COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. c I u c ah o Vv *d o c t u w Singulare remediura antidotumque exhibet PHILOSOPHIA contra " infidelitatem et errores. Nam Salvator noster inquit, ' Erratis " nescientes SCRIPTURAS et POTENTIAM DEI/ Ubi duos libros, ne " in errores incidamus, proponit nobis evolvendos : primo, VOLUMEN " SCRIPTURARUM, qua3 voluntatem Dei, dein, VOLUMEN CREATU- " RARUM, quae potentiam revelant." BACON, DE AUGMENT. SCIENT. lib. i. torn. iv. p. 40. BY GRANVILLE PENN, ESQ. LONDON: PRINTED FOR OGLE, DUNCAN, AND CO. AND SOLD BY PARKER, OXFORD; DEIGHTON, CAMBRIDGE; BELL AND BRADFUTE, EDINBURGH; AND M. OGLE, GLASGOW. 1822. iZHh1 . 11. " The primitive soils, whatever was the " mode of their formation and consolidation, " were not formed or consolidated at the same " instant : there was necessarily a succession of " time 2 ." " Let us carry ourselves, in idea, to " the Jirst moments of the formation of that part " of the globe which is known to us; that is, " of the thin rind or crust which covers our " planet. At that epoch, the part of the globe " which was then actually existing, was like " a kernel surrounded by the elementary prin- " ciples of the minerals, of which its rind " or crust is now composed. We can repre- " sent to ourselves these principles, as suspended " in a vast dissolution, whatever else might have " been its nature 3 . This CHAOTIC OCEAN 4 " or, ' original CHAOTicrLuiD 5 ,' very different " from our present seas, contained the elements " \)fthe primitive earths. In obeying the laws " of the affinity of composition, they coalesced, " and grouped themselves together in different 1 DE Luc, Ib. p. 384. 2 D'AUBUISSON, t. ii. p. 4. 3 D'AUBUISSON, torn. i. 270. 4 Ib. 355. ' KlRWAN, p. 11. 22 PART I. CHAP. III. A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATP: OF TIIE " manners ; and they thus produced the in- " tegral molecules of the different minerals. " This was the^r^, or chemical structure. 12. " Causes which are unknown to us, " having occasioned the precipitation of these " molecules, they successively deposited them- " selves, uniting by the laws of the affinity of <( aggregation; and they formed our minerals. " From this second or proper mineralogical " structure, are derived the different particu- " larities which minerals present to us in their " texture and fracture. 13. " At length, the minerals formed, by *' their assemblage, the masses or rocks, and " the strata or soils, the aggregate of which " constitutes the solid crust of the globe. The " disposition of the minerals in their masses, " of the masses in their strata, of the strata " in the formations which subdivide them, and " lastly, of the formations, with relation to " each other, constitute the geognostic struc- " ture 1 . 14. " The first formations were produced " by a general cause. We can represent them " to ourselves, as precipitations from an uni- " versal dissolution, that is to say, from V a dissolution which covered the whole \ D'AuBuissoN, i. 271. MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 23 " terrestrial globe. But, although the disso- PART I. " lution was general, it will not follow that CHAP. HT. " every precipitate was such, and that each " formed originally a stratum which enveloped " the whole globe. While the dissolution de- " posited one substance, or one rock, in one " place, it is very possible that it produced " no precipitate of the same species in another ; " either because the constituent principles of " the rock were not in sufficient quantities " in that part of the dissolution, or because " the causes of the precipitation did not there " exercise their action, or lastly, because other " causes obstructed them. In this place, they " deposited granite; and a little further, " micaceous schist, because the elements of " mica were, perhaps, in a greater quantity in " that part of the dissolution which covered " the latter place 1 . 15. " When the observer enters into the " details of the formation of minerals, he sees " nothing but precipitations, crystallizations, and " dissolutions. The powers which produced the " minerals, and which collected and united " their elements, were the powers of affinity. " He will not be able to appreciate correctly " their effects, without a profound knowledge " of general chemistry. But he will stand in 1 D'AUEUISSON, i. p. 326, 7. 24 PART I. CHAP. III. A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE " need of great reserve and discrimination, " when he would conclude, from what takes " place in our laboratories, to that which takes " place in nature. Nature acts upon immense " masses ; she has time at her disposal, it is " nothing to her ; and these two circumstances " will often be sufficient to render entirely " dissimilar the effects of the same agent, and " the products of the same cause. Time, '< which has such narrow limits for us, has " none at all for Nature ; for her, it is as inde- " finite as space: both of these exceed even " the conception of our imagination 1 . It is " further to be observed, that we cannot " flatter ourselves with being able to know all '* the means which Nature employs in her forma- " tlons ; and we are not to conclude that an " effect is impossible to her, because we have " not been able to produce it in our labora- <' tories; for instance, we are not to conclude " that a given substance is undecomposable, " merely because we have not been able to " decompose it 2 . 16. " It will be sufficient to recollect ; that '' the science of physics makes known to us the " laws which appear to govern matter, and that, *' by continually keeping before our eyes the 1 D'AuBUissoN, torn. i. p. 241, 2, 3 Id. Disc. Prel. p. 30. MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 25 (< phenomena of Nature, and the causes which PART I. " produce them, it renders us competent to ap- CH 7p~i " prehend and form a just notion of the rela- " tions which may subsist between the effects " ive see and the causes to which we are led to " attribute them ; to be sensible, how necessary " this science is to those who apply their " thoughts to the revolutions of the terrestrial " globe, and who endeavour to account for the " changes which its surface experiences, or has " experienced 1 . 17. " It is principally, I repeat it, the pro- " gress of chemistry, that has conducted us to " this general conclusion, from whence at length " has resulted a solid basis for geology" . General " chemistry, ought here to be our only guide, as " to principles; and it is but very lately, that it " has supplied us with true lights with respect " to these 3 ." Thus, the mineral geology concludes, from the crystalline phenomena of this earth, that it was, originally, " a confused mass of elemental prin- 16 ciples, suspended in a vast dissolution, a chaotic " ocean, or original chaotic fluid ;" which, after an unassignable series of ages, " settled them- " selves" at last into the order, and corre- spondence of parts, which it now possesses, 1 Id. -Disc. Prel. p. 30. 2 DE Luc, Lett. Gcol. p. 112. 3 Ib. p. iii. 26 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. by a gradual process of " precipitation and " crystallization," according to certain " laws Try ' of matter," which it denominates "the laws of affinity of composition and aggregation;" and that they thus formed successively, though remotely in time, 1. a chemical, 2. a mineral, and lastly, a geognostic, which is its present, structure; and that it was during this long process, and before it attained to its present solidity, that the earth acquired its peculiar figure by the operation of the physical laws which cause it to revolve upon its axis. This is that root, or fundamental principle, of the mineral geology; which we were to extract, and to try by the test of the reformed philo- sophy of Bacon and Newton. If these conclusions are the genuine fruits of that reformed philosophy, we shall of course find them to be in exact and entire concord with the conclusions of Bacon and Newton upon the same subject; since the mineral geology professes to deduce them, by the method of induction, " from observation, sound principles " of physics, and by the rule of an exact logic," introduced by that philosophy. Bacon and Newton certainly taught, both by doctrine and example, the method of philo- sophizing by analysis and induction; and it was that method, skilfully and rigidly observed by MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 27 them, that produced and constituted that PART I. " happy revolution in the studies of the natural , . , , , . ,, CHAP. III. 4 sciences, which mineral geology so justly eulogizes. But, was there not a caveat, which Newton annexed to his process of induction ? " The method of analysis ," $&\&hQ, "consists in " making experiments and observations, and " in drawing general conclusions from them " by induction; and in admitting no objections " against the conclusions, but such as are taken " from experiments, or other certain truths 1 ." There were, then, some certain truths, which had always authority, in Newton's philosophy, to govern and regulate the process of induc- tion ; and even to oppose objections to general conclusions, if these betrayed any defect in the analysis from which they were deduced : for the analysis must be complete, before the induc- tion can be conclusive. If, therefore, any cer- tain truths were disregarded, and if the induc- tion still persisted in going forward in despite of them, it necessarily departed from philo- sophy and truth exactly in the same ratio; and only wandered, further and further, into the wilderness of fiction and error. And what are the certain truths, which, in consequence of a manifest evidence of original 1 Optics, L. iii. 28 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. defect in the analysis, have been crying out by CHAP~~IIL ^ e moutn f Newton, during the last ten pages, to the eager and unheeding progress of the mineral geology Siste, viator! Halt! They are these: "It seems probable to me, (said " the wise, sober, and circumspect Newton,) " that GOD, in the beginning, formed matter, in " solid, massy, hard, impenetrable, moveable " particles, of such sizes and figures, and with " such other properties, and in such proportions " to space, as most conduced to the end for which " HE formed them. All material things seem " to have been composed of the hard and solid " particles above mentioned, variously associated " in the FIRST CREATION by the counsels of an 66 INTELLIGENT AGENT. For it became HIM " who created them to set them in order; and " if HE did so, it is unphilosophical to seek " for any other origin of this world, or to " pretend that it might rise out of a CHAOS " by the mere laws of Nature; though, being " once formed, it may continue by those laws " for many ages V This is the test, to which we were to bring and apply the root of the mineral geo- logy. Now, it must be evident to every un- derstanding, that the mundane system which supposed the earth to be at rest on the back of a 1 Optics, L. iii. in Jin. MINERAL ANQ MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 29 tortoise, is not more fundamentally in opposition PART I. to the planetary system of Newton, than the con- CHAP. III. elusions of the mineral geology, which we have just read, concerning the MODE of first formations, are in opposition to the conclusions of Newton upon the same subject ; which conclusions con- stitute the basis of his philosophy. The " confused assemblage of elements, or " chaotic ocean ^ instabilis tellus, innabllis unda, from which the mineral geology derives the figure, symmetry, beauty, and accommoda- tion, which we " observe and experience" in this earthly system, is no other than the " CHAOS," which Newton has expressly and pointedly rejected and reprobated. The opera- tion, which he entitles " the setting in order" is the very same which the mineral geology de- scribes as " the forming successively a chemical, " a mineral, and a geognostic structure" That ope- ration, Newton ascribed to the immediate intel- ligence and power of God; the mineral geology, attributes it to general chemistry, and to certain laws of affinity, acting through a long succession of ages ; Donicum ad extremum crescendi perfica finem Omnia perduxit rerum Natura creatrix ! . 