divine entity-the uncompounded conscious spiritGod incarnated and finited.

If the animals and insects of earth exist in the spirit world, which is plausible, it does not prove that they will so progress, or so exist consciously in the celestial or angelic world, destination being considered the measure of aspiration. The ideal does not belong to the lower kingdoms.

Materialists, and some materialistic spiritists, have endeavored to account for the origin of man by "matter and force," or "matter and motion." Some writers jumble together motion and force. They are not equivalents. Motion is not substantial; it is only the act of a body in changing its position from a state of rest, and necessarily ceases to exist when the body ceases to move. The persistent statement of "molecular motion" only provokes the inquiry, "What caused the motion?" The substantial alone can cause motion, and the substantial is none the less substantial because of its inconceivable attenuation and ethereal intangibility. Steam, though invisible, is an acknowledged force a substancea substance that drives the piston in the steam engine. Force, though unseen, is indestructible. The soulbody, though unseen by the material eye, interpermeates the physical body. It is an intermediate vehicle between spirit and matter, and the force which penetrates and moves it is the spirit. And this spirit, ethereal, intangible and uncompounded, is substantial substance-not gross matter, but divine substance a vital spark from the infinite life—a germinal entity, non-composite, non-compounded, and hence necessarily indestructible, for no thinker, no scientist, no inspired biblicist, would presume to predicate destruction of indestructible substance, which indestructible substance involves life, sensation, thought, self-consciousness and progress in manifestation and so we scientifically and logically prove the immortality, not of the soul, but of the spirit, which spirit is the offspring of, and poten

tially and parentally related to the infinite Spirit of the universe-God, Immanuel with us and Immanuel in us.

The following translation of the speech of Cato on the immortality of the human spirit can scarcely be sufficiently admired for its conciseness, purity and elegance of phraseology:

"It must be so. Plato, thou reasonest well.

Else whence this pleasing hope,-this fond desire,-
This longing after immortality?

Or whence this secret dread and inward horror
Of falling into naught? Why shrinks the soul
Back on herself, and startles at destruction?
'Tis the divinity that stirs within us:

'Tis heaven itself that points out a hereafter,
And intimates eternity to man.

Eternity!-thou pleasing, dreadful thought!
Through what variety of untried being,-

Through what new scenes and changes must we pass!

The wide-the unbounded-prospect lies before me;
But shadows, clouds, and darkness rest upon it.
Here will I hold: If there's a Power above us
(And that there is all Nature cries aloud,

Through all her works), He must delight in virtue;
And that which He delights in must be happy;
But when, or where?

I'm weary of conjectures,-this must end them.
Thus am I doubly arm'd: my death and life
My bane and antidote are both before me.
This, in a moment, brings me to an end;
But this informs me I shall never die.
The soul, secure in her existence, smiles
At the drawn dagger, and defies its point.
The stars shall fade away, the sun himself
Grow dim with age, and Nature sink in years;
But thou shalt flourish in immortal youth,-
Unhurt amidst the war of elements,

The wreck of matter, and the crush of worlds."

EXPLANATORY

The following letter, published in London Light, April 29th, 1906, mentions the circumstances and suggests some of the reasons why this paper was denied a reading by the council.

"Mark well" (using the words of a Masonic degree). While a guest at the dining-club of the secretary, Rev. Dr. Hull, in London, some four years ago, he expressed the wish that I would "prepare a paper" to read, or to be read, before the Philosophical Society of Great Britain. I promised to do so at some future time. That time had now come. It was prepared and personally presented to the secretary, Rev. Dr. Hull, and, according to the custom of this scientific institute, constituted of some of the most distinguished scientists and Christian religionists of England and of other countries, my paper was published in pamphlet form by this Philosophical Society and sent out to the members for consideration and discussion, before the assembled body, after the reading.

And these are the preliminary words, appearing at the commencement of their pamphlet publishing the address:

"While it is the Institute's object to investigate, it must not be held to endorse the various views expressed, either in the paper or discussions."

But just how this body of learned men could “investigate or discuss" a paper that the assembled council, manipulated by a Rev. Church Canon, would not permit to be read, is a mystery worthy of the thirteenth century ecclesiasticism.

