and how to
get it, and uses consummate skill, but the why and the where-
fore is totally unknown to him in the way of constructive
intellectual reasoning. He acts only according to his endow-
ment of Instinctive organic mind. In short, animals act as
they do partly by automatic reflex action, partly by endowed
intuition springing up in and compelling the Instinctive mind,
and according as that is impressed by the ^' acquired ex-
perience" of the individual and of the race (as transmitted by
inheritance) — in so far as the endowed i^ower of variation has
IJermitted such influence to extend.

But in regard to automatic action I hope I need not caution,
and assure the reader that he must not think that by so
dwelling on it I have in any degree slipped into the
Materialistic idea, that every creature is a mere chemico-
physical automaton.

No automaton ever made itself, and endowed itself with
powers and faculties ! No ! no ! every automaton of what-
ever kind must have a designer, and maker, who endows his
handiwork with the power to do certain things and no other.
So that although I advocate " unconscious action," (see
^' Heason and Instinct") as far as certain mental, and vital
processes are concerned, I nevertheless oppose with all the
energy I am capable of, the very suggestion of materialistic
organic self-action; and I contend that the acts of moving,
choosing, and doing are efl'ected in all creatures below man.

UNCONSCIOUS PERCEPTION 439

solely bj an inferior description of mind to that of the Intellec-
tual as possessed by man ; and which lower species of mind,
acting according to God's endowment for the kind, is able as
I have described, to perceive, and do, all that is requisite for
the individual. Granted, the creature, as the fox, dog, &c.,
often does things which display the possession and action of
a kind of reason, and which to a degree we cannot estimate
may be of a dimly conscious kind, still I think we may be quite
sure that the consciousness cannot be of the same sort, if I may
so say, as that of man, and that the reasoning cannot be free
intellectual mental action, but no more than ^^ animal reason "
as bestowed on the species. I repeat, therefore, that the
creature perceives and acts, not because he can reason intellec-
tualhj, hut because he has a certain instinctive capacity for per-
ceiving and acting to the extent God has ordained as needful for
his wants.

But it may be said if that be the case, and each organism
acts only by a strictly endowed faculty, why and how is it that
any creature ever makes a mistake — that is uses wrong judg-
ment in the performance of any of his acts and gets drowned,
&c., in consequence ? The answer to this is, that even man's
animal mind often fails to guide aright. For example, a man
by the spontaneous action of his body-mind turns instinctively
from a savage bull and runs away, and even though aided by
his intellectual mind, the judgment of his instinctive, or body-
mind, may be so flustered as to cause him to stumble in jump-
ing the hedge, and he may in consequence foil.

Therefore, if the animal acts of man are not unerring, even
though assisted by his intellect, we could not but expect that
a less gifted, lower creature would be liable to mistakes.

Uncoiicious Perception. — In the preceding pages I have so
often spoken of " unconscious perception and action," (see
" Unconscious Mind,'") that I will now, for the benefit of the
unscientific reader, dilate somewhat further on that difficult
subject, and in order to do so, T must recur to the '' Organic
Mind;'' and though in so doing I may be guilty of some

440 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

tautology, I trust the reader will bear with me, as it is a point,
the full comprehension of which is so very important.

*' Unconscious " perception, and power of action is then a
faculty — as I hold— of the " Organic Mind," and is possessed
by all living things ivhether plants or animals.

Even man has it independent of his higher faculty of in-
tellectual - reasoning power, and a marked instance of such
unconcious action is seen when a man walks along the street
abstract in thought. He progresses, and he avoids the various
objects he might run against, and he takes the proper turn-
iugs, and presently is surprised to find on a return of intellectual
consciousness that he has reached his destination. The fact
is, therefore, that he has walked and guided himself uncon-
sciously by means of his organic mind. Another good example
of the working of this organic mind in one of its uuconscious
displays of function, is observable in the act of " dressing " in
the morning. Your conscious mind may be deeply absorbed
in thought, yet you go on washing, and dressing unconsciously,
and perform all the various processes in regular succession
without thinking of each one.

In my own case if I do any one of these routine acts out of
the usual order of succession, I at once become conscious of
the mistake, and then I know by experience, I am not well,
and that the irregularity of rhythm has occurred in conse-
quence.

If well, I dress — as I expect most people do — mechanically,
and almost unconsciously. Or to take another instance — a
person with his mind preoccupied, may read aloud, and go
through all the elaborate movements concerned in articulation,
intonation, and emphasis; also turning over the pages, and yet
may do all, so mechanically, and automatically, as not to know
what he has been reading about.

And thus it is, I believe, with all animals from the highest
to the lowest, and even all plants from the highest to the lowest.

2 I am concerned here only with the " unconscious " part of the organic
mind: that of the conscious, or semi-conscious part, I have discussed
elsewhere. (See " Unconscious Mind.")

UNCONSCIOUS PERCEPTION. 441

They all possess, as does man, the " unconscious faculty "
(even during sleep) of respiration, digestion, &c., and the
carrying on of all the processes composing growth, and
nourishment, and repair of the system. All this goes on just
the same in them, though in various modes and degiees, as in
man, and in a manner no less wonderful. As the man's heart
beats and his stomach cells absorb what is needful, and all the
multitudinous processes concerned in existing, go on without
his willing it, or being conscious of it; so the same, or
analogous functions are carried on in all animals and in all
plants. In plants " the organic mind " knows (unconsciously)
how to influence its cells, and according to materials first
provided in the ovule, and afterwards by the earth and air,
how to direct the growth and form of the stem, branches, &c. ;
also hoAV to elaborate the turpentine, the myrrh, the gum,
the strychnia, or what else may be peculiar to the individual
kind. And in the lower animal creature, as well as in the
higher, the " organic mind " also not only carries on uncon-
sciously all the processes needed for the act of living, as cir-
culation, respiration, &c., hut it goes a step further, and hy
means of its higher, or Instinctive part it can direct the bee
how to collect honey and how to make cells; the bird to build
its nest; and it tells all creatures how, and. where, to procure,
and how to take proper food; for in all these cases we cannot,
as I have argued elsewhere, reasonably suppose that bees,
birds, fish, reptiles, mammals — indeed any creature below man,
can act by and through any kind of intellectual reasoning
faculty. They swim, they crawl, they fly, kick, eat, browse,
&c., always guided, and ruled, through the organic mind, by
its two qualities of instinct, and life-giving or vital force.
Even in the highest vertebrata below man — creatures possess-
ing large brains — here, too, it is the organic mind that does
all; and not only causes all the functions of life to be carried
on, but enables the creature to do actions which simulate the
highest acts of man and look like the effect of an intellectual
reasoning power, although for reasons already given, I believe
fully that they are nothing more than a simulation. The

442 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

animal, or bird, does so and so as guided by " animal reason "
and Instinct; and as tlie cells in the mint plant know how to
make essential oil peculiar to its kind, but do not know why
they do it, so the swallow migrates, he knows not why. The
swallow may, it is true, be influenced and guided by certain
secondary influences of heat, &c., as to starting off and in
crossing the seas, but it does not know why and how, any
more than the mint-cells know how or why they act as they
do. Certainly it cannot in either be by inductive reasoning;
and as certainly, in my belief, not by mere chemico-physical
power and continuity; so it must be by the " organic mind;"
and for myself, I cannot see but that if you say the swallow
acts by instinct, or the " organic mind," it is just as rational
to say the plant acts too by the instinct as displayed by its
" organic mind." Neither the swallow nor the plant is acted
on by intellectual reason; so the mere circumstance that the
plant is fixed, and that the swallow can fly about, does not
alter the fact that each is dominated by a power it is uncon-
scious of, and yet which it involuntarily obeys.

The animal, however, has the advantage of locomotion,
and except in the lowest forms, is endowed with higher
powers through a highly-complex and differentiated nervous
system, and it is therefore in a position to move to what it
wants, and this is needful for all the higher animals. Some of
the lowest ones, however, as corals, and sea anemones, may
have their food brought to them by currents of water, as do
plants have their food brought to them by water, earth,
and air agency. But animals — all above the very lowest —
must seek food, which they do chiefly by automatism, as set
. in action by the " unconscious " part of their organic mind.
The locomotive creature needs food — it seeks it; it needs a
nest — it makes one; it needs warmth — it seeks it; it shuns
cold — it flies from it; but the kind of food — nest — climate,
&c., is all selected for it " unconsciously " (as distinguished
from intellectual conscious reasoning) by its organic mind.

At the same time it can experience pleasure — pleasure from
eating, and pleasure from care of its young, from the song of

UiVCONSCIOLS PERCEPTION. 443

its mate, and so on. It can exercise memory; and in the
higher animals — as the dog — can show joy, affection, obe-
dience, anger, fear; and exhibit apparent motives, and conduct,
which almost look as if springing from reason. But still it
is all, even in the dog, but the higher working of the " organic
mind."

There is no evidence of intellectual consciousness and power
of ideation such as is the privilege of man to possess and use,
for if the dog had really and indeed the intellectual conscious-
ness and faculties some people would attribute to him, the
ways of dogs would be more like the ways of men than they
are, and also some form of articulate speech by the dog,
would — as T have already argued — certainly result. (See
" Language^) And I say " certainly " because I do not my-
self believe that intellectual ideation could occur without some
kind of articulate speech being an accompaniment of it, any
more than I believe that intellectual speech could occur without
intellectual ideation. The dog and other brutes and creatures
can, as I have admitted, reason in a manner (see p. 254.)
They can plan to circumvent their prey, or escape from theii"
enemies, and can show memory, cunning, judgment, choice, &c.,
in the exercise of their faculties of swimming, jumping,
making nests, combs, &c., so as to successfully achieve the
object that they have the endowment to accomplish. Let a bee
meet with any unwonted obstacle in the construction of its
comb and it will find means to obviate it, but this is not done
by intellectual judgment such as enables the engineer by means
of close study to build a bridge on a difficult site, and to scien-
tifically calculate the strength of materials to bear strain, and
to estimate the true value of curves, angles, <fcc. And I may
add, the engineer uses iron, stone, &c., which are things foirign
to his body. But the bee secretes the wax from its own body,
and thus provided, and endowed by the Creator with the neces-
sary instinct, it, without drawings and plans, or rules and
plummets, &c., builds works as complete for their use as man
with all his intellect ever did. And why and how ? Because
God endowed the bee with the gift of the '' Organic Mind " in

444 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

its two properties, vital and instinctive, whereby it can do all
the acts of living, flying, building, &c., natural to it, just as nian
can do a thousand things natural to him without reasoning, and
merely by the instinctive part of his organic mind, and without
using his intellectual mind. Thus a man goes to his dinner, or
to romp with his child, or goes to try and capture wild
animals, birds, or fish, not because his intellect prompts him —
maybe — but because he derives a natural pleasure therefrom,
the same as does any lower creature from eating, playing with
its young, or trying to catch prey. Granted, the man may eat
his dinner because he may reflect that if he does not he may
starve, or he may consider that it will please his child to go to
play, or he may go to kill game because he wishes to eat it,
or sell it. But does a man (unless in illness) eat, because he
reflects that if he does not he will die of starvation, or does he
play with his child always for intellectual reasons, or kill game
for an intellectual utilitarian purpose ? Does he not rather in
many instances do all these acts by natural impulse, and to
obtain natural pleasure ? And so also in doing them does he
not often act as instinctively as does the intellectually uncon-
scious infant, when it turns to the privileged gift provided for
it in the mother's bosom ; or as when the sheep grazes. Man
does not reason in eating his dinner about the way to his mouth,
or in playing when he throws the ball he does not reason
about gravitation, or catch it by reasoning on distance, rate,
and force of impulsion, &c. Nor does he reason if the wild
boar turns to tusk him. No! he acts in all such things
by his organic mind and instinct, and not by intellectual
reasoning. And so acts the bee, the beaver, the bird, the
dog, &c.

And so perfectly is the organic mind constituted, that such
acts as those above named, as well as others needful for the
benefit of the creature, give pleasure in their execution. The
dog's stomach cells for example, appreciate through the organic
mind what food is fitting, and eating gives pleasure. And in
the same way the infant " coos " at his mother's breast, not on
account of any intellectual gratification, but because its body

RECAPITULATION. 445

sense or organic mind is gratified. So too the dog licks his
master for pleasure or gratitude, he hangs his head in dejection
or in disappointment, or in pain; he is sprightly, his eyes
sparkle, he wags his tail and barks when joyous, or he sets his
limbs, depresses his tail, snarls, and his eyes flash with anger,
when in a rage. All these actions, be it noted however, are
natural to him in his behaviour to his own kind, and are no
real signs of the possession of intellect. But it may be said
that the dog is not gratified in an animal sense — as by eating —
when his master smiles on him, and that in such case he must
be intellectually pleased. No ! it is not his stomach cells in
that instance that are gratified, but it is just as much his Organic
mind that is pleased. The dog remembers his master feeding
him or stroking him {analogous to licking hy his fellow), or
playing with (as do his fellows romp with hini), or taking him
for a run. And conversely he knows that if his master looks
angry (the reverse of the smile) he may get punished —
(analogous to being bitten and worried by his fellows.) And
I would wish to draw particular attention to the fact that these
gratifications or punishments simulate those as above indicated
which he can derive from associating with his kind, and in
doing which he shows similar manifestations of joy by the
wagged tail ; fear, or disappointment by the depressed tail, &c.
So that in my opinion lovers of dogs attribute mental intel-
lectual qualities to the dog which it does not feel as such, and
which can be accounted for in the way I have indicated, and as
being no more than the exhibition of the natural faculties of
the dog's Instinctive or non-intellectual mind.

Recapitulation. — I am quite aware, however, notwithstand-
ing all I have said, that a whole host of instances may be cited
to support a belief in the possession of intellect by animals.
To mention a few. There are the marvellous doings of bees,
ants, silk-worms, and other insects — the making of nests and
habitations by various creatures — the choosing of a leader by
flights of birds, and by herds — the placing of sentinels — the
strict rules of the rookery, which no rook dare infringe with-
out punishment — the stratagems used in capturing prey, and

446 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

avoiding enemies — the distances some animals are said to go
to procure favourite food — the judgment used as to avoiding
danger and seeking safety — in not attempting what is beyond
their powers, and much more ; but in all this I hold, that it is
an animal instinctive power, a body mind and not an intellec-
tual one that is employed, and tliat all these powers are intuitive
and endowed. See the little chicken of a few hours old ! what
wonderful powers and endowments it displays ! And so, too,
of many creatures who manifest all the powers of their parents
iu a very short time after birth ; and we have no evidence of
there being any " schools " for teaching as to selection of food,
running, flying, jumping, taking prey, singing, making love,
building nests ; or of any matrons to give instruction in the
l)atient, laborious and self-sacrificing rearing of the young by
the parents.

But though there may be absence of intellect in animals,
vet thev possess senses and endowmeyits we can scarcely con-
ceive and realize the power and extent of.

A few, however, we do know, though there may he many we
are quite ignorant of. What we do know, are the exalted
powers of sight, smell, hearing, and touch.

Cast a dead fish on the water, or kill an animal in a hot
climate ; and a gull, or a vulture, not previously perceptible to
your eye, will quickly appear, so keen and far-reaching is the
sight of these birds. But I need not multiply instances, as
others will occur to the reader, though I will just remind him
of the extraordinary faculty by which a dog can follow his
game by scent ; and the faculty by which it is said the bee
can fly straight back to its hive after its wanderings. (See
'• Instinct of Direction'')

In fine, then, I insist that all the acts any creature in the
whole range of the animated creation below man, can do, are
efi'ected, not by intellectual reasoning, but by an endowed
intuitive faculty. From the single-celled yeast plant, through
all grades of plants and animals up to the highest brute, all is
effected by the Organic Mind in its several endowments.

In what creature — if any — this mind first becomes so exalted

EVOLUTIONISTS VIEW. 447

(and with correlative increase of the differentiated, and en-
larged nei'voiis system) as to give rise, possibly, to a capacity
for a kind of conscious pleasure, pain, &c., I cannot pretend to
guess ; all I do say is, that there must he, an absence of intel-
lectual reasoning power ; and absence of intellectual enjoy-
ment of pleasure ; an absence of intellectual fear of death, and
so on ; or, as I have argued elsewhere, animals would be more
like man — nevertheless, there is a dim kind of reasoning
power, a kind of enjoyment of pleasure in eating, running,
Hying, &c., an instinctive fear of death, and so on, but there is
no intell<jct. The animal does not know why it does this or
that, why it likes eating, or playing with its pups, or building
nests, or why it avoids danger, &c. But though things are
done with some degree of choice, judgment, memory, stratagem,
in procuring food, guiding itself in going about, making love,
fighting, playing, hunting, building, &c., still all it does is
without its knowing the why ? and the how ? and it is most
important to reflect, that if it did know the " why " and the
"how," through intellectual apprehension, and reasoning, it is
fair to suppose the lower creatures would improve in their
minds and doings ; hut they do not. The dog, and the monkey
— equally with the fly — does not Jznow wliy it is fond of eating,
iL'liy it makes love, ichy it avoids death. It exercises no intel-
lectual reason in doing any one of these things, and does not
"improve" in any of its ways. It merely acts according to
the promptings of the instinctive part of its organic mind ; and
where choice comes into play, it merely acts according to the
degree of animal reason bestowed on it by the Creator. And
this is clearly seen in the young creature, which in a few hours,
or days, or months, is — according to its kind — possessed of all
the faculties and attributes of its parents ivithout having to
learn.

Evolutionist's View. — But looking at another phase of the
question, the Evolutionist may say, that the difference between
man's reason, and the brute's, is only one of degree — that
man's mind has " evolved " to what it is, and that the brute's

448 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

mind is of the same "sort" as man's, though it has not
" evolved " so high.

Now, if you only speak of the animal acts of eating, walk-
ing, making love, fighting, playing, hunting, &c., I quite
grant that the difference between the natural prompting, and
mode of carrying them out, is much the same in man, as in all
animals, and varies according to their graduated endowments
in the scale of creation.

But here will recur to our minds. Dean Alford's remarks on
the difference between " the animal soul," and the " spirit of
man " (see " /Spzn'i "), in which article it is pointed out that
tinimal though man may be in bodily structure and functions,
the difference between him and the brutes mentally is really,
one not simply of degree ; it is one of absolute difference.
Man is an animal ; but he is more : he is the habitation of an
intellectual reasoning Spirit. True ! he may act like an un-
intellectual being in hosts of ways — and to mention one, drawn
by the master-hand of our greatest English Poet —

" O that men should put an enemy into their mouths, to steal away thsi
brains ! that we should, with joy, revel, pleasure, and applause, transform
ourselves into beasts." {Othello.)

