neral induction would have been the same as Newton's but, by stopping its analysis short of the term to which Newton extended his, its induction became "the less general, and therefore the "less strong by how much it was the less general ;” and thus, it necessarily fell into contradiction to him, as we have seen. CHAPTER VI. BUT, there must have been some cause, which determined the mineral geology thus to check its analytical progress at the term of mineral matter; 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 powerfully attracted by the admirable characters and varieties which they revealed; the appearances of these acquired so dominant an authority in its imagination, as to confine it within their sphere, and to render every other object in nature secondary in its estimation, 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 extends itself over the entire mineral surface of our planet, as alone sufficient to supply all the principles requisite for resolving the problem which it proposed to itself. Mineral phenomena, were therefore assumed by the mineral geology to be all-sufficient for determining the great question, of the MODE of the primitive formation of mineral substances; and, in this common principle, of the all-sufficiency of phenomena, both the neptunian and the plutonian or vulcanian systems, entirely unite and coincide. Yet, there were other orders or classes of matter pertaining to this earth, whose first formations presented subjects for inquiry of equal importance; and, which could not be separated from the former, in the question of the MODE of first formation, without a dereliction of the first principles of the philosophy of Bacon and Newton, and, indeed, the first principles of common sense: these were, the classes of animal and vegetable matter. Newton's rules of philosophising require, that we should refer to the same common cause, all existences which share the same common properties; and, the three kingdoms of matter, share equally the same common properties of matter. But, besides sharing the same common 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 body of the earth, exists with relation 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, without which they could neither be nourished nor supported. "That identity "of design (says Mr. Pr. Buckland,) which has "regulated the organisation of animals and vege"tables, and established in each link of the 66 boundless chain of living beings a system of delicately proportioned laws of co-existence per vading its minutest parts, is equally discernible "in the subserviency of the earth's structure to the "necessities and comforts of the various millions "of inhabitants which the Creator has placed 66 66 66 66 upon it. It is the same hand-writing that we "read, the same system of contrivance that we trace, the same unity of object and relation to final causes which we see maintained throughout, and constantly proclaiming the Unity of the great "divine Original'." This argument, applies with equal force to the earth at its first formation, as in its present condition; it would be a preposterous abuse of reason, not to infer original subserviency to ends from actual subserviency to ends. All these, therefore, are in fact, three corresponding and constituent parts or members of ONE WHOLE; the first formations of each of which, must of necessity, that is, in philosophical consistency, be referred to the same operating cause, and to the same mode of operation. If any one of the three was originally formed perfect for its end, so also were they all. Not to recognise this principle, would bé, to be something more than purblind in philosophy; and indeed we have seen, that the mineral geology lays claim to the province of " connecting with their causes the phenomena pre"sented 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. But it is become necessary, first, to expose the consequence of the dissociation of those three subjects practised by the mineral geology; and which has extended its effect, to a certain degree, even into the pious philosophy of the Vindicia Geologica. "The consideration of the 66 evidences afforded by geological phenomena, (says "the eminent author of that discourse,) may "enable us to lay more securely the very foun"dations of Natural Theology, inasmuch as they 66 66 clearly point out to us a period antecedent to "the habitable state of our globe, and consequently, antecedent to the existence of its inha"bitants. When our minds become thus fami"liarised with the idea of a first beginning and "first creation of the beings we see around us, the proofs of design which the structure of those 66 66 66 66 beings affords, carry with them a more forcible "conviction of an intelligent Creator; and the hypothesis of an eternal succession of causes, is "thus at once removed. We argue thus thus-it is "demonstrable from Geology, that there was a period when no organic beings had existence : "these organic beings must therefore have had a beginning subsequently to this period and "where is that beginning to be found, but in the "will and fiat of an Intelligent and all-wise Creator1?" Sound as this conclusion is, yet surely it is of equal, nay, of prior importance 66 66 1 Vindic. Geol. p. 21. |