of wealth; besides which you have popped sixtythree times behind the curtain to fetch another hat, and the whole thing has been so honestly done, that you have not cared to conceal one of your devices. "Causality," no doubt, explains everything, but is causality anything but mind immanent in matter. Let us see.

18. The only causality of which we are directly conscious is our own; that is, the effort put forth by the mind, when it employs force to move matter. So H. Weber identifies the essence of power with will. Mr. Martineau further adduces the following remarkable words of Herschel, which, as he truly says, have been often criticised but never shaken :-" That it is our immediate consciousness of effort when we exert force to put matter in motion, or to oppose and neutralise force, which gives us this internal conviction of power and causation, so far as it refers to the material world, and compels us to believe that whenever we see material objects put in motion from a state of rest, or deflected from their rectilinear paths and changed in their velocities if already in motion, it is in consequence of such an effort somehow exerted,

though not accompanied with our consciousness."

Now causal power, as we see it in the universe and in man, means force; but it means force and something more. It means force determined in one way, and not in another. How comes this? Force itself may be blind, the sum of it may be constant in the universe. But that which determines the direction of force cannot be blind. Nor can force itself determine force, as Professor Croll says (Journal of Science, 1873, p. 431): "The action of a force cannot be determined by a force, nor can motion be determined by motion." The world, as we know it, is the result of the deflection of forces, forces sent along special lines. Now we know that the mere deflection of force uses up no energy; for instance, no energy is required to deflect a bullet from its path, provided the deflecting force acts always at right angles ("Unseen Universe," p. 180).

The determination of force, a thing in itself which neither increases nor diminishes the sum of force in the universe, is the mind-element in causal power-is that thing not force which guides force.

19. The essence of human causality is mind, will; nor can we conceive of any causal power, not chaotic, which does not imply mind and will.

a. The immediate reply to this is, first that mind is not power, and cannot move a particle of matter.

b. That the forces of nature are blind and mechanical.

c. That mind requires an organism.

d. That to import the notion of mind and will into the operations of external nature is to create an imaginary Divine Mind in our own image is in fact the old anthropomorphism so often condemned.

20. a. Mind cannot move matter. Yet the determination of force, or the effort we use to direct force, is mind, and conscious will, nor can itbe conceived of as anything else. Mind, without being "energy," may still deflect and thus guide force, an operation using up no "energy."

21. b. That the forces of nature are blind and unconscious though orderly. They may nevertheless be connected in their operation with

Divine Will: just as a man who walks, or performs any other act automatically, does so without any conscious effort of will. Still the act is due to an operation of his mind become subordinate and fixed by long and continued habit. Once his whole mind was concentrated upon the act of walking. An intense will and purpose (notice a young child's efforts to walk) fixed the habit or law of his locomotion, which now goes on by itself. The habit once fixed, his mind is set free for the exercise of higher functions, so that whilst he walks he need think not at all of his legs, but can read a book.

If the universe as we conjecture is animated with eternal consciousness, that consciousness or Divine Will may have followed in the Macrocosm, or big world, the course which our consciousness follows in the Microcosm, or little world of our own mind and body.

Professors Tait and Balfour Stewart affirm that the argument derived from an examination of the nature of matter is in favour "of the production of the visible universe by means of an intelligent agency residing in an invisible universe." Following the laws known to us in

our own intelligence, the stream of Divine thought and will would, as Mr. Martineau says, first apply itself to disposing of new conditions, setting up order by differentiation, and general origination of plan.

Thus may have been formed what Martineau finely calls the "habits of the universe;" that is, the laws of nature, due originally to Mind but now far removed from mind or consciousness. "The more mechanical a natural law may be, the farther it is removed from its source, and the organic and unconscious portion of the world, instead of being the potentiality of the organic and conscious is rather the residual precipitate formed as the indwelling Mind of all concentrates an intenser aim on the upper margin of the ordered whole, and especially on the inner life of natures that resemble Him" (p. 537).

22. c. That mind is inconceivable apart from a nervous system and brain.

Mr. Lewis, and the modern school of physicists generally, deny the possibility of intelligence, not the result of organic processes. "No brain," say they, "no mind."