thought it would not be amiss to explain to you the Nature of those Steps, by which we arrive at moral Certainty, and where the Subject will admit of it, Mathematical Conviction, which will not a little contribute to strengthen many of the Arguments hereafter made use of, and in some Degree serve to supply the Place of Proof, where infallible Demonstration cannot from the Nature of the Thing be discovered. But besides the indisputable Principles of Geometry, the universal Law of Analogy and Similitude of things, have a Privilege to assist us, in Conjectures relating to the heavenly Bodies, and though not of equal Force with the former, is often as conclusive as the Subject requires. This sort of probable Evidence (as Dr. _Butler_ observes,) is essentially distinguished from "Demonstrative by this, that it admits of Degrees; and of all Variety of them, from the highest moral Certainty to the very lowest Presumption; and that which chiefly constitutes Probability, is expressed in the Word _Likely_, or Natural Likeness, as to State or Being." This general Way of arguing, I think, is allowed to be evidently natural, just and conclusive, and unquestionably to have its Weight in various Degrees, towards determining our Judgment: For Instance, should any ignorant Person, endowed with rational Principles, cut open a _Pomegranate_ of the natural Growth of _England_, and finding it full of small Globules, or Kernels, upon being presented with an every way similar Fruit, said to be the Produce of _Italy_, doubt of its being of the same Nature, and composed of like globular Seeds within; here indeed would be no mathematical Evidence to assist the Judgment, the Object of Proof being invisible, but sure from the external Similitude, the strongest Probability of their being also internally the same. Again,