Again, Shakespeare says of drunkenness —

"To be now a sensible man; by-and-by a fool; and presently a beast ?
O strange ! "

And it is a fact, that man when intoxicated is as a beast — for
at a certain stage, though he may be able to walk and bellow ;
he cannot reason in an intellectual manner. But yet the
sober man — and the man especially whose intellectual mind is
" spiritualized" is as much above the beast — the monkey or the
Jog — as the angel is above the man.

Spiritualized Mind. — Now let not the Materialist misunder-
stand the meaning of the word " spiritualized," which I have
just used, and which I know he will object to. I will explain
what I mean by it. I mean the man or woman, in whom the
body-mind (animal, or organic mind) as far as the " will " is
concerned, has been brought into subjection to the intellectual
mind, or mind of the spirit, in so far as his or her nature per-

SPIRITUALIZED MIND. 449

in its according to its constitution, and the inherited powers and
taints handed down "from the third and fourth generation."

To illustrate this as between the man, and the brute, we
might take any one of the qualities which by resemblance^
appear to be in common between man and the animal, and I
select the quality — love — a quality which in its most exalted
development, is one of the most pure and spiritual possessed
by man.

Spiritualized or Intellectual love is the love arising by the
prompting and reasoning of the intellectual mind, or spirit.
But what is it that constitutes the difference between animal
love, and spiritualized love ? What is it that so differently
affects and animates the man as distinguished from the mere
animal ?

Why, the enormous difference consists in this, — that it is not
simply the outward form, and beauty of the admired (or be-
loved) that bewitches ; for, in a given instance, there may be a
complete absence of personal beauty ; but it is rather in the
highest sense, that the intellectual mind of the lover is
captivated by the virtues, intellect, and accomplishments of
the loved one.

In both man and w^oman, it is moral qualities — character,
disposition, amiability of temper, high sense of religion, love of
truth ; justice ; mercy ; charity ; modesty of spirit ; honour ;
devotion to duty ; earnestness ; chastity ; candour ; patience ;
courage ; kind-heartedness ; sympathy ; consideration for
others; constancy; unselfishness — and the like, that most truly
kindle admiration. Then there is in the woman, gentleness,
grace, self-sacrifice, besides a hundred other mental qualities
in both too numerous to mention. So that it is not simply
pretty eyes, or a handsome face, or elegant figure that securely
attract, but it is the attributes rather of the intellectual mind,
or, as the old expression was, the qualities of the " head and
heart " that kindle and enchain " spiritualized love " before
marriage, and the most certainly secures it in wedded life — a
kind of love, which when worthily bestowed, binds heart to
heart so surely, that a happiness results, which neither faded

450 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

charms can diminish, nor seas divide, nor death, nor
time.

Then there is too, the pure and beautiful intellectual spiri-
tualized love of Father, Mother, Child, Sister and Brother,
and the love of friends.

The poor brute knows nothing like this. He may, it is true,
show pleasure in associating with certain familiar dogs, &c. ;
and a kind of sorrow if parted by death, or otherwise, from
companions : but these feelings are instinctive in many
animals in greater or less degree \ and as I maintain, they
cannot be felt intellect\ially in the same way as by man, or we
should have such creatures reasoning, and doing more like man
than is the fact.

It may be suggested that there is not much intellectual
spiritualized love amongst the poor; but from ample expe-
'rience in the earliest part of my practice, I can assure the
reader, that I have witnessed certainly as much devoted and
self-sacrificing love amongst the poor and uneducated as
amongst the rich and accomplished.

Then as to the minds of savages. I think savages are de-
graded men, or that they are varieties of man, according to
God's will. But it is quite certain that, savage and degenerate
though they may be, they are infinitely higher in the scale of
Creation than any brute, and that they all possess faculties
capaUe of being developed, as no brute's is capable.

Reflections. — Let us now pause for a few moments in the
general argument, and make some reflections on the fore-
going.

The first thing I would remark is that, to my view, this
capacity of the human mind of achieving spiritualization, or
exalted intellectual feeling, and ratiocination — whether of
love, or any other high mental faculty or attribute — is the
surest proof of its divine origin, and of man being made, as
we are told, in God's image; and I hold that unless such
mind had been made by a Supernatural power, it would not
be capable of entertaining and carrying into effect such
ideas as those of intellectual love — intellectual friendship —

REFLECTIONS. 45

intellectual generosity, &c., and the actions called up thereby;
and certainly, not of conceiving and acting on such even
higher ideas as those of Righteousness, and Worship of God,
actions of mind that we have no reason to believe are pos-
sessed in the faintest degree, by any creature but man.

Nor can there, I think, be any doubt entertained by a
common-sense person, than that mental communion with God
is the highest act and privilege of the human mind. (Refer
Romans viii. 4, 0, 6.)

To show the power possessed by the mind when spiritual-
ized in its higher faculties, we know that a man can, by exer-
cising such, rise superior to sorrow, suffering, pecuniary ruin,
or even the fear of death; and that a sure belief, and reliance
in God's love, justice, and mercy will enable a man to bear
(in a different way to mere stoicism) anything that the con-
tingencies of life may bring to him, or to do anything that
conscience and duty and affection appear to demand the per-
formance of, by his voluntary will.

True, the bull-dog, or tiger — down even to the little hum-
ming-bird— may for personal benefit of many kinds sub-
ject itself to pain, and inconvenience; or even sacrifice its
life in defending its young, &c. ; but if it does such things,
they take place simply as a result of the carrying out of the
behests of its Instinctive mind, and are not in the least brought
about by deliberate reasoning as prompted by the feelings, or
motives, of an intellectual spiritualized sense of duty, or love, or
devotion to others, or of principle carried out even to the death.

No ! the animal has no intellectual sense of duty, or of love
for its young, or of the fear of death, or of future judgment,
&c., and it acts as it does, not from a desire to do its duty, or
to fulfil a moral obligation, but it simply acts according to
instinct. Man, on the contrary, often acts by his reason even
in opposition to his animal instinct.

But the Sceptic may say, that man, though possessing this
intellectual mind (which on my view is peculiar to his race)
does not even when cultured always show spiritualized
qualities.

G g 2

452 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

Exactly so, Sceptic ! The intellectual micd can only
become spiritualized by the choice of its own will. (See
" Grace;' '' Freewill;' Vol. V.)

According to the determination of its individual will, a
human mind may by reflection become spiritualized; or on the
contrary, it may become degraded and unspiritual; according
to whether, as in the former case, it adopts belief in God,
and in Christ and His teaching ; or as in the latter, it dwells
only on the things of this world, and on animal fleshly plea-
sures; or— I would add most emphatically — according as it
revels hy choice in the pride of intellectual enjoyments as mere
exercises of reason, and apart from God; and thinks, and
believes, nothing of Him, and of the life to come after this.
And I would say further— although it is trenching on the
larger discussion of this subject in the fifth volume — that the
intellectual mind or spirit of man, being in the opinion of
believers his immortal part; that whatever the choice of a man
may be — whether towards righteousness, or the reverse — his
spirit will exist after this life has ceased, and according as it
has in this life been " spiritual;' or " mispiritual ; " so, in the
next world it will be " spiritual " or " unspiritual ; " and,
therefore, either be permitted to rejoice in the presence of
God, or will be banished to the abode of the " unspiritual "
and the " unrighteous."

Moral Qualities attributed to Animals. — We will now
leturn to animals, and in doing so I am quite prepared to know
that a fond owner of a dog may say that her pet certainly
possesses many of the qualities I have enumerated as being
solely intellectual qualities; such as afiection, good temper,
devotion to duty, patience, earnestness, courage, constancy,
gentleness, tact, and even an apparent sense of justice.

Granted, the semblance of some of these qualities to those
possessed by men and women ; but then some of these quali-
ties of a certain sort, are necessary constituents of the hody-
mind in animals — especially in such as associate in flocks and
ter(U — iu order to secure peaceable conduct towards one

MORAL QUALITIES ATTRIBUTED TO ANIMALS. 453

another, and for other reasons, an outline of which I have
given in " Social Instincts ; " but I hold that to whatever
extent animals possess these qualities, they are no more than
part and parcel of their Instinctive minds, and cannot, as in
man, be felt and acted on as spiritualized motives, feelings,
and actions.

Communities of animals must either have endowed instincts
to guide them in their conduct towards each other, or intellec-
tual reason to so guide them — either the one or the other —
and I believe we may be quite sure they have not the latter.
No one, I think, who will fairly consider my arguments as to
the non-possession by animals of the power of intellectual
abstract ideation (see page 246) will believe that the quali-
ties under discussion, can be felt by dogs, horses, monkeys,
&c., in the same manner as by men and women : as their
minds must be so diiferently constituted to that of man.

If monkeys, dogs, &c., could conceive, reason upon, and
feel these qualities in the same manner as do men and women
as intellectual abstract ideas, they would certainly soon rise
higher in the scale of creation. They would not continue in
their 2^re sent loidy state. Because if they could conceive the
abstract idea of love — justice — strength — duty, &c., like man,
and not simply according to their limited endowments, they
would be able to realize a just idea of their own faculties,
and strength.

If a horse or an elephant could form such an abstract idea
as " I love my master," or " I hate my master," he would be
an intellectual reasoning animal; and if, in addition, animals
were able in some way to communicate intellectual ideas to
their kind — as many people think they can — and as I myself
believe they can in regard to animal ideas — why then elephants
and monkeys, and horses and dogs, wonld very soon show us by
their actions, that they did possess the power of reasoning,
other than that which according to their natural endowments
I admit them to have. For example, horses and elephants
would ages ago, have got to know that they had only to lie
down — in opposition to the wishes of man when urged to put

454 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF

out their strength for his use — that is, to show constant
obstinacy — to bear some beating with fortitude, and to
kick, bite, rear, &c., unintermittingly, and man would have
found it impossible to use them as beasts of burden, &c.

But the dog enthusiast may still hold out, and persistently
maintain that his pet for certain, can entertain and act on such
moral ideas and motives as those already mentioned ; and also
such as those of responsibility, honour, &c. Now I am quite
prepared to admit that many tales may be brought forward to
support a theory that dogs do possess such ideas and motives ;
but in tracing them out, I think it will be found, that acts
which look like the outcome of intellectual ideation really spring
from a very different source. (See also pp. 248, 253.)

Take the case of a dog in a cart ; or a dog in a house. In
each instance the dog in the absence of his master will resist
an intruder. But in my opinion, this does not arise from an
intellectual sense of responsibility, or duty ; but from a
mixture of causes. 1st. The dog is as suspicious of a strange
man as he would be of a strange dog entering his domain
(analagous to his natural kennel in the woods). 2ndly. He
has been taught to resist intruders. 3rdly. By his companion-
ship with his master, he has got instinctively to regard all
things in the cart or house just as he would regard the sur-
roundings of his own kennel, and resist their being meddled
with accordingly. 4thly. His memory tells him to keep in
view the awarding smile, or frown of his master, according to
his performance of the care-taking duties he has been taught
to execute.

I give this as an instance of how one may explain away
these kind of difficulties.

Why if a dog was able to conceive such a high moral sense
as that of " responsibility," or of duty, there can be no reason
why be should not " have evolved " a host of other cognate
ideas, and principles.

To take one as an instance — freedom ! Why should it be,
that if a dog is so mentally exalted as to be able to feel in-
dividual " responsibility," he should not feel also the degrada-

MORAL QUALITIES ATTRIBUTED TO ANIMALS. 455

tioa of his slavery, and resolve to incite other dogs to baud
together to throw off the humiliation of servility to man ?
Why should it not be that among so many " clever " dogs,
a canine Spartacus should arise ? And if by their possession
of intellectual ideas, and power of communicating them to their
fellows, such a revolt did take place, it would not be one whit
more foolish than many human insurrections that have
occurred ! And I suppose the most ardent advocate of dogs'
" abilities " would not go so far as to say that dogs remain
docile and obedient, because they foresee that a revolt would
be unwise, and hence that they are more sensible than many
men have been, who have initiated, and carried out disastrous
revolutions !

To illustrate further the seeming possession of intellectual
language and ideation by animals, and their performance of
noble actions in consequence ; let us take the case of the farm-
yard cock, who has found a tit-bit, and calls a hen to come and
eat it, instead of taking it himself. The act looks like one
resulting from a high intellectual capacity, and capability of
showing nobility in " deeds of generosity, self-denial, and
politeness." But is it so ? Is it not rather a stratagem
brought about by the only kind of mind the bird possesses, the
animal, and is an act done simply to get the hen near him r
Indeed, I have over and over again on the hen coming near,
seen the cock gobble up the morsel himself.

If it were an intellectual act, then indeed it would show so
high a stage of mental faculty, that there would be no reason
why fowls should not he as intellectually high-minded, and
able, as man himself, and consequently that they ought on
evolution principles (as birds have lived longer than man on
this earth) to be more cultivated and civilized than he is 1

But instinctive acts of the above kind wrongly interpreted,
have led many persons to form wrong deductions. And thus
it is as to numberless acts of the dog, which to a kind master
or mistress look like high intellectual acts, but are simply
instinctive animal selfish ones. For example, dogs can feel
pleasure, as we often see by their signs of joy at meeting their

456 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

kind, and by their gambols. We know too, they can feel pain.
Now amongst animals that associate in numbers, there can be
no question that amongst themselves, there are rules of con-
duct which are instinctive, which lead them to do this, or that,
to please tbeir fellows, and to contribute to the peace and wel-
fare of the society ; for each one knows instinctively, that if
he does not comport himself according to "the rules," he will
be punished by his kindred.

The same applies to creatures much lower than the dog —
rooks, for example. If a rook essays to build outside the pale
of the rookery, he will be punished, as I have seen over and
over again.

And thus it is that the dog has got to perceive that so and so,
will bring caresses from his master, and so and so, stripes :
and in that way he manages to live with man at peace, and
enjoy life, as he would with his fellows.

But as to intellect ! Why, if dogs possessed one-half the
capacity attributed to them by some people, they would be the
equals of many men, and would — on evolution principles, be
able necessarily, to speak man's language after so long an
association with him, and such ancient " acquired experience."

Utilized Instincts, and '' Performing " Animals. — In con-
sidering the quality of mind possessed by animals, much stress
has by some persons been laid on the fact that many of the
higher brutes may be taught to do various acts and feats, that
look as if they were the result of a reasoning power. And no
doubt some of these acts are done by a species of reasoning
power, but then, as I shall hope to prove, it is not of an in-
tellectual kind ; for if the matter be closely investigated, it will
be found that the animal can effect no action further than that
of doing under the domination of man, a thing natural to the
Instinctive part of its organic mind, hut done in an uiiusual, and
perverted, or exaggerated mode. That is to say — in regard to acts
useful to man — there are those of the tamed horse, ox, elephant,
and camel, as utilized physically, for burden, and draught. But
to dwell only on mental acts : man has taught the sheep-dog

' ' PERFORMING ANIMALS. " 457

to " fold " the sheep : the pointer to " stand " to game : the
truffle-dog to find truffles : the ferret to pursue rats and
rabbits : the cat to catch mice : the falcon " to go a hawking,"
&c., &c., all of which doings are for man's benefit ; yet none of
these acts are entirely foreign to the nature of the respective
animals that perform them, the fact being that man has merehj
hent, and utilized the natural instincts of the animals he era-
ploys. And I may add here as a very important reflection,
that nothing shows more clearly the dominancy of man's
intellectual mind, than the fact that he can thus bend the
natural instincts of animals to his own will, and use. And
further, that nothing demonstrates more plainly that animals
do not possess intellect, than the fact that dogs, elephants,
horses, camels, oxen, &c., although capable of having their
natural ways modified by man, yet have not altered essentially
more than they have done, although so long taught by man,
and for so extended a period in close association with him.

*' Performing Animals." — As to these, you may teach a dog
to stand and walk upon his hind legs only; to stop at a certain
card; to balance a piece of sugar on his nose till you have
counted nine, &c. You may teach an elephant, or a horse to
" waltz;" or a monkey, dressed like a man, to take off his hat,
or fire a pistol, &c. But none of these acts are intellectual ;
they are only the results of the association of ideas, working
by means of the low reasoning power possessed by the organic
mind of the animal as altered and bent by man. (See '^Asso-
ciation of Ideas:') All that animals do under these circum-
stances is, to obey the behests of their natural instincts in such
way as ivill conduce to their own bodilg coinfort, ivell-being,
and pleasure; but in a manner, for the particular occasion, as
modified from, nature by man's teaching. That is to say, in
indulging in their natural desire for movements, and gratifica-
tion of bodily sensations, and instincts, their memory and expe-
rience tell them (when under subjection to man) that if they
follow their instincts in a certain way, and in the perverted
manner as produced by man, they will be rewarded by food, or
a caress; or that if they do not do as the master has ordered,

45« SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

they will receive a blow. And thus, the monkey rejoices in
mimicry (which is natural to him); the dog fetches the stick
out of the water — the pointer stands his game — the cat brings
the mouse to the mistress — the truffle dog looks for his reward
of a piece of bread, &c. But yet, as I have already stated,
none of these acts are intellectual; nor yet, at the same time,
are they altogether foreign to the nature of the respective
animals; they are, in fact, nothing more than natural animal
doings and movements so altered by man's controlling influence
as to resemble intellectual acts, though they really are no such
thing. But it may be objected that it is " not natural to a
monkey to do anything like firing a pistol." To this I reply,
that it is not unnatural to a monkey to use its fingers in various
ways, and to mimic what it sees done by men, or its fellows.
And in regard to the impossibility of teaching animals to do
acts which are really intellectual, and therefore foreign to their
nature, and beyond their animal capacities, let me observe that
you cannot teach an ape to repeat or write the letters of the
alphabet; or to say Ma-ma or Pa-pa, although they are such
simple sounds and forms. Nor can you teach a dog, or a
monkey to hum a tune, or the latter to draw even the simplest
picture.

Pray, how is this, Materialist? Why, clearly, for reasons
that are as plain as anything can be to those who are not
blinded by a Godless materialism. 1st. Because the above are
acts which, when done as man does them, are intellectual acts.
2ndly. Because no creature can do things beyond its endow-
ment.

