414 NATURAL SCIENCE [December 
Weismann’s work—of the whole of which, and, indeed, even of 
Weismann’s existence, he seems to be profoundly ignorant—this 
passage, and the whole of his article besides, would have remained 
unwritten. It does seem to me rather hard that metaphysicians 
who want to write about evolution will not take the trouble to find 
out what evolutionism connotes at the present day ; but Professor 
Schiller’s ignorance-of recent advances in biology is quite on a par 
with the curious and fatal misconception of the processes and factors 
of evolution that prevails throughout his article ; and the cue to his 
philosophical status is afforded by his very theological conclusion, 
from which we learn that, if the whole of his argument be valid, 
evolutionism rather helps than hinders the teleologist, since he is no 
longer compelled to attribute perfection, but only gradual perfec- 
tioning, to this very imperfect scheme of nature, nor to saddle an 
omnipotent deity with the responsibility for deliberately planning 
and designing all the cruelty and suffering prevalent throughout the 
world. In other words, he proposes, by the help of evolution, to 
save divine morality at the expense of divine power; his directing 
Intelligence being, not an omnipotent fiend, but only an unpractised 
though well-meaning bungler. I hope that the theologians will be 
duly grateful to their very candid friend.? 
1 The theory of an innate tendency to vary in a definite direction of advance was, 
of course, advocated long ago by Nigeli. In an article on ‘‘ Evolution and Teleology ” 
that appeared in the New Science Review of July, 1895, I pointed out how strongly the 
recent advances in botany have told against this theory, and how in nearly every line of 
ascent evolution upwards has ended in a blind alley. 
F,. H. Perry Coste: 
