(32.) Now, this absolute indestructibility of the ultimate materials of the world, in periods commensurate to our experience, and their obstinate retention of the same properties, under whatever variety of circumstances we choose to place them, however violent and seemingly contradictory to their natures, is, of itself, enough to render it highly improbable that time alone should have any influence over them. All that age or decay can do seems to be included in a wasting of parts which are only dissipated, not destroyed, or in a change of sensible properties, which chemistry demonstrates to arise only from new combinations of the same ingredients. But, after all, the question is one entirely of experience: we cannot be sure, à priori, that the laws of nature are immutable; but we can ascertain, by enquiry, whether they change or not; and to this enquiry all experience answers in the negative. It is not, of course, intended here to deny that great operations, productive of extensive changes in the visible state of nature,—such as, for instance, those contemplated by the geologists, and embracing for their completion vast periods of time,—are constantly going on; but these are consequences and fulfilments of the laws of nature, not contradictions or exceptions to them. No theorist regards such changes as alterations in the fundamental principles of nature; he only endeavours to reconcile them, and show how they result from laws already known, and judges of the correctness of his theory by their ultimate agreement.
(33.) But the laws of nature are not only permanent, but consistent, intelligible, and discoverable