1 LUCRETIUS, ii. 1115. 30 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART 1. Till all things, to their end of growing brought, Creative Nature in perfection wrought. CHAP. III. Newton emphatically, and as it were by a pro- phetical judgment, pronounced this conclusion of the mineral geology to be " unphilosophical ;" and therefore, essentially contrary to that which alone he acknowledged to be philosophical, according to the principles of his own philo- sophy. This judgment, indeed, chiefly affects the Neptunian system ; but he has not altogether forgotten the Plutonian, which perpetually re- places a perishing system of the globe with a new one, by tf the mere laws of nature :" " The growth of new systems out of old ones," says he, " without the mediation of a DIVINE " POWER, seems to me apparently absurd 1 . 99 Third Letter to Dr. Bentky. MINERAL AND MOSAIC AL GEOLOGIES. 31 CHAPTER IV. IT will be instructive and important, to PART I. trace with some minuteness the oppositi&n of doctrine, between the philosophies of Newton and of the mineral geology, respecting a chaotic state of this globe; and to observe, how deeply the foundation of that opposition is laid. " When Newton had remarked, that the planets presented to the view figures of obtuse spheroids, and not of perfect spheres; when he had re- flected upon the nature of that peculiar figure, and had contemplated those orbs as subjected, in their revolutions, to the adverse actions of gra- vity and centrifugal force; his penetrating mind at length discovered, that the rule of harmony and equilibrium between those two contending powers was only to be found in the Jigure of an obtuse spheroid. To make this fact plain to the understanding of others, he imagined this hypothetical illustration. " If," said he, "the " earth were formed of an uniformly yielding " substance, and if it were to become deprived 32 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. " of its motion" si terra constaret ex uni- CHAP~IV " f rm i materia, motuque omni privaretur l f the law of gravity acting equally, and without resistance, from all points of its surface towards its centre, would cause that yielding substance to settle into the figure of a perfect sphere. But, if it were then to receive a transverse im- pulse, which should cause it to revolve upon its axis, the new transverse force would coun- teract the former force of gravity, by urging the particles composing the yielding substance, from their centre, towards their circumference; and would thus produce an alteration in the figure of that sphere. For, the new force would tend to elevate the surface, and would have most power at the equator, and least at the poles ; whereas the opposite force of gravity would tend to depress the surface, and would have most power at the poles, and least at the equator. The result of this inequality of gravita- tion must necessarily be, that the original sphere, becoming elevated at the equator, but not at the poles, and the elevating power gradually dimi- nishing from the equator to the poles, its figure would be eventually changed into that of an obtuse spheroid. Princip. Math. L. iii. prop. I9.prob. 3. MINERAL AND MOSA1CAL GEOLOGIES. 33 It being thus shown, that such would be PART I. the necessary result of the compound power of gravity and centrifugal force; it followed, CHAP * IV - that those two forces, acting at the same time in the earth supposed to be formed of an homoge- neous and uniformly yielding substance, would work themselves into harmony and equilibrium by producing that figure ; which they would thence- forward maintain. Whereas, if we suppose the case of a true sphere, which should consist of a solid and resisting substance ; the two forces must act in perpetual and violent discord and conflict, and with a constant tendency to disunite and rend the texture of the fabric. Now, Newton, main- tained, " that GOD at the beginning formed all " material things, (and therefore this earth " which is one of them,) of such. Jigures, and " properties, as most conduced to the end for which " HE formed them;" and, having thus demon- strated, that the property of an obtuse spheroidw&$ that which most conduced to the end for which God formed the earth, he left it to the capacity of every one to draw the obvious inference, in conformity to his known principles, viz. that it is highly probable, that God has formed the earth with the samejigure, which it is manifest HE has given to the other planets; and for which, an ADEQUATE RE A SON is thus rendered plain to the intelligence. And he confirmed this argument of probability , by super- 34 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. adding the experimental proof; that unless the earth was actually flatter at the poles than at CHAP. IV. the equator, the waters of the ocean, constantly rising towards the equator, must long since have deluged and overwhelmed the equatorial re- gions, and have deserted the polar; whereas, the waters are now retained in equilibrium over all its surface. Such was the whole nature, design, and extent, of Newton's proposition and demonstration. And so his accurate ex- pounder drew his inference : " What we have " said of a fluid earth, must hold of the earth " as it is; for, if it had not this figure in its " solid parts, but a spherical figure, the ocean " would overflow all the equatorial regions, " and leave the polar regions elevated many " miles above the level of the sea; whereas " we find, that one is no more elevated above " the level of the ocean than the other 1 ." It did not enter into his head, any more than it did into Newton's, to draw from this demon- stration the geological conclusion, that the earth had been RE A L L ^ fluid. But, the illustration inspired the mineral geo- logy with peculiar satisfaction. Without mak- ing any reference to the principles and conclusions of Newton's philosophy, or to the object, for 1 MACLAURIN, Account of Sir Isaac Newton's Phil. p. 364. MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 35 which alone he designed the illustration, it PART I. seized upon his plastic sphere ; and transformed CHAP. IV. his philosophical demonstration into a geolo- gical proposition. That supposed sphere, bore too convenient and desirable a resemblance to the " chaotic fluid '," or " confused mixture of " elements" not to be eagerly identified with it by the mineral geology ; which could thus argue the original fluidity of the earth, and its consequent obtuseness ; and refer to the " Prin- " cipia Mathematical for a Chaos. " The spherical figure of the earth, (it " said) had for a long time suggested the idea, " that its mass had been fluid, at least to a " certain depth. Newton, proceeding from this " idea, Newton, part ant de cette idee joined " to the rotatory motion of the globe, found " that its diameter at the poles, must be to " its diameter at the equator, as 229 to 230. " Now we find in the Philosophical Trans- " actions, of the Royal Society of London, for " the year 1791, a memoir by M. D'Albi, in " which, discussing the sum of the results of " the measure of a degree of the meridian in " different latitudes, he finds that this deter- " mination of Newton is confirmed by experi- " ment, as far as this latter method of deter- " mination could extend. We thus, therefore, 36 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. " know, that our globe really was once liquid, " at least to a certain depth ; and that when CHAP. IV. ' it acquired its solidity in the portion essen- " tial to its form, it had the same sensible " velocity of rotation, which it has now." 1 And again : " The earth was covered with a " liquid containing the substances of our mineral " strata. It was then, that by a movement of " rotation, continued sensibly thenceforward " in the same degree, the earth received the " spheroidal figure, which it has been found to " possess by the observers of this age, and " which Newton had proved by its motion"* The " Neptunian system," it says, " only considers " the earth to have had a spheroidal shape, " when it was in a fluid form"* And it con- cludes: " Since the earth has that spheroidal " form, which its motion of rotation ought to " produce in a liquid mass, it follows necessarily, " that it must have been fluid*" Thus reasoned the mineral geology, to fortify itself with the support of Newton's illustrious name. But, Newton did not set out from any such idea, as that the earth " had been " really fluid." The mineralogist's real fluidity 1 DE Luc, Lett. Geol. p. 81. 2 Id. 9 JAMESON'S Mineral. V. iii. p. 10. Note. * DE Luc, Ib. p. 107. MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 37 of the earth, and Newton's supposed equally PART I. yielding substance, have nothing whatever in CHAF IV common ; neither identity of origin, nor conge- niality of nature. And, indeed, the geologist last quoted, in a brighter period of his lucubra- tions refrained from deciding; "whether the " obtuse figure of our globe was owing to its " having been once fluid, or, whether it immedi- " ately received thatjigure at the creation, as being " the most convenient 1 " Although, even at that moment of hesitation, he was far from the phi- losophy of Newton, who had already concluded the latter; yet his judgment might still have fallen into coincidence with that philosophy. But he at length concluded on the side of the mineral geology, against Newton, maintaining, that our globe " really was once a fluid;' consti- tuting a chaotic liquid, out of which the whole mechanism of its wonderful structure " rose by " the mere laws of nature. 