but in general confusedly, from the phenomena. We find, 1." That mankind did not inhabit the con

tinents of Europe, Asia, Africa, and America, “until after the revolution which imbedded animal "eruviæ in their soils," because, that revolution gave the first sensible existence to those continents; that is, "that they did not inhabit the

regions in which those exuvia are found," because, those regions then formed the basin of the primitive sea: 2." That they existed elsewhere," because, they existed upon an earth which was submerged by that revolution: 3. "That human bones are not

66

found, or at least very sparingly, in the bed of the "ancient sea," because, the mass of the human race perished in the bed of the new sea: 4. we are able to determine, That" the last revolution of the mi"neral geology, from which it dates the establish"ment of the societies of the present race of mankind,

and which (it is convinced) cannot be very "ancient;" is the identical revolution in which God executed His menace of destroying all the former race of mankind, excepting only those individuals who should become the progenitors of a new race: And we thus perceive, 5. That these results of physical investigation not only "connect,

66

by an uninterrupted chain, Natural history and "Civil history," but, when duly rectified by the rule of the Mosaical record, that they moreover connect both these with Sacred History.

CHAPTER VIII.

BUT, there is still a phenomenon, connected with those which we have examined, for the explanation of which the mineral geology requires more revolutions; and that is, the discovery of the eruviæ of animals whose species and even genera no longer exist: this phenomenon, appears to it incapable of a reasonable reference to any revolution reported by Moses.

This is, indeed, a phenomenon well calculated to perplex a science which neglects Newton's inculcation, of combining morals with physics, and of subjecting the latter to the former; and which excludes all inquiry into the mode of the first formation of the animal and vegetable structures, confining its speculation to the formation of one inanimate member of creation detached from all the rest, and to chemical and mechanical agencies only. There is no mere physical principle, that will serve to explain this phenomenon; nor can it be expounded, unless by reference to the principle which alone explains the mode of the first animal formations, namely, CREATIVE POWER.

But, the Mosaical Geology, which is founded upon that principle, and which therein accords with the philosophy of Newton, guides us to an easy solution of this mysterious problem. The

sole cause of the last great revolution of the globe, was its Creator, who also caused its first great revolution; and, evidences of that identity were of great moral concernment. When God made known to Noah the animal species which He designed to preserve, "to keep seed alive upon the

earth;" it is manifest, from the testimony which we are here considering, that He was pleased to except some from that preservation'. We know that the formidable animal, the carnivorous elephant, to which science has given the name of Mastodon, and various others, to which the names of Palæotherium, Megatherium, Anoplotherium, Ornithocephalus, Megalosaurus, Plesiosaurus (called also, with more critical correctness, Sauroïdes), &c., have been assigned, have not been perpetuated, but were ordained to perish altogether. He who

1 See after, chap. xiii.

2 M. CUVIER, has described this animal as exclusively herbivorous; but, his description is altogether arbitrary and systematical. We can judge of its nature, only by its remains; and, as the most striking character of those remains is found in the enormous grinding teeth, resembling in several respects those of carnivorous animals, whereas those of the elephant, known to be herbivorous, are very differently constructed; it is reasonable to assume, that the difference of those organs evinces a corresponding difference in the nature of the food of the two species. Cuvier observes, (Disc. Prél. p. 48,) that " an herbivorous diet, requires teeth "with a flat crown or surface, to grind the seeds and vegetables:" such, accordingly, are the teeth of elephants. Whereas, those of the mastodon, he says, "differ from these, in an essential manner, only by the grinding "teeth; which have a crown rugged with protuberances or nobs, more or less numerous, more or less prominent:" (Ossemens Foss. tom. i. p. 205.) and yet he infers, "that the mastodon must have made the same use

planned and regulated the Creation of the earth, unquestionably planned and regulated also its Renovation; and, the extinction of certain animal species, which existed prior to that last revolution, is proved, by the exuvia of those animals, to have been a part of His plan in the Renovation.

It is wisely remarked, in a passage cited from Camper by a writer whom I have recently quoted; "that it was not contrary to the Divine "Wisdom to ordain the cessation of animal "species, when they had entirely fulfilled the

66

66

purpose for which they had been created, although that purpose is unknown to us ::-Sapientiæ Divinæ non repugnare legem, qua res illas "vel animalia illa desinere jubeat, simulac scopo primario, nobis incognito, satisfecerunt penitus'." That those species existed then, is manifest; but, there is no evidence whatever, that they have

"of his teeth as the hog, and hippopotamus, who have the same cha"racters in their teeth. He must therefore have attached himself chiefly "to tender vegetables · aux végétaux tendres-to roots, and aquatic "plants, but he did not feed on a living prey." (Ib. p. 225.) It is hardly necessary, to point out the power of system in this inference. The enormous force of the grinders of the mastodon, appears evidently to have been provided against substances of a much more resisting nature than the “ tender vegetables” which satisfy M. Cuvier's theory. "From the

points and depressions of the teeth, fitting into each other like the "teeth of two saws, they must have been, (Mr. Peale observes,) incapable "of lateral motion, and consequently, of trituration;" he therefore inferred," that it must have been a carnivorous animal." (PARKINSON, Foss. Org. Remains, p. 318.) We know, that the hog is carnivorous, as well as herbivorous.

1 Phil. Trans. vol. civ. p. 108.

existed since. What more probable physical cause can be assigned for the extinction of their races, than the universal inundation? What more probable moral cause, than the will and design of their Creator, the sole Author and Manager of the revolution, Who excluded them from the shelter of His ark? To our preserved progenitors, who were eye-witnesses of all its details, the exclusion and extinction of those several species must have been a subject of devout contemplation; not of that cold and barren sentiment, which their fossil remains now produce in the cabinets of physical curiosity. Moral argument, can alone reach this question; mere physical reasoning can no more attain to it, than the rule of simple addition can resolve a problem in trigonometry.

By ascending to the first moral and physical cause of Newton, we obtain a direct and intelligible solution of the question; but, with the utmost labour of search among the secondary causes of the mineral geology, we can never obtain it; we only encounter the same perplexity, resulting from the same imperfection of analysis, that we witnessed in our inquiry concerning first formations. From that first cause alone it has proceeded, or can have proceeded; that" some races have ceased for ever, "and have left in the world only fragments which "the naturalist can scarcely recognise1." The evidences, of species rendered extinct, and of changes

1 CUVIER, Disc. Prél. p. 9, § 6.