Surface marked by fine concentric striæ which follow the direction of the annulations no longitudinal striæ have been noticed.

This species differs from O. annulatum in the more gently tapering tube, the greater distance of the septa, the low undefined annulations, and the fine concentric striæ, which are not lamellose, and in the absence of longitudinal striæ.

NAUTILUS OCEANUS n. sp.

Shell large, discoidal; volutions closely coiled but not re-entrant ; umbilicus large and open; transverse section elliptical, the dorsoventral diameter being the greater. Shell gradually enlarging.

Chamber of habitation large; length twice the greater diameter, the capacity being equal to, or greater than, the entire septate portion of the shell; becoming straight, and free from the inner volutions, toward the aperture. Septa regular, two in the space of five centimetres on the ventrum, and five in the same space on the dor

sum.

The specimens measure from 20 to 25 centimetres in diameter.

This species resembles N. occidentalis of the Niagara group of Wisconsin, but the form is less gibbous and the septa less distant than in that species.

GYROCERAS ABRUPTUM n. sp.

Shell coiled, rapidly expanding towards the aperture: number volutions about one and a half?, not contiguous. Transverse section broadly elliptical or subcircular; dorso-ventral diameter the longer. Septa distant, the distance between them becoming gradually greater from the apex toward the chamber of habitation. The last three chambers measure on the ventral side 65 mm., and on the dorsal side about 24 mm. Siphuncle near the ventral side.

Surface cancellated by longitudinal furrows, about one millimetre wide, which are crossed by finer strong lines of growth.

The specimen described has had a diameter of about 15 centime

tres.

This species, in a fragmentary condition, may be distinguished from Nautilus Oceanus with which it is associated, by its smaller size, more distant septa, and more rapidly expanding form.

CRUSTACEA.

ACIDASPIS FIMBRIATA n. sp.

Fragments of a species of ACIDASPIS occur upon the surfaces of some of the slabs which are mainly covered with Bryozoans. The separated cheek pieces are distinguishable by the numerous straight lateral spines which give them a fimbriate appearance. As many as eleven of these lateral spines may be counted upon a single imperfect cheek. The border of the cheek is but slightly curved and the long posterior spine is nearly straight.

ILLENUS (BUMASTUS) IOXUS.

Illanus Ioxus HALL. 20th Rep. St. Mus. Nat. Hist., p. 378, plate 22, figs. 4-10. 1867. Revised edit., p. 420, pl. 22, figs. 4-10. [1870.]

A large specimen of the caudal shield from the limestone, has all the proportions of this species, though of somewhat larger dimensions than is usual with the Wisconsin individuals. The specimen measures 60 mm. in length, with a width of about 75 mm.

In addition to the foregoing species the following known forms have been recognized among the collections formerly and recently made at Waldron: Buthotrephis gracilis, Orthis biloba, Cypricardinia arata, Orthoceras subcancellatum, and Orthoceras annulutum.

THE ORIGIN OF FORCE.

BY STEPHEN C. HUTCHINS.

[Read before the Albany Institute, Nov. 18, 1879 ]

In reflecting upon the so-called conflicts between Science and Religion, it has seemed to me that they arise primarily from want of a common starting point; and that if an agreement could be had with regard to the beginning of things, great advantage would be gained. Mankind ought to be willing to see through the eyes of those who see clearest and with the keenest vision. When I look up to the blue vault above, I do not see there all that the astronomer sees. If I then deny the existence of that which is perceived by him, I simply expose my own ignorance, without in the slightest degree invalidating the evidence upon which the facts' perceived by him rest for proofs of their existence. If the world will only recognize the truth, therefore, that that which is seen by specialists who have exhausted human power in a given field must necessarily be true, eveu if not perceived to be true by others, and if then it will harmonize these truths in one rounded whole, it will possess the entire sphere of truth. I regard it, therefore, as not inappropriate, in a society largely devoted to scientific inquiry, to endeavor to find this common starting point, in order that we may the more readily harmonize conflicting views in matters of the gravest concern, by accepting the affirmations of all competent investigators in all fields of inquiry, and rejecting all mere negations not based on scientific examinations.

We live in a universe propelled and sustained by Force. If, in the spirit of scientific inquiry, the origin of Force can be ascertained, we may trace its manifestations from their simplest forms to their present wondrous complex development, in such a way as always to preserve full-orbed truth in all its harmonious conc rd, and without doing violence to anything except the crude negations of incompetent critics.