But the Materialist may say, a dog (see ^^ Language^^) has
been taught to speak words; and the loquacity of the parrot
is proverbial ; and the music of the song-birds is known uni-
versally.

That is true, Materialist ! but if you will turn to other parts
of this book, I think you must acknowledge that in such cases,
the speaking and singing are not intellectual. Is it not certain
that if the dog had intellect he must have spoken long ere
this? And if the Materialist says, its mouth, tongue, and vocal

CONCLUSION. 459

organs are not Just like man's (see page 317), surely the assumed
marvellous faculty of producing the fitting by materialistic
evolution, ought to have caused such needful modifications, as
to have enabled the dog to speak Yes! or No ! long before
this time, considering his very extended association with man.
(A man can in a manner indicate Yes ! or No ! vocally, even
after extirpation of the tongue.) But as to the monkey, his
vocal organs and mouth are like man's, and yet he cannot
speak intelligently, any more than can the dog. (See "iaw-

To repeat and to sum up in regard to animals being taught
to " go-fetch " — to " stand " like a pointer, at the word
" To-ho " — to fire-oifa pistol as will a monkey by a sign, &c.,
the facts are, in brief, that the animal has learnt by means of
his natural instinctive mind (see Habit in article on " Uncon-
scious Mind ") — but as in some degree, perverted by man — to
associate certain sounds (words) and gestures, with certain
objects and sensations, and although there is no intellectual
comprehension of their meaning, yet nevertheless to execute
certain animal movements, and use certain natural faculties
accordingly; but as I have said above, no new faculty can be
set in action — nothing that is entirely foreign to the creature
in nature, can be done under the tutelage of man. In nature
the creature is guided in the execution of his instincts by cer-
tain visual impressions, sounds, smells, tastes, and touchings.
And so it is under domestication; but we may be quite sure
there is no intellectual abstract conception of the true intellec-
tual meaning and object of the sound, or word, or sign of com-
mand, and its resulting action; or we should, without doubt,
see dogs acting for their own comfort and advantage, more
like men. (See ^^Association of Icleas^)

Conclusion. — In concluding this article I would say, that
my aim, all the way through, has been to render as clear to the
reader, as it appears to myself, that no creature below man
possesses intellect; and that there is an absolute and complete
gulf hetweeu the intellectual reason of man, and the simply
instinctive reason of the brute, which no purely materialistic

46o SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

progressive development theory can explain (this will be en-
larged on in Vol. IV.) ; consequently that man stands alone
and cannot have sprung spontaneously hy direct descent — from
the monkey; or that if he did so indirectly in any degree or
way, it could only have been by God's will and pleasure.
Because such change or evolution would not only have required
radical alterations in the bodily conformation of the ape, such
as the loss of hair, &c. — which, as I shall show in Vol. IV., it
would be difficult enough to account for, as arising by secondary
and self acting causes only — but far more importantly, because
such an evolution would have required a complete change in
the "organic mind " of the brute; and what is more, the entire
super-addition of the intellectual nmid, which no ape certainly
now has, or can be shown ever to have possessed. To me,
therefore, it appears absolutely certain, that the intellectual
mind could only have arisen by God's endowment; and even
if God had chosen to bestow it on an ape, and that man aros3
in such a way, that that ivould have been just as much a creation^
as if He had made man straight from dust. But it is quite
possible that an evolutionist may demur, and say that my argu-
ment has not impressed him " because he never contended that
a brute's mind was equal to a man's, and that man's mind
differs from the brute's, because it has evolved higher."

To such an argument I would reply, then why and how is
it that such a gap exists, as that between the highest brute and
man? And why are even such lowly creatures as bees, more
provident and gifted in some respects than man? For the
bees' economy shows either that its mind must have evolved
higher in some respects than man's; or that the mind of the
hee must consist of a different quality, or endowment to that of
man.

Finally, I would say that with my view as to the " organic
mind," it has always struck me, that anatomists, and museum-
naturalists, who study dead animals, and stuffed skins, and
dry bones only, miss the highest peculiarity of the animal
when they look for it in this kind of shaped body, or wing, or
bone, or that kind of nervous system, or heart, lung, colour of

CONCLUSION. 461

feathers, &c. — they miss, I say, the great fact, that the organic
mind, or specialized animal spirit, as endowed by God, is after
all, the most distinguishing and marked characteristic of the
organism ; and therefore that as the Biologist, or Philosopher,
or Chemist, cannot dissect or analyze " spirit," that his study
of" embryology," " development," " heredity," "acquired expe-
rience," " habit," and " secondary causes," sinks into utter
insignificance in comparison with the all-important question.
What is the specialized Spirit of life, and how came it? And
how came it that there is such an enormous difference between
the mind of man and that of the highest ape or dog? In this
article I have given what I consider to be proofs as to the
totally different qualities of the mind in man and the brute — let
the materialistic evolutionist give equally tangible proofs that
I am wrong — let him produce his fanciful " links " between
man and the brute, and let him say why man still holds the
dominion as given him by God over all creatures on this earth
{Genesis i. 26), and why no ingenious animals have ^^ evolvecV^
higher than they have, so as to dispute his supremacy — intel-
lectually— morally — and physically ?

CHAPTER XVIII.

General Summary of the whole Book, and its Con-
clusions.

Although I do not propose in this final chapter to detain the
reader by giving a complete summary of the foregoing sub-
jects, yet it is my wish to recall his attention to a few of
the most important points that — as I consider — have been
proved.

And first as to God and Design — as distinguished from the
self-acting haphazard coming of things somehow of the Mate-
rialists.

The Materialist flatters himself that he goes to the root of
the whole subject, and appears to think that by endeavouring
to show that all things came as they are by self-action, and the
power of things to accommodate themselves to what is fitting
as pressed by surrounding conditions, that he not only explains
all, but shows himself possessed of a mind superior to that of
the old-fashioned believer or " Teleologist," as be contemp-
tuously calls him. But what is the fact ? Why ! simply that
the Materialist is satisfied with the investigation of secondary
causes only, and will not consider how these arose.

For myself I do not deny that evolution may have been a
partial factor in the working of Nature, as I hope to explain
in another volume ; but then as I hold, the process must have
been a gradual unfolding of God^s j^lan and i^urpose^ working
and acting under the creative will, and according to His laws
of development, adaptation, &c.

I think if any one will dispassionately consider the sketch I

CONCLUSIONS. 463

have given of Matter, Force, Spirit, and their marvels, and
especially those of the latter in its unique phenomena as mani-
fested in " Nerve Action'' " Reason and Instinct,'' " Will," &c.,
he surely can come to no other conclusion than that they must
each and all have arisen, and must work according to the
Design and Power of a Supernatural Personality.

I do not wish however, to speak here at any length on the
subjects of Design and Causation, as I trust to enter fully on
their consideration in a future volume.

Conclusions. — What then are the conclusions of this book ?

1st. I consider that I have shown that science proves the
existence of God, and His Power and Design.

2ndly. That as far as we have gone in the examination of
the subject, that the truth of the Scriptures is not only upheld
by the teachings of Science, but that the Bible assists us in the
comprehension of some of the facts connected with Science,
and especially in regard to " Spirit," " Life," and the " Intel-
lect of Man," &c.

3rdly. In regard to the question of Spirit, I consider I have
proved its existence, not only as to God, and also as to the
immortal intellectual spirit of man, but likewise as to the
reality and power of a Spirit of Life, the Vital Principle, or
Organic Mind.^

4thly. I consider I have proved that there are two kinds of
mind, the intellectual, and the animal (Instinctive or Organic),
and that man possesses both, whereas the brute and lower crea-
tures only possess the latter or animal mind. Further, that
the hio-her or intellectual mind of man is very different in its
quality and powers from the mere " animal reason " of the
brutes ; also that his kind of language, his facial expression
and modes of showing the emotions, are likewise each and all
so different and often distinct, from the sort and quality of mental
powers and attributes of the ape, dog, and other brutes and
lower creatures, as to render it clear that man could not have
sprung by a strictly hereditary descent or ascent from such

1 The question of the Spirit of Evil will be more fully discussed in future
volumes.

464 SCIENCE A STRONGHOLD OF BELIEF.

brutes by a mere mechanical evolution working by self-con-
stituted and solely self-acting powers.

Consequently that man must necessarily be a distinct crea-
tion, and that he— as well as the brutes — must have been
formed and endowed with a certain specialized kind of mind
and powers according to the Design and Purpose of God.

othly. I think that I have said sufficient to prove that it is
reasonable to believe both in Science, and in God; and that
the attempt made by some persons to disassociate the con-
joint consideration of Religion, and Science, is not only un-
philosophical, but thoroughly contrary to the evidence of truth
and common sense.

Finally, then, I would as a parting word, and in accordance
with the title of this work, affirm that " Science is a Strong-
hold of Belief^''' and that this is so, because no man can
fully understand Science (the works and working of Nature)
— as far as it is possible for man to comprehend it — without
acknowledging a Supernatural Power, and therefore without
resorting to the Bible as the only source from whence man
can learn anything definite concerning the Supernatural; and
of the cause and origin of the works of Nature, and its laws.

And conversely, that it would be impossible to grasp much
of what ive can understand of God and Religion, unless by a
close study of science — that is, a rigid scrutiny of God's
works, and of the evidences they present of Design, and Pur-
pose, especially as seen in the essential and specific constitu-
tion (so different to that of brutes as is proved by scientific
analysis) of man's mind, with its unique intellectual powers,
its innate tendency towards worship and a longing for im-
mortality.

Consequently I entirely believe that the time will come
when to call a man "a man of Religion" will be tantamount
to calling him a " man of Science," and vice versa — for, in my
opinion, it is impossible to be the one, or the other, under the
most enlightened aspects, without being both.

INDEX;

Abstract ideas, 216, 287.

in animals, 289.

Summary as to, 293.

Act of living, 95, 139.

Advice to non-scientific, 50.

^tlier, 58, 97, 221

Affinity Cliemical (see Chemical

Affinity)
Alford, as to soul, 177.
Analogy, an, 323.
Anecdotes of dogs, 248-253.
Angel, good and evil, 240.
Anger, 330.
Animal Brunels, &c., 247.

heat (see Vol. II.).

Animals, Language of, 309-316.
Animal mind, 236, 239, 251.

Moral qualities of, 452.

not improve, 239, 245, 246.

reason, 239, 245,246, 251,252,

253, 254, 268, 290, 403, 430, 436,

443, 447.
Ants, Instincts of, 398, 415.
Ape and the emotions, 327, 336.
Aphasia, 307.

Association of Ideas, 282, 317.
Astonishment, 331.
Atoms, 29, 34, 57, 87, 90.

Placing of, 71.

Quality of, 60.

Reflections as to, 78.

Shape of, 70.

Size of, 66.

Summary as to, 74.

Vibration of, 68.

Vortex, 62.

Atomic weights, 87.

Attraction, Capillary, 106.

Commentary on, 103.

Corollary on, 114.

Electrical, 104.

Heterogeneous, 101.

Homogeneous, 101.

Magnetic, 105.

Author engages to be candid, 230.
Automatism, 211, 213, 217, 223,
438 (see Involuntary Action).

Beauty, 40, 41, 44.

in flowers, 42, 44, 46.

Beaver, The, 394.

Bees and evolution, 266.

Instincts of, 396.

and Darwinism, 405.

Believer contrasted with unbe-
liever, 48, 51.
Benevolence in dogs, 250, 252.
Better nature, Man's, 240.
Bible, 4, 8, 10, 13, 55.
Bioplasm, 94, 116, 163.

Mind in, 228, 188, 237 (see

Vol. II.).

Birds' -nests, 345.

Blood, Mind in, 188, 237.

Blushing, 217, 331.

Body-mind, 164, 182. 236.

Book of Nature, 19.

Bower bird, 424.

Brain, The, 200, 229.

" Brain " in Invortebrata, 203, 209,

226, 244.
and Spirit, 224.

Functions of, 206.

H h

466

INDEX.

Brain, Material organ of conscious-
ness, 224, 243.
Breasts, origin of, 369.
Breath, The word, 168, 170, 192.
Brush Turkey, 423.
Burning, 126, 128.

without flame, 130.

Burying beetle, 424.
Butler, Bishop, 242, 432.

Caddice fly, 277, 366.
Capillary attraction, 106.
Cat and reason, 299.

suckling rats, 249.

Causes, 12, 50, 51 (and Vol. III.).

of unbelief, 10, 21.

Caterpillar, 367.
Cerebration, Cojiscious, 239.
reflex, 216.

Chance, 26, 40, 42, 49, 62, 92,

158, 230.
Character, 240

Chemical Affinity and Combina-
tion, 29, 80, 86, 87, 89, 91, 92,
93, 102, 122.

Nature of, 125.

Change, 121.

Chemico-physics, 80, 94, 95, 157,

159, 160, 163, 185.

Life Force superior to, 95,

115, 135, 160, 162, 222.

Servant of life force, 95, 222,

238.

Chemistry (see Vital Chemistry).

Christ, 50.

Colour, 154.

Colour blindness, 39.

Combustion, 126, 128, 130.

Compounds, 80^ 81, 156.

Commentary, 103.

Common sense, 43.

Common terms, 286.

Conceit in Science, 15, 21, 23, 51.

Conclusions, General, 463.

Conscience, 240, 273, 451.

Conscious action, 223, 224.

thought, 235, 236, 237, 239.

Consciousness in man, 234, 239.

in animals, 245, 252, 259,

300, 447.

Conservation of energy, 135.

in inorganic things, 136.

• inanimalsand plauts,137.

Continuity, 151.

Co- related forces. The, 120.

Corollary as to Physics, 114.

as to loss of Energy, 146.

Creator, The, 7, 8, 49, 51, 55.
Crystals, 115, 159, 335.
Cuckoo, 423.

Darwinism, 2, 12, 45, 257, 323, 327,

329, 357, 368, 371, 405.
Deaf -mutism, 307.
Death, 32, i6, 180 (see Vol. II.).

in plants, 180, 163.

Deformed man, 268, 269, 430.
Design, 18, 49, 152, 223.
Development, progressive or by

steps, 186.
Differentiation, 31, 77, 94, 115,

116, 118, 160, 163, 185 (and see

Vol. II.).
Diffusion of liquids, 107.

of gases, 109.

Digestion and evolution, 377.
Dipper, 423,

Direction, Instinct of, 426.
Direct nerve action, 223.
Dissipation of energy, 142.
Dissimilar results, 94, 115.

Atoms, 81.

Dreams, 242.

Dog, A, that could speak, 281.
Dogs, Anecdotes of, 248, 253, 454.
Duty, 451, 454.
Dynamical theory of heat, 126.

Earth, Cooling of, 145.

to be destroyed, 146.

Eggs, Care of, 256, 350.

how arise, 358

Hatching of, 364, 365.

Electricity, Nature of, 125.

not the life force, 161, 197,

200.

Elements, The, 86.

Elementary things, 81.

Emotions, Modes of, in cat and

dog, 334.
Eadosmosis, 107.
Endowed qualities, 80, 166, 193,

235, 460.
Energy, 131, 133.

Conservation of, 135.

INDEX.

467

Energy, Dissipation or degradation

of, 14-2.
by earth, 145.

Loss of, by sun, 144.

■ Sources of, 134.

Transformation of, 135.

Equivalents, Chemical, 88.
Evidence, Prof. Huxley as to, 17.
Evil One, The, 50, 55, 133, 232,

240, 241,
Evolution, 2, 5, 12, 23, 27, 46, 186,
223.

of language, 281.

of mind, 246, 261, 292, 460.

and the emotions, 331, 336.

and food, 376.

of man, 460, 461 (and see

Vol. IV.).

Evolutionists' view as to reason,

447.
Expression of emotions, 327-331.
Faculty of naming, 304.
Facial expression, 327.
Faith, 48.

Scientific, 9.

First Cause, 3, 49, 359.

Fitness, Faculty of, 13, 164, 370,

375, 408 (see Vol. III.).
Fluid, A, 82.
Food, 95 (see Vol. II.).

Instincts as to, 372.

and evolution, 376.

Force (see also Energy).

or Energy, 131.

indestructible, 97.

Vital, how it differs from

other forces, 162 (see Vital

Force).
Forces, The physical, 99.

The co-related, 120.

Summary as to, 155.

Constitution of, 159.

Form in inorganic things, 115.

Fowls, Unkindness of, 250.

Freedom, 454.

Freewill (Vol. V.).

Frog, and reflex action, 211.

Ganglia, The, 198, 201.

Functions of, 208, 225.

of vertebrata, 201-208.

of invertebrata, 203-208.

(Jas, A, 58-82.

II h 2

Gas, repulsion of atoms. 111.
Gases, Diffusion of, 109.
Genius, 241.
Gesture, 328.
God, 3, 10-20.

a personality, 7.

Godless evolution, 5.
Growth (see Vol. II.).
Gravitation, 99.

Habit, 46, 259.

Habitations, 389.

Haeckel, 13, 28.

Happening so by chance, 40-42, 158,

Heat, 121, 124.

Dynamical theory of, 12(3,

129.
Heavens to be changed, 146.
Hibernation, 409.
Honey, 42, 46.
Hornbill, 423.

Humility, 21-26, 32, 33, 49, 51.
Huxley, Prof., 17.

Idea, An, 284.

Ideas, Abstract, 246, 287, 293.

in animals, 289.

Association of, 282, 317.

Innate, 274.

in animals, 276.

Idol, Intellect made an, 49, 52.
Illustrations of intellect, &c., 435.
Imagination, 272.
Imitation of vocal sounds, 316,

383.
Inanimate things. Working of

forces in, 80, 114, 117, 159.
Infant, Automatic actions of, 211,

212.

thoughts without words, 302.

Innate ideas, 274, 276.
Innermost nature, 240.
Insects and eggs, 346-319
Inorganic matter, 85.
as ruled by chemico-

physics, 159, 160.
how affected by physi -

cal forces, 114, 156, 159.
Mechanical arrangement of,

115, 156.

Form and shape in, 115.

Transformation and con-
servation of force in, 136.

468

INDEX.

Instinct, 225, 229, 234, 238, 244,

247, 256.

of self preservation, 343.

as to nests, &c., 343, 277.

as to sites for nests, &c., 346,

348.

as to care of e^^s, 350.

as to care of youiig-, 352.

as to kind of food, 372.

as to animal cries, &c., 381.

as to movements, 384.

as to making habitations, 389.

