have been of the same nature, nor dispensed in the same quantities in which they are now received from the sun; and, therefore must have anteceded, as we are informed in scripture they did, its final fixation around the central orb of our system. The contemplation of which event, and the results proceeding from it, will form the subject of our next section.

Meanwhile, the general impression left upon the mind, by the perusal of what has been written, necessarily is, that the whole of these operations are linked together in the most intimate manner; and so far, apparently, under the necessity of a fixed order in the mode of their arrangement, as to require that the unfolding of the one part should precede the unfolding of the other, while itself depended upon the unfolding of one still more antecedent, like the unrolling of some vast plan admirably delineated by consummate wisdom and skill, where all the separate parts and detached groups are made to harmonize with each other, and to form one grand whole of the most perfect symmetry! of which the boldest and truest conception we can imagine, is, that they constitute the material results of the decrees of God:-the materializing of that which had been devised from all eternity, and whose execution required the INSTITUTION of an ORDER of CAUSES; every act recorded in the first chapter of Genesis establishing a primary material cause, productive of consequences whose invariable repetition have acquired for them the term of NATURAL EFFECTS. While the causes, themselves, thus emanating directly from the Omnipotent, compose NATURE'S CONSTITUTIONAL CODE, whose contravention cannot, under any circumstances, be attempted with impunity.

SECTION IX.

CONCENTRATION OF THE LIGHT AROUND THE SUN; AND COMPLETION OF THE WORK OF CREATION.

CHAPTER XXXVI.

Resumption of the promise given to prove, that during the first three days of the Mosaic week the Light was not concentrated around the Sun. Primitive state of the Light and supposed Centre. Analogical authority, deduced from astronomy, for assuming, that primarily the Light had a different nature from that which it now has. Evidence to this effect, and that it was precisely similar in kind, though differing in degree, with the force which occasioned the orbital motion of the spheres. Assumption that the sun, together with all the planets, were caused to rotate around their respective axis by means of the primary light, and its division from the darkness. Astronomical proof of the sun's rotation. Dynamical law to show, that equal but opposing forces produce equilibrium. Astronomical evidence that equal amounts of heat and light are received by the earth from the sun in passing over equal angles round it. These two bodies of evidence made to show, that the Light, as now constituted, could not have caused either the sun or the earth to rotate. The same conclusion deduced from the direction in which the light is now received from the solar centre.

In a previous part of this work we promised to prove, that wherever the light was, or whatever was its intimate nature during the first three days of the Mosaic week, it was not situated it had not its centre-in or around the sun as it has at present; on the assumption that had it been so placed it could not, in accordance with laws then existing, have accomplished what it did perform, under supreme direction, during that period. We now purpose, if possible, to redeem the pledge then given, while we solicit every consideration in consequence of the difficulty of the undertaking; and the

abstract nature of the reasoning which, alone, can be employed.

In order to leave the unity of our future argument unaffected it may perhaps be as well, before entering upon it, to come to some definite understanding as to the state in which the light is considered to have been, or the centre or centres from whence the light is supposed to have proceeded, previous to its concentration around the sun, and during the three days when it produced, under Divine direction, those stupendous effects which we have so lately been considering.

Assuming, therefore, as we have all along done, that it did not emanate, as now, from the centre of our system during the first three days of the Mosaic week, we may assign for it during that period any other condition of its existence which may be most consistent with what is made known to us by Revelation, and in accordance with natural phenomena.

In doing this we are neither so wholly beyond the limits of probability, nor so destitute of the means of reasoning as the startling nature of the subject appears, at first sight, to indiIt is true, it is both abstruse and difficult; but even, with all, the differential method of argument may, with a little industry and dexterity, be made available.

cate.

