"Let him that thinks he stands, take heed lest he and gaolers to carry home conviction of its

and that it is very probable there is not one. unknown cause or causes, which taken in a And such being the case, we can know no- collective sense may signify a number of thing about one, and may be for all we can causes co-operating or working together contell, insulting him by the mummeries and non-jointly, and which may be and are expressed seuse commonly called religion, and if there by the collective term, " The unknown powbe a god with any of those noble feelings we er." Is this the idea of god against which admire in men, he must shrink with horror" M." is contending? Let us see, "There is and disgust from the fiendism and meanness or is not a god "-very good; of course noexhibited by Christians, even in their pre- thing can be plainer. But pray, Mr. "M.," tended protection of him. G. J. H. what do you mean here by the word god? Do you mean Juggernaut or the vis viva? Have you any definite idea under the term? Again, "There is or is not a somebody or a something, a nobody or a nothing, who existed before the worlds. There is or is not an intelligent existence, large or small, good or bad, local or universal, by whom all things were made, itself unmade." Here is a jumble! What idea is "M." attacking now? Certainly not the idea contained in his motto; certainly not the philosophic idea of god -of the unknown power. No philosopher ever asserted that god existed "before the worlds," or that "all things were made by him (out of nothing), himself unmade." Mr. "M." next runs on with a long string of there is or there is not," to which the reader is referred, see p. 250.

[The preceding remarks were not perceived
to refer to the subject of " M.'s" article in
last week's Oracle, until they were set up;
but as they appear to place the subject of
theological dogmatism in another practical
point of view, it has been deemed useful to
present them.
W. C.]

IS THERE NO GOD?

To the Editor of the Oracle of Reason. SIR.-It has often occured to me, as well as to other parties who have given their attention to controverted subjects, that if men would take the pains to give clear and precise" definitions of their terms, there would be much less wrangling, cavilling, and disputing The question of demonstration on either in the world than there is at present. In the side is very frankly and very properly given Oracle of last week there is an article headed up, and the discussion is referred to the "suf"Is there a god?" and signed " M.," which, ficient reason." Ask a Jew, have you a from a want of this necessary qualification," sufficient reason" for believing that your appears to my mind an awfully absurd jumble of conflicting ideas, beginning from no recognizable principle, and winding up without any tangible conclusion.

The writer begins with a quotation from Mirabaud's (or rather, Baron D'Holbach's) System of Nature," which he places at the head of his article, as a kind of motto, and if he had attended to his own motto, he certainly could never have fallen into the absurdities which are exhibited in his article. In combatting the idea of a god, he strikes all around, like an Irishman at a fair (a fault or failing common to Atheists); hitting now at the philosophic idea of god, which he jumbles with the bible idea, then at the bible idea, which he jumbles with the philosophic idea. In short, it is difficult to say what object "M." is attacking; and I have some doubt whether he had any distinct conception himself whether it was Juggernaut or Jehovah, the animus mundi of the ancient philosophers, or the vis viva of the moderns, against which he was exhibiting his prowess and exhausting his valor. Let us take a few specimens, begiuning at the beginning, that is with the motto. "The word god is, for the most part, used to denote the impenetrable cause of those effects which astonish mankind, which man is not competent to explain." Here then is the philosophic idea of god. The idea of an

Jehovah, or lord of hosts, who you say drowned
the Egyptians in the Red Sea, and helped
you to massacre the Philistines, the Ammon-
ites, and others of your neighbours, and to
rob them of their lands in order that he might
give them to your forefathers, who were such
a highly moral and humane people that they
were despised by all the civilised nations of
the earth, at that time existing? What will
be the answer of the Jew? Of course that he
has a
6. sufficient reason " for believing. If
the lord of hosts would give Mr. " M." a land
flowing with milk and honey, perhaps he also
would have a "sufficient reason" for believ-
ing. To avoid details, it may be affirmed
that if we go round the world, we shall find
that every superstitionist " from Indus to the
pole," has a "sufficient reason” (to him) for
believing in the kind of god or unknown power
in which he does believe; and by the same
rule we shall find where we meet with an iso-
lated case of an Atheist here and there, he
likewise will declare that he perceives (what
is to him) a sufficient reason for believing
that there is no god at all. But if we ask
for demonstration on either side, we shall be
at once told that the world is governed by an
"impenetrable cause, which man is not com-
petent to explain."

