ina&ivity of Matter, &c. i i 7

nerally use that expression of course, with-out

far from allowing that the leajl particles of fiuids or ofsolids , are perfectly hard , that he affirms the existence ofsuch particles are impossible, Some will think these thingsought to be more agreed to amongst philosophers, before theycan be held as so strong proofs of natural theology , &c.

But with submission, if the parts of any body coheretogether by a stronger force than what would serve tomove the whole body with a considerable velocity : thatis, if the resistance from cohesion is many thousand timesgreater than their simple vis inertia ; and if the vis iner-tia is the only power that can be inherent in them; all thatI assert for an immaterial cause of cohesion, follows, Ihumbly conceive, demonstratively. And this appearance istoo plain to be denied: a man can throw a pebble,a pieceof wood, the rod of iron I mentioned, a great way: buthe can scarce, by any effort, break the cohesion of theirleast parts. If there be such things as hard bodies, theirparts must be hard: for this is no more than to fay, thatif there be such things as firmly cohering systems of mat-ter, the firm cohesion must be between all their possibleparts. If it were only between the larger parts, but notbetween the parts of these parts, the division would beginthere. If the cohesion were supposed to be only betweenparticles, of the ten thousandth part of an inch diameter,but not the internal parts of these; then we must supposethe whole strength of it to be in the surfaces of theseparticles, and that between the least parts of these. Sothat still we must lodge the whole force of cohesion, andthe firmness of the hardest bodies in some least parts ,whose resistance therefore must be millions of times great-I 3 «