HAP. IX.] NATUBAL SELECTION. 293 



This view may be true or false, but it is a very different 1 

 one from that advocated by the author of the Differ from 

 Origin of Species/ and I am at a loss to under- view. an 

 stand how Professor Huxley could really consider it identical 

 with Mr. Darwin s, more especially as (at p. 237) the points 

 in which this theory coincides with Professor Owen s * Deri 

 vation, and differs from that of the author of the Origin of 



7 O 



Species, had been enumerated. It seems to me strange that 

 Professor Huxley should now assert the &quot;very pith and 

 marrow&quot; of Darwinism to have been the affirmation that 

 &quot; species havel)een evolved by variation, aided by the subor 

 dinate action of natural selection,&quot; when he himself, in his 

 Lay Sermons (p. 321), has enunciated simply that Mr. 

 Darwin s hypothesis is the origin of species &quot; l&amp;gt;y the process of 

 natural selection&quot; without one word of qualification ; and five 

 pages farther on, has considered the possibility of the refuta 

 tion of Mr. Darwin s view by the discovery of residual pheno 

 mena* not explicable by &quot;natural selection&quot; just such 

 phenomena as I have endeavoured to call attention to in my 

 book. 



There is no evidence that Mr. Darwin even now does admit 

 that &quot;natural selection&quot; has only a subordinate action, and, 

 as we have seen, in the last edition of the Origin of Species 

 he still speaks of it as &quot; the most important means.&quot; I do not 

 recollect to have met with any declaration that it is only a 

 subordinate means, although such a declaration should logi 

 cally follow from the various admissions he has latterly made. 

 If he does admit it, then a cause which is subordinate cannot 

 be the determining agent. If he does not admit it, then 

 there is a radical difference between my hypothesis and 

 Mr. Darwin s. 



Mr. Darwin has, in fact, changed his ground without, at 

 the same time, disavowing, as he should have done, &quot; natural 

 selection &quot; as the origin of species. 



This restatement of facts has been called for by the un- 



* His \vords are &quot; What if species should offer residual phenomena, here 

 and there, not explicable by natural selection ?&quot; ( Lay Sermons, p. 326.) 



