Mr. Ure confirms his view by a quotation from Sir Isaac Newton; Optics, Book 3. towards the conclusion. “It seems probable to me that God in the beginning formed matter in solid, massy, hard, impenetrable, movable particles, of such sizes and figures, and with such other properties, and in such proportions to space, as most conduced to the end for which he formed them. All material things seem to have been composed of the hard and solid particles above mentioned, variously associated in the _first creation_ by the counsels of an intelligent agent. For it became him who created them to set them in order; and if he did so, it is unphilosophical to seek for any other origin of this world, or to pretend that it might rise out of chaos by the mere laws of Nature; though being once formed, it may continue by those laws for many ages.” I have given this quotation precisely as I found it in Mr. Ure’s New System of _Geology_, B. 1. chap. 1. p. 10. Considering the well founded reputation of Newton, it adds very much to the probability of the above theory: yet it seems to me to be at variance with the commonly received impression of Newton’s opinion on this subject. I have not his work at hand to examine it. The Encyclopedia Britannica, Article _Earth_, seems to favor this view. It says, “The common notion of the earth’s being originally a chaos, seems neither to have a foundation in reason, nor in the Mosaic account of the creation.” The reader will here perceive high authorities on both sides, and all claiming to agree with Moses. The weight of evidence seems to be in favor of a chaotic creation, which does _not_ necessarily imply that the mass was created in a _soft_ state. But the configuration, and internal structure of the earth abundantly prove it was in a soft, or compressible state when it was assuming its present form and structure. This condition was the effect of the quickening energy of the Spirit of God. The difference between the _equatorial_ and _polar_ diameters of the earth, which is now well established, and is about twenty-seven miles, can scarcely be accounted for, without supposing the substance of the earth, at least to a great depth, to have been partially or wholly fluid; in which case, by turning round rapidly on its own axis, it would assume the shape it is known to possess. It may, indeed, be said, the Almighty could give it any shape and qualities he pleased, and we cannot well object to it. As it regards the interior, or central parts of our planet, our author has said nothing, and possibly he would give this very good reason for his silence--_we can know nothing certainly_. Still, however, we may subjoin the conjectures of some eminent philosophers.