CORRESP ONDENCE. 



697 



CORRESPONDENCE. 



PROFESSOR nUXLEY AND THE 

 "BLIGHTED FIG-TEEE." 

 Editor Popular Science Monthly : 



IN " The Popular Science Monthly " for 

 January, Professor Iluxley, writing on 

 " Science and Veracity," * says : " I do not 

 know any body of scientific men who could 

 be got to listen without the strongest ex- 

 pressions of disgusted repudiation to the 

 exposition of a pretended scientific discov- 

 ery, which had no better evidence to show 

 for itself than the story of the fig-tree that 

 was blasted for bearing no figs when 'it 

 was not the season of figs.' " 



Now this very ignorant fling at Christi- 

 anity is a fair specimen of the objections 

 generally offered by infidels and semi-in- 

 fidels. Coming as this does from a man of 

 more gentlemanly instincts than Ingersoll, 

 it lacks much of the impudence of Inger- 

 soll, but it shows the same utter ignorance 

 of the great subject, for Huxley here has 

 shown himself ignorant of the facts in the 

 case by most absurdly assuming that a fruit- 

 ful fig-tree would only have fruit on it at 

 " certain seasons " ; whereas all who know 

 the facts know that the fig-tree in Palestine 

 should have figs on it at all seasons. Hence 

 Professor Huxley's fiing has no base on 

 which to rest. It is a sad pity in the inter- 

 ests of mankind, and especially of these men, 

 that they are not willing to give as fair tests 

 of the truths of Christianity as they give to 

 chemistry and other sciences. If they could 

 be persuaded to apply the adequate tests to 

 the claims of Christianity which Christ gave, 

 when he said, "If any man will do his will, 

 he shall know of the doctrine whether it be 

 of God," they would thus have ample proof 

 of all the important claims, and would " know 

 of the doctrine," and, as the greater includes 

 the less, the importance of all these little 

 mysteries would vanish. 



Professor Huxley undoubtedly under- 

 stands much about physical sciences (geog- 

 raphy excepted, apparently). But, mani- 

 festly, he knows nothing about the science 

 of religion. 



He thereby falls into the grossest ab- 

 surdities in attempting to write of it as 

 Professor Tyndall did in his quintessence 

 of absurd impudence, when he proposed to 

 test the spiritual efficacy of prayer by a 

 steel spring, which proposition is as far 

 and no further from reason than Professor 

 Huxley's assumption is from facts. 



J. W. HUNTOON, M. D. 

 Lowell, Massachusetts, January 12, 1S53. 



• " Science and the Bishops." 



The obvious comment on the foregoing 

 is, that it affords a " fair specimen " of 

 the pronenoss of many people, in their ex- 

 treme solicitude for the safety of favorite 

 beliefs, to see all sorts of bugbears, where 

 to a cooler judgment there is not the slight- 

 est occasion for alarm. The passage so ex- 

 citedly complained of as " this very ignorant 

 fling at Christianity," " a fair specimen of 

 the objections generally urged by infidels," 

 and as showing "utter ignorance of the 

 great subject " is quoted by Professor Hux- 

 ley from a source that should command the 

 confidence instead of the contempt of our 

 correspondent. For the convenience of the 

 reader we give the passage as it occurs in 

 the Gospel of St. Mark, chapter xi, verses 

 13, 14.— Editor. 



" And seeing a fig-tree afar off, having 

 leaves, he came, if haply he might find any- 

 thing thereon: and when he came to it, lie 

 found nothing but leaves: for the time of 

 figs was not yet. 



" And Jesus answered and said unto it, 

 No man eat fruit of thee hereafter forever. 

 And his disciples heard i^" 



THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE LAW. 

 Editor Popular Science Monthly : 



In your February number there is an 

 article by Mr. Henry Wood on the "Inter- 

 state Long and Short Haul," containing 

 some errors of fact which may bear correc- 

 tion. The clause of the Interstate Act 

 which forbids an aggregate larger charge 

 for a shorter than for a longer distance over 

 the same line, under substantially similar 

 conditions, receives severe criticism, and in 

 illustration of its alleged bad effects several 

 instances are mentioned. It is stated (page 

 540) that the rail-carriers between New Or- 

 leans and New York or Boston are not al- 

 lowed to quote rates in competition with 

 water carriers lower than to intermediate 

 points. This is a mistake ; all water com- 

 petition is considered sufficient excuse for 

 violations of this short-haul section, and the 

 tariffs of our railroads are full of such 

 instances: New York to New Orleans or 

 Mobile, New York to Wilmington, North 

 Carolina, etc., are a few out of many where 

 interior rates are much higher. 



Again, in his foot-note (page 541), Mr. 

 Wood complains that the Canadian Pacific 

 competes with our transcontinental roads, 

 which are prevented by this law from ac- 

 cepting a less rate for a longer distance. 

 This is also an error. Our Pacific roads 



