glorious science upon more solid foundations, which do not rest on an imaginary and untenable theory, but on actual observation, will surely be found. Success cannot be doubtful. Would not the Americans, who appreciate every thing on a grand scale and are not afraid of any expense in their undertakings, do all in their power to further and promote this splendid work?[1]

If—as is well known—matters are not as they are assumed to be, to what purpose have been and are these laborious works prosecuted and the undying works written? If the imaginary is preferred to reality, we set up an imaginary science, without knowing anything about the heaven, and the science thus set up will become the plaything of fancy.

If they inquire, why theory denies reality—the motion of the sun—we shall find that it is because it prefers the imaginary. The sun in motion destroys the found illusions of the astronomers, this they will not submit to, their untenable theory must continue to be looked upon as unadulteratest truth, and the consequence is that the manifestations of the grand and sublime Nature are put down as lies.

This idea of a fixed sun has taken such a firm hold of men's minds that there is no force in nature capable of exercising sufficient power to eradicate it, the sun may move as it pleases, and whilst the whither and rapidity of its motion are diligently studied, men's minds are occupied with its fixity, and these "investigations and inquiries" are prosecuted without any consequences being therefrom deduced. Directly a theory or a law is to be set up, the sun is at once very firmly fixed on—ether. Astronomical writers consider that they have done quite enough, when they have accorded honorable mention to the motion of the sun, but their deductions, conclusions, theories, proofs and laws are all based on the immobility of the sun, according the system of Copernicus.

The idea that the motion of the sun does not necessitate any alteration in the system of Copernicus leads us to the utmost absurdity. If the earth is to move in the invariable plain of its recurrent and closed ellipse, it stands to reason, it cannot follow the sun, and the "circulation around the centre" at once falls to the ground.

It is a very remarkable fact, that the astronomers of the by-gone century could, and those of the present century can believe, such as Copernicus, Kepler and Newton, had they been aware of the motion of the sun, would have set up the same system, the same laws and theories, as they based exclusively on the theory of its being immoveable. This fact is one of which we are right to be ashamed.

The astronomers hug themselves, with great complacency, with the idea—which gradually becomes a delicious certainly—that they have mapped out the heaven very well, and that any change in the arrangement is a thing not to be thought of. If therefore any one of their fellows should get up—which has sometimes occurred—and say: "it is high time that we should clear up the science and subject this untenable theory to a strict examination and test," the immense majority of facultists and authorities proclaim unanimously "non possumus," which is after all but a lingual verification of the first law of the nature[2].