An Expository Outline of the "Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation" Part 1

An Expository Outline of the "Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation"

by Anonymous.

ADVERTIs.e.m.e.nT.

The following tractate first appeared in the form of a literary review in a supplement of the ATLAS; but two impressions of that journal having been long since exhausted, and inquiries still continuing numerous and urgent, the proprietor has granted permission for the article to be reprinted in a separate, more convenient, and perhaps enduring vehicle than that of a newspaper.

Few works of a scientific import have been published that so promptly and deeply fixed public attention as the _Vestiges of Creation_, or elicited more numerous replies and sharper critical a.n.a.lysis and disquisition. Upon so vast a question as the evolution of universal creation differences of opinion were natural and unavoidable. Many have disputed the accuracy of some of the author's facts, and the sequence and validity of his inductive inferences; but few can withhold from him the praise of a patient and intrepid spirit of inquiry, much occasional eloquence, and very considerable powers of a.n.a.lysis, systematic induction, arrangement and combination.

In what follows the leading objects kept in view have been--first, an expository outline of the author's facts and argument; next, of the chief reasons by which they have been impugned by Professor SEDGWICK, Professor WHEWELL, Mr. BOSANQUET, and others who have entered the lists of controversy. These arrayed, the concluding purpose fitly followed of a brief exhibition of the relative strength of the main points in issue, with their bearing on the moral and religious interests of the community.

It is the fourth and latest edition that has been submitted to investigation. In this impression the author has introduced several corrections and alterations, without, however, any infringement or mitigation of its original scope and character. More recently appeared his "Explanations," a Sequel to the "Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation;" in which the author endeavours to elucidate and strengthen his former position. This had become necessary in consequence of the number of his opponents, and the inquiry and discussion to which the original publication had given rise. Of this, also, a lengthened review was given in the ATLAS, which has been included; so that the reader will now have before him a succinct outline of a novel and interesting topic of philosophical investigation.

In the present reprint a few corrections have been made, and the ill.u.s.trative table at page 34, and some other additions, introduced.

_London, January_ 1, 1846.

AN EXPOSITORY OUTLINE

OF THE

"VESTIGES OF THE NATURAL HISTORY OF CREATION."

It rarely happens that speculative inquiries in England command much attention, and the _Vestiges of Creation_ would have probably formed no exception, had it not been from the unusual ability with which the work has been executed. The subject investigated is one of vast, almost universal, interest; for everyone--the low, in common with the high in intellect--find enigmas in creation that they would gladly have unriddled, and promptly gather round the oracle who has boldly stepped forth to cut the knot of their perplexities. The first impression made, too, is favourable. No very striking originality, eloquence, or genius, is displayed; yet there is ingenuity; and though the author betrays the zeal of an advocate, desirous of leading to a determinate and _material_ conclusion, his address, like that of the apostle of temperance, is mostly mild and equable, with occasionally a little gentlemanly fervour to give animation to his discourse. His style is mostly felicitous, sometimes beautiful, lucid, precise, and elevated. In tone and manner of execution, in quiet steadiness of purpose, in the firm, intrepid spirit with which truth, or that which is conceived to be true, is followed, regardless of startling presentments, the _Vestiges_ call to mind the _Mecanique Celeste_, or _Systeme du Monde_. In caution, as in science, the author is immeasurably inferior to LAPLACE; but in magnitude and boldness of design he transcends the ill.u.s.trious Frenchman. LAPLACE sought no more than to subject the celestial movements to the formulas of a.n.a.lysis, and reconcile to common observation terrestrial appearances; but our author is far more ambitious--more venturesome in aim--which is nothing less than to lift the veil of ISIS, and solve the phenomena of universal nature. With what success remains to be considered. That great skill and cleverness, that a very superior mastery is evinced, we have conceded, and, we will also add, great show of fairness in treatment and conclusion.

No partial opening is made; the great design, in all its extent, is manfully grappled with. The universe is first surveyed, next the mystery of its origin. After ranging through sidereal s.p.a.ce, examining the bodies found there, their arrangement, formation, and evolution, the author selects our own planet for especial interrogation. He disembowels it, scrutinizing the internal evidences of its structure and history, and thence infers the causes of past vicissitudes, existing relations, and appearances. These disposed of, the surface is explored, the phenomena of animal and vegetable existence contemplated, and the sources of vital action, s.e.xual differences, and diversities of species a.s.signed. Man, as the supreme head and last work of progressive creation, challenges a distinct consideration; his history and mental const.i.tution are investigated, and the relation in which a sublime reason stands to the instinct of brutes discriminated. The end and purpose of all appropriately form the concluding theme, which finished, the curtain drops, and the last sounds heard are that the name of the Great Unknown will probably never be revealed; that "praise will elicit no response," nor any "word of censure" be parried or deprecated.

