ch. xiv.] 18611871. 293 



derivative creation, so that " their teachings harmonize with 

 all that modern science can possibly require." Here Mr. 

 Huxley felt the want of that " study of Christian philosophy " 

 (at any rate in its Jesuitic garb), which Mr. Mivart speaks 

 of, and it was a want he at once set to work to fill up. He 

 was then staying at St. Andrews, whence he wrote to my 

 father : 



By great good luck there is an excellent library here, 

 with a good copy of Suarez,* in a dozen big folios. Among 

 these I dived, to the great astonishment of the librarian, 

 and looking into them ' as careful robins eye the delver's 

 toil' (vide Idylls), I carried off: the two venerable clasped 

 volumes which were most promising." Even those who 

 know Mr. Huxley's unrivalled power of tearing the heart 

 out of a book must marvel at the skill with which he has 

 made Suarez speak on his side. " So I have come out," he 

 wrote, " in the new character of a defender of Catholic 

 orthodoxy, and upset Mivart out of the mouth of his own 

 prophet." 



The remainder of Mr. Huxley's critique is largely occu- 

 pied with a dissection of the Quarterly reviewer's psycholo- 

 gy, and his ethical views. He deals, too, with Mr. Wallace's 

 objections to the doctrine of Evolution by natural causes 

 when applied to the mental faculties of Man. Finally, he 

 devotes a couple of pages to justifying his description of the 

 Quarterly reviewer's treatment of Mr. Darwin as alike " un- 

 just and unbecoming." f 



In the sixth edition my father also referred to the " di- 

 rect action of the conditions of life " as a subordinate cause 

 of modification in living things : On this subject he wrote 

 to Dr. Moritz Wagner (Oct. 13, 1876) : " In my opinion the 

 greatest error which I have committed, has been not allow- 

 ing sufficient weight to the direct action of the environment, 

 i. e. food, climate, &c, independently of natural selection. 



* The learned Jesuit on whom Mr. Mivart mainly relies. 



t The same words may be applied to Mr. Mivart's treatment of my father. 

 The following extract from a letter to Mr. Wallace (June 17th, 1874) refers to 

 Mr. Mivart's statement (Lessons from JS'ature, p. 144) that Mr. Darwin at first 

 studiously disguised his views as to the " bestiality of man " : 



" I have only just heard of and procured your two articles in the Academy. 

 I thank you most cordially for your generous defence of me against Mr. Mi- 

 vart. Iii the Origin I did not discuss the derivation of any one species ; but 

 that I misrht not be accused of concealing my opinion, I went out of my way, 

 and inserted a sentence which seemed to me (and still so seems) to disclose 

 plainly my belief. This was quoted in my Descent of Man. Therefore it is 

 very unjust ... of Mr. Mivart to accuse me of base fraudulent concealment." 



