It is to this thorough scientific training that I ascribe Hutton’s steady and persistent refusal to look to other causes than those now in operation, for the explanation of geological phenomena.

Thus he writes:—­“I do not pretend, as he [M. de Luc] does in his theory, to describe the beginning of things.  I take things such as I find them at present; and from these I reason with regard to that which must have been."[2]

[Footnote 2:  The Theory of the Earth, vol. i. p. 173, note.]

And again:—­“A theory of the earth, which has for object truth, can have no retrospect to that which had preceded the present order of the world; for this order alone is what we have to reason upon; and to reason without data is nothing but delusion.  A theory, therefore, which is limited to the actual constitution of this earth cannot be allowed to proceed one step beyond the present order of things."[3]

[Footnote 3:  Ibid., vol. i. p. 281.]

And so clear is he, that no causes beside such as are now in operation are needed to account for the character and disposition of the components of the crust of the earth, that he says, broadly and boldly:—­” ...  There is no part of the earth which has not had the same origin, so far as this consists in that earth being collected at the bottom of the sea, and afterwards produced, as land, along with masses of melted substances, by the operation of mineral causes."[4]

[Footnote 4:  Ibid.. p. 371.]

But other influences were at work upon Hutton beside those of a mind logical by nature, and scientific by sound training; and the peculiar turn which his speculations took seems to me to be unintelligible, unless these be taken into account.  The arguments of the French astronomers and mathematicians, which, at the end of the last century, were held to demonstrate the existence of a compensating arrangement among the celestial bodies, whereby all perturbations eventually reduced themselves to oscillations on each side of a mean position, and the stability of the solar system was secured, had evidently taken strong hold of Hutton’s mind.

In those oddly constructed periods which seem to have prejudiced many persons against reading his works, but which are full of that peculiar, if unattractive, eloquence which flows from mastery of the subject, Hutton says:—­

“We have now got to the end of our reasoning; we have no data further to conclude immediately from that which actually is.  But we have got enough; we have the satisfaction to find, that in Nature there is wisdom, system, and consistency.  For having, in the natural history of this earth, seen a succession of worlds, we may from this conclude that there is a system in Nature; in like manner as, from seeing revolutions of the planets, it is concluded, that there is a system by which they are intended to continue those revolutions.  But if the succession of worlds is established in the system of nature, it is in vain to look for anything higher in the origin of the earth.  The result, therefore, of this physical inquiry is, that we find no vestige of a beginning,—­no prospect of an end."[5]