"Give me," exclaimed ARCHIMEDES, "a fulcrum, and I will raise the earth." "Give me," says the author of the _Vestiges_, "gravitation and development, and I will create a universe." ALEXANDER'S ambition was to conquer a world, our author's is to create one. But he is wrong in saying that his is the "first attempt to connect the natural sciences into a history of creation, and thence to eliminate a view of nature as one grand system of causation." The attempt has been often made, but utterly failed; its results have been found valueless, hurtful--to have occupied without enlarging the intellect, and the very effort has long been discountenanced. Great advances, however, have been made in science since system-making began to be discredited; nature has been perseveringly ransacked in all her domains, and many extraordinary secrets drawn from her laboratory. Astronomy and geology, chemistry and electricity, have greatly extended the bounds of knowledge; still, we apprehend, we are not yet sufficiently armed with facts to resolve into one consistent whole her infinite variety.

Efforts at generalization, however, and the systematic arrangement of natural phenomena, are seldom wholly fruitless. If false, they tend to provoke discussion--to lead to active thought and useful research. A solitary truth, though new and useful, rarely obtains higher distinction than to be quietly placed on the rolls of science, while a bold speculation, traversing the whole field of creation, and smoothing all its difficulties, satisfies for the moment, and fixes general attention.

Of this the _Vestiges of Creation_ are an example. Without adding to our positive knowledge by a single new discovery, demonstration, or experiment, they have excited more interest than the _Principia_ of NEWTON. From this popular success, if good do not accrue, no great evil need be antic.i.p.ated. Hypotheses are most hurtful when accredited by an irreversible authority--when erected into a tribunal without appeal, they become the arbitrary dictator in lieu of the handmaid of science.

Discussion and invention, in place of being stimulated, are then fettered by them; the human mind is enslaved, as Europe was for centuries by the _Physics_ of ARISTOTLE, and still continues to be in some of the ancient retreats and conservatories of exploded errors. But these form the exceptions, not the rule of the age, which is free and equal inquiry. Errors have ceased to have prescriptive immunities; and mere conjectures, however sanctioned or plausible, if inconsistent with science--with the ascertained facts of experiment and observation, are speedily pa.s.sed into the region of dreams and chimeras.

Whether this will be the fate of our author remains to be proved. The moment selected for his appearance has at least been well chosen. The _Vestiges_ have the air of novelty, a long time having elapsed since any one had the hardihood to propound a new system of Nature. In common with most manifestations of our time, his effort exhibits a marked improvement on the crudities of his predecessors in the same line of architectural ambition. Science has been called to his aid, and the patient ingenuity with which he has sought to make the latest discoveries subservient to his purpose challenges admiration, if not acquiescence. Some of our contemporaries have been warmed into almost theological aversion by the boldness of his conclusions, but we see little cause for fear, and none for bitterness or apprehension. More closely Nature is investigated and deeper the impression will become of her majesty and might. Unlike earthly greatnesses, she loses no power--no grandeur--no fascination--no prestige, by familiarity. The greatest philosophers will always rank among her greatest admirers and most devout and fervent wors.h.i.+ppers.

Had our author proved all he has a.s.sumed our faith would not be lessened, nor our wonder diminished. Whether matter or spirit has been the world's architect, the astounding miracle of its creation is not the less. What does it import whether it resulted direct from the fiat of Omnipotence, or intermediately from the properties He impressed, or the law of development He prescribed? He who gave the law, who infused the energies by which Chaos was trans.m.u.ted into an organized universe, remains great and inscrutable as ever.

It is time, however, that we entered upon a more detailed and closer investigation of the _Vestiges of Creation_. Our purpose is not hastily, and without examination, to deprecate, deny, or controvert; but patiently, and without prejudice, to inquire, to submit faithfully and intelligibly the outlines of a remarkable treatise; describe briefly its scope and bearing, the arguments by which they are supported, and the counter reasons by which they appear to be wholly or partially impugned.