The Rev. Canon Girdlestone was substituted to give an address upon the "Resurrection"—the resurrecton of Jesus' body-in the place of my "paper." This address in proof of the resurrection of the material body of Jesus Christ, was tame, painfully musty with old theological platitudes, yet soundly orthodox. At the conclusion of this Canon's lecture,

this Philosophical Society, in session, gave me a unanimous vote of thanks for my paper, which they had forbidden to be read. Is it strange that illustrious scientists and liberalists the world over have called "Christian pulpits, cowards' castles"?

Wisely did Milton write: "Let truth and falsehood grapple. Whoever knew truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?"

The president of this Victoria Institute and Philosophical Society of Great Britain is the Right Honorable, the Earl of Halsbury, Lord Chancellor D. C. L., F. R. S., etc., and these gentlemen constitute the council. English-speaking people in all lands have a right to know their names:

Rev. Principal James H. Rigg, D. D.

Rev. Dr. F. W. Tremlett, D. D., D. C. L., Ph. D.

Very Rev. H. Wace, D. D., Wean of Canterbury (Trustee).
Rev. Chancellor J. J. Lias, M. A.

General G. S. Hallowes, f. c.

Rev. F. A. Walker, D. D., F. L. S., F. R. G. S.

Captain E. W. Creak, C. B., R. N., F. R. S.

Thomas Chaplin, Esq., M. D.

Rev. Canon R. B. Girdlestone, M. A.

Theo. G. Pinches, Esq., LL. D., M. R. A. S.

Ven. Archdeacon W. M. Sinclair, M. A., D. D.

Gerard Smith, Esq., M. R. C. S.

Commander G. P. Heath, R. N.

Rev. Canon Tristram, M. A., D. D., LL. D., F. R. S.

Rev. G. F. Whidborne, M. A., F. G. S., F. R. G. S.

His Excellency Lieut.-General Sir H. L. Geary, K. C. B., R. A.

Walter Kidd, Esq., M. D., F. Z. S.

Edward Stanley M. Perowne, Esq.

Martin Luther Rouse, Esq., B. L.

Rev. R. Ashington Bullen, B. A., F. G. S.

Rev. John Tuckwell, M. R. A. S.

Major Kingsley O. Foster, J. P., F. R. A. S.
Lieut.-Colonel George Mackinlay.
General J. G. Halliday.

Here is my explanatory letter of reproof, appearing in the columns of London Light, a very widely circulated Spiritualist journal, under the heading: "THE REJECTED ADDRESS BY DR.

PEEBLES."

It is with a modified yet righteous indignation that I wish to put on record a recent remarkable and unique experience.

I have been for fifteen years a promptly paying member of the London Victoria Institute and Philosophical Society of Great Britain, of which body the Earl of Halsbury is president, but a paper upon "Immortality" that I had prepared to be read at a meeting of that society on Monday, the 17th inst., was, at the last moment, rejected by the council in

session.

Though yearly admiring many of the essays upon science and religion read and discussed by this distinguished body, I felt that the temple of this conservative Institute needed a "living stone," a present-day inspiration; and from the best and highest motives I prepared to furnish it under the name of "Immortality: Its Naturalness, Its Possibilities and Proofs."

The thinking, progressive souls of the twentieth century do not care whether the old Moabites were polygamists or monogamists; whether Samson chased the foxes or was himself chased by foxes; but they do care and pray for the termination of this brutal war between pious Christian Russians and the more enlightened "Pagan" Japanese; they do care about the unemployed in London and the street-corner beggars in New York; they do care about the uneducated, half-clad orphan and the weeping mother mourning over the cold, dead form of a loved child. With no knowledge of a future life, many Rachels are mourning without consolation!

Seriously pondering upon these momentous subjects, I selected Immortality, with its legitimate corollaries, as a fit subject for my paper. It was duly prepared, and handed to the secretary, Professor Edward Hull, LL. D., F. R. S., on April 3d, and, according to the custom of the Victoria Institute, it was printed in pamphlet form, and sent out to many of the members, that they might know its contents and be prepared for the reading and the discussion. The paper was in the hands of the officials and members for two weeks. All seemed well.