846 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



formulated and understood by Darwin him- 

 self. We desire, however, that justice should 

 be done to others as well as to Darwin ; and 

 if there is not in the work before us a de- 

 liberate attempt to ignore the claims of Her- 

 bert Spencer as an exponent of the theory 

 of evolution we are greatly deceived. Turn- 

 ing to the index, we find the following entry : 

 " Spencer, early publications, 215 " that 

 and nothing more. Turning to page 215, we 

 find it mentioned that Spencer was " one of 

 the few out-and-out evolutionists before the 

 publication of the Origin of Species." A 

 reference is made to two of his early essays 

 as bearing this out, and the following quota- 

 tion is given from one of them : " Any exist- 

 ing species, animal or vegetable, when placed 

 under conditions different from its previous 

 ones, immediately begins to undergo certain 

 changes of structure fitting it for new con- 

 ditions." In all (including the quotation), 

 sixteen lines of large type are allotted to 

 Mr. Spencer ; and this is his share in the 

 volume. In the bibliography at the end of 

 the book there is no mention of his name; 

 not even the two early essays refei'ied to 

 in the index are allowed a place. Yet one 

 of the headings in the bibliography is, " The 

 Natural Philosophers and Speculative Evo- 

 lutionists." Mr. Morley is there, on the 

 strength of his work on Diderot and the En- 

 cyclopasdists ; and G. H. Lewes, on the 

 strength of an article published in Eraser's 

 Magazine in 185Y; Mr. Fiske is there, very 

 properly, on the strength of his Cosmic Phi- 

 losophy ; but Mr. Spencer's works, on which 

 Cosmic Philosophy is professedly based, are 

 absolutely ignored. How is this to be ex- 

 plained ? It would be ridiculous on our part 

 to enter upon a serious argument to prove 

 that, as a "speculative evolutionist," Mr. 

 Spencer occupies simply the foremost posi- 

 tion in the world to-day. Darwin fully 

 recognized the fact ; Huxley recognizes it ; 

 Mr. Sully, who has gone over very much the 

 same ground as Prof. Osborn, says that 

 "the philosopher who has done more than 

 any one else to elaborate a consistent phi- 

 losophy of evolution on a scientific basis is 

 Mr. Herbert Spencer " ; Mr. Leslie Stephen, 

 in the introduction to his Science of Ethics, 

 speaks of Mr. Spencer as " the leading expo- 

 nent of the philosophy of evolution," and of 

 his having " worked out an encyclopedic 



system of which his ethical doctrine is the 

 crown and completion " ; Geddes and Thom- 

 son, in their very able work on The Evolu- 

 tion of Sex (Contemporary Science Series), re- 

 fer repeatedly to Spencer, and say pointedly 

 that to him is due " the first adequate dis- 

 cussion of growth." But why multiply opin- 

 ions ? Mr. Spencer is not beyond disparage- 

 ment, or attempted disparagement, by smaller 

 minds ; but in the judgment of the fore- 

 most men of the present day his position 

 as an original, powerful, and most fertile 

 thinker, in regard to the problems of evolu- 

 tion in general and of biology in particular, 

 is decisively established. The omission, 

 however, of Mr. Spencer's name is not the 

 only peculiarity of Prof. Osborn's bibliogra- 

 phy. We look in vain for the names of 

 Romanes, Grant Allen, Patrick Geddes, J. 

 Arthur Thomson, and Andrew Wilson, not 

 to mention any others. It can not be urged 

 in explanation that the bibliography only 

 comes down to the date of Darwin's Origin 

 of Species, because it contains dates as re- 

 cent as 1892. We can only conclude, there- 

 fore, that a partisan effort is being made to 

 keep as much as possible from the knowledge 

 of Columbia students in biology not only Mr. 

 Spencer's work in biology and the general 

 theory of evolution, but that of other writers 

 who recognize the commanding position 

 which he occupies. 



The historical sketch, which the work 

 before us purports to give, is in general well 

 done, and the student who masters it will 

 have a tolerably correct and complete idea 

 of the work of Darwin's predecessors. To 

 many doubtless the information given will 

 come as a surprise, so widespread is the idea 

 that evolution sprang in full armor from the 

 brain of Darwin. Darwin himself was sur- 

 prised when he took to reading Buffon. " I 

 have read Buffon," he says in a letter to 

 Huxley; "whole pages are laughably like 

 mine. It is surprising to see how candid it 

 makes one to see one's views in another 

 man's words." Darwin was a man who 

 was candid at all times, and not only can- 

 did but generous. Were he still living he 

 would be foremost in regretting that a 

 book written, as we may say, in his honor 

 should have done so much less than justice 

 to one whom he honored and esteemed so 

 highly. 