Our readers will thus be enabled to appreciate the merits of a controversy, the most comprehensive and interesting that for a lengthened period has occupied the attention of the scientific and intellectual world.

For greater clearness of exposition we shall endeavour to follow the order observed by the author in the division and treatment of his subjects, commencing first with the

BODIES OF s.p.a.cE.

The author opens his subject with a brief but luminous outline of the arrangement and formation of the astral and planetary systems of the heavens. He first describes the solar system, of which our earth is a member, consisting of the sun, planets, and satellites with the less intelligible orbs termed comets, and taking as the uttermost bounds of this system the orbit of Ura.n.u.s, it occupies a portion of s.p.a.ce not less than three thousand six hundred millions of miles in diameter. The mind cannot form an exact notion of so vast an expanse, but an idea of it may be obtained from the fact, that, if the swiftest racehorse ever known had began to traverse it at full speed at the time of the birth of MOSES, he would only yet have accomplished half his journey. Vast as is the solar system, it is only one of an infinity of others which may be still more extensive. Our sun is supposed to be a star belonging to a constellation of stars, each of which has its accompaniment of revolving planets; and the constellation itself with similar constellations to form revolving cl.u.s.ters round some mightier centre of attraction; and so on, each astral combination increasing in number, magnitude, and complexity, till the mind is utterly lost in the vain effort to grasp the limitless arrangement.

Of the stars astronomers can hardly be said to know anything with certainty. Sirius, which is the most l.u.s.trous, was long supposed to be the nearest and most within the reach of observation, but all attempts to calculate the distance of that luminary have proved futile. Of its inconceivable remoteness some notion may be formed by the fact, that the diameter of the earth's annual orbit, if viewed from it, would dwindle into an invisible point. This is what is meant by the stars not having, like the planets, a _parallax_; that is, the earths' orbit, as seen from them, does not subtend a measurable angle. With two other stars, however, astronomers have unexpectedly and recently been more fortunate than with Sirius, and have been able to calculate their distances from the earth. The celebrated BESSEL, and soon afterwards, the late Mr.

HENDERSON, astronomer royal for Scotland, were the first to surmount the difficulty that had baffled the telescopic resources of the HERSCHELS.

BESSEL detected a parallax of one-third of a second in the star 61 Cygni, and in the constellation of the Centaur HENDERSON found another star whose parallax amounted to one second. Of the million of fixed glittering points that adorn the sky, these are the only two whose distances have been calculated, and to express them, miles, leagues, or orbits seems inadequate. Light, whose speed is known to be 192,000 miles per second, would be three years in reaching our earth from the star of HENDERSON; and starting from BESSEL'S star and moving at the same rate it could only reach us in ten years. These are the nearest stars, but there are others whose distances are immeasurably greater, and whose light, though starting from them at the beginning of creation, may not have reached our globe!

The stars visible to the eye are about 3,000, but the number increases with every increase of telescopic power, and may be said to be innumerable. They are not of uniform l.u.s.tre or form, but vary in figure and brightness. Some of them have a _nebulous_ or cloudy appearance; and there are entire cl.u.s.ters with this dusky aspect, mostly pervaded, however, with luminous points of more brilliant hue. In the outer fields of astral s.p.a.ce Sir WILLIAM HERSCHEL observed a mult.i.tude of nebulae, one or two of which may be seen by the naked eye. All of them, when seen by instruments of low power, look like ma.s.ses of luminous vapour; but some of them had brighter spots, suggesting to Sir WILLIAM the idea of a condensation of the nebulous matter round one or more centres. But when these luminous ma.s.ses are examined by more powerful instruments many of them lose their cloudy form, and are resolved into s.h.i.+ning points, "like spangles of diamond dust." It is in this way several nebulae have yielded to the gigantic reflector of Lord ROSSE, and others with still greater optical resources may follow. This brings us to the first questionable and controversial portion of the _Vestiges_; namely,--the

NEBULAR HYPOTHESIS.

It is among the gaseous bodies just described, in the outer boundary of Nature, which neither telescope nor geometry can well reach, that speculation has laid its _venue_, and commenced its aerial castles.

