Page:Lacrosse- The National Game of Canada (New Edition).djvu/69

52 training and education of the intellect, a high use of the reasoning faculty, and a capacity to experiment and improve, and impart principles of knowledge to another. It can only be a human prerogative. The difference between it and art is, that science is a collection of the general principles or leading precepts; art is the skill that applies them. "A principle in science is a rule of art." The theory of Lacrosse is its science—the practice is its art.

The science of a sport is not immutable like that of mathematics. The latter is founded upon a few axioms and definitions, and it is impossible to prove Euclid's propositions to one who disputes the axioms. In a sport, however, contingencies and casual circumstances occur, which lead off from some theories into new ones, and such science can never be unalterable and certain.

Is the art of Lacrosse based on a science? Not entirely so, not as much so as cricket; but that there is science in the game is proved by the fact that many throws, dodges, checks, &c., are explained by fixed principles, from which no one can deviate and be successful. The throw of the ball, for instance, unlike that of a die, is not under the doctrine of chance.