lives in z. If the succession were infinite, the last factor would be an exact equivalent to the first. If a produces two effects, b and c, equal to itself; and b and c each produce two effects, d and e, fand g, the two former unitedly equal to b, and the two latter unitedly equal to c; and if d, e, f, g each produce two effects, h and i, j and k, I and m, n and o, there being in each two-fold effect the exact equivalent of its cause; then, h, i, j, k, l, m, n, o, however they may differ among themselves, are together equal to a. No force has been annihilated. A force which exhausts itself in producing an effect or effects loses its identity, but does not cease to be. If it has exhausted itself in part, it subsequently exists partly in its effect, and partly in its unchanged identity. If it has exhausted precisely one-tenth of itself in producing twenty effects, then the remaining nine-tenths may be unchanged, and the one-tenth still continues to exist in its twenty effects. No force has been lost. If the ninetenths subsequently produce, either instantaneously or through a protracted period, one hundred effects, each differing from the other both in its nature and in the measure of force requisite to its production, still no portion of the original force has been annihilated. It continues in its effects, which are themselves causes of succeeding effects. The stream of cause flows on undiminished, and may be regarded as a series of effects dependent upon an Eternal First Cause, or as a succession of secondary causes which must have originated in an Efficient Primal Force. Nor is the case altered when we contemplate a cause acting in conjunction with one or more other causes and exhausting itself in producing ten thousand effects, in each of which it has had a different measure of efficiency; for, though we may be unable to recognize its exact equivalent in the

new forms assumed, we are impelled alike by reason and by the deductions of modern science to conclude that the initial force has not been destroyed. Blended with other forces, it still lives in ten thousand effects.

The indestructibility of force is taught by the talented Dr. J. R. Mayer, by Prof. Helmholtz, by Dr. Faraday, by Prof. Grove, by Prof. Liebig, by Dr. Carpenter, by Tyndall, Joule, Thomson-by nearly all scientists of the present day. Prof. W. R. Grove says, "In all phenomena the more closely they are investigated the more are we convinced that, humanly speaking, neither matter nor force can be created or annihilated, and that an essential cause is unattainable." * Prof. J. Clerk Maxwell says: "The total energy of any body or system of bodies, is a quantity which can neither be increased nor diminished by any mutual action of these bodies, though it may be transformed into any one of the forces of which energy is susceptible." + Prof. Helmholtz affirms: "No portion of force can be absolutely lost." Prof. Faraday declares: "The strict science of modern times has tended more and more to the conviction that force can neither be created nor destroyed. ... Let us not admit the destruction or creation of force without clear and constant proof." § Dr. W. B. Carpenter asserts: "As force is never lost in the inorganic world, so force is never created in the organic. . . . Plants restore to the inorganic world not only the materials, but the forces at the expense of which the vegetable fabric was constructed." It is the opinion of Prof. Liebig that,

*See Youmans' Correlation and Conservation of Forces, p. 199.
† Encyc. Brit., Art.

Youmans' Correlation and Conservation of Forces, p. 227.

§ Idem, pp. 359, 378.

|| Idem, pp. 420. 433.

"If a power could be annihilated, or in other words, have nothing as its effect, then there would be no contradiction involved in the belief that out of nothing also power could be created." * Sir Wm. Hamilton affirms, "Omnia mutantur; nihil interit, is what we think, what we must think... We think the causes to contain all that is contained in the effect; the effect to contain nothing which was not contained in the causes. . . . We are unable, on the one hand, to conceive nothing becoming something,or on the other, something becoming nothing. . . . In thought, causes and effects are thus, pro tanto, tautological; an effect always pre-existed potentially in its cause; and causes always continue actually to exist in their effects. There is a change of form, but, we are compelled to think, an identity in the elements of existence. . . . What is now considered as the cause may at another time be viewed as the effect; and vice versa." +

VI. FORCE CANNOT BE EVOLVED FROM MATTER, UNLESS IT HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN INVOLVED IN MATTER.

Heat, light, electricity, and magnetism may be eliminated from a lump of coal. They are not coal, nor any product of coal. Force is not matter. The heat of the coal is, science tells us, absorbed sunlight-force treasured up in convenient form, and ready for man's use. Amber, if rubbed, gives off electricity. Though not matter, it must have been involved in it, or it could not have been evolved from it. The flint, if struck, emits a spark. The light must have been imprisoned therein. These forces, if incapable of existing antecedent to and independent of matter, must be regarded as its invariable attendants; in which case, the latter must be viewed as

* See Youmans' Correlatiou and Conservation of Forces, p. 388. ↑ Metaphysics and Logic, pp. 533, 691.

a concomitant of the former. We must believe that there is no force without matter, and no matter without force. Whether the latter may or may not exist dissevered from the former, it cannot be evolved from it unless it has been previously involved in it.

CHAPTER XVI.

FORCE VERSUS MATERIALISM.

IN discussing the essence of matter it became apparent that the testimony of science warranted neither an assumption of the eternity of material existences, nor their evolution from nothingness. In the chapter just closed it has been shown that they could not have evolved from physical force, for it is inconceivable that an immaterial, impersonal, unintelligent agent could have originated objectivity. The theory that an Infinite Personality called them into being ex nihilo, by the fiat of His unconditioned Will, is encircled with fewer difficulties. Nor can they be regarded as force in repose, a species of congealed energy; for, though force can be eliminated from matter, it is not its transformation. That the two are not identical is evident, inasmuch as the former can be generated from the latter in indefinite amounts; as heat from iron-filings, by friction. They are alike in this, each demands the existence of a Primal Cause to explain its origin and continuance. In other respects they are totally dissimilar.

The essence of force, like the essence of matter, is unknown and indefinable. Consequently, until atheism is able to define its terms, why should it object to the terms, vital force, mental force, and spiritual force, on the ground that these are indefinite and incomprehensible? That they are in measure beyond man's comprehension