LAPLACE was the first to suggest the nebular hypothesis, which he did with great diffidence, not as a theory proved, or hardly likely, but as a mathematical possibility or ill.u.s.tration. His range of creation, moreover, was not so vast as that of our author, which a.s.sumes to compa.s.s the entire universe, but was limited to the evolution of the solar system. The mode in which this might be evolved, LAPLACE thus explains:--

He conjectures that in the original condition of the solar system the sun revolved upon his axis, surrounded by an atmosphere which, in virtue of an excessive heat, extended far beyond the orbits of all the planets, the planets as yet having no existence. The heat gradually diminished, and as the solar atmosphere contracted by cooling, the rapidity of its rotation increased by the laws of rotatory motion, and an exterior zone of vapour was detached from the rest, the central attraction being no longer able to overcome the increased centrifugal force. The zone of vapour might in some cases retain its form, as we still see in Saturn's ring; but more usually the ring of vapour would break into several ma.s.ses, and these would generally coalesce into one ma.s.s, which would revolve about the sun. Such portions of the solar atmosphere abandoned successively at different distances, would form planets in the state of vapour. These ma.s.ses of vapour, it appears from mechanical laws, would have each its rotatory motion, and as the cooling of the vapour still went on, would each produce a planet that might have satellites and rings formed from the planet, in the same manner as the planets were formed from the atmosphere of the sun.

All the known motions of the solar system are consistent and reconcileable with this theory of LAPLACE, and upon it the author of the _Vestiges_ has enlarged and founded his wider scheme of physical creation. He supposes the void of nature to have been originally filled with a universal FIRE MIST (p. 30), out of which all the celestial orbs were made and put in motion. How this mist was put in activity, and resolved into the luminous and revolving bodies that we now see, and one of which we inhabit is the first urgent perplexity to surmount in the conjecture. It is manifest that if a mist filled the entire region of s.p.a.ce, a mist it must for ever remain, unless acted upon by some cause adequate to give it new action and arrangement. No sun, no stars or planets could spontaneously emanate from an inert vapour any more than from nothing. To meet this, his first difficulty, the author supposes that there were certain _nuclei_, or centres of greater condensation, a.n.a.logous to those still remarked in the nebulae of the heavens, and that these nuclei, by their superior attractive force, consolidated into spheres the gaseous matter around them:--

"Of nebulous matter," says he, "in its original state we know too little to enable us to suggest _how nuclei should be established in it_. But supposing that from a _peculiarity_ in the const.i.tution nuclei are formed, we know very well how, by the power of gravitation, the process of an aggregation of the neighbouring matter to these nuclei should proceed until ma.s.ses more or less solid should be detached from the rest. It is a _well-known law in physics, that when fluid matter collects towards, or meets in a centre, it establishes a rotatory motion_. See minor results of this law in the whirlpool and the whirlwind--nay, on so humble a scale as the water sinking through the aperture of a funnel. It thus becomes certain, that when we arrive at the stage of a nebulous star we have a rotation on its axis commenced."

Up to this, however, the author has proved nothing. The existence of the fire-mist and nuclei are a.s.sumptions only, and the way by which he tries to account for rotatory motion is clearly erroneous. The aggregation of matter round the nuclei by gravitation would have no such tendency; no more than a perfect balance would of itself have a tendency to move about its fulcrum, or a falling stone to deviate from its vertical course. Gravitation would indeed compress the particles of matter, but its tendency and entire action is towards the nucleus; it compresses them no more on one side of the line of their direction to the centre of force than on any other side; and hence no _lateral_ or _rotatory motion_ would ensue. Rotation, therefore, is yet unaccounted for; though the author says _it is a well-known law in physics_ that when fluid matter collects towards, or meets in a centre, it establishes a rotatory motion; and then for ill.u.s.tration refers to a whirlwind or whirlpool. No such effect would follow the conditions stated, and an entire ignorance is betrayed of the laws of mechanical philosophy. In the whirlpool and the whirlwind the gyration is caused by the fluid pa.s.sing, not _to_ the centre, but _through_ it and away from it; in the whirlpool downwards through the place of exit, in the whirlwind upwards to where the vacuum has caused the rapid aggregation.

