XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 293 



strictly correct, for the shape of each depends on a 

 long sequence of events, all obeying natural laws, on 

 the nature of the rock, on the lines of stratification or 

 cleavage, on the form of the mountain which depends on 

 its upheaval and subsequent denudation, and lastly, on the 

 storm and earthquake which threw down the fragments. 

 But in regard to the use to which the fragments may be 

 put, their shape may strictly be said to be accidental. 

 And here we are led to face a great difficulty, in alluding 

 to which I am aware that I am travelling beyond my 

 proper province." 



"An omniscient Creator must have foreseen every conse- 

 quence which results from the laws imposed by Him ; but 

 can it be reasonably maintained that the Creator inten- 

 tionally ordered, if we use the words in any ordinary 

 sense, that certain fragments of rock should assume certain 

 shapes, so that the builder might erect his edifice ? If the 

 various laws which have determined the shape of each 

 fragment were not predetermined for the builder's sake, 

 can it with any greater probability be maintained that He 

 specially ordained, for the sake of the breeder, each of the 

 innumerable variations in our domestic animals and plants 

 — many of these variations being of no service to man, and 

 not beneficial, far more often injurious, to the creatures 

 themselves ? Did He ordain that the crop and tail-feathers 

 of the pigeon should vary, in order that the fancier might 

 make his grotesque pouter and fantail breeds? Did He 

 cause the frame and mental qualities of the dog to vary, 

 in order that a breed might be formed of indomitable 

 ferocity, with jaws fitted to pin down the bull lor man's 

 brutal sport ? But, if we give up the principle in one 

 case — if we do not admit that the variations of the pri- 



