of the argument of Hume? Simply this,--that though the
producing Cause of all that appeared was competent to the formation of
gases and earths, metals and minerals, it would be unphilosophic to deem
him adequate to the origination of a single plant or animal, even to
that of a spore or of a monad. Ages pass by, and the Palaeozoic creation
is ushered in, with its tall araucarians and pines, its highly organized
fishes, and its reptiles of comparatively low standing. And how now, and
with what effect, does the argument apply? It is now rendered evident,
that in the earlier creation the producing Cause had exerted but a
portion of his power, and that he could have done greatly more than he
actually did, seeing that we now find him adequate to the origination of
vitality and organization in its two great kingdoms, plant and animal.
But, still confining ourselves with cautious skepticism within the
limits of our argument, we continue to hold that, as fishes of a high
and reptiles of a low order, with trees of the cone-bearing family, are
the most perfect specimens of their respective classes which the
producing Cause has originated, it would be rash to hold, in the absence
of proof, that he _could_ originate aught higher or more perfect. And
now, as yet other ages pass away, the creation of the great Secondary
division takes the place of that of the vanished Palaeozoic; and we find
in its few dicotyledonous plants, in its reptiles of highest standing,
in its great birds, and in its some two or three humble marsupial
mammals, that in the previous, as in the earlier creation, the producing
Cause had been, if I may so express myself, working greatly under his
strength, and that in this third creation we have a still higher display
of his potency. With some misgivings, however, we again apply our
argument. And now yet another creation,--that of the Tertiary period,
with its noble forests of dicotyledonous trees and its sagacious and
gigantic mammals,--rises upon the scene; and as our experience in
creations has now become very considerable, and as we have seen each in
succession higher than that which preceded it, we find that,
notwithstanding our assumed skepticism, we had, compelled by one of the
most deeply seated instincts of our nature, been secretly anticipating
the advance which the new state of things actually realizes. But
applying the argument once more, we at least assume to hold, that as the
sagacious elephant is the