104 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



treated Prof. Huxley with courtesy, 

 though it could be wished that the 

 clergy would inform themselves a little 

 more thoroughly upon the subject be- 

 fore answering him with such perfunc- 

 tory promptness. 



In one thing both the professors, 

 auditors, and the public generally, have 

 been seriously disappointed. They have 

 been led to regard Huxley as a man of 

 pugnacious temper, a kind of contro- 

 versial bully, who is only happy when 

 in a fight. And so they expected to 

 see some brilliant aggressive work, and 

 that he would " polish off" his adversa- 

 ries in the most approved and exciting 

 style of polemical pugilism. But Prof. 

 Huxley indulged in nothing of the kind, 

 and so it was murmured round that the 

 lectures were disappointing, and not at 

 all up to what was expected from him. 

 That is, the man himself, when ob- 

 served, and heard, and known, con- 

 tradicted the preconceived theory of 

 the man. And here is the proper place 

 to say that this current theory of Prof. 

 Huxley's character is quite erroneous. 

 He has been a good deal in controver- 

 sy, no doubt, and has often hit hard ; 

 but it is a total mistake to suppose that 

 he has ever sought or provoked strife 

 because of combative propensities. His 

 dominant tastes and inclinations are all, 

 on the contrary, for quiet scientific in- 

 quiry. Controversy has, however, been 

 thrust upon him. Standing prominent- 

 ly as the exponent of a doctrine that 

 has been regarded with horror for the 

 last twenty years by all classes, high as 

 well as low, he has been misrepresent- 

 ed, and badgered, and vilified, with a 

 recklessness that would have aroused 

 vigorous resistance and sharp counter- 

 strokes in any man of spirit. 



In his opening lecture Prof. Huxley 

 showed first that Nature, or the uni- 

 verse, has not always been what it is 

 now. To minds that seek for causes 

 it therefore presents the problem, How 

 did it come to be what it is now ? The 

 theoretical solution of this problem that 

 has prevailed in the past and is still 



widely accepted is, that it was called 

 into existence a few thousand years ago 

 in much the condition that we now 

 know it. This is the Mosaic theory, in 

 its old and popular interpretation. But 

 as the Mosaic records have been rein- 

 terpreted in recent times, and as the 

 question whether or not the doctrine is 

 taught there is hotly disputed among 

 those who defer to Mosaic authority, 

 Prof. Huxley did not assume to settle 

 the question, and wisely let the Mosaic 

 account alone. Seme newspapers were 

 indignant at this, and charged him with 

 cowardice and evasion for not pitching 

 into Moses. But that was not his busi- 

 ness, and if he had done so he would 

 have been open to the charge of going 

 out of his way to drag in a foreign ques- 

 tion, and make an assault upon the 

 Christian religion there is no pleasing 

 everybody. But, while keeping clear 

 of the Scriptures, he still had to deal 

 with the doctrine which has been uni- 

 versally believed for centuries to be 

 grounded in Scripture authority, and so 

 he took it as vividly and concretely de- 

 scribed by a classic Christian poet more 

 than two centuries ago. He called it 

 the "Miltonic hypothesis," and read a 

 graphic passage from " Paradise Lost " 

 describing the way the animal world 

 came into existence. Herbert Spencer 

 has been soundly belabored by various 

 critics for calling this view the "car- 

 penter theory" of creation, but the 

 great Christian poet certainly lends his 

 authority to this interpretation of the 

 case. He describes the creative work 

 with great literalness as a mechanical 

 operation, in the following lines : 



" .... In his hand 

 He took the golden compasses, prepared 

 In God's eternal store, to circumscribe 

 This universe, and all created things : 

 One foot he centred, and the other turned 

 Bound through the vast profundity obscure ; 

 And said, ' Thus far extend, thus far thy 



bounds, 

 This be thy just circumference world.' " 



But further comment is unnecessary, 

 as the reader will find the full lecture 

 in our pages. 



