V MR. GLADSTONE AND GENESIS 185 



the great work of Zeller, for example, will only 

 bring out the same fact into still more striking 

 prominence. I have professed no "minute 

 acquaintance " with either Indian or Greek philo- 

 sophy, but I have taken a great deal of pains to 

 secure that such knowledge as I do possess shall 

 be accurate and trustworthy. 



In the third place, Mr. Gladstone appears to 

 wish that I should discuss with him the question 

 whether the nebular hypothesis is, or is not, con- 

 firmatory of the pentateuchal account of the 

 origin of things. Mr. Gladstone appears to be 

 prepared to enter upon this campaign with a light 

 heart. I confess I am not, and my reason for this 

 backwardness will doubtless surprise Mr. Glad- 

 stone. It is that, rather more than a quarter of a 

 century ago (namely, in February 1859), when it 

 was my duty, as President of the Geological 

 Society, to deliver the Anniversary Address, 1 I 

 chose a topic which involved a very careful study 

 of the remarkable cosmogonical speculation, 

 originally promulgated by Immanuel Kant and, 

 subsequently, by Laplace, which is now known as 

 the nebular hypothesis. With the help of such 

 little acquaintance with the principles of physics 

 and astronomy as I had gained, I endeavoured to 

 obtain a clear understanding of this speculation in 

 all its bearings. I am not sure that I succeeded ; 

 but of this I am certain, that the problems involved 

 1 Keprintcd in Lay Sermons^ Addresses, and Ilcviews, 1870. 



