MR. GLADSTONE AND GENESIS. 793 



science appears to me to decline to have anything to do with either ; 

 they are as wrong in detail as they are mistaken in principle. 



There is another change of position, the value of which is not so 

 apparent to me as it may well seem to be to those who are unfamiliar 

 with the subject under discussion. Mr. Gladstone discards his three 

 groups of " water population," "air population," and "land popula- 

 tion," and substitutes for them (1) fishes, (2) birds, (3) mammals, (4) 

 man. Moreover, it is assumed in a note that " the higher or ordinary 

 mammals" alone were known to the "Mosaic writer" (p. 619). No 

 doubt it looks, at first, as if something were gained by this alteration ; 

 for, as I have just pointed out, the word " fishes " can be used in two 

 senses, one of which has a deceptive appearance of adjustability to the 

 "Mosaic" account. Then the inconvenient reptiles are banished out 

 of sight ; and, finally, the question of the exact meaning of "higher" 

 and " ordinary " in the case of mammals opens up the prospect of a 

 hopeful logomachy. But what is the good of it all in the face of Le- 

 viticus on the one hand and of paleontology on the other ? 



As, in my apprehension, there is not a shadow of justification for 

 the suggestion that when the Pentateuchal writer says " fowl " he 

 excludes bats (which, as we shall see directly, are expressly included 

 under "fowl" in Leviticus), and as I have already shown that he de- 

 monstrably includes reptiles, as well as mammals, among the creeping 

 things of the land, I may be permitted to spare my readers further 

 discussion of the " fivefold order." On the whole, it is seen to be rather 

 more inconsistent with Genesis than its fourfold predecessor. 



But I have yet a fresh order to face. Mr. Gladstone (p. 624) under- 

 stands " the main statements of Genesis, in successive order of time, 

 but without any measurement of its divisions, to be as follows : 



1. A period of land, anterior to all life (v. 9 and 10). 



2. A period of vegetable life, anterior to animal life (v. 11 and 12). 



3. A period of animal life, in the order of fishes (v. 20). 



4. Another stage of animal life, in the order of birds. 



5. Another, in the order of beasts (v. 24 and 25). 



6. Last of all, man (v. 26 and 27)." 



Mr. Gladstone then tries to find the proof of the occurrence of a 

 similar succession in sundry excellent works on geology. 



I am really grieved to be obliged to say that this third (or is it 

 fourth?) modification of the foundation of the "plea for Revelation " 

 originally set forth satisfies me as little as any of its predecessors. 



For, in the first place, I can not accept the assertion that this order 

 is to be found in Genesis. With respect to No. 3, for example, I hold, 

 as I have already said, that " great sea monsters " includes the Ceta- 

 cea, in which case mammals (which is what, I suppose, Mr. Gladstone 

 means by " beasts ") come in under head No. 3, and not under No. 5. 



Again, " fowl " are said in Genesis to be created on the same day as 



