force of a defcending body is fo great as to perform this effect, I think, is clear to any who confiders that a heavy body runs down fifteen foot in a fecond, and that the spaces. thro' which it does move, are always in a duplicate proportion to its times, as is demonftrated by Galileo, and confirmed by the Experiments of Riccioli: from whence by calculation it will follow that a body would run down four thousand miles in the space of twenty three feconds, abftracting from the refiftance of the air. But if we will fuppofe but the hundredth part of this space run thro' in that time, allowing all the rest for the refiftance of the Medium, yet even in that cafe, the velocity would far exceed that of the swifteft bullet, that can be shot out of a Cannon.

Thus, I think, I have made it evident, that the particles of earth after falling thro' the air, could not reft upon the furface of the oily Orb, to form there an hardened habitable Cruft, not only upon the account of their greater gravity, which the Theorist acknowledges, and is alfo plain by experience, common earth being near twice as heavy as water; but alfo upon the account of the great force by which they muft of neceffity fall upon the liquid Orb, which will carry them down towards the Center.

I hope now it will appear to any thinking man, plainly impoffible, that either oil

or water fhould fuftain fuch an immenfe heavy Orb, in which was not only the foft earth, which in few places is ten foot deep, but also a. prodigious quantity of ftones and minerals much heavier than water: for it is certain that these great heavy bodies must have funk to the bottom if they were left to themselves, and yet even these bodies make up the greatest part of our outward earth. I know the Theorift does boldly affirm, that there was neither Metals nor Minerals in the primitive earth; but this is both contrary to reafon and Scripture, for the Holy Scriptures tell us, that Tubal Cain before the floud, was an inftructer of every Artificer in Brass and Iron: and I would fain know, how there could be fuch Artificers before the floud, when, according to him, there was no fuch thing to be feen as Metals. Befides, 'tis hardly poffible to build an Ark, that fhould contain all the terreftrial and aerial animals, without Iron. The Americans without any Iron made themselves fmall Cannoes of one folid piece of Timber which they hollowed by burning, but it would be a strange Tree that was of the dimenfions of the Ark, and could contain fo many animals as it did. These things do (in my judgment) plainly fhow, that the Theorift's opinion in this point is utterly falfe.

From what I have already faid, I think, it may be clearly demonftrated, that the Fabrick of the earth can never be deduced from a Chaos,

Chaos, by the fole help of Mechanical principles and Natural caufes. For it is evident to any one who has eyes (tho' there have been fome wife Philofophers of another opinion) that the Land is higher than the Water; and it is also plainly experienced, that common arable earth or clay is much heavier than water and if we defcend into the Mines or Pits, we shall find the matter there to be three or four times heavier than the earth above. Now it is plain from what I have already proved, that in a Chaos, the true change that would follow from Mechanical principles and Natural caufes, is, that if all were fluid, the heaviest and folideft Bodies would fubfide and fall to the Center, every one taking place according to the fpecifick gravity; fo that the lighter Bodies would always be forced uppermoft: the earth therefore being heavier than the water, muft of neceffity place it felf nigher the Center, and leave the water to cover the face of the whole Orb. Thus the furface of the World could never be inhabited by any other Animal than Fishes. But in how much wiser order than this, has the great Creator of the World placed all the Bodies of the earth, fo that notwithstanding the greater gravity of the Land, it is raised higher than the Sea, and thereby made fit and habitable both for man and beasts, without the help of Natural and Mechanical caufes, which would have produc'd the contrary effect. Several

D 3

Several other arguments might be brought to demonftrate that the frame of this World was the refult of wisdom and counfel, and not of the neceffary and effential Laws of motion and gravitation, which could never have either made or fupported the World. I always wonder'd at the wild an extravagant fancy of the Philofophers, who thought that brute and stupid matter would by it felf, without fome fupreme and intelligent director, fall into a regular and beautiful ftructure, whose parts fhould be fo extreamly well adapted to various ufes, as if they had been the refult of wifdom and contrivance. I will conclude this Chapter with a difcourfe of the Theorift in his 10th Chap. lib. 2.

"In the construction of the Body of an Animal, (fays he) there is more of thought "and contrivance, more of exquifite inventi"on, and fit difpofitions of parts, than is in "all the Temples, Palaces, Ships, Theaters, or "any other pieces of Architecture the World "ever yet faw, and not architecture only,

but all other Mechanism whatsoever, En"gines, Clock-work, or any other is not "comparable to the Body of a living crea "ture. Seeing then we acknowledge thefe "artificial works wherefoever we meet with "them, to be the effects of wit, under"ftanding and reafon; is it not manifeft partiality or ftupidity rather, to deny the works of nature, which excel these in all

degrees,

degrees, to proceed from an intelligent "principle? Let them take any piece of hu"man art, or any Machine fram'd by the "wit of man, and compare it with the Body "of an Animal, either for diverfity and mul"tiplicity of workmanship, or curiofity in "the Minute parts, or just connexion and "dependance of one thing upon another, or "fit fubferviency to the ends propos'd of Life, "Motion, Ufe, and Ornament to the creature: " and if in all these refpects, they find it fu"perior to any work of human production, "as they certainly muft, why fhould it be "thought to proceed from inferior and sense

lefs caufes? ought we not in this as well "as in other refpects to proportion the causes "to the effect, and to fpeak truth, and bring "an honeft verdict for Nature as well as for "Art?

I defire the Theorist may apply this excellent discourse to himself, and confider whether this Argument which he produces against the Epicureans and Atheists, does not fully fhew the abfurdity of his own Theory.