9 ' Had Newton conceived, that his illustration was liable to such gross and unscientific abuse ; and that it would have been thus perverted to prop a doctrine, from which he was abhorrent, which he emphatically disclaimed, and which he pronounced to be " unphilosophical '/" we may be assured, that he would not have instanced 1 Lettres sur I Hist, de la Terre, torn. ii. p. 154, 38 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. of this earth particularly, but of any ball consist- ing of moist, homogeneous, and yielding matter, such as softened clay ; which would have equally supplied the illustration which he in- tended. But his exalted mind, being con- versant with the planetary orbs, drew his example from them: incautiously, and too confidently, as it would now appear. His sole design, was to render intelligible, and sensible, the compound effect of two known forces. That he did not suppose that the earth had ever really been fluid, and that it had settled itself by laws of matter into its present figure ; is proved, both by the object, and hypothetical form, of his proposition, and by his express ascription of its " properties," as of those of all first formations, to the intelligent counsels and creative act of God, immediately. His own words were sufficient to have preserved his proposition from the perversion which it has experienced ; for he states it in different modes, by which his intention is cleared from all ambiguity. He does not only argue, " if " the earth were fluid" &c. ; but he also argues, " z/all circular diurnal motion were taken from "the planets," x &c. ; " if all matter were fluid 1 " &c. That these were only different 1 Pn'nc. Math. L. in. prop. 18. theorem 16. MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 39 hypothetical propositions, employed to illustrate PART I. the same principles, is thus manifest to every V' H * \ c JL V capacity. And, when we can demonstrate to our intelli- gence, by means of the illustration, that the figure of an obtuse spheroid is that which alone can produce harmony between two adverse, but requisite forces acting in the same globe ; why are we not rather to assume, with him, that such a figure was given to it at its origin with a view to that harmony, provided we acknowledge, with him, an intelligent agent; than to conclude, with the mineral geology, that it was left to pro- duce itself, as the ultimate issue of a long, rude, and violent conflict between the two forces ? Such, however, are the opposite conclusions of the two philosophies ; the one, concluding from the figure of the earth to an intelligent act of God; the other, to the action of a chemical menstruum. " The several planets are " spheroidal like the earth, therefore it has been " fluid* -." I fear, that this argument would not be held secundum artem, in the schools. " Let the earth, (it argues) be supposed fluid to " a certain depth ; then, the statical figure " which it would assume, in consequence of ro- " tation on its axis, would be that of a spheroid 1 GREENOUGH'S Geology, p. 172. 40 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. " flattened at the poles. Such, or nearly such, H~P~ T " being the figure which it has assumed, we have good reason to belie vefrom this circumstance^ " that the earth has been more or less fluid to " a certain depth 1 ." No doubt, if we were sure that the earth did assume that figure, we should have the best reason to conclude of its primitive fluidity ; but here also the logic needs revisal ; for the previous question is, whether it did assume that figure, or whether it received it from an intelligent cause, and with a view to a particular end; in which latter case, we cannot possibly conclude to its primitive fluidity* The latter, is the conclusion of Newton; the former, is that of the mineral geology, which it calls, " the great fact le grand fait" from which results " the proposition, funda?nent at to miner at " geology; viz. that the epocha, when all the " operations whose monuments are before our " eyes began upon the earth, is characterized "by an immediate chemical circumstance, " namely, the original fluidity of the globe* ." Thus, both from crystalline character, and from the obtuseness of spherical flgure, the mi- neral geology concludes to Chaos; whereas, from both of these, Newton concluded to God. But, what is least to be tolerated in this 1 GREEN QUGH'S Geology, p. 91. 8 DE Luc. Lcttres Geol. p. 81. MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 41 error, is that, after thus misapprehending and PART L perverting Newton's illustration, it proceeds to ~^i\ find him guilty of error in it. " Newton," it ^^^^^' says, " supposed that the mass of the globe was " homogeneous in density, and that its Jigtire, " in flattening itself, became an ellipsoid. " Maclaurin demonstrated the legitimacy of " the second of Newton s two suppositions, the " ellipticity of its form ; with respect to the " other, that of its homogeneity, Clairault " showed that it was inadmissible, by proving " ' that it is denser in its interior than at its " surface V " But, did Newton require it to be " admitted as a fact?" Clairault might have saved his pains, as far as they related to the refutation of Newton. Newton indeed supposed, that is, proposed, the case of the earth's homo- geneity, as a philosophical hypothesis, in order to a particular demonstration ; but, where did Clairault discover that he supposed it, that is, assumed it, as a geological fact ? After rectify- ing Newton's error, however, by the more accurate rule of Clairault, the mineral geology thus proceeds to draw out the consequence of Newton's supposition. " We have seen, that the flatness of the " earth is such as is indicated by the laws 1 D'AUBUISSON, i. 17. 42 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE CHAP. IV PART I. "of hydrostatics ; that is, that the earth has exactly the same figure which it should have, if it had been originally fluid. By what singular Chance, if it had always been solid, " CM//*/ it have so extraordinary a form, which " is a necessary consequence of the properties " of fluids, and which seems to pertain to them " exclusively ? The fact is, it has moulded itself " into this .singular form : and, in order to 2 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART L " can be the effect of nothing else than the " wisdom and skill of a powerful ever- living " agent 1 " Thus, Newton accounted at once, and by the same principle, for all first forma- tions whatever, while mineral geology can only propose a principle for the first formations of mineral matter; a principle, utterly inapplicable to any other system of terrestrial matter, and therefore proving the extent of its analysis. And thus, his philosophy easily accomplished, what mineral geology claims as its province, but which it has never even attempted to accomplish, viz. " to connect ivith their causes " the phenomena, presented in our globe by " the three kingdoms of terrestrial matter*" But Newton prevented the equivocation (shall I say? or the prevarication) which at- tends the geognostic phrase, " mode of first " formation," by employing the simple, dis- tinct, and unequivocal word, creation. In doing which, his exalted reason conformed to the 1 Optics, L. iii. 8 " La Geologic est principalement distincte de THistoire " Naturelle, en ce que celle-ci se borne a la description et <4 classification des phenomenes que presente notre globe, " dans les trois regnes; au lieu que la premiere doit Her ces " phenomenes avec leur causes." DE Luc, Lett. Geol. p. 3. We should rather have expected, that such a writer would have said, " aiec leur cause'' MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 53 CHAP. V. plain dictates of common sense. For common PART I. sense, duly instructed and rightly exercised, plainly perceives that all first formations must be creations ; otherwise, there would be forma- tions before first formations. For, creations are unquestionably formations ; and, if they are not first formations, they must be prior to Jirst formations; which would be a contradiction in terms. The existence, arrangement, sizes, figures, and properties of all these, Newton ascribed to the immediate act of God Himself; and he adjudged it to be unphilosophical, to ascribe them to any mediate or secondary cause, such as laws of nature operating in a Chaos. De Luc abstained, with a very curious re- servation, from employing the word creation, in physical inquiries: " I shall not say created, (said he) " because in physics I ought not to " employ expressions which are not thoroughly " understood between men 1 ." Not tinder stood! By whom ? By those who do not choose to understand it ; by those, who, like Falstaff, " are troubled with the disease of not listening, " the malady of not marking." Such were his contemporay atheists and materialists of the 1 " Je ne dirai pas qu'elles ont ete creces ainsi, parce- " qu'en physique je ne dois pas employer des expressions svr " lesquelles on ne sentend pas. " Lett, sur I' Hist, de la Terre, torn. ii. p. 211. 54 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. middle of the last century. But was he, there- CHAP v f re ' to com P^ ment those perverters equally of morals and physics, by excluding from physical science all mention of creation ? Was he aware, that in excluding the word, he at the same time excluded the idea associated with that word ; and, together with the idea, the principle in- volved in the idea? the exclusion of which is the very parent-cause of all materialism, and of all atheism? Newton was well aware of this; and, therefore, though assuredly he knew the laws of physical inquiry at least as well as the best mineral geognist, he did not exclude the word, but entertained it ; and proclaimed it, as sufficiently intelligible to every unsophisti- cated understanding, and as the sine qua non of truth , in treating of material first formations. His logic found, that God is the first physical principle in physics, as He is the first moral principle in morals ; and, that there is no argu- ing truly in either branch of philosophy, without the application of that Jirst, common, and uni- versal principle. " De DEO ex ph&nonienis dis- " aerere ad philosophianz Naturalem pertinet. - " It pertains to Natural philosophy" said he, " to reason from phenomena to GOD." Had the mineral geology, therefore, carried its analysis as far back as Newton, it would have concluded to th&tjirst physical principle forjirst CHAP. V. MINERAL AND MOSA1CAL GEOLOGIES. & formations; and, if it had done so, its general PART I. induction would have been the same as New- ton's ; but, by stopping its analysis short of the term to which Newton extended his, its induction became " the less general, and there- " fore the less strong by how much it was the " less general;' and thus it necessarily fell into contradiction to him, as we have seen. 56 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE CHAPTER VI. PART I. BUT, there must have been some cause, which determined mineral geology thus to check its analytical progress, at the term of mineral mat- ter ; and to return at once from that point, to the exercise of its synthetical operation. That cause, was the fascination of physical impressions, or what it denominates, phenomena. For, being habitually conversant with mineral substances, and passionately attracted by the admirable characters and varieties which they revealed ; the appearance of these acquired so powerful an authority in its imagination as to confine it within their sphere, and to render every other object in nature secondary, and comparatively unregarded ; and being unequally instructed in other branches of knowledge, and therefore partial to that particular branch with which it felt itself most familiar, it was led to regard that one branch, which in fact ex- tends itself over the entire mineral surface of our planet, as alone sufficient to supply all the principles requisite for resolving the pro- blem which it proposed to itself. Mineral phenomena, were therefore assumed by mineral MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 57 geology as all-sufficient for determining the PART I. great question, of the mode of the first formation of mineral substances; and, in this common prin- ciple, of the omnipotence of phenomena , both the Neptunian and the Plutonian or Vulcanian sys- tems entirely coincide. Yet there were other orders, or classes, of matter pertaining to this earth, whose first form- at ions presented subjects for inquiry of equal