The social, 390, 397.

of bees, 396-405.

of ants, 398-401.

of hibernation, 409.

for storing food, 412.

of migration, 416.

of direction, 426.

in man, 426.

Origin of, 427.

Ordainment of, 428.

Illustrations of, 435.

utilized, 456.

The maternal, 343-304.

absence of, 354.

reversal of, 355.

origin of, 360.

Instincts, The pure, 340.

of the young, 364.

Special, 422.

in invertebrata, 244.

Endowed, 273, 277.

Instinctive mind, 236, 238, 241,
251.

Intellect, Illustrations of, 435.

Worship of, 24, 49, 52.

Animals no, 245, 251.

Intellectual love, 449.

mind, 166, 235, 237, 246.

Intuition, 244, 255, 274, 280.

Invention, Faculty of, 277.

Invertebrata, Nervous system of,
202, 225.

The " brain" in, 203, 209,

226, 244.

Involuntary action (see Automa-
tism), 211-217, 223. 255.

Irregularity in organic things, 116,
160.

Joy, 330.

Kangaroo, 422.

Language, 279.

Human, 283.

in animals, 309-316.

Origin of, 304.

Laughter, 328.

Law of multiples, 88.

equivalents, 88.

of chemical combination, 86-

93.
Laws, 6, 12, 29, 93, 94.
Life, 27, 95, 135, 179.

and mind, 164.

causing power, 238.

The word, 169, 179.

Chemico-physical reasons of,

139, 222.

of plants, 140, 180, 182.

force (see Vital Force).

above chemico-phj^sics, 94,

115, 159, 160, 162, 165, 222, 238.

specialized, 227.

Spirit of, 183, 227.

Light, 121.

Nature of, 124.

Like causes — like effects, 94.

Links, 45.

Liquid, A, 58, 156.

Love, Intellectual, 256, 449.

spiritualized, 449.

Magnetism, Nature of, 124.
Magnificat, The, 189.
Materialism, 23, 28, 185, 222.
Materialist, Definition of, 28.

The, and beauty, 44.

Questions for (see Questions).

Materialistic evolution, 2, 5, 19-32,
79, 184, 219.

philosophers, A walk with, 39.

Matter, Arrangement of, 159.

Constitution of, 57, 155, 159.

Indestructible, 92, 97.

Inorganic, 85.

and mind, 223, 231, 233.

Oi"ganic, 94.

substance of, 63.

Summary as to, 155.

Mechanical evolution, 5, 185.
Memory, 270.

Microscope, Efi'ects of, on some
minds, 34.

INDEX.

469

Migration, 416,

Mind, 27, 159, 220, 230, 241.

intellectual, 16G, 191, 187,

246.

in bioplasm, 228.

of brutes. Scriptural proofs

as to, 260.

Evolution of, 292, 460, 461.

examined by analogy, 323.

ground out of brain cells, 3.

Higher, 237.

Lower, 238.

of animals, 236, 238, 244, 268.

• of man, 237.

and matter, 223, 231, 233.

in nerve cells, 197, 328.

Organic (see Organic Mind).

specialized according to kind.

193, 235, 246, 277, 333.
— Spiritual, 166, 191.
Spiritualized, 448.

Molecules, 80.

Qualities of, 83.

Movements of, 83.

Monism, 28.

Moral sense, 273, 449.

quality in animals, 452.

Motion, 63, 123, 124.

Nature of, 125.

Motor nerve action, 210.

Naming, Faculty of, 304.
NaiTOw culture. Effects of, 10.
Nature, 2.

Nature's secrets, 5, 34, 36.
Necessity, 19, 43, 92, 158, 184.
Nerve substance, 197, 198.

and mind, 228, 231.

Nerve action, or energy, 198.

voluntary, 205.

involuntary, 205.

chemico - physical,

223.

primary, 223.

Nervous system. The, 195.

an organized machine, 196,

219, 224, 225.
analogy to galvanic battery,

196.
Different forms of, 200.

in vertebrata, 200.

in invertebrata, 202, 225.

Functions of, 205, 225.

Nervous system, Mode in which

sjurit works on, 231.
Nest, Birds', 256.
Nut weevil, 365.
Nutrition (see Vol. II.).

Ordainment, 258, 274.

Organism and specialized life force,
184, 227.

Transformation and conser-
vation of force in, 137, 139.

Organic fluids, 95.

matter, 94.

solids, 95.

products, artificial, 95, 96.

Organic mind (see Vital Force),
94, 115, 162-166, 182, 184, 221,
228, 229, 440, 444, 460.

Creation and variation of,

186.

— constitutes the

227.

individual.

Conscious quality of, 236.
Unconscious quality of, 236
in plants, 229.
pervades the organism, 187,

222, 228, 237.
— Selective choosing by,
165.

specialized, 184, 225,

163,

227,

229, 236, 258.
Organized structure, 116, 117.
Origin of instinct, 4:^7.
Osmosis, 107.
Oxidation, 130.

Pain, 338.

Pangenesis, 184 (and see Vol. II.).

Parrot, The, and speech, 282.

Performing animals, 457.

Personality of God, 6-8.

Perception, Unconscious, 439.

Perverted culture, 10.

Pessimism, 25, 235.

Physical forces, The^ 99, 150.

Pigeons, 423.

Pipe fish, 363.

Plants and animals. Analogy be-
tween, 181.

Act of living in, '.•5, 180,

238.

Soul in, 182, 238.

Death in, 180.

470

INDEX.

Pleasure, \\'i1 .
Polarity, 113.
Positivists, 16.

Poisons, cflcct on animals, 325.
Progressive development, 186.
Primary nerve action, 223.
Protoplasm (see Bioplasm), 31, and
Vol. II.

Questions to philosophers, 29.

• for materialists to answer,

314, 349, 352, 356, 368, 373,
382, 385, 402, 411, 413, 419.

Eat stealing eggs, 252.

Rapacity, 47, 247 (and see Vol. II.).

Eealists, 224.

Reason in animals (see Animal

Reason).

and instinct, 234, 269, 436.

Recapitulation, 89, 333, 445.
Reflex actions, 210, 255.

excito-motor, 213.

sensori-motor, 214.

ideo-motor, 215.

• cerebration, 216.

Reflections, 78, 89, 92, 157, 218,

450.
Regularity in inorganic things,

115, 160.

Religion and science, 464.
Religious reflections, 157, 218.
Reproduction (see Vol. I J.).
Repulsion, 110.
Resemblances, 327, 334, 335.
Responsibility, 454.
Reticence of men of science, 20.
Reverence, 25.
Rusting, 130.

Sameness in inorganic things, 114.

116, 118, 160.

Satan, 50, 133, 230, 240, 241,

251.
Science, Efiect of, on mind, 21.

• and religion, 464.

Scientists not avow belief, 4.
Scientific sceptic. The, 48.

reflections, 157, 218.

Scepticism, 1, 15, 21, 27, 48.
Sceptical materialist. The, 48, 51.
Secondary causes, 19, 49.
Selective choosing, 32, 163, 165.

Self-action, 13, 19, 27, 32, 158,

165, 186, 223, 235, 246.

evolution, 266, 293.

Senses exalted in animals, 446.
Sensory nerve action, 210.
Sensationalists, 224.
Schopenhauer, 235.
Shakespeare and drunkenness,

448.
Signs, 282.

Similar results, 114, 118, 160.
Simple things, 81, 156.
Sin, 49 (see Satan and Evil).
Sleep, 32, 243.
Snarling, 332, 336.
Sneering, 332.
Social instincts, 390.
Solid, A, 58, 82, 156.
Soul, Prof. Tyndall, as to, 17.

The word, 169-172.

in plants, 179, 182.

in animals, 179, 238.

or life, 238.

Sound, 152.

Spartacus, A canine, 455.
Spectrum analysis, 6.
Spencer, Mr. H., 79.
Spinal cord, The, 201.

Functions of, 208, 211.

the material veiiicle of

reflex action, 224.
Special instincts, 422.
Specialized life force constitutes

the individual, 166, 184, 225-

229, 235-240, 253-257, 277.
Spirit, 3, 159, 166, 219, 220.

and brain, 224.

and matter, 233.

Intellectual, of man, 191, 237.

of man has two qualities, 237.

of life, 183, 219, 224-229, 255-

mode in which it works, 231.

Sceptics ignore, 222.

Specialized forms of,

227 277

The word, 169, 172, 174.

What is it ? 226.

225,

Spiritualized mind, 448.

love, 449

Spiritualism, 220.
Storing food, Instinct for, 412.
Sun, Cooling of, 144.
Sunshine and chance, 40.

INDEX.

471

Summary as to matter and force,
155.

as to reason and instinct 261,

as to abstract ideas, 293.

as to vocal soiinds, 320.

as to instincts, 432.

General, of book, 462.

Supernatural power, 32, 93, 152.

processes, 28.

— — instruction, 242, 432.
Surfeit, 271.

Sympathetic nerve system, 201.
nerve action, 225.

Tears, 330.
Tension, Fluid, 101.
Termites, The, 401.
1 bought, 235, 241.

without words, 294, 295.

of infants, 302.

Transformation of energy, 135.
Trapdoor spider, 424.
Tyndall, Prof., 17.

Unbelief, Causes of, 10.

Unbeliever, The, 48, 51.

Uncertainties of science, 33, 98.

Unconscious thought or cerebra-
tion, 235, 236, 237, 239, 240,
243, 244.

life-causing power, 238, 262.

memory, 271.

nerve action, 211, 223.

perception, 439.

Utilized instincts, 456.

Vanity, 22.
Variation, 251, 254.

Vertebrata, Nervous system of,

206.
Vital chemistry, 94, 115, 197, 323.

325.

Working of, 188, 238.

Vital force or principle (see also

Organic Mind), 3, 80, 94-96,

115-118, 135, 141, 157, 160,

162, 179, 182, 197, 222, 224-227.
constrains inorganic things,

115, 141, 162, 222, 238.
how it differs from

other forces, 94, 115, 135, 162'

222.
Vocal organs, 317.
Voluntary action, 223-225.
Vortex theory, 62.

Walk with philosophers, 39.
Wasp, 413.

mason, 424.

Water, Freezing of, 30.
Water-spider, 424.
Watson, Sir T., Remarks of, 38.
Wave theory, 33, 124, 152.
Weaver bird, The, 395.
Weeping, 330.
White ant, 401.
Will, The, 223, 263.

of intellect, 264.

of organic mind, 264.

Woman's intuition, 298.
Word, A, 284, 286.
Wordless thought, 294, 295,
Worship of intellect, 24, 52.

Youatt, 281.

LONDON :
GILBERT AND EIVINGTON, PKINTERS,

ST. John's squart:.

A Catalogue of American and Foreign Books Published or

Imported by Messrs. Sampson Low & Co. can

be had on application.

Crown Buildings, i88, Fled Street, London y
Apr it, 1880.

a ^tlettion from tfte Sfet of asoofesi

PUBLISHED EY

SAMPSON LOW, MARSTON, SEARLE, & RIVINGTON.

ALPHABETICAL LIST.

CLASSIFIED Educational Catalogue of Works pub-
lished in Great Britain. Demy Svo, cloth extra. Second Edition,
revised and corrected to Christmas, 1879, 5^.

About {Ed?nond). See " The Story of an Honest Man."

About Some Fellows. By an Eton Boy, Author of ''A Day
of my Life." Cloth limp, square i6mo, 2s. 6d.

Adventures of Captain Mago. A Phoenician's Explorations
1000 years B.C. By Leon Cahun. Numerous Illustrations. Crown
Svo, cloth extra, gilt edges, 7^. 6^. ; plainer binding, ^s.

Adventures of a Young Naturalist. By Lucien Biart, with
117 "beautiful Illustrations on Wood. Edited and adapted by Parker
GiLLMORE. Post Svo, cloth extra, gilt edges. New Edition, 7^. dd.

Afghan Knife {The). A Novel. By Robert Armitage

Stern DALE, Author of *' Seonee." Small post Svo, cloth extra, 6s.
Afghanistan and the Afghanis. Being a Brief Review of the

Histoiy of the Countiy, and Account of its People. By H. W.

Bellew, C.S.I. Crown Svo, cloth extra, 6s.
Alcott {Louisa M.) /immys Cruise in the " Finafore." With 9

Illustrations. Second Edition. Small post Svo, cloth gilt, 3 J. 6d.
Au/it Jos Scrap-Bag. Square i6mo, 2S. 6d.

(Rose Library, is.)
Little Men : Life at Plumfield with Jds Boys. Small

post Svo, cloth, gilt edges, 3j. 6d. (Rose Library, Double vol. is.)
Little Women, i vol., cloth, gilt edges, 3j-. dd. (Rose

Library, 2 vols., is. each.)

Sampson Low, Marsto?i, 6^ Co.^s

Alcott {Louisa M. ) Old-Fashioned Girl. Best Edition, small
post 8vo, cloth extra, gilt edges, 3^. (id. (Rose Library, 2^.)

Work and Beginning Again. A Story of Experience.

Experience, i vol., small post 8vo, cloth extra, 6s. Several Illustra-
tions. (Rose Library, 2 vols., is. each.)

Shawl Straps. Small post 8vo, cloth extra, gilt, 35. 6d.

Eight Cousins ; or, the Aunt LLill. Small post 8vo,

with Illustrations, 3^. 6d.

The Rose in Bloom. Small post 8vo, cloth extra,

3J. U.

Silver Pitchers. Small post 8vo, cloth extra, 35. dd.

Under the Lilacs. Small post 8vo, cloth extra, ^s.

Jack and yUl. Small post 8vo, cloth extra, 5^.

"Miss Alcott's stones are thoroughly healthy, full of racy fun and humour . . .
exceedingly entertaining .... We can recommend the ' Eight Cousins. '" —
A thencBUftt.

Alpijte Ascents afid Adventures ; or, Rock and Snow Sketches.
By H. SCHiJTZ Wilson, of the Alpine Club. With Illustrations by
Whymper and Marcus Stone. Crown 8vo, los. 6d. 2nd Edition.

Andersen {IIa?ts Christian) Fairy Tales. With Illustrations in
Colours by E. V. B. Royal 4to, cloth, 25j-.

Animals Fainted by Themselves. Adapted from the French of
Balzac, Georges Sands, &c., with 200 Illustrations by Grandville.
8vo, cloth extra, gilt, ioj. 6d.

Art Education. See " Illustrated Text Books."

Art in the Moimtains : The Story of the Passion Play. By

Henry Blackburn, Author of "Artists and Arabs," "Breton

Folk," &c. With numerous Illustrations, and an Appendix for

Travellers, giving the Expenses of the Journey, Cost of Living, Routes

from England, &c., Map, and Programme for 1880. 4to, cloth, \os. 6d.

" Of the many previous accounts of the play, none, we are disposed to think,

recalls that edifying and impressive spectacle with the same clearness and

vividness as Mr. Blackburn's volume." — Guardian.

" He writes in excellent taste, and is interesting from the first page to the
last." — Saturday Review.

Art of Reading Aloud {The) in Pulpit, Lecture Room, or Private
Reunions. By G. Vandenhoff, M. A. Crown 8vo, cloth extra, ds.

Art Treasures in the South Ke?tsi?igto7i Museum. Published,
with the sanction of the Science and Art Department, in Monthly
Parts, each containing 8 Plates, price is. In this series are included
representations of Decorative Art of all countries and all times from
objects in the South Kensington Museum, under the following classes: — -

Sculpture : Works in Marble, Ivory, and Terra-Cotta.

Bronzes : Statuettes, Medallions, Plaques, Coins.

Decorative Painting and Mosaic.

List of Publications.

Decorative Furniture and Carved Wood- Work.

Ecclesiastical Metal- Work.

Gold and Silversmiths' Work and Jewellery.

Limoges and Oriental Enamels.

Pottery of all Countries.

Glass : Oriental, Venetian, and German.

Ornamental Iron- Work : Cutlery.

Textile Fabrics : Embroidery and Lace.

Decorative Bookbinding.

Original Designs for Works of Decorative Art.

Views of the Courts and Galleries of the Museum.

Ai-chitectural Decorations of the Museum.
The Plates are carefully printed in atlas 8vo (13 in. by 9 in.), on
thick ivory-tinted paper ; and are included in a stout Avrapper, orna-
mented with a drawing from ** The Genoa Doorway " recently acquired
by the Museum.

Asiatic Turkey : being a Narrative of a Journey from Bombay
to the Bosphorus. By Grattan Geary, Editor of the Times of India.
2 vols., crown 8vo, cloth extra, with many Illustrations, and a Route
Map, 28j.

Australian Abroad {The). Branches from the Main Routes
Round the World. Comprising the Author's Route through Japan,
China, Cochin-China, Malasia, Sunda, Java, Torres Straits, Northern
Australia, New South Wales, South Australia, and New Zealand, By
James Kingston ("J, H." of \\\^ Melboume Argus). With Maps
and numerous Illustrations from Photographs. 2 vols., Svo, 145-. each.

Autobiography of Sir G. Gilbert Scott, R.A.^ F.S.A., a^c.
Edited by his Son, G. Gilbert Scott. With an Introduction by the
Dean of Chichester, and a Funeral Sermon, preached in West-
minster Abbey, by the Dean of Westminster. Also, Portrait on
steel from the portrait of the Author by G. RICHMOND, R.A. I vol.,
demy Svo, cloth extra, iSj.

TDAKER {Lieut. -Gen. Valentine, Pasha). See "War in
-^ Bulgaria."

THE BAYARD SERIES,

Edited by the late J. Hain Frisvvell.

Comprising Pleasure Books of Literature produced in the Choicest Style as
Companionable Volumes at Home and Abroad.

" We can hardly imagine better books for boys to read or for men to ponder
over." — Times.

Price IS. 6d. each Volume, complete in itself, flexible cloth extra, gilt edges,
zvith silk H eadbands and Registers.

The Story of the Chevalier Bayard. By M. De Berville.
De Joinville's St. Louis, King of France.

A 2

Sampson Low^ Marston^ ^ Co.^s

The Bayard Series {continued) : —

T/ie Essays of Abraham Cowley ^ including all his Prose Works.

Abdallah ; or the Four Leaves. By Edouard Laboullaye.

Table-Talk and Opinions of Napoleon Buonaparte.

Vathek : An Oriental Romance. By William Beckford.

The King and the Commons. A Selection of Cavalier and
Puritan Songs. Edited by Prof. MoRLEV.

Words of Wellington : Maxims and Opinions of the Great
Duke.

