Evohttion and its Consequences. 6 1 



untenable, and that natural selection is not the origin of 

 species. This was and is my conviction purely as a man of 

 science, and I maintain it upon scientific grounds only. 



My second object was to demonstrate that nothing even 

 in Mr. Darwin's theory, as then put forth, and a fortiori in 

 evolution generally, was necessarily antagonistic to Christi-~ 

 anity. 



Professor Huxley ignoring the arguments by which I 

 supported my first point, fastens upon my second ; and the 

 gist of his criticism is an endeavour to show that Christianity 

 and science are necessarily and irreconcilably divorced, and 

 that the arguments I have advanced to the contrary are false 

 and misleading. 



Before replying to Professor Huxley's observations and 

 misconceptions on this head, I may be excused for saying a 

 few words as to my first point, namely, the scientific reasons 

 which seem to oppose themselves to the reception of the 

 Darwinian theory as originally propounded by its author; 

 and here I claim to be acting, and to have acted, as ' a loyal 

 soldier of science ' in stating the scientific facts which have 

 impressed me Avith certain scientific convictions (on purely 

 scientific grounds), in opposition to Mr. Darwin's views. 



Professor Huxley does not so much dispute the truth of 

 my conclusions as deny their distinctness from those at which 

 Mr. Darwin himself has arrived, or indeed originally put forth, 

 asserting that my book is but ' an iteration of the fundamen- 

 tal principle of Darwinism.' 



I shall then shortly endeavour to show more distinctly 

 wherein my view radically differs from that first propounded 

 by Mr. Darwin, and still maintained, or at least not distinctly 

 repudiated by him ; though I believe that the admissions he 

 has of late made amount to a virtual, but certainly not to an 

 explicit, abandonment of his theory. 



The Professor expresses his doubt as to the existence of 