importance ; and which could not be separated from the former, in the question of the mode of first formations, without a dereliction of the first principles of the philosophy of Bacon and Newton, and, indeed, the first principles of com- mon sense: these were the classes, of animal and vegetable matter. Newton's rules of philoso- phizing require, that we should refer to the same common cause all existences, which share the same common properties ; and the three kingdoms of matter, equally share the same general properties of matter. But, besides sharing the same general properties of matter, they demonstrate a community of system ; each existing with relation to the others, and having the reason of its own existence in that relation. Thus the solid body of the earth exists with rela- tion to the vegetation, which it is to fructify; and to the animals which it is to support. The . two latter exist with relation to the earth, 8 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. without which they could neither be nourished nor supported. They are thus, in fact, corre- CHAP. VI. spending and constituent parts or members of one whole; the first formations of each of which, must therefore be referred to the same cause, and to the same mode. Not to recognise this principle, would be, to be something more than purblind in philosophy ; and indeed we have seen, that mineral geology lays claim to the province, of " connecting with their causes " the phenomena presented by our globe in " the three kingdoms ;" although it has hitherto confined its exercise to one only. What it has thus omitted to perform, we shall now endeavour to supply. By the universal analysis of matter, we arrive at the common cause of all the three orders of terrestrial matter, and of their several systems, and we perceive the equal relation of each to that cause ; so that by discerning the relation of any one of them, we at the same time discern that of the other two. Now, their respective characters, or phenomena, in first formations, must be subject to the same common law; and the authority of the phenomena for determining the mode of their first formations, must be the same in all. The highest principle of probability in this question to which the mind of Newton could attain by induction, was, as MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 50 we have seen, " that all material things were PART I. " in the beginning created, and set in order " by God, in their fittest sizes, figures, pro- " portions, and properties ;" from the vast planetary system, including this mineral globe, to the most diminutive insect which exercises its instinctive sagacity upon it. Common sense discerns, that creation alone could give origin of existence to that which before did not exist ; it discerns, that there can be no intermediate stage or degree between non-existence and exist- ence, and therefore, no graduality in the passing from the one state to the other. To the mode of creation, we cannot therefore ascribe that mode of succession to which we give the name of time. The action of creation was therefore effected without the mediation of time, and con- sequently, in that mode which we express when we exclude all notion of the mediation of time ; namely, immediately, instantaneously, or suddenly. Let us now endeavour to ascertain exactly, what is the authority of sensible pheno- mena for determining the mode of the first forma- tions of each of the three kingdoms of matter, by trying that authority, in each of them, succes- sively. As we trace back all terrestrial matter to a term of first, or creative formation, so we trace back each of its three orders, or kingdoms, to 60 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. the same term ; for, all terrestrial matter, sig- r nifies only the aggregate of those three kingdoms. In the same manner, we trace back each of the individuals composing each order ; for, the order is only the aggregate of the individuals which compose it. We thus likewise trace back the generations of men to a primitive, ungenerated parent or parents; and we perceive, that there must have been a jirst formed, created man, as certainly as there . has since been a succession of generated men. Now, whatever be the stan- dard of age in correspondence to which we may suppose that first man to have been created, it must correspond to some period of the human life subsequent to the birth. It is of little consequence to the argument, what that age may be; but it is most consistent with the notion of an Intelligent Agent, and therefore most philosophical, to suppose, that He created that first man with the perfection of mind and body, " which most conduced to the end for " which He formed him." That man received a frame, to be sustained by the laws of nutrition, which commenced with his existence; which frame was similar to those that were to be engendered from his own. He possessed, there- fore, a bodily structure similar to ours, and con- sisting of similar parts. Of these, let us con- template those solid parts, which support the MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 61 CHAP. VI. soft and flexible, namely the bones; and let us PART I. first ask, " what is bone, in its nature and com- " position?" To this question Anatomy replies : " the use " of the bones is to give shape audjirmness to " the body ; to be leavers for the muscles to " act upon, &c.: their fibres, when first formed, " are very soft, until, by the addition of a " matter which is separated by the blood into " them, they grow by degrees to the hardness " of a cartilage, and then, perfect bone. But " this change is neither made in a very short " time, nor begun in all parts of the bone at once. " By the continual addition of the ossifying " matter, the bones increase till the hardness " resists a further extension; and that hard- " ness increasing while they are growing, the " increase of their growth becomes slower " and slower, till they cease to grow at all V This is indeed the nature and composition of bone, according to the law established after creation by the creating agent, for the formation and gradual growth of the animal system, and which we call one of the laws of animal matter; but we are now concerned exclusively with the first, created, ungenerated man, and with his bone; from the period of whose first form- [ CHES EL DEN'S Oitcographia, Introd. 62 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I, at ioji only, those laws were to begin to CHAP" vi operate. It is evident, that in this man none of those processes took place ; but he was created, by the will and immediate power of God, in the same form, and with the same structure, which, after him, was to be produced only by the operation of those laws. His bone, therefore, was not formed " by degrees" but " in a very " short time," namely, " at once;' not by " a " continual addition of ossifying matter," but with the full measure of that matter; not " with " soft fibres, and growing by degrees to the hard- " ness of a cartilage, and then of bone," for this process must commence in a maternal womb, from whence he did not proceed. In him, therefore, the act of the Creator produced at once, by the mode of creation, that form, struc- ture, and composition of bone, which in all other men is produced by the gradual process of ossification, which has been described. From hence we obtain this first principle, with respect to the first formations of animal matter; " that in those first formations the " Creating Agent anticipated, by an immediate " act, effects which were thenceforward to be " produced only by & gradual process, of which " He then established the laws." If a bone of that first, created man now remained, and were mingled with other bones MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 63 pertaining to a generated race ; and if it were to PART I. be submitted to the inspection and examina- . . CHAP. VI. tion of an anatomist, what opinion and judg- ment would its sensible phenomena suggest, respecting the mode of its first formation, and what would be his conclusion ? If he were unapprised of its true origin, his mind would see nothing in its sensible phenomena but the laws of ossification ; '^t as the mineral geology " sees nothing in the details of the formation " of minerals, but precipitations, crystallizations, " and dissolutions 1 ." He would therefore na- turally pronounce of this bone, as of all the other bones; that its "fibres ' were originally "soft;" until, in the shelter of the maternal womb, it acquired "the hardness of a cartilage, and then of bone;' 7 that this effect " was not pro- " duced at once, or in a very short time," but, by " degrees;" that, after birth, it increased in hardness " by the continual addition of ossifying " matter, until it ceased to grow at all." Physically true, as this reasoning would ap- pear, it would nevertheless be morally and really false. Why would it be false? Because it concluded, from mere sensible phenomena, to the certainty of a fact which could not be established 1 See above, p. 23. 64 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. by the evidence of sensible phenomena alone ; namely, the mode of the first formation, of the substance of created bone. From hence we obtain a second principle, with respect to such first formations by crea- tion : " That their sensible phenomena alone " cannot determine the mode of their formation, " since the real mode was in direct contradiction " to the sensible indications of those phenomena" What has been here said of the solid parts of the animal structure, is equally applicable to all its parts, and to every member of the animal king- dom, at itsjirst creation. Let us proceed from animal to vegetable matter ; and let us consider the first created tree, under which the created man first re- posed, and from which he gathered his first fruit. That tree must have had a stem or trunk, through which the juices were conveyed from the root to the fruit, and by which it was able to sustain the branches upon which the fruit grew. Let us consider the structure of the wood which composed that stem or trunk ; and let us ask, what is wood, in its nature and composition ? To this question, Natural History replies : " If we entirely remove the bark, we perceive " the wood; which is a solid body, giving support " and strength to the tree. On which account MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 65 *' some naturalists have regarded it, as being PART I. " with respect to trees, what bones are in the < 1 v r / rr.t T i CHAP. VI. bodies oi animals. Ihe ligneous, or woody " folds, are at first soft and herbaceous, before " they acquire the solidity of wood. They do " not suddenly pass from the state of softness " which they first have, to the hardness of " perfect wood ; they only acquire that hard- " ness, of which they are capable, after many " years. In a young tree, all those woody " folds (I mean those sensibly apparent folds " which indicate the growth of each year,) are " of unequal firmness, hardness, and density ; " those of the centre being the hardest, and " those of the circumference the most tender. " The hardness of these folds is, therefore, only " effected by degrees 1 : and since Nature does " nothing but by a progressive course, it is not " surprising that wood acquires its hardness " only by little and little*." This is, indeed, the nature and composition of wood, according to the law established, after creation, by the creating agent, for the formation and gradual growth of the vegetable structure ; and which we call one of the laws of vegetable matter. But, we are now concerned exclu- DUHAMEL, La L'hysique des Arbres, torn. i. c. 3. p. 30. 