We affirm, therefore, that the sun was not, during the first three days of the Mosaic week, the centre of the light, whose formation and division from the darkness caused the revolution of the spheres around their axes, and the other important consequences resulting therefrom; and this merely because, if so situated, it could not-agreeably to the laws previously established, and which consequently were not to be infringed upon-have produced those effects. While we remit the proofs for this assertion to the sequel of this chapter, we shall, meanwhile, endeavour to come to some satisfactory conclusion as to where it may have been. To effect this, in the absence of all direct philosophical testimony, for who could expect philosophical proof in such a case as this? we must have recourse to the words of Scripture themselves, which treat of a period prior to the investigations of man-they are, "God said, Let there be light, and there was light." In these there is no locality assigned for the light; the mere act of its for

mation is recorded by the inspired historian, and when we consider whose command it was which called it forth, we shall have no doubt as to its almost ubiquity; and we therefore maintain, that in the absence of a direct assertion as to its removal around the sun, we are not only at liberty, but are even bound to infer, that it was not removed, but remained where it was formed; and the more so, as its concentration, three days thereafter around its present point, is subsequently announced by the same historian when he asserts that "God made luminaries and set them in the firmament of Heaven." We may therefore, conclude, that the light remained during the first three days where it was formed at first. But it may be asked, where was it formed? "where is the way that light dwelleth? And as for darkness, where is the place thereof ?"* Of this we are not informed, yet, notwithstanding, even here, we may, by investigation, come to some satisfactory conclusion; for we know positively, that all the works of the Creator are conducted by consummate wisdom and knowledge, and that he possesses power over all things to will them into those conditions most suitable for producing effects corresponding to that wisdom and knowledge, whereby we become impressed with the conviction, through the evidence of our senses, of his possessing those attributes. These considerations authorize us to conclude, in the absence of any direct announcement to the contrary-and with our conviction that the attributes mentioned are eternal, and must have preceded the formation of the light-that the locality of this subtile influence would be precisely where best adapted for producing the effects which were to flow from it. Before we can deny this conclusion we must impugn the validity of the announcements of Scripture, and deny the known and confessed attributes of the Deity.

We shall presently, in accordance with what we have already so clearly stated with respect to the ubiquity of the primary light, endeavour to show where we consider the locality to have been, or, in other words, the nature of the movement impressed upon it; meanwhile, to convince our readers that we are taking no unwarrantable, or at least no

*Job xxxviii. 19.

unprecedented liberty with their credulity, in supposing a centre or centres of impulse which no longer exist; and, at the same time to exonerate ourselves from the charge of recurring unnecessarily to final causes, we have to plead the example of astronomers, a class of men dedicated to the cultivation of a science which, of all others, possesses the best founded pretensions to the character of exact. In testimony of this we shall primarily adduce the fact contained in the second clause of the first part of the fifth Theorem, namely, "That the planets move in orbits cutting the ecliptic at different degrees of obliquity;" and shall content ourselves with bringing forward the evidence of Prof. Whewell on that point; who, when treating of the stability of the solar system, makes use of the following expressions:

"They (the planets) might have had any inclination to the ecliptic from no degrees to ninety degrees. Mercury, which deviates most widely, is inclined 73 degrees, Venus 3, Saturn 23, Jupiter 14, and Mars 2. How comes it that their motions are thus contained within such a narrow strip of the sky ?"*

In continuation we shall refer to the fourth Theorem; "That the orbital revolutions of the EARTH and other planets around the sun, almost in the plane of its equator, and of the satellites around their primaries, are caused by the combination of the sun and the planets' mutual attraction, and an original projectile impulse. And that the same laws maintain the comets in their more elliptical orbits, their eccentricity depending wholly on the direction and force of the original impulse which put them in motion." The evidences in support of this theorem will exercise considerable influence on our future reasoning, and we shall, therefore, give them somewhat fully, and perhaps add some remarks on them from other sources afterwards.

"The moon," observes Mrs. Somerville, "is retained in her orbit by a force, having the same origin, and regulated by the same law, with that which causes a stone to fall at the earth's surface. .... "Newton ascertained that a body projected in space, will move

* Bridgewater Treatise, pp. 165, 166.