EDITOR'S TABLE. 



239 



we have shown again and again in these 

 pages. Mr. Spencer, therefore, under- 

 took no illegitimate or superfluous task 

 in devoting many years to evolutionary 

 I'esearches. If the work of Darwin 

 and other biologists was not futile, the 

 larger inquiry was imminent and lay 

 straight in the path of progressive sci- 

 ence . Mr. Spencer undertook it, and the 

 language of the Nation implies that in 

 his contributions to it there is nothing 

 that is really honored by men of science. 

 To this dictum we give a flat contra- 

 diction, and, if space allowed, we could 

 weary our readers with the copious 

 evidence that eminent men of science 

 honor the work of Spencer by accept- 

 ing his results as guides to their own 

 investigations. Let one illustration suf- 

 fice : Mr. Alfred Russel Wallace, one of 

 the independent discoverers of the prin- 

 ciple of natural selection, in his address 

 as President of the Anthropological So- 

 ciety of London, in 1872, referred to a 

 view propounded by Mr. Spencer on 

 biological evolution as " one of the most 

 ingenious and remarkable theories ever 

 put forth on a question of natural his- 

 tory." Nor did he stop with turning a 

 mere compliment. He went on to say: 

 "More than sis years ago Mr. Herbert 

 Spencer published, in his ' Principles of 

 Biology,' a view of the nature and ori- 

 gin of the Annulose type of animals, 

 which goes to the very root of the whole 

 question; and, if this view is a sound 

 one, it must so materially afi:ect the 

 interpretation of all embryological and 

 anatomical facts bearing on this great 

 subject, that those who work in igno- 

 rance of it can hardly hope to arrive 

 at true results. I propose, therefore, to 

 lay before you a brief sketch of Mr. 

 Spencer's theory, with the hope of call- 

 ing attention to it and inducing some 

 of you to take up what seems to me a 

 most promising line of research." Of 

 course there are plenty of scientific men 

 who do not honor what Mr. Spencer has 

 done and care little for what anybody 

 has done outside of his own narrow 



specialties. Human nature works in 

 scientific men, it must be confessed, 

 much as it does in other people, and they 

 often exhibit petty jealousies toward 

 each other that are a scandal to the 

 scientific character. That from timid- 

 ity, prejudice, and lack of interest in 

 general ideas, many of them should de- 

 cline to honor a broad and independent 

 thinker like Spencer, is not surprising. 

 But all scientific men are not of this 

 class. 



We again affirm that the task which 

 Mr. Spencer accepted, of investigating 

 the general principles of evolution, was 

 one that stood clearly in the pathway 

 of Science, and was not to be escaped. 

 He was the first to grasp the full breadth 

 of its implications, the first to analyze 

 it into its elements, the first to organize 

 its varied facts into a coherent system, 

 and make it the basis of a comprehen- 

 sive philosophy of Nature. His "First 

 Principles," containing the full exposi- 

 tion of the doctrine, has now been be- 

 fore the world thirteen years, and its 

 essential positions have not yet been 

 impugned. There has not been even 

 an attempt to invalidate his proofs that 

 the processes of universal change are 

 from the homogeneous to the hetero- 

 geneous. There has never been even 

 an attempt to invalidate his universal 

 principle of the " Instability of the Ho- 

 mogeneous." There has not been even 

 an attempt to invalidate the principle 

 of the " Multiplication of Eftects ; " nor 

 have his critics ever even tried to show 

 that these great principles are not essen- 

 tial and fundamental factors of evolu- 

 tion ; and until this is done they may as 

 well hold their peace in regard to his 

 claims as an original explorer in this 

 field. 



Finally, in his zeal to upset Spencer, 

 the Natioii's writer throws Bacon at 

 his head, but he sadly misses his aim. 

 It is now well understood that Bacon's 

 attempt to lay down the rules of scien- 

 tific pursuit was a signal failure. He 

 tried his own rules in the investigation 