1 Ibid. p. 45. F (36 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. s i ye ty w i tn tne fast, created, unpropagated tree, and with its wood; from the period of wnose jl rs t formation only, those laws were to begin to operate. In the wood of this tree, it is evident that none of those gradual processes took place; but it was created, by the will and immediate power of God, in the same form, and of the same structure, which, after it, was to be produced only by the operation of those laws. Its wood, therefore, was not formed " by degrees" but "suddenly;" its solidity was not acquired "by a progressive course by little " and little after many years ;" not by a gradual hardening from a state of Softness and herba- ceousness ; for that has its origin in a growth from seed, from whence this tree did not pro- ceed. In this wood, therefore, the act of the Creator produced at once, by the mode of creation, that form, structure, and composition, which in all succeeding trees is produced by the gradual process of lignification, which has been described. Here, then, we find the same first principle in the first formations of created vegetable matter, which we found in the first formations of created animal matter ; a principle, common to both ; viz. " That in those first formations the Creating " Agent anticipated, by an immediate act, effects " which were thenceforth to be produced only MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 67 " by a gradual process, of which he then esta- PART I. " blished the laws." CHAP VI If a portion of this created tree now re- mained, and if a section of its wood were to be mingled with other sections of propagated trees, and submitted to the inspection and examination of a naturalist ; what opinion and judgment would its sensible phenomena suggest to him, respecting the mode of its jirst formation ; and what would be his conclusion ? If he were unapprized of its true origin, his mind would see nothing in its sensible phenomena , but the laws of lignification ; just as the mineral geolo- gist " sees nothing in the details of the forma- " tions of primitive rock, but precipitations, " crystallizations, and dissolutions." He would, therefore, naturally pronounce of it as of all the other sections of wood : that its "fibres" when they first issued from the seed, " were soft and " herbaceous;' that they " did not suddenly pass " to the hardness of perfect wood," but, "after " many years ;" that the hardness of their folds, " which indicate the growth of each year,"" was therefore effected only " by degrees ;" and that, " since Nature does nothing but by a progres- " sive course, it is not surprising that its sub- " stance acquired its hardness only by little and " little^ Physically true, as the naturalist would here 68 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. appear to reason ; yet his reasoning, like that of the anatomist, would be morally and really f alse * And why would it: be false ? For the same reason ; because he concluded, from mere sensible phenomena, to the certainty of a fact which could not be established by the evidence of sensible phenomena alone ; namely, the mode of the first formation of the substance of created wood. We thus find a second principle, common to the first formations both of animal and vegetable matter; viz. "That their sensible phenomena " alone cannot determine the mode of their " formations ; inasmuch as the real mode was " in direct contradiction to the sensible indications " of those phenomena." What has here been said of the solid parts of the vegetable struc- ture, is applicable equally to all its parts, and to every member of the vegetable kingdom, at its first creation. If, therefore, the natures of created bone and created wood had suffered them to subsist, and to be preserved until the present day; we plainly perceive, how easy it would have been to demonstrate to the science of physics, its absolute incompetence to determine any thing at all, by phenomena alone, concerning the mode of the first formations of the first individuals composing either the animal or vegetable king- doms of matter. MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 69 CHAPTER VII. THERE only now remains to be considered, the PART I. third, or mineral kingdom of this terrestrial system ; and it appears probable, to reason and philosophy, by prima facie evidence, that the principle determining the mode of first forma- tions, in two parts of this threefold division of matter, must have equal authority in this third part. And indeed, after the closest investigation of the subject, we can discover no ground whatever for supposing, that this third part is exempted from the authority of that common principle ; or that physics are a whit more com- petent to dogmatize concerning the mode ofjirst formations, from the evidence of phenomena alone, in the mineral kingdom, than they have been found to be in the animal or vegetable-, or, to affirm, from the indications of the former, that the mode of its first formations was more gradual and tardy than those of the other two. Let us try this point, by proceeding with our comparison ; and let us consider the first created rock, as we have considered the first created 70 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. bone and wood ; and let us ask, what is rock, in AP~~ its nature and composition? To this question, Mineralogy replies : " By " the word rock, we mean every mineral mass " of such bulk as to be regarded an essential " part of the structure of the globe 1 . We un- " derstand by the word mineral, a natural body, " inorganic, solid, homogeneous, that is, com- " posed of integrant molecules of the same " substance 2 : We may, perhaps, pronounce *' that a mass is essential, when its displace- " ment would occasion the downfall of other " masses which are placed upon it a . Such are, " ' those lofty and ancient mountains, the first " and most solid bones, as it were, of this globe,' " les premiers, les plus solides ossemens which " have merited the name of primitive, because, " scorning all support and all foreign mixture, " they repose always upon bases similar to " themselves, and comprise within their sub- " stance no matter but of the same nature 4 . " These are the primordial mountains ; which " traverse our continents in various directions, " rising above the clouds, separating the basins " of rivers one from another ; serving, by means D'AuBUissoN, i. p. 272. 2 Ibid. 271. 3 Ibid. 272. SAUSSURE, Voyages des Alpes, Disc. Prel. p. 6, 7. MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 71 *" of their eternal snows, as reservoirs for feed- PART I. " ing the springs, and forming in some measure " the skeleton, or, as it were, the rough frame- " work of the earth 1 ." These primitive masses " are stamped with the character of a formation " altogether crystalline, as if they were really the *' product of a tranquil precipitation 2 ." Had the mineral geology contented itself with this simple mineralogical statement, we should have thus argued, concerning the crystalline phenomena of the first mineral formations ; con- formably to the principles which we have re- cognized. As the bone of the first man, and the wood of the first tree, whose solidity was essential for " giving shape, firmness, and sup~ " port" to their respective systems, were not, and could not have been formed by the gradual processes of ossification, and Ugnification, of which they nevertheless must have exhibited the sen- sible phenomena, or apparent indications ; so, reason directs us to conclude, that primitive rock, whose solidity was equally essential for giving shape, firmness, and support to the mineral system of this globe, was not, and could not have been formed by the gradual process of UVIER, 7. p. 39. * D'AuBuissoN, ii. p. 5, 72 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE" PART I. precipitation and crystallization., notwithstanding* any sensible phenomena, apparently indicative of ' those processes, which it may exhibit; but that in the mineral kingdom, as in the animal and vegetable kingdoms, the creating agent antici- pated in his formations, by an immediate act, effects, whose sensible phenomena could not determine the mode of their formation; be- cause the real mode was in direct contradiction to the apparent indications of the phenomena. The correspondence and correlation of the three subjects, is pointed out by physical science itself, in the passages which have just been quoted; for, natural history notes the analogy of the wood, in the vegetable structure, and mineralogy notes that of primordial rock, in the mineral structure, with the bone in the animal structure. Solidity and consistency, therefore, are the common properties of all the three. To produce that solidity and consistency, which were as necessary for the surface which was to sustain, as for the bodies which were to be sustained by it, was equally the end of the formation of each ; and, there- fore, according to Newton's second rule, we are bound by reason to assign the same identical cause for the solidity and consistency of each. And it will then necessarily follow ; that primi- tive immediate crystallization, can furnish no data MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 73 for computing time, more than primitive 'im* PART I. mediate ossification, or primitive immediate ligni- jicatwn. It matters not to this argument, whether the mineral geology adopts the Neptunian or the Plutonian system; whether it sees in the phenomena of minerals, the characters of aqueous solution, or of igneous fusion; because, the argument is directed, universally, to the ques- tionof the authority of phenomena, in first formations, for determining the mode of their production ; and it is, therefore, in no manner affected by- the particular differences subsisting between those two conflicting hypotheses : whether the phenomena seem to indicate the mode of water, or the mode of jire, they cannot be indicative of the real mode. But, the mineral geology has not contented itself with that simple mineralogical statement ; nor drawn the conclusion which we have drawn, in conformity with the principles, and in obser- vance of the rules, of Newton's philosophy. It " affirms, that the characters^ which geology " is written in the book of nature, in which it is " to be studied, are minerals*;" and it " sees " nothing" in that book of nature but " precipi- " tations, crystallizations, and dissolutions ;" ' D'AuBtnssoN, Disc. Prcl. p. 29. 