the structure of the gland, which fits it for this purpose, and prevents the secreted portion from proceeding with the rest of the blood.

Now, in speaking of these very different parts of the body, joints and glands; and the different purposes, which they answer, we have had in view, animals of such magnitude, that their various parts may be distinctly seen. But the smallest insect is as truly an organized body, as the largest beast, that tramples the forest. If the latter has bones, so has the former, and if they have bones, they have likewise joints. If these small insects have joints, there must be at the end of each bone a particular configuration, else they could not be joined, the one to the other. The same reason, which requires cartilage at the joints in large animals, requires it at the joints of those, which are small. Equally necessary is lubricity in the joints of both. If so, lubricous matter must be prepared. But to the preparing of this, it is further necessary that there be a particular organization.

There are in insects, as in larger animals, different fluids. For the secretion of these, glands are necessary. But a gland is a portion of the body, so peculiarly constructed as to produce a separation between different particles of the same fluid. How extremely minute must be all these parts! Is it possible to conceive of any human discernment and ingenuity so great, as to fix these portions, and to adjust, with perfect accuracy, these objects, one to another? The fact is, that no human intellect can form distinct ideas of objects so minute; and if unable to conceive the plan, how much more obvious is their inability to carry it into execution! Let it not be said, that this is mere theory, and that it is folly to speak of bones, joints, cartilages, and glands belonging to a fly or an ant.

What! Is it a question, whether these creatures possess limbs ? Is it not undeniable that some insects of the most inferior kind, have a vigor and elasticity in their limbs, greater beyond all comparison, in proportion to their size, than that of the hare, the fox, or the deer? If these limbs are capable of such imVOL. I.

13

portant uses, they must be so constructed as to qualify them for the purposes they are designed to answer. It is incumbent on the unbeliever to show, that these limbs are not formed with bones, sinews, joints etc., or at least that there is some other way, in which they may be formed, bearing fewer marks of intelligence and design.

But in regard to many insects, limbs, joints, etc. are evident to the naked eye. In regard to the rest, the same is apparent by the assistance of glasses. Even the circulation of the blood is in some, perfectly visible. But the circulation of the blood implies a variety of other objects; and all these objects must be formed after a particular model, and be suited to each other.

I close the lecture with this enquiry: As human beings, confessedly have not a thousandth part of the intelligence, requisite for the structure of a leaf or an insect, have they intelligence enough to determine that the cause, which produced not only leaves and insects, but the heaven and the earth, the sun, the moon, and the stars, had no design, had no intelligence?

LECTURE III.

THE INTELLIGENCE OF GOD.

IN exhibiting proofs of intelligence in the great First Cause, our difficulty is not to find objects suited to this purpose, but from a vast variety to select those which are most so.

The formation of the eye has been deservedly reckoned among the most striking displays of the Creator's wisdom. The general structure of this organ I shall not describe; but only notice a very few particulars in the eyes of different creatures, by which it will appear, how much the safety and convenience of individuals have been consulted.

At what distance an object may be placed and yet vision be distinct, is well known to depend on the structure of the eye. Some animals see objects distinctly at a small, others, at a greater distance. Birds appear to need the power of distinct vision, both when the object is remote and when it is near. To discern the food, which must, when taken into the beak, be very near the eye, it seems requisite, that the surface of the eye should be extremely globular. But such a configuration would disable them from clearly seeing those distant objects, which it is important for them to discern, when soaring high in the air. The same shape and state of the eye would not accommodate them in both cases. But observe how this convenience has been consulted. They have, as naturalists inform us, the power of altering the shape of the eye. Being furnished with a bony, yet flexible rim or hoop, surrounding the broadest part of the eye, they are able, by pressing this against the eye, to render the external surface more globular, and therefore, better fitted for the discernment of objects that are near. When ob

jects far remote are to be viewed, as a less globular surface would be most conducive to this end, the rim or hoop is not applied. But merely the not using of this does not constitute the whole difference, which there is in the eye at different times. A muscle is provided, by which the crystalline lens may, when occasion requires, be drawn further back, in consequence of which very distant objects are distinctly visible.

Now the Creator's wisdom is evident not only in the structure itself, but in disposing its possessor to make a right use of it. The bird must be divinely taught, as it would be beyond all measure absurd, to suppose her in possession of sufficient reason to discern the use from the structure.

In many insects the eye is immovable. This circumstance is, in itself, disadvantageous. But, to compensate for this inconvenience, a larger number of eyes are given; or else the surface is rendered reticular; i. e. it is cut up, so to speak, into a great number of inexpressibly small lenses, standing in different directions, that by some of them the rays from every surrounding object may reach the retina. "Other creatures," says an ingenious naturalist,* " are obliged to turn their eyes towards the object. But insects have eyes directed thereto, on whatever side it may appear. They more than realize the wonderful accounts of fabulous history. Poets gave to Argus, an hundred eyes. Insects are furnished with thousands, having the benefit of vision on every side, with the utmost ease and speed; though without any motion of the eye, or flexion of the neck." By which it is meant, that these numerous reticulations on the eye serve as so many distinct organs of sight.

This subject furnishes us with two separate arguments to prove design in the first cause: 1. That a creature should be compensated for the privation of one advantage, by the possession of another, proves design: 2. That in a surface, no larger than an insect's eye, there should be thousands of perfectly regular figures, is such evidence of contrivance and skill, as cannot be contemplated, but with high astonishment.

* Adams on the Microscope, p. 196.

The human eye, and that of most other animals, is so formed as to vary according to the degree of surrounding light. The pupil, or aperture, is involuntarily dilated, when there is a scarcity of light, and is contracted as the light increases. Is not this the effect of an intelligent cause?

We now mention another proof of the same intelligence, of a kind somewhat different. The Scarabaeus, or beetle, has large transparent wings of a very delicate texture. This delicacy seems to render it peculiarly necessary, that some defence should be provided. A sheath, or case called by the Greek name Elytron, is accordingly provided for each wing. This is of a horny substance. When the wing is not used, it is folded up, and laid under this covering. When the insect has employment for his wings, the covering is removed, and the wings are expanded. (Adams 203, 204. Paley 228.)

While we are mentioning insects to prove the existence of an intelligent Creator, there is one peculiarly adapted to our design. I mean the ox-fly. The appearance, which the head of this insect makes, when under the microscope, you may see among the plates, in Adams' treatise on this instrument. 1. There is a tube, contained in a case, by which the blood is to be extracted from the ox, or horse, on which the creature fixes. But before this can be used, an aperture must be made through the skin. For this work he is abundantly furnished; having on each side of this tube an instrument perfectly resembling a surgeon's lancet. When he has, by one or both of these, opened the skin, if an enlargement of the aperture for the admission of the tube, is necessary, he has two other instruments of equal length, indented on the edges, like a saw. By this, he accomplishes what was begun with the lancet. Nothing more prevents him from satisfying his appetite for blood. (Adams, 108.)

As another proof of design, I would direct your attention to the phenomenon of digestion in the stomach, i. e. the solution of food. Digestion, it is now well ascertained, is not produced by the attrition of contiguous parts, but by a fluid, prepared for