1872.] Notices of Books. 375). 
it has been stated that I attribute the modification of species 
exclusively to natural selection, I may be permitted to remark 
that in the first edition of this work, and subsequently, I placed 
in a most conspicuous position—namely, at the close of the 
Introduction—the following words:—‘I am _ convinced that 
natural selection has been the main but not the exclusive means 
of modification.’ This has been of no avail. Great is the 
power of steady misrepresentation ; but the history of science 
shows that fortunately this power does not long endure, It can 
hardly be supposed that a false theory would explain in so satis- 
factory a manner as does the theory of natural selection the 
several large classes of facts above specified. It has recently 
been suggested that this is an unsafe method of arguing; but it 
is a method used in judging of the common events of life, and 
has often been used by the greatest natural philosophers. The 
undulatory theory of light has thus been arrived at; and the 
belief in the revolution of the earth on its own axis was until 
lately supported by hardly any direct evidence. It is no valid 
. objection that science as yet throws no light on the far higher 
problem of the essence or origin of life. Who can explain what 
is the essence of the attraction of gravity? No one now objects 
to following out-the results consequent on this unknown element 
of attraction; notwithstanding that Liebnitz formerly accused 
Newton of introducing ‘ occult qualities and miracles into philo- 
sophy.’”’ 
I see no good reason why the views given in this volume 
should shock the religious feelings of any one. It is satisfactory, 
as showing how transient such impressions are, to remember 
that the greatest discovery ever made by man, namely, the law 
of the attraction of gravity, was also attacked by Leibnitz, 
‘as subversive of natural, and inferentially of revealed 
religion.” A celebrated author and divine has written to me 
that ‘‘he has gradually learnt to see that it is just as noble 
a conception of the Deity as to believe that He required a fresh 
act of creation to supply the voids caused by the action of His 
laws.” This quotation not only answers Lord Ormathwaite’s 
objection, but it also removes the obstacle to the reception of the 
Darwinian theory by the most timorous in acknowledging the 
advancement of scientific inquiry. It may be said to be the 
chief addition, as it is that embodying the widest principle; the 
remaining corrigenda relate to natural science particularly, and 
are further evidence in support of the theory. 
Dr. Bichner divides his work under three heads: ‘ Our 
Origim;” “What are We?” ‘* Whitheriare we. Going?” In 
considering the origin of man, the author very carefully brings 
to the surface all the geological proofs of man’s antiquity, buried 
to the general reader in almost inaccessible works. The method 
of the arrangement is admirable. ‘‘ What are we?” cannot 
strictly be said to follow the Darwinian theory of evolution, 