Dr. Johnson^ s Rasselas^ Prince of Abyssinia. With Notes.

Hazlitfs Round Table. With Biographical Introduction.

The Religio Medici^ Hydriotaphia, and the Letter to a Friend,
By Sir Thomas Browne, Knt.

Ballad Poetry of the Affections. By Robert Buchanan.

Coleridge's Christabel, and other Imaginative Poems. With
Preface by Algernon C. Swinburne.

Lord Chesterfield'' s Letters, Sente?ices, and Maxims. Witli
Introduction by the Editor, and Essay on Chesterfield by M. DE Ste. •
Beuve, of the French Academy.

Essays in Mosaic. By Thos. Ballantyne.

My Uncle Toby ; his Story and his Friends. Edited by
P. Fitzgerald.

Reflections ; or, Moral Sentences and Maxims of the Duke de
la Rochefoucauld.

Socrates : Memoirs for English Readers from Xenophon's MemO"
rabilia. By Edw. Levien.

Prince Alberfs Golden Precepts.

A Case containing T.Z Volumes, price 315. 6^. ; or the Case separately, price 3J. ()d.

Beauty and the Beast. An Old Tale retold, with Pictures by
E. V. B. 4to, cloth extra. 10 Illustrations in Colours. \2s. 6d.

Beumers' German Copybooks. In six gradations at 4^. each.

Biart [Lucicji). See "Adventures of a Young Naturalist,"
"My Rambles in the New World," "The Two Friends," " Involun.
tary Voyage."

List of Publications.

Bicke?'stet]Cs Hymnal Companion to Book of Commo7i Prayer
may be had in various styles and bindings from \d. to 2ij. Price
List and Prospectus will be forwarded on application.

BicJzersteth {Rev. E. H., MA.) The Reef and other Parables,

I vol. , square 8vo, with numerous veiy beautiful Engravings, is. 6d.
The Clergyman in his Home. Small post 8vo, \s,

The Master's Ho me- Call ; or, Brief Memorials of

Alice Frances Bickersteth. 20th Thousand. 32mo, cloth gilt, is.

The Master's Will. A Funeral Sermon preached

on the Death of Mrs. S. Gurney Buxton, Sewn, dd. ; cloth gilt, \s.

The Shadow of the Rock. A Selection of Religious

Poetry. i8mo, cloth extra, 2s. 6d.

The Shadoived Home and the Light Beyond. 7th

Edition, crown 8vo, cloth extra, 5^-.
Bida. The Autho?'ized Version of the Four Gospels, with the
whole of the magnificent Etchings on Steel, after drawings by M.
Bida, in 4 vols., appropriately bound in cloth extra, price 3/. 3j-. each.
Also the four volumes in two, bound in the best morocco, by Suttaby,
extra gilt edges, 18/. i8j., half-morocco, 12/. 12s.

" Bida's Illustrations of the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. John have already
received here and elsewhere a full recognition of their great merits." — Tunes.

Biographies of the Great Artists, Illustrated. This Series is
issued in the form of Plandbooks. Each is a Monograph of a Great
Artist, and contains Portraits of the Masters, and as many examples
of their art as can be readily procured. They are Illustrated with from
16 to 20 Full-page Engravings. Cloth, large crown 8vo, 3^. (id. per
Volume.

Titian. Rubens. Tintoret and Veronese.

Rembrandt. Leonardo, Hogarth.

Raphael. Turner. Michelangrelo.

Van Dyck and Hals. The Little Masters. Reynolds.

Holbein. Delaroche & Vernet. Gainsboroug-h.

Figure Painters of Holland.

"A deserving Series, based upon recent German ^\\\>\\cz.\\o\is."— Edinburgh
Jxei'ieiv.

" Most thoroughly and tastefully edited." — Spectator.

Black ( Wm. ) Three Feathers. Small post 8vo, cloth extra, 6s.

Lady Silver dale's Sweetheart, and other Stories, i vol.,

small post Svo, 6s.

Kilmeny : a Novel. Small post Svo, cloth, 6f.

In Silk Attire. 3rd Edition, small post Svo, 6s.

A Daughter of Heth. nth Edition, small post Svo, 6^.

■ ■■■■ .. Sunrise. 15 Monthly Parts, \s. each.

Sampson Lo2v, Marston, 6^ Co.^s

Blackmore {R. D.) Lorna Doom. loth Edition, cr. 8vo, 6^.

Alice Lorraine, i vol., small post 8vo, 6th Edition, ds,

Clara Vaughan. Revised Edition, 6s.

Cradock NowelL New Edition, ds.

C7'ipps the Carrier. 3rd Edition, small post 8vo, ds.

Mary Anerley. 3 vols., 31^. dd.

Erema ; or, My Father's Sin. With 12 Illustrations,

small post 8vo, 6s.

Blossoms from the King's Garden : Sermons for Children. By
the Rev. C. Bosanquet. 2n(l Edition, small post Svo, cloth extra, 6j.

Blue Banner {The); or, The Adventm-es of a Mussulman, a
Christian, and a Pagan, in the time of the Crusades and Mongol
Conquest. Translated from the French of Leon Cahun. With
Seventy-six Wood Engravings. Imperial i6mo, cloth, gilt edp-es,
*]s. 6d. ; plainer binding, 5j-.

Bofs Froissart {The), js. 6d. See "Froissart."
Bra7e Janet: A Story for Girls. By Alice Lee. With
Frontispiece by M. Ellen Edwards. Square Svo, cloth extra, 3^-. 6d.

Brave Men in Action. By S. J. Mackenna. Crown 8vo,
480 pp., cloth, loj. dd.

Brazil: the Amazons, and the Coast. By Herbert H. Smith.
With 115 Full-page and other Illustrations. Demy Svo, 650 pp., 2\s.

Brazil a?id the Brazilians. By J. C. Fletcher and D. P.
Kidder. 9th Edition, Illustrated, Svo, 21s.

Breton Folk : An Artistic Tour in Brittany. By Henry
Blackburn, Author of "Artists and Arabs," "Normandy Pictu-
resque," &c. With 171 Illustrations by Randolph Caldecott.
Imperial Svo, cloth extra, gilt edges, lis.

British Goblins : Welsh Folk-Lore, Fairy Mythology, Legends,
and Traditions. By Wirt Sykes, United States Consul for Wales.
With Illustrations by J. H. Thomas. This account of the Fairy
Mythology and l"olk-Lore of his Principality is, by permission, dedi-
cated to H.R.H. the Prince of Wales. Second Edition. Svo, iSj-.

British Philosophers.

Buckle {Henry Thomas) The Life and Writings of By Alfred

Henry IIuth. With Portrait. 2 vols., demy Svo.
Burnaby {Capt.) 6"^^ " On Horseback."

Burnham Beeches {LLeath, F. G.). With numerous Illustrations
and a Map. _ Crown Svo, cloth, gilt edges, 3.V. 6d. Second Edition,

"Writing with even more than his usual brilliancy, Mr. Heath here gives the
public an interesting monograph of the splendid old trees. , . . This charmin^
httle \,-ork:'—GMe. "^

List of Puhlkations.

Butler ( W. F.) The Great Lone Land ; an Account of the Red
River Expedition, 1869-70. With Illustrations and Map. Fifth and
Cheaper Edition, crown 8vo, cloth extra, ']s. 6d.

The Wild North Land; the Story of a Winter Journey

with Dogs across Northern North America. Demy Svo, cloth, with
numerous Woodcuts and a Map, 4th Edition, iZs. Cr. Svo, 7^-. 6d.
Akini-foo : the LListory of a Failure. Demy Svo, cloth,

2nd Edition, i6j". Also, in crown Svo, 7^-. dd.

r^ADOGAN {Lady A.) Lllust rated Games of Patience,

^-^ Twenty-four Diagrams in Colours, with Descriptive Text. Foolscap
4to, cloth extra, gilt edges, 3rd Edition, \is, 6d.

Caldecott {R). See '' Breton Folk."

Carbon Process {A Manual of). See Liesegang.

Ceramic Art. See Jacquemart.

Changed Cross {The), and other Religious Poems. i6mo, 2s. 6d.

Chant Book Companion to the Book of Common Prayer. Con-
sisting of upwards of 550 Chants for the Daily Psalms and for the
Canticles ; also Kyrie Eleisons, and Music for the Hymns in Holy
Communion, &c. Compiled and Arranged under the Musical Editor-
ship of C. J. Vincent, Mus. Bac. Crown Svo, 2s. dd. ; Organist's
Edition, fcap. 4to, ^s.

Of various Editions of Hymnal Companion, Lists will be forwa7-ded on

application.

Child of the Cavern {The) ; or, Strange Doings Underground.
By Jules Verne. Translated by W. H. G. Kingston. Numerous
Illustrations. .Sq. cr. Svo, gilt edges, 7^. dd. ; cl., plain edges, 5j-.

Child's Play, with 16 Coloured Drawings by E. V. B. Printed
on thick paper, with tints, 'js. 6d.

Neic. By E. V. 13. Similar to the above. See New.

Children's Lives and LLow to Preserve Them ; or, The Nursery
Handbook, By W. LOMAS, M, D. Crown Svo, cloth, <^s.

Children's Magazine. Illustrated. See St. Nicholas.

Choice Editions of Choice Books. 2s. 6d. each, Illustrated by
C. W. Cope, R.A., T. Creswick, R.A., E. Duncan, Birket
Foster, J. C. Horsley, A.R.A., G. Hicks, R. Redgrave, R.A.,
C. Sto^^ehouse, F. Tayler, G. Thomas, H. J. Townshend,
E. H. Wehnert, Harrison Weir, &c.

Bloomfield's Farmer's Boy.
Campbell's Pleasures of Hope.
Coleridge's Ancient Mariner.
Goldsmith's Deserted Village.
Goldsmith's Vicar of Wakefield
Gray's Elegy in a Churchyard.
Keat's Eve of St. Agnes

Milton's L' Allegro.

Poetry of Nature. Harrison Weir.

Rogers' (Sam.) Pleasures of Memory.

Shakespeare's Songs and Sonnets.

Tennyson's May Queen.

Elizabethan Poets.

Wordsworth's Pastoral Poems.

" Such works are a glorious beatification for a poet." — Atkenaum.

Sampson Low^ Marston, 6^ Co*s

Christ in Song, By Dr. Philip Schaff. A New Edition,

Revised, cloth, gilt edges, 6j.
Cohbett ( Williani). A Biography. By Edward Smith. 2

vols., crown 8vo, 25^.

Comedy {The) of Europe^ i860 — 1890. A retrospective and
prospective Sketch. Crown 8vo, (>s.

Conflict of ChristiaJiity with Heathe7iism. By Dr. Gerhard
Uhlhorn. Edited and Translated from the Third German Edition
by G. C. Smyth and C. J. H. Ropes. Svo, cloth extra, \os. 6d.

Contifiental Tour of Eight Days for Forty-four Shillings. By
a Journey-man. i2mo, \s.

"The book is simply delightful." — Spectator.

Corea {The). See "Forbidden Land."

Covert Side Sketches: Thoughts on Hu7iting, with Different
Packs in Different Countries. By J. Nevitt Fitt ( H.H.of the Sporting
Gazette, late of the Field). 2nd Edition. Crown Svo, cloth, \os. dd.

Crade-La?id of Arts and Creeds ; or^ Nothing New under the
Sun. By Charles J. Stone, Barrister-at-law, and late Advocate,
High Courts, Bombay, Svo, pp. 420, cloth, 14^.

Cripps the Carrier. 3rd Edition, ds. See Blackmore.

Cruise of H.M.S. " Challefiger'' {The). By W. J. J. Spry, R.N.
With Route Map and many Illustrations. 6th Edition, demy Svo, cloth,
iSj-. Cheap Edition, crown Svo, some of the Illustrations, 7j. 6d.

Curious Adventures of a Field Cricket. By Dr. Ernest
Candeze. Translated by N. D'Anvers. With numerous fine
Illustrations. Crown Svo, cloth extra, gilt edges, 'js. 6d.

T^ANA {R. H) Two Years before the Mast and Twenty -Four
-^-^ years After. Revised Edition with Notes, 1 2mo, 6j.
Daughter {A) of Heth. By W. Black. Crown 8vo, ds.
Day of My Life {A) ; or, Every Day Experiences at Eton.
By an Eton Boy, Author of "About Some Fellows." l6mo, cloth
extra, 2s. 6d. 6th Thousand.

Day out of the Life of a Little Maiden {A) : Six Studies from
Life. By Sherer and Engler. Large 4to, in portfolio, '^s.

Diane. By Mrs. Macquoid. Crown Svo, ds.

Dick^ Cheveley : his Fortunes and Misfortunes. By W. H. G.
Kingston. 350 pp., square i6mo, and 22 full-page Illustrations.
Cloth, gilt edges, ^s. 6d.

Dick Sands, the Boy Captain. By Jules Verne. With
nearly 100 Illustrations, cloth extra, gilt edges, loj-. 6d.

List of Puhlicattons,

Dodge {Mrs, M.) Bans B tinker; or, the Silver Skates. An
entirely New Edition, with 59 Full-page and other Woodcuts.
Square cro^vn 8vo, cloth extra, 5^-. ; Text only, paper, is.

Dogs of Assize. A Legal Sketch-Book in Black and White.
Containing 6Drawings by Walter J. Allen. Folio, in wrapper, 6s. Sd.

JpiGHT Cousins. See Alcott.

Eldmuir: An Art-Story of Scottish Home-Life, Scetiery^ and
Incident. By Jacob Thompson, Jun. Illustrated with Engravings
after Paintings of Jacob Thompson. With an Introductory Notice
by Llewellynn Jewitt, F.S.A,, &c. Demy 8vo, cloth extra, 14^.

Elinor Dry den. By Mrs. Macquoid. Crown 8vo, ds.

Embroidery {Handbook of). By L. Higgin. Edited by Lady
Marian Alford, and published by authority of the Royal School of
Art Needlework. With 16 page Illustrations, Designs for Borders,
&c. Crown 8vo, 5^.

English Catalogue of Books {The). Published during 1863 to
1871 inclusive, comprising also important American Publications. 30J-,
*#* Of the previous Volume, 1835 to 1862, very few remain on
sale ; as also of the Index Volume, 1837 to 1857.

■ Supplements, 1863, 1864, 1865, 35. 6d. each; 1866

to 1880, ^s. each.

English Writers, Chapters for Self-Improvement in English
Literature. I'y the Author of "The Gentle Life," 6j-. ; smaller
edition, zs. 6d.

English Philosophers. A Series of Volumes containing short
biographies of the most celebrated English Philosophers, designed to
direct the reader to the sources of more detailed and extensive criticism
than the size and nature of the books in this Series would permit.
Though not issued in chronological order, the series will, when
complete, constitute a comprehensive history of English Philosophy.
Two Volumes will be issued simultaneously at brief intervals, in square
l6mo, price 2s. 6d.

The following are already arranged : —
Bacon. Professor Fowler, Professor of Logic in Oxford.
Berkeley. Professor T. H. Green, Professor of Moral Philosophy,

Oxford.
Hamilton. Professor Monk, Professor of Moral Philosophy, Dublin.
J. S. Mill. Miss Helen Taylor, Editor of "The Works of

Buckle," &c.
Mansel. Rev. J. H. HUCKIN, D.D., Head Master of Repton.
Adam Smith. Mr. J. A. Farrer, M.A., Author of "Primitive

Manners and Customs."

10 Samj>soji Low, Marston. 6^ Co.^s

English Philosophers^ continued : —

Hobbes. Mr. A. H. Gosset, B.A., Fellow of New College, Oxford.
Bentham. Mr. G. E. Buckle, M.A., Fellow of All Souls', Oxford.
Austin. Mr. Harry Johnson, B.A., late Scholar of Queen's

College, Oxford.
Hartley. "^ Mr. E. S. BowEN, B. A., late Scholar of New College,
James Mill. 3 Oxford.

Shaftesbury. ) ^^^^^^^^^ FoWLER.
Hutcheson. )

Eixhomenon ; or, The Republic of Mateiialism. Small post

8vo, cloth, 5^.
Erema ; or, My Father's Sin. See Blackmore.

Eton. See " Day of my Life," " Out of School," " About Some

Fellows."
Evans (C.) Over the Hills and Far Away. By C. Evans.

One Volume, crown 8yo, cloth extra, igj-, ^d.

A Strange F7'iendship. Crown Svo, cloth, ^s.

rpAMILY Prayers for Working Men. By the Author of
■^ " Steps to the Throne of Grace." With an Introduction by the

Rev. E. H. BiCKERSTETH, M.A. Cloth, \s. ; sewed, (id.

P-'etn Paradise {The): A Plea for the Cultuj'e of Ferns. By F. G.
Heath. New Edition, entirely Rewritten, Illustrated with Eighteen
full-page, numerous other Woodcuts, including 8 Plates of Ferns and
Four Photographs, large post Svo, cloth, gilt edges, \2s. 6d. Sixth
Edition. In 12 Parts, sewn, is. each.

" This charming Volume will not only enchant the Fern-lover, but will also
please and instruct the general render."— S/>ccfaior.

Fern World {The). By F. G. Heath. Illustrated by Twelve
Coloured Plates, giving complete Figures (Sixty-four in all) of every
Species of British Fern, printed from Nature ; by several full-page
Engravings. Cloth, gilt, 6th Edition, \2s. 6d. In 12 parts, is. each.

" ]\Tr. Heath has really given us good, well-written descriptions of our native
Ferns, with indications of their habitats, the conditions under which they grow
naturally, and under which they may be cultivated." — Athetiaeum.

Few {A) Hints on Proving Wills. Enlarged Edition, is.

First Steps in Conveisational French Grammar. By F. Julien.
Being an Introduction to " Petites Legons de Conversation et de
Grammuire," by the same Author. Fcap. Svo, 128 pp., I J".

Five Yeaj's in Mi?inesota. By Maurice Farrar, M.A.

Crown Svo, cloth extra, 6s.
Flooding of the Sahara {The). See Mackenzie.

Food for the People ; or. Lentils and other Vegetable Cookery,
By E. E. Orlebar. Third Thousand. Small post Svo, boards, \s.

List of Publications. 1 1

A Fools Errand. By One of the Fools. Crown 8vo, cloth

extra, ^s.

Footsteps of the Master. See Stowe (Mrs. Beecher).

