LITERARY NOTICES. 



247 



doctrines with which it is associated, and 

 of which it is itself but a part ; and a book, 

 professing to answer the question implied 

 in this title, should make the discrimina- 

 tion and dispel the vagueness. If the ques- 

 tion were given with its ominous implica- 

 tions, as, " What is this horrible Darwin- 

 ism ? " the reader would be set on the right 

 track by the title ; for the book is actually an 

 essay on the relations of Darwinism and 

 orthodoxy, and its aim seems to be to es- 

 tablish the position that Mr. Darwin's theory 

 excludes design in Nature, and is therefore 

 atheistic. Dr. Hodge cites various authori- 

 ties who hold to this view, and he cites 

 others against it. He admits that Mr. Dar- 

 win recognizes the agency of the Creator in 

 originating the first germs of life, and he 

 says, "it is conceded that a man may be an 

 evolutionist and yet not be an atheist, and 

 may admit of design in Nature." And yet 

 he is unwilling to let the matter rest here, 

 and the drift of his book seems to be to 

 show that the whole tendency of the inquiry 

 is irreligious and pernicious. He could make 

 out exactly the same case with the doc- 

 trine of gravitation as with the doctrine 

 of evolution. The theory of Newton was 

 objected to in its time as dispensing with 

 God, and explaining the movements of mat- 

 ter by a self-sufficing law of inherent attrac- 

 tion. That question is passed by, and men 

 are left at liberty to interpret it in the way 

 they choose. Why not deal with evolution 

 in the same way ? The real question is, 

 " What is the truth of the case ? " and, un- 

 til that is worked out and established, it is 

 premature to complicate it with theological 

 difficulties. Nothing is more certain than 

 that it must be investigated by scientific 

 men, on its own merits. 



So acute and cultivated a mind as that 

 of Dr. Hodge could not deal with the ques- 

 tion without giving interest to it, and his 

 book will well repay perusal. The author 

 evidently aims to be just, and his volume is 

 measurably free from the denunciatory spir- 

 it which is too characteristic of controver- 

 sy. But it must still be said that he is 

 evidently too little familiar with the sub- 

 ject, and some of his statements will sur- 

 prise the well-informed reader. For example : 

 " When the theory of evolution was pro- 

 pounded, in 1844, in the 'Vestiges of Crea- 



tion,' it was universally rejected ; when 

 proposed by Mr. Darwin, less than twenty 

 yeai's afterward, it was received with accla- 

 mation. Why is this ? The facts are now 

 what they were then ; they were as well 

 known then as they are now. The theory, 

 so far as evolution is concerned, was then 

 just what it is now. How, then, is it that 

 what was scientifically false in 1844 is sci- 

 entifically true in 1864?" This state- 

 ment of Dr. Hodge that the doctrine of evo- 

 lution, as now understood, was propounded 

 by the author of the " Vestiges of Creation " 

 in 1844, is about as correct as the state- 

 ment of Drs. Burr and Dawson, that it is a 

 plagiarism from the old Greek atheists, 

 Anaxamander, Anaxagoras, Democritus, and 

 Epicurus. The theory of the "Vestiges" 

 was nothing more than a restatement, in 

 popular form, of that of Lamark, and there 

 was no pretension that its author had con- 

 tributed any thing to it of scientific impor- 

 tance. The real reason, undoubtedly, why 

 the new statement was caught at with 

 such avidity, was the growing conviction 

 that the prevailing explanation of the 

 origin of living forms, by special creation, 

 was indefensible. The " Vestiges " was 

 widely read, but the theory was not ac- 

 cepted, because it did not offer any ra- 

 tional or probable scientific solution of 

 the difficulty. There was, however, a kind 

 of indefinite feeling that the inquiry was in 

 the true direction, and that its fundamental 

 conception might be strengthened and veri- 

 fied by further investigation. This appre- 

 hension is well shown by the following ex- 

 tract from a letter of Principal James D. 

 Forbes to Dr. Whewell, in 1846: "You 

 have read, of course, the sequel to the 

 ' Vestiges ' . . . . the author of the ' Ves- 

 tiges,' who is generally believed to be a 

 denizen of modem Athens, has shown him- 

 self a very apt scholar, and has improved 

 his knowledge and his arguments so much 

 since his first edition, that his deformities 

 no longer appear so disgusting. It was 

 well that he began to write in the fullness 

 of his ignorance and presumption, for, had 

 he begun now, he would have been more 

 dangerous." In 1859, Mr. Darwin and Mr. 

 Wallace, working independently of each 

 other, developed the principle of Natural 

 Selection, which was the most important sin- 



