Year: 1877

| We know that many in some sense
defy natural law, and assume that
! there is no power that will, II indeed
! il can, control il. But the assump-
| ton is so manifestly fallacious il is d


wonder that any do not perceive the
! fallacy. Man is every day CONT oling
natural law. We plOw the soil and


SOW the seed, and thus make natural


law do what of itself it never would


have done. We control and direct


natural law, to the working out OF
otherwise impossible results, in the
building of every edifice and the con-
struction of every maohine,-in the


transportation of our products, in the
Improvement of our stock, in the
preparation Of our food and clothing,
and In ways too numerous to enum-
crate.


Now, unless we assume there Is no
overruliDg power, superior TO man,
there is no reason why 1t may not
control and direct natural law, to an
extent rs much greater than anything
man can do, as it is more powerful
than man. There are some things
such overrRling power will not do. 1t
will not tuin night into day nor OBJ
struct the succession of the seasons.
But the removal of the locust pest is
something IL has done, and therefore
something that may reasonably be hop
ed for again, and so we judge also
prayed for.-KcnesGoO Times.


The editor of the Times has right,
we believe, to the title of prof" or
REV" just as you please, and may
be thought to be deep thinker and
logical ressoner, especially upon such
subjects as he discusses above. But
we Will take brief look into the Prof
fessor's reasoning, which to US "is so
manifestly fallacious it is wonder


that any do not perceive the fallaoy."


"Man lie every day controlling natur-
al law" Had he said applying in
stead of controlling, he would have
been nearer the truth.


1--WE plow the soil and SOW the
seed" Why? For the production of
certain result we apply to the seed
certain natural laws, and those laws.
Interchangeable. operate, and we cannot
"make" them produce different re-
suit without the application of some
other natural law. If we want a field
of grain we subject tho seed to one
law and If we want the seed for food
we subject il to another, and we can
not make the seed do anything with
out the application Of a natural law
necessary to the result desired. Ifwe
cast the seed upon stone we cannot
make it produce there, because the
law to make ii bring forth fruit of its
kind is not applied but it is as much
gverned by a natural law on the stone
as it would be in the warm damp soil.
If we control natural law, as the
Prof. declares, we can make" it
grow Just as well on the stone as If in
the ground.


The Prof. intro duces the above ar
ticle as follows:


Quite a number of our papers have
made merry over Gov. Pillsbury's
proclamation of day of fasting and |
prayer, for relief from locusts.


But the fact is that Providence has |
done more to relieve both Minnesota |
and Nebraska from the pests, thou
sand times over, than all the people |
have done.


The Prof means, by providence"
the direct interposition of God, we
suppose; and 1t ia legitimate for us to
Inquire, of the Prof. of course, why,
while he was about it, he did not kill
all Of the grasshoppers There are
some left-an occasional field is being
devastated. And this Is sufficient
reason for US to believe there was no
special order concerning the matter,
but that combination of natural
laws. hard on the hopper, has had
a tendency TO destroy most of them.


"Old Probability" and the almanac
maker, and the entomologists, gave
reason to hope for the impotency of
the hoppers, long before Pillsbury's
proclamation, or the Catholic masses,
and are deserving of the credit of re-
storing among the people confidence
to plant with hope to reap. In the
spring of 1875, Notwithstanding pray
ers and tears, the country was devas-
tsted. We would not charge the ca
lsmity on Providence" because we
do not believe he caused 1t or could
have averted II. The sensible conclu-
Is that there was not then, as now, a
Of natural causes, to de-
stroy the grasshoppers and save the
crops.