juices were conveyed from the root to the fruit, and by which it was able to sustain the branches upon which the fruit grew. Let us consider the structure of the wood, which composed that stem or trunk; and let us ask, what is wood, in its nature and composition?

To this question, Natural History replies: " If "we entirely remove the bark, we perceive the "wood; which is a solid body, giving support and

66

66

66

strength to the tree. On which account, some "naturalists have regarded it as being with respect to trees, what bones are in the bodies of "animals. The ligneous, or woody folds, are at first soft and herbaceous, before they acquire the solidity of wood. They do not suddenly pass from the state of softness which they first have, "to the hardness of perfect wood; they only acquire the hardness of which they are capable, after many years. In a young tree, all those woody folds (I mean those sensibly apparent folds which indicate the growth of each year,) are "of unequal firmness, hardness, and density; "those of the centre being the hardest, and "those of the circumference the most tender. The hardness of these folds is, therefore, only effected by degrees1:-and, since Nature does nothing but by a progressive course, it is not surprising that wood acquires its hardness only by little and little."

66

66

1 DUHAMEL, La Physique des Arbres, tom. i. c. 3. p. 30.

2 Ibid. p. 45.

This is, indeed, the nature and composition of wood, according to the law established after creation by the Creating Agent, for the formation and gradual growth of the vegetable structure; and which we call, one of the laws of vegetable matter. But, we are now concerned exclusively with the first, created, unpropagated tree, and with its wood ; at the period of whose first formation those laws were to begin to operates In the wood of this tree, it is evident that none of those gradual processes took place; but it was created, by the will and immediate power of God, in the same form, and with the same structure, which, after it, was to be produced only by the operation of those laws. Its wood, therefore, was not formed" by degrees,' but " suddenly," its solidity was not acquired› 'by a progressive course -by little and little-after 'many years" not by a gradual hardening from as stated of softness and herbaceousness; for,' that has its origin in a growth from seed, from" whence this tree did not proceed. In this wood, therefore, the act of the Creator produced at once,' by the mode of creation, that form, structure, and composition, which in all succeeding trees is produced by the gradual process of lignification, which has been described.

667

66

ར། །

"

(

Here, then, we find the same first principle in the first formations of created vegetable matter, that we found in the first formations of created animal matter; a principle, common to both; viz. "That in those first formations the Creating

>

2

.66

J

Agent anticipated, by an immediate act, effects which were thenceforth to be produced only "by a gradual process, of which He then esta"blished the laws."

If a portion of that created tree now remained, and if a section of its wood were to be mingled with other sections of propagated trees, and submitted to the inspection and examination of a naturalist; what opinion and judgment would its -sensible phenomena suggest to him, respecting the mode of its first formation; and what would be his conclusion? If he were unapprised of its true origin, his mind would see nothing in its sensible phenomena but the laws of lignification; just as the mineral geologist sees nothing in the details of "the first formations of minerals, but precipita"tions, crystallisations, and dissolutions." He would, therefore, naturally pronounce of this, as of all the other sections of wood; that its "** fibres," when they first issued from the seed, "were soft "and herbaceous;" that they "did not suddenly

66

pass to the hardness of perfect wood," but, “after

many years," that the hardness of their folds, "which indicate the growth of each year," was therefore effected only by degrees;" and that, "since Nature does nothing but by a progressive

6.6

course, it is not surprising that its substance acquired its hardness only by little and little."

Physically true as the naturalist's reasoning would here appear to be, yet, like that of the anatomist, it would be morally and really false.

And why would it be false? For the same reason; because he concluded from mere sensible phenomena, to the certainty of a fact which could not be established by the evidence of sensible phenomena alone; namely, the mode of the first formation of the substance of created wood.

We thus find a second principle, common to the first formations both of animal and vegetable matter ; viz. "That their sensible phenomena alone, cannot "determine the mode of their formations; inas"much as the real mode was in direct contradiction "to the apparent indications of the phenomena." What has here been said of the solid parts of the vegetable structure, is applicable equally to all its parts; and to every member of the vegetable kingdom, at its first creation.

If, therefore, the natures of created bone and created wood had suffered them to subsist, and to be preserved until the present day; we plainly perceive, how easy it would have been to demonstrate to the science of physics, its absolute incompetence to determine any thing at all, by phenomena alone, concerning the MODE of the first formation of the first individuals composing the two kingdoms of terrestrial matter, animal and vegetable.

CHAPTER VII.

THERE only now remains to be considered, the third or mineral kingdom of this terrestrial system; and it appears probable to reason and philosophy, by prima facie evidence, that the principle determining the mode of first formation in two parts of this threefold division of matter, must have equal authority in this third part. And indeed, after the closest investigation of the subject, we can discover no ground whatever for supposing, that this third part is exempted from the authority of that common principle; or, that physics are a whit more competent to dogmatise concerning the mode of first formations, from the evidence of phenomena alone, in the mineral kingdom, than they have been found to be in the animal or vegetable; or, to affirm, from the indications of the former, that the mode of its first formation was more gradual and more tardy than that of the other two.

Let us therefore try this point, by proceeding with our comparison to those primitive mineral masses, whose natures have suffered them to subsist, and to be preserved until the present day; let us consider first, created rock, as we have considered first, created bone and wood; and let us ask, what is rock, in its nature and composition?

To this question, Mineralogy replies:

66

By