CHAP. IX.] NATUEAL SELECTION. 297 



in the clear, lucid, and admirable writings of Mr. Wallace. 

 In this matter I have the support of an eminent Darwinian, 

 for Dr. Hooker, in his address to the British Association at 

 Norwich, made the following remarks on this subject : &quot; Of 

 Mr. Wallace and his many contributions to philosophical 

 biology, it is not easy to speak without enthusiasm; for 

 putting aside their great merits, he, throughout his writings, 

 with a modesty as rare as I believe it to be in him un 

 conscious, forgets his own unquestioned claims to the honour 

 of having originated, independently of Mr. Darwin, the 

 theories which he so ably defends.&quot;* 



Having, then, examined the meaning and nature of the 

 hypothesis of &quot; Natural Selection,&quot; it is necessary Mr Darwin s 

 to call attention to the mode and manner of its Btyle&amp;gt; 

 advocacy by its author a style calculated to impress, by 

 authority of tone, minds easily dominated, and not prepared 

 by special studies to accurately weigh the evidence put 

 before them. Two objections may be made to Mr. Darwin s 

 mode of advocacy. The first is a too great tendency to 

 dogmatic assertions. The second is a habit of quietly 

 slipping in, or assuming, in his arguments the presence 

 of some power or quality when its existence is the very 

 point in dispute. This applies as much, or more, to his 

 remarks on the distinctive mental qualities of man as to 

 those on questions of the structure or habits of animals. 



Thus, to take for instance the theory of the descent of 

 man from some inferior form, he says : &quot; The grounds upon 

 which this conclusion rests will never le shaken &quot; (vol. ii. 

 p. 385), and &quot; the possession of exalted mental powers is no 

 insuperable objection to this conclusion&quot; (vol. i. p. 107). 

 Also (vol. i. p. 32) : &quot; It is only our natural prejudice &quot; &quot; which 

 leads us to demur to this conclusion.&quot; Yet we might surely 

 be led to demur by the conviction that not to do so would 

 be to contradict evident truths. Speaking of sympathy, 

 he boldly remarks : &quot; This instinct no doubt was originally 



* See Report for 1868, p. Ixxi. 



