y 
) 
us CRITICISMS ON “THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES” 99 
fairness in admitting and discussing objections, 
what is to be thought of M. Elourens’ assertion, 
~ that 
“M. Darwin ne cite que les auteurs qui partagent ses 
opinions.” (P. 40.) 
Once more (p. 65) :— 
**Enfin l’ouvrage de M. Darwin a paru, On ne peut qu’étre 
frappé du talent de l’auteur. Mais que d’idées obscures, que 
Widées fausses! Quel jargon métaphysique jeté mal & propos 
dans histoire naturelle, qui tombe dans le galimatias dés qu’elle 
sort des idées claires, des idées justes! Quel langage prétentieux 
et vide! Quelles personnifications puériles et surannées! O 
lucidité ! O solidité de l’esprit Francais, que devenez-vous ?” 
ay. ke 
“Obscure ideas,” “metaphysical jargon,” “ pre- 
_tentious and empty language,’ ‘‘puerile and 
superannuated personifications.” Mr. Darwin has 
many and hot opponents on this side of the 
Channel and in Germany, but we do not recollect 
to have found precisely these sins in the long 
_ catalogue of those hitherto laid to his charge. It 
is worth while, therefore, to examine into these 
discoveries effected solely by the aid of the 
“lucidity and solidity” of the mind of M. 
-Flourens. 
According to M. Flourens, Mr. Darwin’s great 
error is that he has personified Nature (p. 10), 
and further that he has 
“imagined a natural selection: he imagines afterwards that 
__ this power of selecting (powvoir d’élire) which he gives to Nature 
is similar to the power of man. These two suppositions ad- 
H 2 
