accuracy. They have taken forms which no geometer, no analytical integrater, could divine,-forms which, even arrived at approximately by our imperfect mathematical analysis, we could not imitate mechanically. Possessing, too, just those refractive indices which are adapted, in combination with those forms, to secure a minimum, indeed, for aught I know, a perfect degree of absence of spherical and chromatic aberration. Possessed, again, with an inexplicable power of adapting their form to the perfect vision of a star in infinite space, and to an object removed but a few inches from them. Supplied, again, with a self-acting diaphragm sensitive to light-not for vision, but for contracting and expanding so as to adapt the rays of light admitted into the marvellous camera obscura in such quantities only as are adapted to secure the proper impression on the retina. Need I refer to the black pigment for absorbing superfluous light; to all the accessories of the wondrous camera obscura; to the muscles which move it with mechanical design and contrivance; to the lids which veil it from light too injurious to be admitted into the dark chamber; to the contrivances for preserving the transparency of the external surface of the transparent cornea with a never-failing supply of moisture? Where am I to seek for the architects of this wondrous exhibition of skill and contrivance? Is it in the blood corpuscles or in the fluid in which they swim? The blood certainly was the agent by which all this structure was built up, with faultless, unerring accuracy, by no law of natural selection by the destruction of less perfect instruments. If I ask modern physiologists as to the structure of my eye, I am told it is like a fountain, which preserves its general form amid the unceasing motion of the particles which form it. The atoms which form my eye are constantly being laid down and taken up again. Constantly deposited from the vital stream of blood flowing through my body; as constantly taken up again into the general stream. Let this stream stop, and the marvellous structure from that instant commences to fall into irretrievable ruin. Where, I may ask, is the formative nisus which erected this skilful structure? Where dwells the constant formative nisus which preserves this structure when once it is built up? What architect endows the atoms which constitute the structure with such marvellous powers? Why do the same corpuscles which form the ear, with its marvellous auditory purposes, when they reach another part of the body, become such skilled artists in optical wisdom? Why in one part of the organ form lenses possessed with one refractive index, in another part of another, and then a third, every one mutually adapted amid a thousand, nay, myriads, of possible different refractive indices? What chemistry could combine the atoms constituting the blood into the differing structures of the eye? If formed, what mechanism could combine these structures with all their marvellous adaptation to the purposes of the eye? Can natural selection, ruled only by the stern necessity of destruction to the imperfect, answer these queries? No. Nor yet will the laws of vitality alone, superadded to the laws of chemical combination of the atoms of matter, answer my questions. My proud intellect can find no rest till it learns the humility necessary for all true knowledge. I must admit that the eye was not formed without skill in optics; that the ear was not formed without knowledge of sounds. Can atoms of matter do all this? What are these atoms? How do they act and react on one another? What are their mutual relations? "These same relations," says Sir J. Herschel, "in which they stand to one another are anything but simple ones. They involve all the 'ologies' and ail theometries,' and in these days we know something of what that implies. Their movements, their interchanges, their 'hates and loves,' their 'attractions and repulsions,' their correlations,' their what not, are all determined on the very instant. There is no hesitation, no blundering, no trial and error. A problem of dynamics, which would drive Lagrange mad, is solved instanter, 'Solvitur ambulando.' A differential equation which, algebraically written out, would belt. the earth, is integrated in an eye-twinkle, and all the numerical calculation worked out in a way to frighten Zerah Colborn, George Bidder, or Jedediah Buxton." What can solve such wonders as these? what account for such relations? "The presence of MIND is what solves the whole difficulty, so far, at least, as it brings it within the sphere of our own consciousness, and into conformity of our own experience of what action is." The most profound investigations into the laws and phenomena of nature, aided by all the powers of the human mind, assisted by all we know of human experience, bring us back, not to law, but the mind of the Lawgiver, as the only starting-point, the only-stand point, from which our reason can exercise itself. He that made the eye was skilled in optics. He said, "Let there be light, and there was light." He alone can say, "I form the light and create darkness." "I am the Lord, and there is none else, there is no God beside me. I girded thee, though thou hast not known me." Shall not we say with Job, "Hast thou not poured me out as milk, and curdled me like cheese? Thou hast clothed me with skin and flesh, and hast fenced me with bones and sinews"? Shall we not confess with David, "Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it "?" The darkness hideth not from Thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to Thee. For Thou hast possessed my reins Thou hast covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise Thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. My substance was not hid from Thee when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in Thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them"? The assertion" that the gradual reduction of all phenomena within the sphere of established law carries with it as a consequence the rejection of the miraculous," upon which assertion modern rationalism has invaded the domain of theology and natural philosophy, has only to be brought face to face with the highest inductions of modern science to meet its own refutation. We are not required to banish God, to banish a Creator from the physical world, to cultivate with freedom the revelations of modern science. The assumed laws which replace design by rigid fate, crumble before a calm, dispassionate