Forbidden Land {A) : Voyaf^es to the Corea. By G. Oppert.
Numerous Illustrations and JNIaps. Demy 8vo, cloth extra, 2\s.

Four Lectures on Electric Induction. Delivered at the Royal
Institution, 1878-9. I>y J. E. H. Gordon, B.A. Cantab. With
numerous Illustrations. Cloth limp, square i6mo, 3^.

Foreign Countries and the British Colonies. Edited by F. S.
Pulling, M.A., Lecturer at Queen's College, Oxford, and formerly
Professor at the Yorkshire College, Leeds. A Series of small Volumes
descriptive of the principal Countries of the World by well-known
Authors, each Country being treated of by a Writer who from
Personal Knowledge is qualified to speak with authority on the Subject.
The Volumes will average 180 crown 8vo pages, will contain Maps,
and, in some cases, a few typical Illustrations.

The following Volumes are in preparation : —

Canada.

Sweden and Norway.
The West Indies.
New Zealand.

Franc {Maude Jeane). The following form one Series, small

post 8vo, in uniform cloth bindings : —

Emily's Choice, ^s.

Hall's Vineyard, a^s.

John's Wife : a Story of Life in South Australia. 4^,

Marian ; or, the Light of Some One's Home, ^s,

Silken Cords and Iron Fetters. OfS,

Vermont Vale. ^s.

Minnie's Missioii. \s,

Little Mercy. 5^.

Denmark and Iceland.

Russia

Greece.

Persia.

Switzerland.

Japan.

Austria.

Peru.

— Beatrice Melton, ^s.

Friends and Foes in the Transkei : An Englishwoman's Experi-
ences during the Cape Frontier War of 1S77-8. By Helen M.
Prichard. Crown Svo, cloth, loj. dd.

Froissart {IVie Boy's). Selected from the Chronicles of Eng-
land, P' ranee, Spain, &c. By Sidney Lanier. The Volume will
be fully Illustrated. Crown Svo, cloth, 7^. (xl.

Funny Foreigners and Eccentric Englishmen. 16 coloured
comic Illustrations for Children. Fcap. folio, coloured wrapper, 4^-.

12 Sampson LoWy Marsion^ 6r» Go's

r^ AMES of Patience, ^^^ Cadogan.

Gentle Life (Queen Edition). 2 vols, in i, small 4to, \qs. dd.

THE GENTLE LIFE SERIES.

Frice 6^. each ; or in calf extra, price loj. dd. ; Smaller Edition, cloth

extra, 2J-. dd.
A Reprint (with the exception of *' Familiar Words" and "Other
People's Windows") has been issued in very neat limp cloth bindings
at 2s. 6d. each.
T/ie Gent/e Life, Essays in aid of the Formation of Character
of Gentlemen and Gentlewomen. 21st Edition.

"Deserves to be printed in letters of gold, and circulated in every house." —
Chambers' yov.riial.

About in the World, Essays by Author of " The Gentle Life."

"It is not easy to open it at any page without finding some handy idea."— il/i^rw-
ing Post.

Like unto Christ. A New Translation of Thomas a Kempis'
** De Imitatione Christi." 2nd Edition.

" Could not be presented in a more exquisite form, for a more sightly volume was
never seen." — Illustrated LoidoH News.

Familiar Words. An Index Verborum, or Quotation Hand-
book, Affording an immediate Reference to Phrases and Sentences
that have become embedded in the English language. 3rd and
enlarged Edition. 6s.

"The most extensive dictionary of quotation we have met with," — Notes and
Queries.

Essays by Montaigne. Edited and Annotated by the Author
of "The Gentle Life," With Portrait. 2nd Edition.

" We should be glad if any words of ours could help to bespeak a large circula-
tion for this handsome attractive book." — I Ihtstrated Ti7nes.

The Coiifitess of Pembroke's Arcadia. Written by Sir Philip
Sidney. Edited with Notes by Author of ** The Gentle Life." "js. 6d.
"All the best things are retained intact in Mr. Friswell's edition."— Exa7fii tier.

The Gentle Life. 2nd Series, 8th Edition.

"There is not a single thought in the volume that does not contribute in some
measure to the formation of a true gentleman." — Daily News.

The Silent LLour: Essays, Original and Selected. By the
Autlior of "The Gentle Life," 3rd Edition,
"All who possess 'The Gentle Life ' should own this volume." — Standard.

Half-Length Portraits, Short Studies of Notable Persons.

By J. Hain Friswell. Small post 8vo, cloth extra, 6s.
Essays on English Writers, for the Self-improvement of

Students in English Literature.

"To all who have neglected to read and study their native literature we would

certainly suggest the volume before us as a fitting introduction." — Examiner.

List of Publications. 1 3

The Gentle Life Series {cofitinued) : —

Other People's Windows. By J. Hain Friswell. 3rd Edition.

"The chapters are so lively in themselves, so mingled with shrewd views of
human nature, so full of illustrative anecdotes, that the reader cannot fail to be
amused. " — Mor7iing Post.

A Man's Thoughts. By J. Hain Friswell.

German Primer. Being an Introduction to First Steps in

German. By M. T. Preu. 2s. 6d.
Getting On in the World ; or, LLints on Success in Life. By

W. Mathews, LL.D. Small post Svo, cloth, 2.s. 6d. ; gilt edges, y. 6d.
Gilpin's Forest Scenery. Edited by F. G. Heath. Large

post Svo, with mimevous Illustrations. Uniform with "The Fern

World" and "Our Woodland Trees." \2s. 6d.

"Those who know Mr. Heath's Volumes on Ferns, as well as his 'Woodland

Trees,' and his little work on ' Burnhain Beeches,' will understand the enthusiasm

with which he has executed his task. . . . The Volume deserves to be a favourite

in the boudoir as well as in the library." — Saturday Review.

Gordon {/. E. LL.). See " Four Lectures on Electric Induc-
tion," " Physical Treatise on Electricity," &c.

Gouffe. The Royal Cookery Book. By Jules Gouffe ; trans-
lated and adapted for English use by Alphonse GoUFFfi, Head
Pastrycook to her Majesty the Queen. Illustrated with large plates
printed in colours. 1 61 Woodcuts, Svo, cloth extra, gilt edges, 2/. 2J.

Domestic Edition, half-bound, 10^. 6^.

" By far the ablest and most complete work on cookery that has eve been sub-
mitted to the gastronomical world." — Fall MaU Gazette.

Gouraud {Mdlle.) Four Gold Pieces. Numerous Illustrations.

Small post Svo, cloth, 2s. 6d. See also Rose Library.
Government of M. Thiers. By Jules Simon. Translated from

the French, 2 vols., demy Svo, cloth extra, 32j-.

Great Artists. See Biographies.

Greek Grammar. See Waller.

Guizofs Llistory of France. Translated by Robert Black.
Super-royal Svo, very numerous Full-page and other Illustrations. In
5 vols., cloth extra, gilt, each 24J.

" It supplies a want which has long been felt, and ought to be in the hands of all
students of history." — Times.

Masson's School Edition. The

History of France from the Earliest Times to the Outbreak of the
Revolution; abridged from the Translation by Robert Black, M.A.,
with Chronological Index, Historical and Genealogical Tables, &c.
By Professor Gustave Masson, B.A., Assistant Master at Harrow
School. With 24 full-page Portraits, and many other Illustrations.
I vol., demy Svo, 600 pp., cloth extra, \Qs. 6d.

14 Sampson Low, Marston, 6^ Co.'s

Guizofs History of England. In 3 vols, of about 500 pp. each,

containini^ 60 to 70 Full-page and other Illustrations, cloth extra, gilt,

24J". each.

"For luxury of typography, plainness of print, and beauty of illustration, these
volumes, of which but one has as yet appeared in English, will hold their own
against any production of an age so luxurious as our own in everything, typography
not excepted." — Times.

Guy on {Aide.) Life. By Upham. 6th Edition, crown 8vo, ds.

JLIANDBOOK to the Charities of London. See Low's.

of Embroidery ; which see.

to the Principal Schools of England. See Practical.

Half-Hours of Blind Alan's Holiday ; or, Summer and Winter
Sketches in Black & White. By W. W. Fenn. 2 vols., cr. 8vo, 24^.

Half Length Po7'traits. Short Studies of Notable Persons.
By J. Hain Friswell. Small post 8vo, ds. ; Smaller Edition, is. 6d.

Hall {JV. W.) Ho7V to Live Long; or, 1408 Health Maxims,
Physical, Mental, and Moral. By W. W. Hall, A.M., M.D.
Small post 8vo, cloth, 2s. Second Edition.

Ha7is B r inker ', or, the Silver Skates. See Dodge.

Have L a Vote ? A Handy Book for the Use of the People,

on the Qualifications conferring the Right of Voting at County and
Borough Parliamentary Elections. With Forms and Notes. By
T, H. Lewis, B.A., LL.B. Paper, 6^.

Heart of Africa. Three Years' Travels and Adventures in the
Unexplored Regions of Central Africa, from 1868 to 1871. By Dr.
Georg Schweinfurth. Numerous Illustrations, and large Map.
2 vols., crown 8vo, cloth, 15^-.

Heath {^Francis George). See "Fern World," "Fern Paradise,"
"Our Woodland Trees," "Trees and Ferns;" "Gilpin's Forest
Scenery," " Burnham Beeches," "Sylvan Spring," &c.

LLeber's {Bishop) Illustrated Edition of Llynms. With upwards
of 100 beautiful Engravings. Small 4to, handsomely bound, 7^-. 6d.
Morocco, l8x. 6d. and2ij-. An entirely New Edition.

Hector Servadac. ^S^^ Verne. 10s. 6d. and ^s.

Heir of Kilfinnan (The). New Story by W. H. G. Kingston,
Author of " Snoe Shoes and Canoes," "With Axe and Rifle," &c.
With Illustrations. Cloth, gilt edges, ^s. 6d.

History and Handbook of Photography. Translated from the
French of Gaston Tissandier. Edited by J. Thomson. Imperial
i6mo, over 300 pages, 70 Woodcuts, and Specimens of Prints by the
best Permanent Processes. Second Edition, with an Appendix by
the late Mr. Henry Fox Talbot. Cloth extra, 6s.

List of Publica tions. i e

History of a Crime {The) ; Depositioji of an Eye-tvitjiess. By
Victor Hucjo. 4 vols., crown 8vo, 42^. Cheap Edition, i vol., 6x.

Engiand. See GuizoT.

France. See GuizoT.

of Russia, ee Ram baud.

Me7'cJiant Shipping. See Lindsay.

United States. See Bryant.

' Ireland. Standish O'Grady. Vols. I. and II., 7^. 6^.

each.

Amei'ican Literature. By j\I. C. Tyler. Vols. I.

and II., 2 vols, 8vo, 24J.
History a?id Principles of Weaving by Hand and by Poiver. With
several hundred Illustrations. By Alfred Barlow. Royal 8vo,
cloth extra, i/. 5^-. Second Edition.

Hitherto. By the Author of" The Gayworthys." Ne^v Edition,

cloth extra, 3J-. dd. Also, in Rose Library, 2 vols., 2s.
Home oftheEddas. By C. G. Lock. Demy 8vo, cloth, ids.
How to Live Long. See Hall.

Hotv to get Strong and how to Stay so. By William Blaikie.
A Manual of Rational, Physical, Gymnastic, and other Exercises.
With Illustrations, small post 8vo, 5^-.
"Worthy of every one's attention, whether old or yonnzr —Graphic.

Hugo ( Victor) ''Ninety-Three:' Illustrated. Crown 8vo, 6j.

Toilers of the Sea. Crown 8vo. Illustrated, ds. ; fancy

boards, 2s. ; cloth, 2s. 6d. ; On large paper with all the original
Illustrations, los. 6d.

. See " History of a Crmie."

Hmdred Greatest Men {The). 8 vols., containing 15 to 20

Portraits each, 2is. each. See below.

"Messrs. Sampson Low & Co. are about to issue an important ' International'
work, entitled, 'THE HUNDRED GREATEST MEN.' being the Lives and
Portraits of the loo Greatest Men of History, divided into Eight Classes, each Class
to form a Monthly Quarto Volume. The Introductions to the volumes are to be
written by recognized authorities on the different subjects, the English contributors
Vjeing Dean Stanley, Mr. Matthew Arnold, Mr. Frouoe, and Professor Max
MuLLER: in Germany, Professor Helmholtz ; in PVance, MM. Taine and
Renan ; and in America, Mr. Emerson. The Portraits are to be Reproductions
from fine and rare Steel Engravings." — Academy.

Hygiene and Public Health {A Treatise ofi). Edited by A. H.
Buck, M.D. Illustrated by numerous Wood Engravings. In 2
royal 8vo vols., cloth, one guinea each.

Hymnal Cofnpafiioji to Book of Common Prayer. See

BiCKERSTETH.

1 6 Sainpson Lo7U, Marston, c^ Co*s

ILLUSTRATED Text-Books of Art-Education. A Series
•*■ of Monthly Volumes preparing for publication. Edited by Edward
J. POYNTER, R. A., Director for Art, Science and Art Department.

The first Volumes^ large croivn Svo, cloth, 3^. dd. each^ tvill be issued in the
following divisions : —
PAINTING.
Classic and Italian. | French, and Spanish.

Qerman, Flemish, and Dutch. | Eng-lish and American.

ARCHITECTURE.

Classic and Early Christian. | Gothic, Renaissance, & Modern.

SCULPTURE.

Classic and Oriental. | Benaissance and Modern.

ORNAMENT.

Decoration in Colour. | Architectural Ornament.

Illustratio7is of China a?td its People. By J. Thompson
F.R.G. S. Four Volumes, imperial 4to, each 3/. 3^-.

Tit my Indian Garden. By Phil Robinson. With a Preface
by Edwin Arnold, M. A., C.S.L, &c. Crown Svo, limp cloth, 3^-. dd.

Involuntary Voyage (An). Showing how a Frenchman who
abhorred the Sea was most unwillingly and by a series of accidents
driven round the World. Numerous Illustrations. Square crown
Svo, cloth extra, Js. 6d.

Irish Bar. Comprising Anecdotes, Bon-Mots, and Bio-
graphical Sketches of the Bench and Bar of Ireland. By J. Roderick
O'Flanagan, Barrister-at-Law. Crown Svo, \2s. Second Edition.

^ACK andym. By Miss Alcott. Small post Svo, cloth,
J gilt edges, 5^.

facquemart (A.) History of the Ceramic Art. By Albert
Jacquemart. With 200 Woodcuts, 12 Steel-plate Engravings, and
1000 Marks and Monograms. Translated by Mrs. BuRY Palliser.
Super-royal Svo, cloth extra, gilt edges, 28^-.

linuny's Cruise in the Pinafore. See Alcott.

J^AFIRLAND : A Ten Mo7iths' Campaign. By Frank N.
"*- ^ Streatfield, Resident Magistrate in Kaffraria, and Commandant

of Native Levies during the Kaffir War of 1S78. Crown Svo, cloth

extra, ^s. 6d.

Keble Autogi-aph Birthday Book {The). Containing on each left-
hand page the date and a selected verse from Keble's hymns.
Imperial Svo, with 12 Floral Chromos, ornamental binding, gilt edges,
15J.

List of PuhUcaiions. 1 7

Khedive's Egypt {The); or, The old House of Bondage under
New Masters. By Edwin de Leon. Illustrated. Demy 8vo, 8j. 6cL

King's Rifle {The): From the Atlantic to the Indian Ocean;
Across Unknown Countries ; Discovery of the Great Zambesi Affluents,
&c. By Major Serpa Pinto. With 24 full-page and about 100
smaller Illustrations, 13 small Maps, and i large one. Demy 8vo.

Kingston {IV, If. G.). See ''Snow-Shoes."

Child of the Cavern.

Two Supercargoes.

With Axe and Rifle.

Begufn's Fortune.

Heir of Kilflnnan,

Dick Cheveley.

T A DY Silverdalis Sweetheart. 6^. ^S^^ Black.

Lenten Meditations, In Two Series, each complete in itself.
By the Rev. Claude Bosanquet, Author of "Blossoms from the
King's Garden." i6mo, cloth. First Series, is.6d. ; Second Series, 2s.

Lentils, See " Food for the People."

Liesegang {Dr. Paul E.) A Manual of the Carbon Process of
Photography. Demy Svo, half-bound, with Illustrations, 4^.

Life and Letters of tJie Honourable Charles Sumner {The).
2 vols., royal Svo, cloth. Second Edition, 36J.

Lindsay ( IV. S.) History of Merchant Shipping and Ancient
Commerce. Over 150 Illustrations, Maps and Charts. In 4 vols.,
demy Svo, cloth extra. Vols. I and 2, 2ij-. ; vols. 3 and 4, 245-. each.

LionJacJz: a Stoiy of Perilous Adventures amongst Wild Me7i
and Beasts. Showing how Menageries are made. By P. T. Barnum.
With Illustrations. Crown Svo, clolh extra, price ds.

Little King ; or,, tJie Taming of a Young Russian Count, Ly
S. Bi.ANDY. 64 Illustrations. Crown Svo, gilt edges, ^s, 6d, ; plainer
binding, 5^.

Little Mercy; or, For Better for Worse. By Maude Jeanne
Franc, Author of "Manan,"" "Vermont Vale," &c., &c. Small
post Svo, cloth extra, 4^. Second Edition.

Long {Col, C. C/iaille) Central Africa, Naked Truths of
Naked People : an Account of Expeditions to Lake Victoria Nyanza
and the Mabraka Niam-Niam. Demy Svo, numerous Illustrations, \%$.

Lost Sir Massingberd. New Edition, crown Svo, boards, coloured
wrapper, 2s,

1 8 Sampson Low, Marston, &> Co.^s

Loiu^s German Series —

1. The Illustrated G-erman Primer. Being the easiest introduction

to the study of German for all beginners, is.

2. The Children's own German Book. A Selection of Amusing

and Instructive Stories in Prose. Edited by Dr. A. L. Meissner.
Small post 8vo, cloth, is. 6d.

3. The First German Reader, for Children from Ten to

Fourteen. Edited by Dr. A. L. Meissner. Small post 8vo,
cloth, is. 6d.

4. The Second German Reader. Edited by Dr. A. L. Meissner.

Small post 8vo, cloth, is. 6d.

Buchheivi^ s Deutsche Prosa. Two Volumes, sold separately : —

5. Schiller's Prosa. Containing Selections from the Prose Works

of Schiller, with Notes for English Students, By Dr.' Buchheim,
Small post Svo, 2s. 6d.