74 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. and therefore, because it sees nothing else, it concludes without hesitation, from crystalline CHAP. VII. phenomena to actual crystallization. Thus, by attempting the impossibility of deducing an universal principle, viz. the mode of Jirst forma- tions, from the analysis of a single individual, viz. mineral matter, separate from co-ordinate animal and vegetable matter; and concluding from that defective analysis, to the general law of Jirst formations ; it set out with inadequate light, and it is no wonder that it ended in absolute darkness ; for such is its elemental chaos, and its chemical precipitation of this globe : a doctrine, so nearly resembling the exploded atomic philosophy of the Epicurean school, that it requires a very close and laborious inspection to discover a single feature, by which they may be distinguished from each other. The sensible phenomena, which suggest crys<- tallization to the Wernerian, or vitrification to the Huttonian, in examining a fragment of pri^- mitive rock, are exactly of the same authority, but not of a particle more, with that which would have suggested ossification and lignification to the anatomist and naturalist, who should unknow- ingly have inspected or analyzed created bone, or created wood; and the same error would have befallen all the three, should each have con- eluded, from what they saw, that the substances MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 75 which they were severally engaged in examin- PART I. ing, had been formed by the several modes of CHA ~ VII crystallization, ossification, and ligniftcation: the mineralogist can no more discover the mode of the formation of primitive rock by the laws of general chemistry, be they the laws ofjfire, or the laws of water, than the anatomist can discover the mode of the formation of created bone, by the laws of generation and accretion. But there is this notable difference between the three cases ; that the animal and vegetable structures were formed to continue only for short durations of time ; they were to reproduce their species, and to perish; and to be con- tinued only by the succession of generation. The first formations of these, have therefore long since been resolved into their ultimate elements, and are now totally irrecoverable by us. Whereas, the first formed mineral masses of this earth, constituting the " skeleton, or rough " frame^work" of this globe, were not made to reproduce their kind, nor to perish within the experience of the human race ; they still subsist, with the nature and structure which they received at their first formation, or crea- tion. When we discover no evidence what- ever of re- compos it ion of divided parts, but a simple homogeneous mineral substance, inca- pable of production by any known secondary cause, then we see a true Jirst formation. Such 76 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. are the granite masses which we survey ; which . were coeval with created man. vll. Hence it is evident, that we are to reason of the first formation of primitive rock, as we should reason of a hortus siccus, composed of created plants from the garden of Eden; with which those primitive rocks were contemporary, although they have so long outlasted them. If we knew, that those dried plants were formed before the laws of vegetable generation and growth could have commenced, we should take no account of the apparent indications of gene- ration and growth in their phenomena ; nor suffer ourselves to be deluded by them, in respect to the mode of their formation. In the same manner we ought to dispose our judgments, with respect to the first mineral formations; which were unquestionably formed by the same mode, because anterior to the first flowers that grew upon the earth. When,, therefore, we handle a piece of granite from the Alps, the Andes, or the Himmaleh mountains, and think we discern in it the characters of aqueous, or igneous, action ; if we would be sure to reason unphilosophically and falsely, we shall instantly conclude, from the first promptings of our senses, that the mode of its first formation was by aqueous solution, or by igneous fusion; we shall say, " this " substance looks as if it was formed by the MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 77 " agency of water, or fire; we see nothing in PART L " it but the characters of water, or of fire; ~~ " therefore, it was formed by the agency of " water, or of fire." And thus it is, that the mineral geology actually does reason; though professing to govern its reasoning, " by the " principles of sound physics, and the rules of " an exact logic." Nothing can be more un- philosophical, and popular, than such prima facie conclusions. But, if we would reason philosophically, and conformably to the principles and method of Newton, we shall take our premises much higher ; and shall reason thus : This substance is a portion of terrestrial matter, and of that order of terrestrial matter which constituted the first mineral formations of this globe : it was therefore not produced by any secondary cause, but it was " created, and set in its order, by the Creator, " with the properties which most conduced to the " ends for which He formed it;" which properties were, solidity and stability. It was designed to sustain the loose materials of the globe, as the bones were designed to sustain the soft and flexible parts of the body. His first formations were made in correspondence with the laws which He was then about to establish, and in anticipation of effects and appearances which were thenceforward to be produced only by the operations of those laws; 78 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. and since there are no decays and reproduc- tions of granite mountains, as there are of CHAP. VII. . animal and vegetable structures, and therefore no known laws for their successive or occasional formation, it is reasonable and philosophical to regard this piece of granite as a part of a Jirst for- mat ion, the mode of which was Divine Creation; and which has therefore always subsisted the same, since the act of Creation brought it into being. " But (exclaims the mineral geology,) can any " one uphold the doctrine of universal forma- " tion? Let him who answers in the affirmative " reflect on the consequence which that doctrine " involves. He must admit, that when the " particles of quartz, feldspath, and mica, which " had before arranged themselves so as to form " granite, changed their mode of arrangement, " so as to form gneiss, that change was con- " veyed with the rapidity of an electric shock, " from one end of the world to the other : " that the currents of the different ^hemispheres " had so equable a motion, that the particles " borne along by these currents were so equally " assorted, that within the tropics and without, " the same dispositions began and ceased at the " same moment: that similar pebbles were " detached from their native rocks, at the poles " and at the equator, by equal forces acting " under the same circumstances, and were MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 79 . deposited by the same means, and at the same PART I. " time. All these he must admit, or reject in r " toto the doctrine of universal formation*" We have no objection whatever to the alternative here offered us ; only we must rectify some confusions in the statement. For, in admitting universal formation, we are so far from admitting what is here assumed, viz.: that the particles of quartz^ feldspath, or mica, pre- viously arranged themselves, or subsequently changed the mode of their arrangement, that we absolutely deny that any particles of matter, of any description whatever, arranged them- selves at all, prior to universal formation ; because we affirm, that universal primitive formation gave to all particles of matter, both their being and their arrangement. And we cannot be embarrassed by " the rapidity" of the operation " from one end of the world to the other, like an " electric shock;" because we suppose it in the mode of first formation ; which was Divine Crea- tion. We cannot be perplexed, that the par- ticles were " equally assorted f both within the " tropics and without, at the same moment," because we conclude with Newton, " that all " the particles of matter were variously associated * GREENOUGH'S Geol. p. 225. 80 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PARTI. " at the FIRST CREATION by the, counsels of an CH \P~VII " I ntt ttig ent Agent;" and, for the same reason, , we find no difficulty in supposing this operation to have taken effect " at the poles and at the " equator, by the same means, and at the same " time" because it is the very conclusion of Newton's philosophy, and of unsophisticated reason ; which teach, Universal Primitive Form- ation, by the Creative Act. " What, then ! (it will perhaps further ex- t( claim,) has God introduced appearances into " His works, to mislead and to deceive His moral ." and intellectual creatures? Has He affixed " phenomena, which should seduce them into " error?" Mu yii/oiTo, God forbid! Great was the authority which warned ; py xpnire xar' ev}/*i>, aAAa TW $ixV' -'WttVx* 0/(l ' vo^v^wniV \VV'V CHAPTER X. i PART I. WE have now determined the question, con- cerning the authority of sensible phenomena, for deciding the mode of Jirst formations in the mineral kingdom of matter,by applying the same question to the animal and vegetable kingdoms ; and sound philosophy clearly perceives, that their authority is precisely the same in all the three ; and that the mineral geology can advance no one plea in objection, which might not have been equally advanced, and with equal futility, by anatomy and natural history. It therefore concludes of the " skeleton, or frame-work of this globe," the " magnce ossaparentis" as of the skeleton of created man : That it was not produced by any secondary cause, but by the immediate act of the First, Intelligent, Omnipotent Cause ; and that it is unphilosophical, to seek any other origin for its form and composition, or to pretend, that these might have arisen out of a chaos, chaotic ocean, or confused assemblage of elements, by the mere laws of Nature. And thus, the whole order of Jirst mineral formations, or simple primitive rocks and earths, together with all their strata and all their varieties, are withdrawn from the specula- MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 117 tions of the mineral geology, respecting the mode PART L of their production ; so that it may only exer- cise those speculations, philosophically , upon that remaining order of minerals, which, by bearing incontestable evidence of alteration, either by decomposition, recomposition, or mechanical action, prove themselves to be distinct in circumstance from the former. To what cause, then, it will exclaim, are we to ascribe the regular successive strata in the first mineral formations, pre- vious to the disturbance of which they bear the evidence ? I ask, in reply : To what cause are we to ascribe the regular successive lamina in the shell of foe first tortoise ; or the regular successive folds in the wood of the first tree; or the regular successive compartments in the pulp of the first orange ? The final cause, in each, was the end to which it was to serve ; the effi- cient cause, was the intelligent power which sought those ends ; to whom, all created mag- nitudes are equal. To what cause, it will again exclaim, are we to ascribe the characteristic diversities of granite, porphyry, serpentine, &c. ? I again reply, by asking : To what cause are we to ascribe the diversity, of the ivory of the first elephant, and the horn of the first elk ; of the wool of \hzfirst sheep, and the fur of the first ermine ? Those 118 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART I. were first formations, then, as the granite, the porphyry, and the serpentine, continue to be first formations, now. To what cause are we to ascribe the diversity, of spots in the first formed 'pant her, of stripes in the Jirst formed tiger, and of & plain hide in thejirst formed lion? To what are we to ascribe the differing textures, of bone, cartilage, and muscle, in the created animal ? We may as well ascribe all these to differences of secretion and accretion, which never took place, as the diver- sity of primitive rocks to differences of precipi- tation and crystallization, which never took place. Of true first formations, the cause of the being and of the diversity must be the same. Are not use, beauty, and variety, manifest ends in this creation? and, if they are so in the vegetable and animal kingdoms, why are they not to be the same in the mineral ? And, as the Creator at first planted the earth with every tree, not only "good for food," but also " pleasant to " the sight" that is, the sight of man; as He adorned it with the gaiety of flowers, and enlivened it, not only with melody of sounds, but likewise with variety and splendour of co- lours ; so He provided its interior with mineral substances both of use and beauty, to be afterwards drawn forth to light by the activity and industry of man ; imbedding within it His treasuries of ores and gems, and causing to MINERAL AND MOSAIC AL GEOLOGIES. 