When a difficult question like the present is started, it is amusing to observe how aux

ious each party is to throw the burden of
proof upon their opponents. Mr. "M." says,
"It is a rule of logie, and a very sensible
rule, that the onus probandi, that is, the bur-
then or weight of proving, rests on those
who affirm a proposition. Very true Mr. "M."
it is a rule of logic, and a very sensible rule
too; let us see then how it applies. "There
is a god;" here is an affirmation, and who-
ever makes such affirmation is bound by the
rules of logic to prove his assertion. But
here is another proposition equally dogmatic,
"There is not a god." Now the same
rule of logic which calls upon the Theist to
prove his assertion "there is a god," also
calls upon the Atheist to prove his position,
"there is not a god." Oh! but I shall be
told this is not a fair and correct statement
of the question; the Atheist does not say
dogmatically or affirmatively "there is not a
god." Then I tell you, unless be affirm this
much he is not an Atheist, but a sceptic. If
the Atheist claim the convenient privilege of
advancing his proposition with a qualifica-
tion, saying, "I think, or believe there is no
god; in that case the Theist may claim a
like privilege, and then the onus probandi
lies-on neither side each side may be
asked for their "sufficient reasons" why
they think or believe so and so, but neither
side is bound to prove by the rules of logic.
The question, after all, is not so very diffi-
cult, so far as the general conclusion is con-
cerned, as some people would fain make it
appear. Adopting "M.'s" phraseology, "there
is or there is not a power which controls
the general operations of nature; or there
are or are not a power or powers operating
conjointly by which the general results de-
nominated the phenomena of nature are
effected." The real question, so far as it
may be regarded as a question of mere fact,
is not whether there be a power or powers
operating throughout the universe in accor-
dance with fixed laws or rules of action, but
the question is, what are the qualities or at-
tributes of this power or powers? And this
question can only be determined by referring
to the laws or rules by which this power
operates, so far as these laws or rules come
under the observation of man. All the pow.
ers of nature, whether we call them by the
names of god, attraction, repulsion, affinity,
or by any other name, have this one charac-
teristic, they are invisible--no man hath seen
them at any time, Yours,

T. S. MACKINTOSH,

THEORY OF REGULAR GRADATION.

XX.

I SHALL this week describe the leading characteristics of the remaining subdivision of the invertebrata, namely, the mollusca. The

shells of these animals are remarkable for
their want of symmetry on the two sides of
the body and their inconstancy in animals
of similar structure. The shells of the con-
chifera (the muscle is an example) usually
consist of two moveable pieces placed on the
exterior of the body, connected by ligament
and muscle; they have a muscular foot and
a pair of tentacula. In the cephalopodons
mollusca we recognise the transition from
the external unorganised shells of the inver-
tebrata to the internal organised bones of the
vertebrata. The shells are sometimes external,
as in the nautilus, and sometimes internal,
as in the sepia. In this complicated class of
animals we find a near approach to the car.
tilaginous fishes, in the presence of cranium,
spinal column, &c., in a rudimentary form.
"The greater number of the mollusca being
aquatic, their nerves present the same pale
and soft characters observed in the other
aquatic invertebrates; hence the difficulty
of indicating their particular distributions.
Here, as in the radiata, the same tendency
to accumulate nerves around the entrance to
the alimentary canal prevails, but in this case
more generally accompanied with ganglia,
In the lowest classes of the divisiou, as the
tunicata and conchifera, the nervous chords
are placed beneath the alimentary canal: in
the two next classes, gasteropoda and ptero-
poda, they are more in the vicinity of the
stomach; and in the cephalopoda, which is
the last and highest of the division, the ner-
vous ganlia attain a more elevated position,
they cease to embrace the œsophagus; and a
distinct brain, as in the vertebrata, with nu-
merous symmetrical ganglia along the abdo
men, take their place."

This great division of the animal kingdom living chiefly on soft food, masticating organs are little required by them, hence they are often but slightly developed, and in some cases wholly absent. But their food is greatly varied and often coarse, so as to require a complicated form of alimentary caual, and a high development of glandular apparatus. The greater number of the animals which compose this class are aquatic, and enjoy a branchial respiration; some, however, breathe by lungs in the air. In the ascidia the heart is very simple, consisting merely of a thin membranous ventricle destitute of valves. The conchifera have two auricles and a ventricle; the gasteropoda and pteropoda possess a strong auricle and ventricle provided with valves. In the ce phalopoda there is an aortic heart, and two branchial hearts, or dilatations; in these animals the blood having been carried to the system by the arteries is returned by the veins to the branchial fringes; in some bivalves, however, a portion of it is sent direct to the heart without passing through the

respiratory organ. In the gasteropodous and other mollusca the rectum passes through the ventricle.

A curious circumstance connected with the couchifera is, that the eggs on escaping from the ovary, are deposited between two layers of the branchial membrane, where they increase in size, and undergo incubation.

(Concluded.)