6. Goethe's Prosa. Selections from the Prose Works of Goethe,

with Notes for English Students. By Dr. Buchheim. Small
post Svo, 3J-. 6d,

Low's Jjiternational Series of Toy Books. 6d. each ; or
Mounted on Linen, is.

1. Little Pred and his Fiddle, from Asbjornsen's "Norwegian

Fairy Tales."

2. The Lad and the North Wind, ditto.

3. The Pancake, ditto.

Lota's Standard Libjnry of Travel and Adventio'c. Crown Svo,
bound uniformly in cloth extra, price ']s. 6d.

1. The Great Lone Land. By Major W. F. Butler, C.B.

2. The Wild North Land. By Major W^ F. BuTLER, C.B.

3. How I found Living-stone. By PI. M. Stanley.

4. The Threshold of the Unknown Region. By C. R. Mark-

HAM. (4th Edition, with Additional Chapters, los. 6d.)

5. A Whaling- Cruise to BaflB.n's Bay and the Gulf of Boothia.

By A. H. Markham.

6. Campaigrning- on the Oxus. By J. A. MacGahan.

7. Akim-foo : the History of a Failure. By Major W. F.

Butler, C.B.

8. Ocean to Ocean. By the Rev. George M. Grant. With

Illustrations.

9. Cruise of the Challengrer. By W. J. J. Spry, R.N.

10. Schweinfurth's Heart of Africa. 2 vols., i^s.

11. Through the Dark Continent. By H. M. Stanley, i vol.,

I2J-. 6d.

List of Publications. 19

Loiv's Standard Novels. Crown 8vo, 65. each, cloth extra.

My Lady Greensleeves. By Helen Mathers, Authoress of
" Comiu' through tlie Rye," "Cherry Ripe," &c.

Three Feathers. By William Black.

A Daug-hter of Heth. 13th Edition. By W. BLACK. With
Frontispiece by F. Walker, A.R.A.

Kilmeny. A Novel. By W. BLACK.

In Silk Attire. By W. Black.

Lady Silverdale's Sweetheart. By W. Black. ^

History of a Crime : The Story of the Coup d'Etat. By Victor
Hugo.

Alice Lorraine. By R. D. Blackmore.

Lorna Doone. By R. D. Blackmore. 8th Edition.

Cradock Nowell. By R. D. BLACKMORE.

Clara Vaughan. By R. D. BLACKMORE.

Cripps the Carrier. By R. D. BLACKMORE.

Erema ; or My Father's Sin. By R. D. Blackmore.

Innocent. By Mrs. Oliphant. Eight Ilkistrations.

Work. A Story of Experience. By Louisa M. Alcott. Ilkistra-
tions. See also Rose Library.

The Afg-han Knife. By R. A. Stern dale. Author of " Seonee."

A French Heiress in her own Chateau. By the author of " One
Only," "Constantia," cS:c. Six Illustrations.

Ninety-Three. By Victor Hugo. Numerous Illustrations.

My Wife and I. By Mrs. Beecher Stowe.

Wreck of the Grosvenor. By W. Clark Russelu

Elinor Dryden. By Mrs. MacQUOID.

Diane. By Mrs. Macquoid.

Poganuc People, Their Loves and Lives. By Mrs. Beecher
Stowe.

A Golden Sorrow. By Mrs. Cashel Hoey.

Low's Handbook to the Charities of London. Edited and
revised to date by C. Mackeson, F.S.S., Editoi of " A Guide 10 the
Churches of London and its Suburbs," &c. is.

Ji/fACGAHAN (/. A.) Campaigning on the Oxus, and the
-^'^ Fall of Khiva. With Map and numerous Illustrations, 4th Edition,

small post 8vo, cloth extra, 'Js. 6d.
Macgregor {John) ''Rob Roy'' on the Baltic. 3rd Edition,

small post Svo, 7.s. 6d.
A Thousand Miles in the ''Rob Roy'' Canoe, nth

Edition, small post Svo, 2s. Oct.

20 Sampson Low, Marston, 6^ Go's

Macgregor {Jolm) Description of the ''Rob Rof Canoe, with
Plans, &c., IS.

The Voyage Alone in the Yawl ''Rob Roy.'' New

Edition, thoroughly revised, with additions, small post 8vo, S^. ;
boards, 2s. 6d.

Mackenzie (V). The Flooding of the Sahara. By Donald
Mackenzie. 8vo, cloth extra, with Illustrations, lo^. 6^.

Macqtwid{Mrs.) Elinor Dry den. Crown 8vo, cloth, 6s.

Diane. Crown 8vo, 6s.

Magazine {Illustrated) for Young People. See " St. Nicholas."

Markhani {C. R.) The Threshold of the Unknown Region.
Crown 8vo, with Four Maps, 4th Edition. Cloth extra, \os. 6d.

Maury {Co?nmander) Physical Geography of the Sea, and its
Meteorology. Being a Reconstruction and Enlargement of his former
Work, with Charts and Diagrams. New Edition, crown 8vo, 6s.

Memoirs of Madame de Remusat, 1802— 1808. By her Grand-
son, M. Paul de Remusat, Senator. Translated by Mrs. Cashel
HoEY and and Mr. John Lillie. 4th Edition, cloth extra. This
work was Avritten by Madame de Remusat during the time she
was living on the most intimate terms with the Empress Josephine,
and is full of revelations respecting the private life of Bonaparte, and
of men and politics of the first years of the century. Revelations
which have already created a great sensation in Paris. 8vo, 2 vols. 32.?.

Men of Mark: a Gallery of Contemporary Portraits of the most
Eminent Men of the Day taken from Life, especially for this publica-
tion, price IJ-. 6d. monthly. Vols. I., II., III., and IV,, handsomely
bound, cloth, gilt edges, 25^. each.

Michael Strogoff. \os. 6d. and ^s. 6*^^ Verne.

Mitford {Miss). See " Our Village."

Montaigne's Essays. See " Gentle Life Series."

My Brother Jack ; or, The Story of Whatd'yecallem. Written
by Himself. From the French of Alphonse Daudet. Illustrated
by P. PniLirpoTEAUX. Imperial i6mo, cloth extra, gilt edges, "js. 6d. ;
plainer binding, $s.

My Lady Greensleeves. By Helen Mathers, Authoress of
♦'Comin' through the Rye," "Cherry Ripe," &c. I vol. edition,
crown Svo, cloth, ds.

List of Publications. 2 1

My Rambles in the New JVorld. By Lucien Biart, Author of
"The Adventures of a Young Naturalist." Numerous full-page
Illustrations. Crown 8vo, cloth extra, gilt edges, 7^. 6cf. ; plainer
binding, 5^-.

Mysterious Island. By Jules Verne. 3 vols., imperial i6mo.
150 Illustrations, cloth gilt. 3.r. dd. each ; elaborately bound, gilt
edges, 7^-. dd. each. Cheap Edition, with some of the Illustrations,
cloth, gilt, 2s. ; paper, \s. each.

ATARES (Sir G. S., K.C.B) Narrative of a Voyage to the
•^ ^ Polar Sea during 1S75-76, in II. M.'s Ships "Alert" and "Discovery."
By Captain Sir G. S. Nares, R.N., K.C.B., F.R.S. Published by per-
mission of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty. With Notes on
the Natural History, edited by H. W. Feilden, F.G.S., C.M.Z.S.,
F.R.G. S., Naturalist to the Expedition. Two Volumes, demySvo, M'ith
numerous Woodcut Illustrations, Photographs, &c. 4th Edition, 2/. 2s.

National Music of the World. By the late Henry F. Chor-
LEY. Edited by II. G. Hewlett. Crown 8vo, cloth, %s. 6d.

" What I have to offer are not a few impressions, scrambled together in the haste
of the moment, but arc the result of many years of comparison and experience." — •
Ftotii the Ajithor's '^ Pre hide.'"

New Child s Play (A). Sixteen Drawings by E. V. B. Beauti-
fully printed in colours, 4to, cloth extra, 12s. 6d.

New Guinea {A Few MontJis in). By Octavius C. Stone,
F. R.G.S. With numerous Illustrations from the Author's own
Drawings, Crown 8vo, cloth, 12s.

New Ireland. By A. M. Sullivan, M.P. for Louth. 2 vols.,
demy 8vo, 30j'. Cheaper Edition, i vol., crown 8vo, Sj. dd.

New Novels. Crown 8vo, cloth, \os. Gd. per vol. : —

Mary Anerley. By R. D. Blackmore, Author of " Lorna Doone,"

&c. 3 vols.
The Sisters. By G. Ebers, Author of "An Egyptian Princess."

2 vols., i6mo, 2s. each.
Countess Dapline. By Rita, Authoress of ".Vivienne " and "Like

Dian's Kiss." 3 vols.
Sunrise. By W. Black. In 15 Monthly Parts, is. each.
Wait a Year. By Harriet Bowra, Authoress of "A Young

Wife's Story." 3 vols.
Sarah de Berangrer. By Jean Ingelow. 3 vols.
The Braes of Yarrow. By C. Gibbon. 3 vols.
Elaine's Story. By Maud Sheridan. 2 vols.
Prince Fortune and His Friends. 3 vols.

2 2 Sampson Low^ Marston, 6^ Go's

Noble Words and Noble Deeds. Translated from the French of

E. MULLER, by Dora Leigh. Containing many Full-page Illustra-
tions by Philippoteaux. Square imperial i6mo, cloth extra, 7^. (xL

North American Review {The), Monthly, price 2S. Gd.

Notes on Fish and Fishing. By the Rev. J. J. Manley, M.A.
With Illustrations, crown 8vo, cloth extra, leatherette binding, loj-. 6d.

Nursery Playmates {Prince of ). 217 Coloured pictures for
Children by eminent Artists. Folio, in coloured boards, 6s.

niBERAMMERGAU Passion Play. See "Art in the

^ Mountains."

Ocean to Ocean: Sandford Flemings Expedition through
Canada in 1872. By the Rev. George M. Grant. With Illustra-
tions. Revised and enlarged Edition, crown Svo, cloth, 7^. (>d.

Old-Fashioned Girl. See Alcott.

Oliphant {Mrs) Innocent. A Tale of Modern Life. By Mrs.
Oliphant, Author of "The Chronicles of Carlingford," &c., &c.
With Eight Full-page Illustrations, small post Svo, cloth extra, 6s.

On Horseback through Asia Minor. By Capt. Fred Burnaby,
Royal Horse Guards, Author of "A Ride to Khiva." 2 vols.,
Svo, with three Maps and Portrait of Author, 6th Edition, sSj-. ;
Cheaper Edition, crown Svo, \os. 6d.

Our Little Ones in Heaven. Edited by the Rev. H. Robbins.
With Frontispiece after Sir Joshua Reynolds. Fcap., cloth extra.
New Edition — the 3rd, with Illustrations, $s.

Our Village. By Mary Russell Mitford. Illustrated with
Frontispiece Steel Engraving, and 12 full-page and 157 smaller Cuts
of Figure Subjects and Scenes. Crown 4to, cloth, gilt edges, 21s.

Our Woodland Trees. By F. G. Heath. Large post Svo,
cloth, gilt edges, uniform with "Fern World " and " Fern Paradise,"
by the same Author. 8 Coloured Plates (showing leaves of every
British Tree) and 20 Woodcuts, cloth, gilt edges, 12s. 6d. Third
Edition.

"The book, as a whole, meets a distinct need ; its engravings are excellent, its
coloured leaves and leaflets singularly accurate, and both author and engraver
appear to have been animated by a kindred love of their s\xh}QQX.."— Saturday
Review.

List of Publica tions. 2 3

pAINTERS of All Schools. By Louis Viardot, and other
■^ Writers. 500 pp., super- royal 8vo, 20 Full-page and 70 smaller
Engravings, cloth extra, 25^-. A New Edition is issued in Half-
crown parts, with fifty additional portraits, cloth, gilt edges, 31^-, 6(/.

Palliser (Afrs.) A Histo7y of Lace, from the Earliest Period.
A New and Revised Edition, with additional cuts and text, upwards
of 100 Illustrations and coloured Designs. I vol. 8vo, i/. \s.

"One of the most readable books of the season ; permanently valuable, always in-
teresting, often amusing, and not inferior in all the essentials of a gift book." — Tunes.

— Histo7-ic Devices, Badges, and War Cries. 8vo, i/. i^.

The China Collector's Pocket CompanioJi. With up-
wards of 1000 Illustrations of INIarks and Monograms. 2nd Edition,
with Additions. Small post Svo, limp cloth, 5j-.

Petitcs Lee^ons de Convei^sation et de Granimaire : Oral and
Conversational ]\Iethod ; being Lessons introducing the most Useful
Topics of Conversation, upon an entirely new principle, &c. By
F. JULIEN, French Master at King Edward the vSixth's School,
Birmingham. Author of "The Student's French Examiner," " First
Steps in Conversational French Grammar," which see.

Phillips (Z.) Dictionaiy of Biographical Reference. Svo,
i/. IIJ-. 6^.

Photography [IListory and ILandbook of). See Tissandier.

Physical Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism. By J. E. H.
Gordon, B.A. With about 200 coloured, full-page, and other
Illustrations. Among the newer portions of the work may be
enumerated : All the more recent investigations on Striee by Spottis-
woode, De la Rue, Moulton, &c. An account of Mr. Crooke's recent
researches. Full descriptions and pictures of all the modern Magnetic
Survey Instruments now used at Kew Observatory. Full accounts of
all the modern work on Specific Inductive Capacity, and of the more
recent determination of the ratio of Electric units (v). It is believed
that in respect to the number and beauty of the Illustrations, the work
will be quite unique. 2 vols., Svo, 36^-.

Picture Gallery of British Art (The). 38 Permanent Photo-
graphs after the most celebrated English Painters. With Descriptive
Letterpress. Vols. I to 5, cloth extra, iSj. each. Vols. 6, 7, and 8,
commencing New Series, demy folio, 3IJ. 6d.

Pinto {Major Serpa). See " King's Rifle."

Placita Anglo-Normannica. The Procedure and Constitution of
the Anglo-Norman Coiu-ts (William I. — Richard L), as shown by
Contemporaneous Records. With Explanatory Notes, &c. By M. M.
BiGELOW. Demy 8vo, cloth, 21J.

24 Sampson Low, Mars ton, 6^ Co*s

Plutarch's Lives. An Entirely New and Library Edition.
Edited by A. H. Clough, Esq. 5 vols., 8vo, 2/. loj-.; half-morocco,
gilt top, 3/. Also in i vol., royal 8vo, 800 pp., cloth extra, i8j. ;
half-bound, 21s.

Morals. Uniform with Clough's Edition of " Lives of

Plutarch." Edited by Professor Goodwin. 5 vols., 8vo, 3/. 3J.

Poems of the Inner Life. A New Edition, Revised, with many
additional Poems. Small post 8vo, cloth, 5^.

Poganuc People: their Loves and Lives. By Mrs. Beecher
Stowe. Crown 8vo, cloth, 6j.

Polar Expeditions. See Koldewey, Markham, MacGahan,

and Nares.

Practical (A) Handbook to the Principal Schools of England.
By C. E. Pascoe. New Edition, crown 8vo, cloth extra, y. 6d.

Prejevalsky {N. M) From Kulja, across the Tian Shan to Lob-
nor. Translated by E. Delmar Morgan, F.R.G.S. Demy 8vo,
with a Map. i6s.

Prince Ritto ; or, The Four-leaved Shamrock. By Fanny W.
CuRREY. With 10 Full-page Fac-simile Reproductions of Original
Drawings by Helen O'Hara. Demy 4to, cloth extra, gilt, los. 6d.

Publishers' Circular {The), and General Record of British and
Foreign Literature. Published on the ist and 15th of every Month, ^d.

1)AMBA UD {Alfred). History of Russia, from its Origin
•^ ^ to the Year 1877. With Six Maps. Translated by Mrs. L. B.
Lang. 2 vols., demy 8vo, cloth extra, 38^-.

Recollections of Writers. By Charles and Mary Cowden

Clarke. Authors of ** The Concordance to Shakespeare," &c. ;
with Letters of Charles Lamb, Leigh Hunt, Douglas Jerrold,
and Charles Dickens ; and a Preface by Mary Cowden Clarke.
Crown 8vo, cloth, ioj-. 6c/.

Reminiscences of the War i?i New Zealand. By Thomas W.
Gudgeon, Lieutenant and Quartermaster, Colonial Forces, N. Z.
With Twelve Portraits. Crown 8vo, cloth extra, ioj-. 6a'.

Remusat {Madame de). See " Memoirs of."

Robinson {Phil). See " In my Indian Garden."

Roch(foucaulds Reflections. Bayard Series, 2s. 6d.

List of Publications. 2 5

J^ogers (S.) Pleasures of Af emery. See "Choice Editions of
Choice Books." 2s. 6d.

Pose in Blootn. See Alcott.

Pose Library {The). Popular Literature of all countries. Each
volume, IS. ; cloth, 2s. 6d. Many of the Volumes are Illustrated—

1. Sea-GuU Rock. By Jules Sandeau. Illustrated.

2. liittle Women. By Louisa M. Alcott.

3. Little Women Wedded. Forming a Sequel to '•' Little Women. "

4. The House on Wheels. By Madame de Stolz. Illustrated.

5. Little Men. By Louisa M. Alcott. Dble. vol., 2s. ; cloth, 3^. ed.

6. The Old-Fashioned Girl. By Louisa M. Alcott. Double

vol., 2s. ; cloth, 3^. 6d.

7. The Mistress of the Manse. By J. G. Holland.

8. Timothy Titcomb's Letters to Young- People, Single and

Married.

9. Undine, and the Two Captains. By Baron De La Motte

FouQU£. A New Translation by F. E. Bunnett, Illustrated.

10. Draxy MHler's Dowry, and the Elder's Wife. By Saxe

Holm. ^

11. The Four Gold Pieces. By Madame GouRAUD. Numerous

Illustrations,

12. Work. A Story of Experience. First Portion. By Louisa M.

Alcott.

13. Beg-inning- Ag-ain. Being a Continuation of "Wor':." By

Louisa M. Alcott.

14. Picciola; or, the Prison Flower. By X. B. Saintine.

Numerous Graphic Illustration^

15. Robert's Holidays. Illustrated.

16. The Two Children of St. Domingo. Numerous Illustrations.

17. Aunt Jo's Scrap Bagr.

18. Stowe (Mrs, H, B.) The Pearl of Orr's Island,
19- The Minister's Wooing-.

20. Betty's Bright Idea.

21. . The Ghost in the Mill.

