"Ah!" interposed the skeptic, "I deny the major premise of this last syllogism; you must prove that all force is imperishable."

"How do you prove that any force is imperishable?" replied the preacher.

"I prove the imperishableness of any and of all force," replied the skeptic, "by the admitted fact that its quantity is fixed; that is, that force can be neither increased nor diminished, neither created nor destroyed. Do you not believe this?"

"I do not admit conservation of force to be the fact, in your terms," replied the preacher, "but only that such is the theory by which you scientists try to account for phenomena that can, as yet, be accounted for as well in no other way.

"You certainly do not tell me," exclaimed the skeptic, "that you, with your learning, do not accept the doctrine of the conservation and correllation of force?"

"I accept it as much as Herbert Spencer accepts it.

'Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.'

2

1

Those who know the most say the least. Herbert Spencer says the persistence of force is an ultimate truth of which no inductive proof is possible.' Youmans says 'it is not without its difficulties, which time alone must be trusted to remove.' Grove, Faraday, Stewart, LeConte and Bain assume, rather than attempt to prove, the doctrine of the conservation of force. Do you believe these doctrines yourself? I can see such correllation as heat into electricity, and of electricity into heat; but I do not see gravitation correllated or transferred into any other manifestation of force, or of any other force into gravitation. Besides, if force can be and is exhaustively correllated backwards and forwards, how can your theory of evolution be true, that everything progresses forever? The constancy or inconstancy in the quantity of force depends upon whether its source is personal or impersonal, and this ques

1 First Principles, Chap. VI, § 59.

2 Introduction to Cor. and Con. of Forces, xiv.

tion of source must be first settled.

The manifestation of impersonal force, that is, force manifested in things as well as persons—such as the blind force of heat, electricity, or gravitation-is as an ocean of force lifted and broken at times into individual waves that lapse and subside into the infinite fullness. Personal or will force, originating in the mind of an Infinite Person, is deposited and perpetually correllated in the wills of finite, conscious persons. If a Person did not create force, force has certainly created not only a person, but multitudes of persons, for man is here. If there be no God, and unintelligent, eternal Force created everything, then it was indeed a miraculous leap for the conscious force manifested in every man's will to come up out of what you call unconscious force lurking only in matter. If unconscious force originated everything, which one of its forces did the work? Did unconscious

gravitation create everything? Did unconscious electricity create everything? Did unconscious chemical affinity create everything?

"Do you deny that the quantity of force in the universe is fixed?" inquired the skeptic.

66

Why should it be fixed, and who is to fix it?" replied the preacher.

"Excuse me, if I insist

upon a

direct answer."

"Then," said the preacher, "I admit that the quantity of force is fixed; but it is infinite."

"Nonsense!" exclaimed the skeptic.

"It is more logical, and not so difficult,” réplied the preacher, to suppose that your creative nature, in originating and fixing the quantity of force would have provided an infinite quantity, than to suppose that she would have experimented upon the possible insufficiency of a finite quantity."

"How could there be any possible insufficiency' of force, even if the quantity were finite?" asked the skeptic, in a puzzled tone.

"If nature had any plan to which she invariably worked, we might suppose that she would have known exactly how much and what kind of force she would need, and might, with good reason, have fixed its quantity in finite limits;

but as you, Buckner, Vogt, and Moleschott, deny that there is design or plan in nature, she could not, therefore, know how much force she might need in her blind work, and might well be expected to fix enough once for all, and make it infinite. Any way, nature, in the prodigality of her works, seems to be quite confident of having enough stuff to keep up, and even extend, her phenomena. The quantity of force must be infinite or self-limited; for you deny any God to limit it. But if you say that it is not infinite, then you must prove definitely how much less it is; because if it be not infinite it may be zero, and vanish entirely. I admit that force is in the universe. Those who assert a given quantity must define and prove the quantity. The fact is, my unbelieving friend, neither you nor any one else knows much about this thing you call force. The definition of force I have used is about as good as any, if not the best; but keep in mind that I argue this question from your exclusive standpoint of science, not from mine, of both science