The author of Genesis tells us that "in the beginning God fashioned the heavens and the earth."

The phrase heavens and earth is phenomenal, expressive of the visible universe. The sentence pictures this universe to our senses,

tells us that there was a time when it was not, and that in the beginning of its existence God began the work of fashioning it. We are required to fix our minds upon this pre-existing state; this age when neither heavens nor earth existed as now, and when there was something out of which God could fashion them. We are also required to consider the beginning of this work. The English version of the Scriptures uses the word created instead of fashioned; but all expositors concur in saying that the original Hebrew word (bara) means to shave, to cut or to shape. It, therefore, implies the fashioning of something which did not exist, out of existing material. The word create originally signified growth; and to create would mean to cause to grow. Fashioning and creation are therefore distinct terms, and in some important respects opposing ideas.

Science also asserts that the heavens and the earth had a beginning. It does not say that God fashioned them; but it says they were fashioned by Force. Science and the author of Genesis, therefore, assuming the existence of unorganized matter, assert that the heavens and the earth were fashioned therefrom. What was the nature of this pre-existing material? Science tells us that an etherial mass spread throughout space, before the spheres existed; and Genesis, as we shall see, can only be rationally interpreted by accepting this hypothesis. Indeed, we may go further, and affirm that a rational interpretation of Genesis will prove this hypothesis to be true, to all who accept it as authority. If we shall succeed in establishing this, then we are justified in now assuming that the primordial universe was a monotonous sea of jelly, and that this etherial fluid, or gelatinous mass, was unillumined by a single ray of light.

This absence of light is rendered certain from the fact that there was an absence of motion-or, the fact that there was an absence of motion renders certain the fact that there was an absence of light; for light is simply the manifestation of motion, or a form of motion. There must have been a time when the primordial ether was absolutely motionless. If we assume that it is a thousand million years since the Laurentian continent first appeared above the waters, we must also assume that there was a definite time when the first impulse of motion was applied which resulted in its appearance. That time may have been countless ages preceding the formation of Laurentide; but, whenever it was, it had a distinct and definite be

1 See Six Days of Creation, by Tayler Lewis. p. 49,50

ginning. No matter how feeble or how forceful that beginning may have been, it is still scientifically true that the beginning of motion was a reality. Any other assumption is illogical and unscientific, and would annihilate chronology. Motion must necessarily have had a beginning; for the further back we place the commencement of motion, the more remote becomes the period when the Laurentian continent first appeared, and the longer becomes each age in the history of the universe, until infinity itself will fail to furnish room for the beginning.

Motion is life. Absence of motion is death. How came this motionless mass of ether to move? If it had had life within itself, it would have moved from all eternity. This assumption would not only annihilate chronology; it would establish pantheism. The same doctrine would follow from a concession that motion was generated by this etherial mass. It is, however, scientifically impossible for a dead universe to generate life in itself. Motionless molecules will not move without the application of an external force. Overlooking this limitless sea of ether, therefore, we can safely assert it as a scientific fact that unless there is a Life external to itself, capable of applying force to it, it will never move. This limitless expanse of

death necessitates a limitless Life for its awakening.

In the beginning, therefore, the universe was filled with an etherial fluid, which we can liken to nothing except to say that it was like the palpable, congealed, perceptible breath of God; and there came a time when the all-pervading imperceptible Spirit which exhaled. it, gave it momentum, and began to fashion it to suit His purpose.

This limitless mass of motionless ether could never have been moved by anything less than an Omnipotent Power. God and God only, could have fashioned the heavens and the earth therefrom. State in scientific phraseology as you please the nature of this drear waste of monotonous matter, and you must admit it to have been at one time motionless. It is impossible to interject life within it except from a living source. If it had a self-generating power, it must have had the power of self-restraint, to hold that power from all eternity until the time had come for its exercise. That is to make it God. It is scientifically impossible to imagine molecules in motion from all eternity, and yet not effecting changes in form such as we are able to trace in the universe now. It is equally impossible to suppose that anything less than Infinite energy moved this mighty This Omnipotent energy began the work of fashioning the heavens and the earth in the beginning. when the time therefor had

mass.