DARWIN AND EI3 REVIEWERS. 159 



stant, however infinitely diversified, action of the in- 

 telligent efficient Cause. 



It must be allowed that, while the third is preemi- 

 nently the Christian view, all three are philosophi- 

 cally compatible with design in JSTature. The second 

 is probably the popular conception. Perhaps most 

 thoughtful people oscillate from the middle view tow- 

 ard the first or the third — adopting the first on some 

 occasions, the third on others. Those philosophers 

 who like and expect to settle all mooted questions 

 will take one or the other extreme. The Examiner 

 inclines toward, the North American reviewer fully 

 adopts, the third view, to the logical extent of main- 

 taining that " the origin of an individual, as well as 

 the origin of a species or a genus, can be explained 

 only by the direct action of an intelligent creative 

 cause." To silence his critics, this is the line for Mr. 

 Darwin to take ; for it at once and completely relieves 

 his scientific theory from every theological objection 

 which his reviewers have urged against it. 



At present we suspect that our author prefers the 

 first conception, though he might contend that his hy- 

 pothesis is compatible with either of the three. That 

 it is also compatible with an atheistic or pantheistic 

 conception of the universe, is an objection which, 

 being shared by all physical, and some ethical or 

 moral science, cannot specially be urged against Dar- 

 win's system. As he rejects spontaneous generation, 

 and admits of intervention at the beginning of organic 

 life, and probably in more than one instance, he is 

 not wholly excluded from adopting the middle view, 

 although the interventions he would allow are few and 



