It is more obvious than necessary to suggest an astronomical argument against the supposition of successive creations of suns and systems. It is a doctrine of astronomy that our sun with its dependent system revolves round a central orb, as our planets revolve around the sun; but in an orbit of such immense extent as to require near two millions of years, at the rate of thirty millions of miles a year, to accomplish one revolution. From the observations and facts which verify this doctrine, it is legitimate to infer that there is a like revolution of all other suns and systems, and that the laws which govern those vast and complicated movements were established at the creation. With these considerations in view, we may confidently infer that the infinite Creator did not call into existence and establish the relations, motions, and revolutions of a portion of the celestial orbs at one epoch, and another portion at a later epoch, so as to derange all that had been perfected, and require new adjustments, new relations, new movements, new velocities, and peradventure enlarged forces of attraction and gravitation throughout the realms of space. To judge of the force of this argument, one must, in view of the harmony of the existing material system under the well-known laws which govern it, consider what would be the necessary and inevitable effects of adding to that system new stars equal in number and dimensions to those visible from the earth, or even one other solar system, equal to that to which the earth belongs. Undoubtedly, if our mathematics, our inductive philosophy, and our astronomy are to be relied on, the addition to the existing orbs of one globe like the earth would more or less disturb and derange the whole, or require an infinite miracle to prevent disturbance.