362 DARWINIANA. 



Chance, seems as unthankful and iniquitous as it seems absurd. 

 Chance produces nothing in the human sphere ; nothing, at 

 least, that can be relied upon for good. Design alone engen- 

 ders harmony, consistency ; and Chance not only never is the 

 parent, hut is constantly the enemy of these. How, then, can 

 we suppose Chance to be the author of a system in which every- 

 thing is as regular as clock-work ? . . . . The hypothesis of 

 Chance is inadmissible." 



There is, then, in Nature, an order ; and, in " P. 

 C. "W.'s" sense of the word, a manifest purpose. 

 Some sort of conception as to the cause of it is inevi- 

 table, that of design first and foremost. " "Why " 

 the Westminster Reviewer repeats the question 

 " why, if the marks of utility and adaptation are con- 

 clusive in the works of man, should they not be con- 

 sidered equally conclusive in the works of Nature ? " 

 His answer appears to us more ingenious than sound. 

 Because, referring to Paley's watch, 



" The watch-finder is not guided solely in his inference by 

 marks of adaptation and utility ; he would recognize design in 

 half a watch, in a mere fragment of a watch, just as surely as 

 in a whole time-keeper. . . . Two cog-wheels, grasping each 

 other, will be thought conclusive evidence of design, quite in- 

 dependently of any use attaching to them. And the inference, 

 indeed, is perfectly correct ; only it is an inference, not from a 

 mark of design, properly so called, but from a mark of human 

 workmanship. . . . No more is needed for the watch-finder, 

 since all the works of man are, at the same time, products of 

 design ; but a great deal more is requisite for us, who are called 

 upon by Paley to recognize design in works in which this 

 stamp, this label of human workmanship, is wanting. The 

 mental operation required in the one case is radically different 

 from that performed in the other ; there is no parallel, and 

 Paley's demonstration is totally irrelevant." ' 



1 Hume, in his " Essays," anticipated this argument. But he did 