investigation. As men of science, we can say that we believe not only that God created us and all things; we can confess even with heathen poets of old, "that in Him we live and move and have our being." That no disbelief in the miraculous, no knowledge of correlation of forces, no conservation of ris vitæ compels us to deny that "He left not Himself without witness in that He did good, and gave us rain from heaven, filling our hearts with food and gladness." Our philosophy still allows us with simple hearts to pray, "Give us this day our daily bread." We can still believe that no sparrow can fall from heaven without our Heavenly Father's knowledge and will. Nay, the more we know, the more deeply we investigate the phenomena of nature, the more are we compelled to admit our own ignorance. "Hardly do we guess aright at things that are upon earth, and with labour do we find the things that are before us." Laws of nature we confess, with Hooker, have in them "more than men have as yet attained to know, or perhaps ever shall attain, seeing the travail of wading herein is given of God to the sons of men, that perceiving how much the least thing in the world hath in it more than the wisest are able to reach unto, they might by this means learn with humility." Humbly we confess, with Bishop Butler, "other orders of creatures may perhaps be let into the secret counsels of Heaven, and have the designs and methods of Providence in the creation and government of the world communicated to them, but this does not belong to our rank and condition." Of one thing I feel the deepest conviction, that nothing man has yet discovered, no length to which science has been pursued, has at all educed any principle diametrically opposed to the truths of religion; any principle like law destroying the idea of creation and design which should lead us to regard Moses in no higher light than a Hebrew Descartes or a Newton. 1 It is alleged, however, that modern science has produced a great number of facts utterly irreconcileable with revelation. These so-called facts are derived, for the most part, from the sciences of geology, ethnology, anthropology, and philology. Now, I need not detain you by any lengthened argument in opposition to these statements. The able pamphlet entitled " Scientia Scientiarum," giving an account of the origin and objects of the Victoria Institute, has so fully entered into this branch of the subject, and is so well known to you, that I need not waste your time by repeating the long array of supposed contradictions between the facts of science and the records of revealed truth which have fallen before a dispassionate review of the progress of science. Revelation has oftentimes suffered much by the over-zeal-laudable though it be in itself-of its defenders accepting crude scientific theories as demonstrated facts. I have watched the progress of modern science with much satisfaction, as I have seen one supposed contradiction of science to revelation after another fall away. The infant sciences in their imperfect stage have presented difficulties to revelation which their advanced progress has of itself removed. The pursuit of this inquiry; the investigation of facts alleged to be in opposition to revelation; the examination of the contradictory and conflicting hypotheses of all the principal "ologies" of the day, is the work to which this Institute proposes to devote itself. I feel no doubt as to the result. I believe the more intimately we study the book of nature, hard as it is to read aright, difficult as its hieroglyphics are to decipher, yet, if we do so in a humble spirit, I doubt not its records will confirm the records of the Bible; in that faith I will venture to conclude my address, in the words of Bishop Butler : "Let us adore that infinite wisdom, and power, and goodness, which is above our comprehension. To whom hath the root of wisdom been revealed? or who hath known her wise counsels? There is one wise and greatly to be feared; the Lord sitting upon His throne. He created her, and saw her, and numbered her, and poured her out upon all his works.' If it be thought a considerable thing to be acquainted with a few, a very few, of the effects of infinite power and wisdom, the situation, bigness, and revolution of some of the heavenly bodies, what sentiments should our minds be filled with concerning Him who appointed to each its place, and measure, and sphere of motion, all which are kept with the most uniform constancy? Who 'stretched out the heavens, and telleth the number of the stars, and calleth them all by their names? Who laid the foundations of the earth, who comprehendeth the dust of it in a measure, and weigheth the mountains in scales and the hills in a balance?' And when we have recounted all the appearances which come within our view, we must add, 'Lo, these are parts of His ways; but how little a portion is heard of Him? Canst thou by searching find out God? Canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection? It is high as Heaven; what canst thou do? Deeper than Hell; what canst thou know?' The conclusion is, that in all lowliness of mind we set lightly by ourselves; that we form our temper to an implicit submission to the Divine Majesty; beget within ourselves an absolute resignation to all the methods of His providence, in His dealings with the children of men; that in the deepest humility of our souls, we prostrate ourselves before Him, and join in that celestial song, 'Great and marvellous are Thy works, Major-General CRAWFORD said, that in rising to move a vote of thanks to the Rev. Mr. Mitchell for his very able and admirable paper, he was fully aware that he was speaking in the presence of a number of gentlemen of high literary attainments and deep scientific knowledge. It was because he could lay claim to no such acquirements that he undertook the duty of moving a vote of thanks to the rev. gentleman who had just sat down. He felt that any person who possessed the power of grappling with such subjects of thought and magnitude, and clearly arranging the interesting facts which were recorded in the paper then read, so as to reduce them to his (General Crawford's) intelligent appreciation, was entitled to his gratitude. He had ever felt convinced that a thorough grasp and mastery of a subject was necessary to simplification. When, then, he looked upon the millions in this country who were upon the same platform as himself as to mental power, and at the thousands who were now busy distilling the poison of doubt and |