LAPLACE was too able a mathematician to commit these elementary blunders; he did not a.s.sume to account for rotation by inapplicable laws, but took for granted that the sun revolved upon its axis, and thence communicated a corresponding motion to the bodies thrown from its surface. But our author has sought to advance beyond his teacher, and in this way has shown his ignorance of physics by an egregious mistake. At this point we might stop, without following the ulterior steps by which the solar system is made to evolve out of heated vapour. Having got rotation, though by an impossible process, the author falls into the ill.u.s.tration already given of the theory of LAPLACE. The rotation of each nucleus or sun round its axis produces centrifugal force; that force, by refrigeration, increases beyond the centripetal force of gravity; in consequence rings are formed and detached from the surface, whose unequal coherence of parts mostly causes them to break into separate ma.s.ses or planets, partaking of the motion of the bodies from which they have been separated, and these primaries in their turn becoming centres of gravitation and centrifugal force, throw off their secondaries, or _moons_.

In this way the solar system and other systems upon a similar plan of arrangement, it is conjectured, may have been formed. According to the author the generative process is still in progress, and new worlds are in course of being thrown off from new suns in the confines of creation.

These nebulous stars on the outer bounds of s.p.a.ce, of varying forms and brightness, are supposed to be the centres of new systems in different stages of development, like children of various ages and growth in a numerous family. This is the author's own ill.u.s.tration (p. 20), and after giving it he proceeds:--

"Precisely thus, seeing in our astral system many thousands of worlds in all stages of formation, from the most rudimental to that immediately preceding the present condition of those we deem perfect, it is unavoidable to conclude that all the perfect have gone through the various stages which we see in the rudimental.

This leads us at once to the conclusion that the whole of our firmament was at one time a diffused ma.s.s of nebulous matter, extending through the s.p.a.ce which it still occupies. So also, of _course_, must have been the other astral systems. Indeed, we must presume the whole to have been originally in one connected ma.s.s, the astral systems being only the first division into parts, and solar systems the second.

"The first idea which all this impresses upon us is, that the formation of bodies in s.p.a.ce is _still and at present in progress_.

We live at a time when many have been formed, and many are still forming. Our own solar system is to be regarded as completed, supposing its perfection to consist in the formation of a series of planets, for there are mathematical reasons for concluding that Mercury is the nearest planet to the sun, which can, according to the laws of the system, exist. But there are other solar systems within our astral systems, which are as yet in a less advanced state, and even some quant.i.ties of nebulous matter which have scarcely begun to advance towards the stellar form. On the other hand, there are vast numbers of stars which have all the appearance of being fully formed systems, if we are to judge from the complete and definite appearance which they present to our vision through the telescope. We have no means of judging of the _seniority of systems; but it is reasonable to suppose that among the many, some are older than ours_. There is, indeed, one piece of evidence for the probability of the comparative youth of our system, altogether apart from human traditions and the geognostic appearances of the surface of our planet. This consists in a thin nebulous matter, which is diffused around the sun to nearly the orbit of Mercury, of a very oblately spheroidal shape. This matter, which sometimes appears to our naked eyes, at sunset, in the form of a cone projecting upwards in the line of the sun's path, and which bears the name of the Zodiacal Light, has been thought a residuum or last remnant of the concentrating matter of our system, and thus may be supposed to indicate the comparative recentness of the princ.i.p.al events of our cosmogony. _Supposing the surmise and inference_ to be correct, and they may be held as so far supported by more familiar evidence, we might with the more confidence speak of our system as not amongst the elder born of Heaven, but one whose various phenomena, physical and moral, as yet lay undeveloped, while myriads of others were fully fas.h.i.+oned, and in complete arrangement. Thus, in the sublime chronology to which we are directing our inquiries, we first find ourselves called upon to consider the globe which we inhabit as a child of the sun, elder than Venus and her younger brother Mercury, but posterior in date of birth to Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and Ura.n.u.s; next to regard our whole system as probably of recent formation in comparison with many of the stars of our firmament. We must, however, be on our guard against supposing the earth as a recent globe in our ordinary conceptions of time. From evidence afterwards to be adduced, it will be seen that it cannot be presumed to be less than many hundreds of centuries old. How much older Ura.n.u.s may be, no one can tell, far less how much more aged may be many of the stars of our firmament, or the stars of other firmaments, than ours."