119 arise from its surface the useful and beautiful PART I. varieties which are found among His primitive CH 7T -_ mineral formations. The philosophy of Bacon and Newton, will never consent to derive these from an elemental chaos. I know, that the mineral geology wishes to establish a distinction between the mineral, and the other two kingdoms; and that it claims a sort of scientific property in the former, to which it does not lay equal pretension in the latter ; but, as the distinction it intends is unreal, so its claim can never be realized. " Man" it says, "who has weighed the planets, " and measured their distances, may presume " to trace the operations by which the surface " of the globe has been arranged 1 ." What true analogy can be found between the two cases, or what possible consequence can flow from the one to the other ? What just comparison can be made, between the measurement of present objects of sense, and the recovery of past facts of history? Because we can apply rules of arithmetic or mathematics to present objects, we are not therefore, capacitated to recal past events. In the former case, we carry the evi- dence of the truth along with us; in the latter, 1 See above, p. 15. 120 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE CHAP. X. PART I. we must seek it elsewhere, for we can never find It in the subject matter of our study. What, then, is to become of that vast por- tion of the mineral kingdom, of which we would thus despoil the Mineral Geology? It is to be restored to, and to be committed to the charge of, simple and genuine Mine- ralogy ; that sound and valuable science, to which pertains the cognizance of the mineral natures of the globe, as that of the animal natures pertains to zoology, and that of the vege- table to botany. The zoologist does not speculate on the mode of the formation of the first animal in- dividuals by secondary causes, nor the botanist on that of thejirst vegetable : they severally confine their attention to the characters and properties of the individuals themselves ; which bound their vast and admirable sciences. In the same man- ner, the characters and properties of the mineral individuals, bound the science of mineralogy; but yet leave it an equally wide and luxuriant field, for the exercise of its intelligence. When it would attempt to refer to secondary chemical causes, for the MODE of the first formations of those individuals, it then mistakes its sphere, and becomes Mineral Geology : a science, which is so far from conducting us in the same course with Newton, that it leads us quite the con- trary way. Newton's course leads upwards, to MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 121 an open and unimpeded issue; at the exit of PART L which we perceive the da wirings of a light, that CHAP. X, assures us we are near the sources of divine, truth. That of the mineral geology, on the contrary, con- ducts us downwards, to an obscurity ; in which we are presently stopped by a bivium, leading, on the one hand, to a chaos of aqueous solution, and, on the other, to a chaos of igneous fusion. Here we might long hesitate, which path to pursue ; and little would it matter, which of the two we take at last, if we are deter- mined to proceed in that direction ; for, as both are equally remote from the exit to truth, whichever is most pleasing to the palate of the fancy, will yield the greater gratification ; and all that can be obtained from either, is the gratification of the fancy. The Neptunian and Plutonian geologies may here securely contend, in ceaseless equality, for the truth of their re- spective systems ; for, both being equally erroneous in principle, neither can ever become vanquished by the other. But, can we seriously contemplate this in-' terminable contest, to dogmatize concerning the first formations of this globe by secondary agencies, without hearing the Voice which spoke " out of the whirlwind, and said: Who is this that " DARKENETH COUNSEL BY WORDS WITHOUT " KNOWLEDGE? Gird up Thy loins like a man; 122 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE CHAP. X, PART I. " for I will demand of Thee, and answer Thou ME. " Where wast Thou, when I laid the foundations of " the earth ? Declare, if Thou hast understand- " ing. Whereupon are the foundations thereof " fastened? or, WHO laid the corner-stone thereof? " Knowest Thou it, because Thou wast then born ? " or, because the number of Thy days is great l ? " Whereas, if we will take the contrary direc- tion, and travel with Newton ; we shall make the nearest approximation, which the light of unaided reason can make, to the truth of the MODE of Jirst formations, in all the THREE king- doms of terrestrial matter. Job, xxxviii. 1. MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 123 PART II. CHAPTER I. IT has been sufficiently shown ; that the root, or PART II. chaotic principle, of the Mineral Geology, cannot endure the test of the reformed philosophy of /HAP - * Newton, to which it appealed. It will hardly expect, that we should enter into an argument to prove that Newton is right; before we infer, from that failure, that its own conclusions are erroneous. Since it has admitted the authority of his philosophy, it must abide by its decision ; and the reader will have seen enough, in the progress of this discussion, to convince him of the just title which that authority possesses to decide the question at issue ; viz. the MODE, by which all Jirst formations of this globe were really produced. He will be sensible, that the highest probability to which the energies of unassisted reason can attain in this question, is only to be found in that philosophy ; and there- fore, that it cannot exist in the opposite philo- 124 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART II. sophy, which it contradicts, refutes, and repro- bates. The conclusions of the mineral geology upon this point are, therefore, in direct opposition to the highest probability ; and therefore, to say the least, they must be in the highest degree improbable. Valuable, however, as the highest probability is, where the certainty of truth cannot be attained ; yet, when the mind has once attained to that emi- nence of secondary evidence, it experiences an eager yearning to advance still higher, in conse- quence of the innate appetite for truth, which characterizes the intellect of man. Let us then inquire, whether this final gratification is abso- lutely withheld from us ; or, whether we may not be able to add, to the sentiment of the highest probability, the consummation of positive cer- tainty. That this can only be supplied by competent and positive history, and that physical induction is utterly inadequate to impart it, is a truth felt, and indirectly avowed, by the mineral geology itself. " Before we proceed to deter- " mine causes, (says the ingenuous M. D'Au- " buisson,) let us endeavour to make ourselves " acquainted with their effects. All the cir- " cumstances of the division of mineral masses " into beds and strata, as well as the presence " of these, both in their primitive and actual MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 125 CHAP. I. " state, are yet far from being known to us; PART II. " and we are constrained to say, in closing " the subject, that the determination of stratifiV " cation, its circumstances, and laws, remain " still a problem to be solved ; and it is per- " haps the most important of geognosy. We " should have nothing more now to do, than " to compose an history of the revolutions which " have taken place in the terrestrial globe during " the formation of its mineral crust; but that " those revolutions are of an order which has " nothing analogous to the effects which ive see " Nature produce. The thread of induction is cut " off, it can no longer conduct us: to attempt to " advance without its aid, would be voluntarily to " lose ourselves in pure hypothesis. Neverthe- " less, to Jill up the void, as far as we are " permitted, and to show what observation " seems to indicate as most probable, and most " simple, I shall summarily expose the manner " in which Werner represents the changes " which progressively took place in the forma- " tion of the mineral strata 1 ." He then lays down the principle, constituting the root of this geology, which we have just tried by the criterion of Newton; viz. " that the earth was " heretofore covered by a vast chaotic ocean, 1 Tom. i. 353. 126 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART ir. " very different from our actual seas, and containing the elements of the primitive CHAP. I. " earth 1 . 99 The prudence and judgment of this estim- able geologist are not so conspicuous in the conclusion of this passage, as his ingenuousness is in the former part. He first acknowledges, that a void exists in the physical means of recording an history of the revolutions of the globe, occasioned by the thread of induction being cut off; and, that to attempt to advance without its guidance, is to plunge ourselves into pure hypothesis; and yet he immediately proceeds to supply that void with pure hypothesis, as if the presence of fiction is always a more desirable thing than the absence of truth : a principle, which has been the fruitful source of the most dangerous errors. But, how comes there to be any void? The truth is, that the mineral geology has created the void at which it repines, by rejecting the history which had filled it. And it is the place of the history so rejected, that it fills up with the hy- pothesis which we have confuted by the authority of NEWTON ; whose " thread of induction' has not been " cut off;" but, on the contrary, has conducted us to the measure of the highest 1 M. D'AUBUISSON, torn, i. 355. MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. 