v] OF. EVOLUTION 51 



was published, Lyell undertook the preparation of 

 a review for the Quarterly and this review was 

 a very able and discriminating production. 



Although Lyell did not derive his views con- 

 cerning terrestrial evolution directly from Hutton, 

 as is sometimes supposed, there were two respects 

 in which he greatly profited when he came to read 

 Button's work at a later date. 



In the first place, he was very deeply impressed 

 by the necessity of avoiding the odium theologicum, 

 which had been so strongly, if unintentionally, aroused 

 by Hutton, of whom he wrote, 'I think he ran un- 

 necessarily counter to the feelings and prejudices of 

 the age. This is not courage or manliness in the 

 cause of Truth, nor does it promote progress. It 

 is an unfeeling disregard for the weakness of human 

 nature, for it is our nature (for what reason heaven 

 knows), but as it is constitutional in our minds, to 

 feel a morbid sensibility on matters of religious faith, 

 I conceive that the same right feeling which guards 

 us from outraging too violently the sentiments of our 

 neighbours in the ordinary concerns of the world and 

 its customs, should direct us still more so in this 40 .' 



In the second place, Lyell was warned by the fate 

 of Button's writings that it was hopeless to look 

 for success in combating the prevailing geological 

 theories, unless he cultivated a literary style very 

 different from that of the Theory of the Earth. 



42 



