EDITOR'S TABLE. 



763 



living forms of which Mr. Darwin is 

 now the leading representative. And 

 although in the field of biology large 

 numbers of its most eminent students, 

 who are of all men most competent to 

 decide upon it, have accepted that doc- 

 trine as representing the truth of Na- 

 ture more perfectly than any other, and 

 as of immense value in tbeir researches 

 into the laws of life, yet Dr. Smith, as 

 our readers will see, denounces it as a 

 groundless hypothesis due to a riotous 

 imagination, and, in the language of 

 Agassiz, a " mere mire of assertions." 

 His declarations have called forth the 

 applause of the press always so can- 

 did, and intelligent, and independent, 

 on such matters who seize the occa- 

 sion to preach new sermons on the " va- 

 garies of science," and declare that they 

 "take sides with the angels against the 

 monkeys," and are " with the Creator 

 against Darwin." 



The course of the president was 

 not commended even by his own 

 party. Dr. Newberry, an eminent 

 student of biology and geology, is re- 

 ported as having spoken in the follow- 

 ing decided way : " Prof. Newberry, 

 after a handsome allusion to the re- 

 tiring president, Prof. J. Lawrence 

 Smith, protested against the opposition 

 to the development theory as ex- 

 pounded in that gentleman's address. 

 Prof. Newberry said he was not him- 

 self a Darwinian, but he recognized 

 the value of the evolution theory in 

 science. You cannot measure its value 

 as you can the work of an astronomer, 

 measured by definite ratios of space 

 and time ; but he considered the hy- 

 pothesis one of the most important con- 

 tributions ever made to a knowledge 

 of Nature. Most men and women are 

 partisans, and some are willing to sup- 

 pose that the hypothesis is sufficient to 

 account for all the phenomena of the 

 animal kingdom, while, on the other 

 hand, there are those who see in it 

 nothing but failure and deficiency. Let 

 us assume a judicial position, and al- 



low the tests of time and truth to settle 

 the questions involved. Go, however, 

 in whatever direction the facts may lead, 

 and throw prejudice to the winds. Rec- 

 ollect that all truth is consistent with 

 itself." 



Dr. Smith can hardly be said to 

 have argued the question of Darwinism. 

 He gave us his own opinion of it, and 

 quoted, to sustain it, two distinguished 

 authorities in natural history. But he 

 gave the influence of his name and po- 

 sition to the charge that it transcends 

 the legitimate limits of inductive in- 

 quiry, and is only a wild and absurd 

 speculation. "While the technical and 

 difficult questions of natural history by 

 which the truth or falsity of the doc- 

 trine must be determined are beyond 

 the reach of unscientific readers, and 

 belong to the biologists to decide, the 

 question here raised as to whether 

 the investigation, as conducted, is le- 

 gitimately scientific or not, is one of 

 which all intelligent persons ought to 

 be capable of forming a judgment. 

 We have repeatedly considered this 

 point in the pages of The Popttlab Sci- 

 ence Monthly, and have endeavored 

 to show that the present attitude of 

 the doctrine of evolution is precisely 

 the attitude which all the great es- 

 tablished theories and laws of science 

 had to take at their first promulgation. 

 It is familiar to all who know any thing 

 of the progress of science, that astrono- 

 my and geology, in their early stages, 

 passed through precisely the same or- 

 deal that biology is passing through 

 now ; their leading doctrines were rep- 

 robated as false science, and the wild 

 dreams of distempered imaginations. 

 Let us now take another case, in the 

 department of pure physics, and see 

 how scientific history repeats itself: 



The undulatory theory of light is 

 now a firmly established principle in 

 physics. Dr. Smith says that "the 

 failure to explain one single well-ob- 

 served fact is sufficient to cast doubt 

 upon, or subvert, any pure hypothesis," 