127 probability, and therefore, to the verge of that PART II. certainty which can only be supplied by com- petent and positive history. It is amusing to observe the confidence, with which the mineral geology offers to contrive an history that shall supply that void; as if we were left totally without one. " The ancient tf history of the globe," it justly remarks, " is one " of the most curious subjects that can engage " the attention of enlightened men ; and if " they take any interest in examining, in the " infancy of our species, the almost obliterated " traces of so many nations that have become " extinct, they will doubtless take a similar " interest in collecting, amidst the darkness " which covers the infancy of the globe, the traces " of those revolutions which took place anterior " to the history of all nations. We admire the " power by which the human mind has " measured the motions of globes, which " nature seemed to have concealed for ever " from our view. Genius and science have " burst the limits of space; and a few observa- " tions, explained by just reasoning, have <* unveiled the mechanism of the universe. ft Would it not also be glorious for man to i burst the limits of time, and, by a few (( observations, to ascertain the history of the I2S A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART II. " world, and the series of events which preceded " the birth of the human race l V CHAP, I. It is needless to inquire, what degree of glory would attend the success of the effort ; because we are perfectly certain, that the effort never could be successful. Imagination might be satisfied, and enthusiasm gratified, by the schemes of apparent concinnity which those efforts might produce ; but, stern reason, which only looks to truth and evidence, sees before- hand, that physical induction can never pro- duce a true history of the series of events which preceded the birth of the human race. The certainty of history, must be derived from a source very different in its nature from physical speculation. It is wisely observed by Mr. Kirwan; that " past geological facts being of an historical " nature, all attempts to deduce a complete " knowledge of them merely from their still " subsisting consequences, to the exclusion of " unexceptionable testimony, must be deemed " as absurd, as that of deducing the history of " Ancient Rome solely from the medals or " other monuments of antiquity it still exhibits, 'CUVIER, l.p. 27. MINERAL AND MOSAICAL GEOLOGIES. ] 29 " or the scattered ruins of its empire, to the PART II. " exclusion of a Livy, a Sallust, or a Ta- (e ^ , CHAP. I. ' CltUS 1 . To add the consummation of certainty to the highest probability, respecting the Jirst formation and the revolutions of this globe, is the peculiar pretension of the Mosaical Geology; and we are now to try the root, m fundamental principle, of this geology, by the same test, by which we have already tried that of the Mineral Geology. It is evident to reason, that certainty con- cerning a past fact, such as is the mode by which all material existences were really Jirst formed, must be historical certainty : the subject, there- fore, is no longer a subject for philosophical induction, but for historical testimony ; and, like all other subjects for evidence, demands a voucher, competent to establish its truth. Now, the voucher that could establish the fact, respect- ing the true mode of Jirst formations, must have been a witness of that mode; but the only witness of the mode of Jirst formations, or creations, was the Creator Himself. But, how may we presume to hope, that we can obtain the positive testimony of that awful Actor, and sole Witness, of the opera- 1 KIUWAX, p. 5. K 130 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART II. tion of Creation? from whom alone we can derive the consummation, of positive certainty. CHAP. I. As Newton has conducted us to the emi- nence of the highest probability, and therefore to the verge of certainty ; so BACON, to whom the mineral geology equally appeals, shall be our guide, to lead us on to that sacred testimony in which alone the evidence of certainty can subsist ; for, the foundation-stone which he laid for that system of science which produced " the happy revolution effected by himself, and " afterwards by NEWTON, in the studies of the 66 natural sciences," was no other than this : " Let us FIRST seek for the dignity of science " in its Archetype, or Exemplar, that is, in " the attributes and acts of GOD ; so far as they " are revealed to man, and may be discreetly " investigated by him. In which inquiry, we " are not to speak of doctrine, since all doctrine " is acquired knowledge; but no knowledge in " God is acquired, but original. We must " therefore seek another name ; that of ' Wis- " DOM,' by which name the sacred Scriptures " denominate it." Bacon particularly adverts to that article of those sacred Scriptures, in which " WISDOM" is sublimely personified ; as having been present with, and attendant on the Creator, at the first formation of His creation. MINERAL AND MOSAIC AL GEOLOGIES. 131 " The Lord by WISDOM hath founded the PART II. " earth, by INTELLIGENCE hath He established pTT p T " the heavens. Doth not WISDOM cry, and " INTELLIGENCE put forth her voice, saying : " The Lord possessed Me in the beginning " of His way, before His works of old. I " was set up from everlasting, from the be- " ginning, before ever THE EARTH was. When " there was no depths I was brought forth ; " when there were no fountains abounding " with water. Before the mountains were " settled, before the hills, was I brought " forth: while as yet He had not made THE " EARTH, neither the plains, nor the heights " of the dust of the world. When He prepared " the heavens, I was there; when He set a " compass upon the face of the depth: when " He established the clouds above : when He " strengthened the fountains of the deep: " when He gave to the sea His decree, that " the waters should not pass His command- " ment: when He appointed the foundations " of THE EARTH. Then I was by Him as one " brought up with Him ; and I was daily His " delight, rejoicing always before Him; re- " joicing also in the habitable part of His " earth, My delights were with the sons of " men. Now therefore hearken unto Me, O " ye children : for, blessed are they that keep 132 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE CHAP. I. PART II. " My ways. Hear My instruction, and be " wise, and refuse it not 1 !" It is this " WISDOM," vouchsafed to man as a positive and competent voucher of the fact of the first formation of this earth, that Bacon here propounds; and upon the authority of whose testimony, he thus proceeds : " Thus, then, the FACT stands: In the works " of the Creation, we behold a twofold emana- " tion of the divine virtue ; of which the one " relates to its power, the other to its wisdom. " The former, is especially observed, in the " creating the material mass; the latter, in " the disposing the beauty of its form. This " being established, it is to be remarked, that " there is nothing in the ' History of the Crea- " tion,' to invalidate the fact, that the mass " and substance of heaven and earth was ' ( created confusa 2 confusedly or undistinguish - " ably, in ONE MOMENT of time; but that six " DAYS were assigned for disposing and adjusting " it: in so signal a manner did God distinguish, " between the works of His Power, and of His " Wisdom. We may further observe ; that in " the creation of matter, it is not related, ' God " said, Let the heaven and the earth be,' as it is 1 Prov. Hi. 19; viii. 1, 22 33. * See after, p. 150. MINERAL AND MOSA1CAL GEOLOGIES. 133 " related of His other works which ensued ; PART 11. " but, simply and actually, ' God created the ^ " heaven and the earth: so that the matter " itself seems to have been, as it were, a work " of hand; but the introduction of its form, " bears the style of a law or a decree 1 ." Bacon here appeals to a " Revealed History of " the Creatio?if'the authority of which, his judg- ment entirely acknowledged, and the statements of which, he employed for the foundation of his new philosophy : a document, which we should therefore have expected to obtain equal authority with all those who endeavour to gain confidence to their own doctrines, by making profession of conforming to his. This " Revealed History" is no other than that which was imparted to man by GOD, the only possible voucher for the fact of creation, through the ministry of MOSES; the authority of which record is acknowledged, with equal homage of the reason, by Newton, and which supplies the last degree of evidence that remained, to perfect that of the highest probability, deduced by Newton from a general analysis of the universe. This sacred and inestimable record, which was revealed to mankind above 3000 years J BACON de Augment. Scient. lib. i. p, 37, vol. iv. 134 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART II. a g> unfolds a detailed recital of the sensible mode by which God "formed, and set in order' f H AP T the entire system of this terrestrial globe ; and likewise, the history of a great universal revolution which He caused it to sustain, by the operation of water, 1656 years after He had created it. This history comprises, therefore, a revelation, 1. of the MODE of Jirst formation, of every member of this earthly system ; and 2. of the MO DE,by which God afterwards effected an universal alteration in the substance and circumstances of its structure. A record of such amazing authority ought, in common reason, if it be authentic, to direct, and altogether to govern the intelligence, in all researches concerning first formations and re- volutions of the earth ; for, in proportion as we should depart from such a guide, we must necessarily depart from the only rale which is able to establish certainty upon those sub- jects. This record, comprises the Mosaical Geo- logy. We shall therefore proceed to investigate the great and important facts disclosed in this sacred geological history ; comparing them with the same test with which we before compared the Mineral Geology, and keeping constantly in view, both the general conclusion of Newton, respecting the mode of Jirst formations, and the corollaries, which we have been led to MINERAL AND MOSAIC AL GEOLOGIES. 135 CHAP. I. deduce from that conclusion. But, in pursuing PART II, that comparison, let us be careful to adhere firmly to the principles which they disclose ; observing rigidly the admonition of Newton, which enjoins, " to admit no objections against " them, but such as are taken from certain truths'" plainly and unequivocally competent to dis- prove them. The conclusion of Newton was this : I. That GOD, in the beginning, formed all material things, of such sizes and figures, and with such other properties, and in such propor- tion to space, as most conduced to the end for which He formed them; and that He variously associated them, and set them in order, in His FIRST CREATION, by the counsels of His own Intelligence ; antecedently to the commencement of all secondary causes, or laws, which, though they might continue the first formations, could not possibly have any share in producing them. The corollaries which resulted from that conclusion, were these : 1 . That, in the first formations of all material things, God anticipated, by an immediate and incomprehensible act of His power, sensible effects, which were thenceforward to be produced only by gradual processes, of which He then established the laws. 2. That the sensible phenomena alone of the 136 A COMPARATIVE ESTIMATE OF THE PART II. first formations of material things, whether animal, vegetable, or mineral, could not there- fore determine any thing at all concerning the mode of their formation ; because, the mode by which they were actually first formed, must have been in direct contradiction to the apparent indications of those phenomena. " That the things which are seen, were not " made of things which do appear' ^ EX $AINO- MENflN TO, fixc-rroptvfr yzyowou : but, " that they " were formed by the Word ofGov-^-of HIM, who " calleth those things which are not as though *' they We7'e" ie**nfT*