x.J MB. DARWIWS CRITICS. 263 



social existence must have Lad the same tendency, if we 

 consider the indisputable facts that even animals possess 

 tlie power of distinguishing form and number, and that 

 they are capable of deriving pleasure from particular 

 forms and sounds. If we admit, as Mr. Wallace does, 

 that the lowest savages are not raised &quot; many grades 

 a.bove the elephant and the ape ; &quot; and if we further 

 admit, as I contend must be admitted, that the con 

 ditions of social life tend, powerfully, to give an advan 

 tage to those individuals who vary in the direction 

 of intellectual or aesthetic excellence, what is there to 

 interfere with the belief that these higher faculties, like 

 the rest, owe their development to natural selection ? 



Finally, with respect to the development of the moral 

 sense out of the simple feelings of pleasure and pain, 

 liking and disliking, with which the lower animals are 

 provided, I can find nothing in Mr. Wallace s reasonings 

 which has not already been met by Mr. Mill, Mr. Spencer, 

 or Mr. Darwin. 



I do not propose to follow the Quarterly Reviewer and 

 Mr. Mivart through the long string of objections in 

 matters of detail which they bring against Mr. Darwin s 

 views. Everyone who has considered the matter care 

 fully will be able to ferret out as many more &quot; diffi 

 culties ; &quot; but he will also, I believe, fail as completely as 

 they appear to me to have done, in bringing forward any 

 fact which is really contradictory of Mr. Darwin s views. 

 Occasionally, too, their objections and criticisms are 

 based upon errors of their own. As, for example, when 

 Mr. Mivart and the Quarterly Reviewer insist upon the 

 resemblances between the eyes of Cephalopoda and Ver- 

 tebrata, quite forgetting that there are striking and alto 

 gether fundamental differences between them ; or when 

 the Quarterly Eeviewer corrects Mr. Darwin for saying 