All this is ingenious and fluently expressed. The author has an easy way of surmounting his difficulties by the use of such little auxiliary phrases, as "of course," "it may be surmised," "it is reasonable to suppose," and so on; which, though trifling in themselves, help him in their connecting inferences through many embarra.s.sing perplexities. But his hypothesis is yet unproved; his fire-mist is only a conjecture; his nuclei, scattered like so many eggs in s.p.a.ce out of which future suns and worlds are in process of incubation, is of the same description, and rotation, the first step in his process of creation, would not ensue under the conditions he has a.s.signed. Without dwelling on these shortcomings, we shall terminate this portion of the author's inquiry with a few general strictures. First, on its inconsistency with what we know of the solar system; and, secondly, on its inadequacy to explain the facts of which we are cognizant on our own globe.

In the first place, for the hypothesis to be applicable to our system, it is requisite that the primary and secondary bodies should revolve, both in their orbits and round their axes, in one direction, and nearly in one plane. Most of the bodies of the system observe these laws, their orbits are nearly circular, nearly in the plane of the original equator of the solar rotation, and in the direction of that rotation. But there are exceptions; the comets, which intersect the equatorial plane in every angle of direction form one, and the most distant of the planets forms another. The satellites of Ura.n.u.s are retrograde. They move from east to west in orbits highly inclined to that of their primary, and on both accounts are exceptions to the order of the other secondary bodies.

Our author is so perplexed by this inconsistency that he first doubts the fact, and next tries to explain it by alleging that "it may be owing to a _boulevers.e.m.e.nt_ of the primary." What is meant by the _boulevers.e.m.e.nt_ of a planet none of his critics seem to apprehend, nor do we. But that the moons of Ura.n.u.s are contrariwise to those of the other planets, Sir JOHN HERSCHEL has indubitably established; so that the author at any rate upon this point has sustained a boulevers.e.m.e.nt.

Our own moon forms a third exception to his theory. According to his system, this satellite is a slip or graft from our planet, and in const.i.tution, it might be inferred, would partake of the elements of the parent. But the fact is otherwise. The moon has no atmosphere, no seas, or rivers, nor any water, and of course totally unfit for human inhabitants, or organic life of any kind. It must, then, have had a different origin, or be in some earlier stage of development than that through which our earth has pa.s.sed.

Leaving these exceptions, we may next inquire into the relevant purposes of the nebular hypothesis, supposing its a.s.sumptions acquiesced in. Like the fanciful theories of the ancient philosophers, it seems only to involve a profitless topic of controversy, without solving natural phenomena. It does not unravel the mystery of the beginning, brings us no nearer to the first creative force. Like a good chemist, previous to a.n.a.lysis, the author first throws all matter into a state of solution; but granting him his fire-mist and nuclei in the midst, how or whence came this condition and arrangement of nature? What was its pre-existing state? or, if that be answered, how or whence was that preceding state educed, for it, too, must have had one prior to it? So that the mind makes no advances by such inquiries, is lost in a maze that can have no end, because it has no beginning; and, like Noah's messenger, for want of a resting place, is compelled to return to the first starting point.

Easier, and quite as satisfactory, it seems to believe, as we have been taught to believe, that the celestial spheres were at once perfect and entire, projected into s.p.a.ce from the hands of the maker, than that they were elaborated out of luminous vapour by gravity and condensation.

Hopeless inquiry is thus foreclosed, an inquisition that cannot be answered, silenced, and removed out of the pale of discussion.

It is not from any attribute of the Deity being impugned that the hypothesis is objectionable. Design and intelligence in the creation are left paramount as before, and our impression of the skill exercised, and the means employed, only transferred to another part of the work. He who produced the primordial condition the author supposes, who filled s.p.a.ce with such a mist, composed of such materials, subjected to such laws, such const.i.tution, that sun, moon, and stars necessarily resulted from them, appears omnipotent as ever. But it does not advance inquiry, nor a.s.sist us in explaining the wonders we contemplate in our own globe.

Suppose a planet formed by the author's process, what kind of a body would it be? Something, as Professor WHEWELL suggests, resembling a large meteoric stone. How after wards came this unformed ma.s.s to be like our earth, to be covered with motion and organization, with life and general felicity? What primitive cause stocked it with plants and animals, and produced all the surprising and subtle contrivances which we find in their structure, all the wide and profound mutual dependence which we trace in their economy? Is it possible to conceive, as the _Vestiges_ inculcate, that man, with his sentiment and intellect, his powers and pa.s.sions, his will and conscience, were also produced as the ultimate result of vapourous condensation?