22. Captain Kidd's Money.

23. We and our Neigrhbours. Double vol,, 2s.

24- M:y Wife and I. Double vol, 2s. j cloth, gilt^ 3^. 6d.

25. Hans Brinker ; or, the Silver Skates.

26. Lowell's My Study Window.

27. Holmes (O. W.) The Guardian Ang-el.

28. Warner (C. D.) My Summer in a Garden.

2 6 Sampson Low, Marston, 6^ Go's

The Rose Library, continued : —

29. Hith.erto. By the Author of " The Gay worthys." 2 vols. , I j. each.

30. Helen's Babies. By their Latest Victim.

31. The Barton Experiment. By the Author of '* Helen's Babies."

32. Dred. By Mrs. Beecher Stowe. Double vol., 2s, Cloth,

gilt, 3^. ^d.

33. Warner (C. D.) In the Wilderness.

34. Six to One. A Seaside Story.

Russell {W. II., LL.D) The Tour of the Prince of Wales in
India. By W. H. Russell, LL.D. Fully Illustrated by Sydney
P. Hall, M.A. Super- royal 8vo, cloth extra, gilt edges, 52 j. 6^.;
Large Paper Edition, 84^-.

QANCTA Christina: a Story of the First Century. By
•^ Eleanor E. Orlebar. With a Preface by the Bishop of Winchester.
Small post 8vo, cloth extra, 5^.

Scientific Memoirs: being Experimental Contributiofis to a
Knowledge of Radiant Energy. By John William Draper, M.D,,
LL.D., Author of "A Treatise on Human Physiology," &c. With
Steel Portrait of the Author. Demy 8vo, cloth, 473 pages, 14J.

Scott {Sir G. Gilbert.) See " Autobiography."

Sea- Gidl Rock. By Jules Sandeau, of the French Academy.

Royal l6mo, with 79 Illustrations, cloth extra, gilt edges, "^s. 6d.
Cheaper Edition, cloth gilt, 2s. 6d. See also Rose Library.

Seonee : Sporting in the Satpura Range of Central India, and in
the Valley of the Nerbudda. By R. A. Sterndale, F.R.G.S. 8vo,
with numerous Illustrations, 2i.f.

The Serpent Charmer: a Tale of the Indian Muti?iy. By
Louis Rousselet, Author of "India and its Native Princes."
Numerous Illustrations. Crown 8vo, cloth extra, gilt edges, p. bd. ;
plainer binding, 5^.

Shakespeare {The Boudoir). Edited by Henry Cundell.
Carefully bracketted for reading aloud ; freed from all objectionable
matter, and altogether free from notes. Price 2s. 6d. each volume,
cloth extra, gilt edges. Contents : — Vol I., Cymbeline— Merchant of
Venice. Each play separately, paper cover, is. Vol, II., As You
Like It— King Lear— Much Ado about Nothing. Vol. III., Romeo
and Juliet— Twelfth Night — King John. The latter six plays sepa-
rately, paper cover, gd»

List of Publications. 2 7

Shakespeare Key {The). Forming a Companion to "The
Complete Concordance to Shakespeare." By Charles and Mary
CowDEN Clarke. Demy 8vo, 800 pp., 2\s.

Shooting: its Appliances, Practice, and Purpose. By James
Dalziel Doug all, F.S.A., F.Z.A. Author of "Scottish Field
Sports," &c. Crown Svo, cloth extra, los. 6d.

"The book is adtiiirable in every way We wish it every success." — Globe.

"A very complete treatise Likely to take high rank as an authority on

shooting." — Daily News.

Silent Hour {The). See " Gentle Life Series."

Silver Pitchers. See Alcott.

Simon {Joules). See " Government of M. Thiers."

Six to One. A Seaside Story. i6mo, boards, is.

Smith (G.) Assyrian Explorations and Discoveries. By the late
George Smith. Illustrated by Photographs and Woodcuts. Demy
Svo, 6th Edition, iSj.

TJie Chaldean Account of Genesis. By the late

G. Smith, of the Department of Oriental Antiquities, British Museum.
With many Illustrations. Demy Svo, cloth extra, 6th Edition, i6j-,

Sn 07a- Shoes and Canoes ; or, the Adventwes of a Pur-Hunter
in the Hudson's Bay Territory. By W. H. G. Kingston. 2ncl
Edition. With numerous Illustrations. Square crown Svo, cloth
extra, gilt edges, "js. 6>i. ; plainer binding, 5j'.

Songs and Etchings in Shade and Sunshine. By J. E. G.

Illustrated with 44 Etchings. Small 4to, cloth, gilt tops, 25J.

South Kensington Museum. Monthly \s. See " Art Treasures."

Stanley (H. M.) Hoiv I Found Livingstone. Crown Svo, cloth
extra, 7^. dd. ; large Paper Edition, los. 6d.

"J/y Kalulu," Prince, King, and Slave. A Story

frf)m Central Africa. Crown Svo, about 430 pp., with numerous graphic
Illustrations, after Original Designs by the Author. Cloth, "js. 6d.

Coomassie and Alagdala. A Story of Two British

Campaigns in Africa. Demy Svo, with Maps and Illustrations, i6j.
Through the Dark Continent, which see.

St. Nicholas Ma<^azine. 4to, in handsome cover, ij-. monthly.
Annual Volumes, handsomely bound, 15^. Its special features are,
the great variety and interest of its literary contents, and the beauty

28 Sampson Low, Marston, 6^ Co.*s

and profuseness of its Illustrations, which surpass anything yet
attempted in any publication for young people, and the stories are by
the best living authors of juvenile literature. Each Part contains, on
an average, 50 Illustrations.

Stojy without an End. From the German of Carove, by the late
Mrs. Sarah T. Austin. Crown 4to, with 15 Exquisite Drawings
by E. V. B., printed in Colours in Fac- simile of the original Water
Colours ; and numerous other Illustrations. New Edition, ^s. 6d.

square 4to, with Illustrations by Harvey. 2s. 6d.

Stowe {Mrs. Beecher) Dred. Cheap Edition, boards, 2s. Cloth,
gilt edges, 3^-. 6^.

Footsteps of the Master. With Illustrations and red

borders. Small post 8vo, cloth extra, ds.

Geography, with 60 Illustrations. Square cloth, 4^. dd.

Little Foxes. Cheap Edition, is.\ Library Edition,

4-r. dd.

Betty s Bright Ldea. is.

My Wife a?id L ; or, LTarry Henderson^ s Llistory,

Small post 8vo, cloth extra, 6^.*

Minister's Wooing. 5i'.; Copyright Series, \s. 6d.] cl, 2^.*

Old Town Folk. 6s. ; Cheap Edition, 2s. 6d,

Old Town Fireside Stories. Cloth extra, 3^. 6d.

Our Lolks at Poganuc. 10s. 6d.

We a?td our Neighbours, i vol., small post 8vo, 6s.

Sequel to "My Wife and I."*

Fink and White Tyranny. Small post 8vo, 3^". 6d. j

Cheap Edition, \s. 6d. and 2s.

Queer Little People, is. ; cloth, 2s,

Chimney Corner, is. ; cloth, is. 6d.

The Pearl of Orr's Lsla?id. Crown 8vo, 55.*

Little Pussey Willow. Fcap., 2s.

* See also Rose Library.

List of Publications. 2 9

Stoive {Mrs. Beeche?-) IFoman in Sacred History. Illustrated
with 15 Chromo-Iithographs and about 200 pages of Letterpress.
Demy 4to, cloth extra, gilt edges, 2$s.

Student's French Examiner. By F. Julien, Author of " Petites
Lecons de Conversation et de Grammaire-" Square crown 8vo, cloth, 2s.

Studies in German Literature. By Bayard Taylor. Edited
by Marie Taylor. With an Introduction by the Hon. George
II. BoKER. 8vo, cloth extra, los. 6d.

Studies In the Theory of Descent. By Dr. Aug. Weismann,
Professor in the University of Freiburg. Translated and edited by
Raphael Meldola, F.C.S., Secretary of the Entomological Society
of London. Part I. — " On the Seasonal Dimorphism of Butterflies,''
containing Original Communications by Mr. W. H. Edwards, of
Coalburgh. With two Coloured Plates. Price of Part. I. (to Sub-
scribers for the whole work only) 8j j Part II. (6 coloured plates), i6j. :
Part III., 6s.

Sugar Beet {The). Including a History of the Beet Sup^ar
Industry in Europe, Varieties of the Sugar Beet, Examination, Soil.-,
Tillage, Seeds and Sowing, Yield and Cost of Cultivation, Harvesting,
Transportation, Conservation, Feeding Qualities of the Beet and of
the Pulp, &c. By L. S. V/are. Illustrated. Svo, cloth extra, 2is.

Sullivan {A. M., M.P.). See " NeAv Ireland."

Sulphuric Acid (A Practical Treatise on the Manufacture of).
By A. G. and C. G. Lock, Consulting Chemical Engineers. With
77 Construction Plates, and other Illustrations.

Sumner {Hon. Charles). See Life and Letters.

Sunrise : A Story of These Times. By William Black,
Author of " A Daughter of Heth," &c. To be published in 15
Monthly Parts, commencing April 1st, \s. each.

Surgeon^ s Handbook on the Treatment of Wounded in War. By
Dr. Friedrich Esmakch, Professor of Surgery in the University of
Kiel, and Surgeon-General to the Prussian Army. Translated l)y
H. H. Glutton, B.A. Cantab, F.R.C.S. Numerous Coloured
Plates and Illustrations, Svo, strongly bound in flexible leather, i/. Sj-.

Sylvan Spring. By Franxis George Heath. Illustrated by
12 Coloured Plates, drawn by F. E. Hulme, F.L.S., Artist and
Author of " Familiar Wild Flowers;" by 16 full-page, and more than
100 other Wood Engravings. Large post Svo, cloth, gilt edges, 12s, 6d.

30 Sampson Low, Marsfon, 6^ Co.''s

^AUCHNITZS English Editions of German Authors .
Each volume, cloth flexible, 2s. ; or sewed, is. 6d. (Catalogues post
free on application.)

[B.) German and English Dictionary. Cloth, is. 6d.;

roan, 2j,
French and English. Paper, is. 6d. ; cloth, 2s. ; roan,

2:. 6d.

Italian and Etrglish. Paper, i^. 6d. ; cloth, 2s. ;

roan, 2s. 6d,
Spanish and English. Paper, 15. dd. ; cloth, 2s. \ roan,

2j. (id.

New Testament. Cloth, 2s. ; gilt, 2s. 6d.

Taylor {Bayard). See " Studies in German Literature."

Textbook {A) of Harmony. For the Use of Schools and
Students. By the late Charles Edward Horsley. Revised for
the Press by Westlet Richards and W. H. Calcott. Small post
8vo, cloth extra, 3^. dd.

Through the Dark Continent : The Sources of the Nile ; Around
the Great Lakes, and down the Congo. By Henry M. Stanley.
2 vols., demy 8vo, containing 150 Full-page and other Illustrations,
2 Portraits of the Author, and 10 Maps, 42J, Seventh Thousand.
Cheaper Edition, crown Svo, with some of the Illustrations and Maps.
I vol., I2s. 6d.

Tour of the Prince of Wales in India. See Russell.

T?'ees and Ferns. By F. G. Heath. Crown Svo, cloth, gilt
edges, with numerous Illustrations, 3J-, 6i/.

" A charming little volume.' — Land and Water,

Turkistan. Notes of a Journey in the Russian Provinces of

Central Asia and the Khanates of Bokhara and Kokand. By Eugene
Schuyler, Late Secretary to the American Legation, St. Petersburg.
Numerous Illustrations. 2 vols, Svo, cloth extra, 5th Edition, 2/. 2s.

Two Friends. By Lucien Biart, Author of " Adventures of
a Young Naturalist," " My Rambles in the New World," &c. Small
post Svo, numerous Illustrations, gilt edges, yj-. bd. ; plainer binding, 5^.

Two Supercargoes {The) ; or., Adventures in Savage Africa.
By W. H. G. Kingston. Numerous Full-page Illustrations. Square
imperial i6mo, cloth extra, gilt edges, ']s. ()d. ; plainer binding, 5^-.

TJF and Dowfi ; or., Fifty Years' Experiences in Australia,
^-^ California, New Zealand, India, China, and tlie South Pacific.

Being the Life History of Capt. W. J. Barry. Written by Himself.

With several Illustrations. Crown Svo, cloth extra, %s. (>d.

List of Publications.

dules Verne, that Prince of Story-tellers."— Times,
BOOKS BY JULES VERNE.

Large Crown 8vo. . .

1 Containing 350 to 600 pp.
, and from 50 to 100

Containing the whole of the

[ full-page illustrations.

text with some illustrations.

In ver

In cloth

handsom

plainer

binding, gilt

WORKS.

cloth bind

binding,

edges,

Coloured Boards.

ing, gilt

plain

smaller

edges.

type.

s. d.

s. (L.

s. d.

Twenty Thousand Leagues

)

under the Sea. Part I.

}■ 10 G

5 0

3 G

2 vols., Is. each.

Ditto. Part II.

)

Hector Servadac . . .

10 8

5 0

The Fur Country . . .

10 6

5 0

3 G

2 vols., Is. each.

From the Earth to the

)

Moon and a Trip round

}■ 10 6

5 0

vols., 2s.

2 vols., Is. each.

)

each.

Michael StrogoiF, the
Courier of the Czar . .

I 10 6

5 0

Dick Sands, the Boy

1 10 G

Captain

s. d.

Five Weeks in a Balloon .

7 6

3 6

2 0

1 0

Adventures of Three En-

glishmen and Three
Russians

(76

3 G 1;

2 0

1 0

Around the "World in
Eighty Days ....

]. 7 6

3 G

2 0

1 0

A Floating City ....
The Blockade Runners .
Dr. Ox's Experiment . .

} 7 0

3 6

2 0

1 0

Master Zacharius . . . •

2 0

1 0

A Drama in the Air . .

> 7 G

3 C

1
1

A Winter amid the Ice ,

2 0

1 0

The Survivors of the

"Chancellor". . . .
Martin Paz

3 G

2 0
2 0

2 vols. Is. each.
1 0

The Mysterious Island,

3 vols. :—

") 23 G

10 G

G 0

3 0

Vol. I. Dropped from the

)

Clouds

[ 7 G

3 G !

2 0

1 0

Vol. II. Abandoned . .

( 7 G

3 G

2 0

1 0

Vol. III. Secret of the Is-

land

J 7 G

3 G

2 0

1 0

Tlie Child of the Cavern .

7 G

3 G

The Begum's FortuDO . .

7 6

The Tribulations of a

} '«

Chinaman

Celebrated Travels and Travellers. 3 vols. Demy 8vo, GOO pp.,
upwards of 100 full-page illustrations, 12s. Gd.; gilt edges, 14s. each : —

(1) The Exploration op the World.

(2) The Great Navigators of the Eighteenth Century.

(3) The Explorers or the Nineteenth Century. (In the Press.)

32 Sampson Lotv, Mars ton, 6^ Go's List of Publications.

JJ/ALLER {Rev. C. H.) The Names on the Gates of Fear!,
^^ and other Studies. By the Rev. C. H. Waller, M.A. Second
edition. Crown 8vo, cloth extra, 6s.

A G7'ammar and Analytical Vocahulatj of the Words in

the Greek Testament. Compiled from Briider's Concordance. For
the use of Divinity Students and Greek Testament Classes. By the
Rev. C. H, Waller, M.A. Part I., The Grammar. Small post 8vo,
cloth, 2s. 6d. Part II. The Vocabulary, 2s. 6d.

Adoption and the Covenant. Some Thoughts on

Confirmation. Super-royal i6mo, cloth limp, 2s. 6d.
Wanderings in the Western Land. By A. Pendarves Vivian,

M.P. \Vith many Illustrations from Drawings by Mr. Bierstadt

and the Author, and 3 Maps. I vol., demy 8vo, cloth extra, \%s.
War in Bulgaria : a Narrative of Fersofial Experiences. By

Lieutenant-General Valentine Baker Pasha. Maps and

Plans of Battles. 2 vols. , demy Svo, cloth extra, 2/. 2s.
Warner (C. D.) My Summer in a Ga7'den. Rose Library, is.

Back-log Studies. Boards, \s. 6d. ; cloth, zs.

L?i the Wilderness. Rose Library, i^.

Mummies and Moslems. Svo, cloth, 12s,

Weaving. See " History and Principles."

Whitney {Mrs. A. D. T.) ILitherto. Small post Svo, 3^. dd.

and 2s. 6d.

Sights and Lnsights. 3 vols., crown Svo, 315". 6^.

Summer in Leslie Goldthwaite' s Life. Cloth, 35". 6d.

Wills, A Few LLi?its on Froving, without Professional Assistance.

By a Probate Court Official. 5th Edition, revised with Forms

of Wills, Residuary Accounts, &c. Fcap. Svo, cloth limp, is.
With Axe and Rife on the Western Prairies. By W. H. G.

Kingston. With numerous Illustrations, square crown Svo, cloth

extra, gilt edges, 7^-. dd. ; plainer binding, 5^-.
Witty aiid LIumorous Side of the English Poets {The). With a

variety of Specimens arranged in Periods. By Arthur H. Elliott.

I vol., crown Svo, cloth, \os. 6d.
Woolsey {C. D., LL.D.) Ljttroduction to the Study of Lnter-

national Law ; designed as an Aid in Teaching and in Historical

Studies. 5th Edition, demy Svo, I Si".
Words of Wellington: Maxims and Opinions, Sentences and

Reflections of the Great Duke, gathered from his Despatches, Letters,

and Speeches (Bayard Series). 2s. 6d.
Wreck of the Grosvenor. By W, Clark Russell. 6s. Third

and Cheaper Edition.

SAMPSON LOW, MARSTON, SEARLE, & RIVINGTON,
CROWN BUILDINGS i88, FLEET STREET.

1, * vi ''^i'- ^

jwmM

^mmmi

Prrnceton Theological Seminary-Speer Library

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Science a stronghold of belief : or, Scientific and common-sense proofs of the reasonablemess of religious belief, as based on a plain and candid study of nature and the Scriptures, the whole forming a general practical view of belief and an opposition to modern doubt and infidelity"

See other formats