"In our own country, two views of the constitution of the world and of human nature have long been prevalent, differing widely from each other, and which, if legitimately followed out, would lead to distinct practical results. The one is, that the world, including both the physical and moral departments, contains within itself the elements of improvement, which time will evolve, and bring to maturity; it having been constituted on the principle of a progressive system, like the acorn in reference to the oak.

"The other hypothesis is, that the world was perfect at first, but fell into derangement, continues in disorder, and does not contain within itself the elements of its own rectification."

It is quite obvious, that in adopting the former of these views, in opposition to the latter, Mr Combe openly maintains opinions, in regard to the past and present condition of the human race, directly at variance with the doctrines of our divines, and of our national church. He nowhere pretends to conceal this; on the contrary, he constantly, throughout his whole work, refers to the doctrine of the corruption of human nature as a fundamental error, which has been adopted by divines in consequence of their entire ignorance of a true system of mental philosophy. A great part of his introductory chapter is devoted to shewing the causes of this and various other errors into which he supposes them to have fallen, and pointing out to them a course by which they may promote the intellectual and moral improvement of mankind more effectually than they have hitherto been able to do.

It may here be remarked, in the first place, that the question respecting the corruption of human nature, or, in other words, its degeneracy from its original state, is not a question dependent on any philosophical theory, or system of mental philosophy. It is purely a question

of fact, to be determined by the ordinary means by which we acquire information with regard to other facts. If Mr Combe thinks he is in possession of evidence sufficient to prove that the moral and intellectual faculties of man are at present in a state equal or superior to that in which they existed at his creation, let him produce this evidence, and we shall give it all due consideration. But it must be quite clear, that any evidence upon which we can come to a conclusion on such a subject, can have no connection with the peculiar nature of the faculties themselves with which man is endowed. It is of no consequence, as to the point at issue, whether man possesses sentiments of benevolence, veneration, and conscientiousness, or whether he is endued with propensities of destructiveness and combativeness. The question is, whether these, and all the other faculties, propensities, and sentiments which form part of his nature, are now in an equally perfect state as in the day when he came from the hands of his Creator. If Mr Combe can prove that they are so, or that, instead of degenerating, they have actually improved, it will be time enough for him to find fault with the doctrines of divines on the subject of human degeneracy.

To illustrate what I mean when I say, that it is of no consequence, as to this question, what the faculties are, I shall suppose the question to be, whether our breed of horses has degenerated from the time when it was first introduced into this island? In this case, it would not in the least tend to a solution of the question, to enter into any detail respecting the anatomy of the horse, or to shew that, at his first introduction, he had exactly four legs as at present; that he had then, as now, two eyes, two ears, two nostrils; that the form of the neck, the hoof, the pastern, and every part, was

similar to what it is now. All this, we would answer, has nothing to do with the question. What we want to know is, not what is his form, and what are his members, but has he, in his entire nature, degenerated or improved? Are his size, strength, or swiftness in the race, diminished or increased? Does he shew more or less sagacity, or is his average age lesser or greater than it was?

As it is obvious that these questions have no connection with the structure, form, and anatomy of the animal, so the question alluded to with regard to the degeneracy or improvement of man, is totally independent of any system we may happen to adopt with regard to the structure of his faculties.

Another remark that occurs on this part of Mr Combe's speculation, is this, that in his statement of the several systems, he mixes up two questions which are perfectly distinct. The one is,- Has man, as he at present exists, degenerated from his original state; or is he, and has he always been, from the beginning, in a state of slow and gradual improvement? Another, and quite a separate question, is,—supposing it to be shewn that the human race is now in an improving state,what are the means by which that improvement has been brought about in time past, and what are the best means for promoting this improvement now, and for raising man to the highest perfection of which his nature is capable? Are his present faculties, such as they are, sufficient for this purpose? or does he require the aids of revelation, and of spiritual influences, to lead him to the ultimate ends of his being, and to open to him the sources of his highest happiness? These are different questions, and will require to be separately considered; and although, in regard to the last of them, there may be some colour for supposing that something may depend upon our possessing a true

system of mental philosophy, I think it may appear hereafter that Mr Combe places far too high a reliance upon his own views of our mental faculties, and very much undervalues the knowledge which divines, in common with the rest of mankind, have hitherto possessed on the subject.

I may here repeat my regret, that, in coming to the consideration of both these questions, Mr Combe had not confined himself to a statement of his own views, instead of going out of his way to attack those of others. If the first view given here of the constitution of the world had been the true one, and if it could have been established by fair logical deductions from a sufficient number of undoubted facts, Mr Combe needed not to have troubled himself with any other that could be proposed. He might have satisfied himself with maintaining his own doctrine, and trusted to the harmony which must ever subsist between all truths, to reconcile his conclusions with a correct interpretation of Scripture.

The geologists who maintained, from the appearances of the different rocks, and other materials forming the outer crust of the earth, that this world must have existed many thousand years before the period generally assigned to the creation, at first excited great alarm in many religious and well-meaning persons, from the apprehension that their speculations would undermine the authority of the Mosaic writings. This alarm was unfounded, and is now no longer entertained. The geologists attacked no doctrine connected with Christianity. They properly and philosophically confined themselves to the proof of a fact, which is now established by such an overwhelming mass of evidence, that it can no longer be questioned. Had Mr Combe followed their example, and employed himself in a diligent

investigation of the facts bearing upon the point at issue, he probably would have come to different conclusions from those which he has now adopted. At all events, while he confined himself strictly to facts, and to pure philosophical investigation, he need not have feared the hostility of the divines, and it was entirely out of his province to attack any of their doctrines.

When Sir Isaac Newton proposed his theory of universal gravitation as accounting for all the phenomena of the motions of the heavenly bodies, as well as of those on the surface of the globe, he did not encumber himself with attempting to disprove the vortices of Descartes, or the cycles and epicycles of other astronomers. He was quite satisfied with proving his own theory, which he placed upon the basis of a broad induction of wellobserved facts, and rigid mathematical demonstration, and he left the admirers and supporters of other systems to maintain their own opinions, or reconcile them to the facts, as they best might.

Mr Combe's procedure differs from this in two respects. He has attacked the opinions of others; and he has not established his own on any thing like a satisfactory basis.

I shall, in what follows, go more at large into an examination of his fundamental proposition, that the world has been constituted, with regard to man, on the principle of a progressive system; and, after a full examination of the evidence, I trust I shall be able to shew,

1. That the analogy to be drawn from the geological facts, stated by Mr Combe himself, instead of supporting his general principle, leads to the very opposite conclusion.

2. That throughout the whole range of organic existence, from which any analogies can be drawn applicable to this question, these are uniformly adverse to