182 MR. GLADSTONE AND GENESIS v 



philosophy ; and (3) that I should show cause for 

 my hesitation in accepting the assertion that 

 Genesis is supported, at any rate to the extent of 

 the first two verses, by the nebular hypothesis. 



A certain sense of humour prevents me from 

 accepting the first invitation. I would as soon 

 attempt to put Hamlet's soliloquy into a more 

 scientific shape. But if I supposed the " Mosaic 

 writer" to be inspired, as Mr. Gladstone does, it 

 would not be consistent with my notions of respect 

 for the Supreme Being to imagine Him unable to 

 frame a form of words which should accurately, or, 

 at least, not inaccurately, express His own meaning. 

 It is sometimes said that, had the statements 

 contained in the first chapter of Genesis been 

 scientifically true, they would have been unintel- 

 ligible to ignorant people ; but how is the matter 

 mended if, being scientifically untrue, they must 

 needs be rejected by instructed people ? 



With respect to the second suggestion, it would 

 be presumptuous in me to pretend to instruct Mr. 

 Gladstone in matters which lie as much within the 

 province of Literature and History as in that of 

 Science ; but if any one desirous of further know- 

 ledge will be so good as to turn to that most 

 excellent and by no means recondite source of in- 

 formation, the " Encyclopaedia Britannica," he will 

 find, under the letter E, the word " Evolution," 

 and a long article on that subject. Now, I do 

 not recommend him to read the first half of the 