W. C.

to assist any or every party, as far as their means would extend, in destroying the barriers to man's freedom and happiness-WITHOUT FEAR OF THE CONSEQUENCES. This was the light in which some of them I knew had looked upon socialism, and I hope yet to see them resolve to carry it out. In this proceeding I felt myself honest, and fancied my conduct honourable; I had merely expressed my opinions and my wishes, to both my friends and acquaintances, and upon the arrival of the president informed him of my labour. He charged me with

'YOU WILL INJURE OUR CAUSE,' acting underhandedly. And why? Because he was not present. What was his presence to me-I had But no to do with principles, not with men? sooner did he come, than he stated that he wanted the attendance of the members only to hear the accounts, &c., which of course led to my departure; so that, had I neglected the opportunity which offered at tea-time, I should have had none, for I left the city the next day. Here are a number of individuals holding a large hall, capable of accom modating between two thousand and three thousand persons, making no other use of it than for dancing on a Monday evening, or occasionally letting it for the same purpose to other parties-and why? Because they cannot, they will tell you, get a lecturer -a rational lecturer, one who carries the Jew-Book in one hand and the "Book of the New Moral World" in the other, giving you a quotation from each alternately. But these parties would fain have you believe they are free inquirers, lovers of truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; yet when an offer is made for a Socialist lecturer to address the public in their hall, they say, "He will injure the property; he has been prosecuted for blasphemy; we must not countenance him; our name is bad enough, without having atheism tacked to it." Sage regenerators of the human race! Were the Socialists first denounced as Atheists upon the appearance of the Oracle? No! Years before that time, when Robert Owen made his celebrated decla ration that "all the religions in the world were founded in error," they were rightly judged to be such; for all the religions in the world rest upon a belief in a god or gods, as a first principle. But what if the two circumstances were contemporaneous, viz. the appearance of the Oracle and the denunciation of the Socialists as Atheists? Am I or others to hold our peace, and suffer those to whose welfare and happiness we have devoted ourselves, to remain in the dark, with respect to an important fact, viz.-that there are as many probabilities in favor of atheism as there are in favor of goddism; one which well understood would speedily remove their misery-are we to remain supine, and hold our peace, lest we might injure a party who could not go so far as we did? What if we were the cause of their utter annihilation, if, in addition to establishing their economical views we likewise destroyed the very foundation of superstition and removed the cause of an immense amount of misery and degradation? What would the destruction of a party be to the happiness of a state? We were prepared to take the consequences of our movement, we have met them unflinchingly, and glorious have been the results!

THE reflections in my last, under this head, were
suggested by a recent visit to Bristol, where the cir-
cumstances connected with the starting of the Oracle
were brought forcibly to my mind by the conduct, or
rather the expressions, of certain parties there dur-
ing my stay. Having accompanied Mr. HOLYOAKE
from Gloucester to my native place, I suggested the
advisability of his lecturing in the Hall of Science,
on the Sunday evening, there having been no Social
lecturer there for some time. He stated that he had
no objection, if it was agreeable, and gave me leave
to apply to the president, to know his opinion.
This I did, and received in reply that he "should
not like it; for he had reason to believe they had lost
a large sum of money through not letting the hall,
to some parties who wanted such a place, in conse-
queace of SOUTHWELL'S conduct," which had
made socialism stink in the nostrils of the respectable
inhabitants of Bristol. Knowing the character of
the individual, I did not waste any time by remon-
strance, but determined to wait until Sunday even-
ing, when I knew there would be a tea-meeting, at
which the quarter's accounts would be read, and the
officers or officer of the branch be there with the
members. Just before, I believe, the tea was served,
the president left, and did not return until its con-
clusion; this did not prevent my entering upon the
subject of the refusal of the hall for a lecture that
evening, and to my surprise I found that nearly
every member, every one to whom I spoke, declared
their willingness to hear any one, and for the hall to
be open to every one. I learnt, however, at the
same time, that they had never expressed such an
opinion to the president, and that he might be truly
said to represent their conduct, if not their feelings
or wishes. I also discovered, that they were in such
a strait that the really liberal-minded conld do no-
thing for the cause of free inquiry, which since
Southwell's death had been miserably burked in
Bristol, its former companions being ashamed of
such company. I then seriously advised the forma-
tion of a class of Free Inquirers, out of the remnant
of the branch, before it was completely scattered; to
be entirely distinct from the Social body, the mem-
bers already in that society either leaving it or re-
maining, as they may prefer; I advised the former,
as it would leave the class untrammelled, and en-
able the members to contribute more liberally to
carry out its objects. These would be the distribu-
tion of liberal tracts; delivery of lectures; provid-
ing suitable lecture rooms upon the occasion of a
visit similar to Holyoake's, in which a lover of truth
might communicate his views to those who chose
to attend to hear him; and to be, in fact, ever ready

No sooner did the Oracle appear, than numbers of the Socialists (or so called ones) in Bristol busied

* See "Philo Publicola," at the beginning of this in Bristol Gaol. Price Threepenee. This work article in last week's Oracle.