42 LIFE OF PROFESSOR HUXLEY chap, ii 



tion between shehretz and rehmes, and accused him of 

 " wilful blindness " in his theological controversy of 

 1886 :— 



Let me assure you that it is not my way to set my 

 face against being convinced by evidence. 



I really cannot bold myself to be responsible for the 

 translators of the Eevised Version of the O.T. If I had 

 given a translation of the passage to which you refer on 

 my own authority, any mistake would be mine, and I 

 should be bound to acknowledge it. As I did not, I 

 have nothing to admit. I have every respect for your 



and Mr. 's aiithority as Hebraists, but I have noticed 



that Hebrew scholars are apt to hold very divergent views, 

 and before admitting either your or Mr. — — 's interpreta- 

 tion, I should like to see the question fully discussed. 



If, when the discussion is concluded, the balance of 

 authority is against the revised version, I will carefully 

 consider how far the needful alterations may affect the 

 substance of the one passage in my reply to Mr. Gladstone 

 which is affected by it. 



At present I am by no means clear that it will make 

 much difference, and in no case will the main lines of 

 my argument as to the antagonism between modem 

 science and the Pentateuch be affected. The statements 

 I have made are public property. If you think they are 

 in any way erroneous I must ask you to take upon your- 

 self the same amount of resjjonsibility as I have done, 

 and submit your objection to the same ordeal. 



There is nothing like this test for reducing things to 

 their true proportions, and if you try it, you will probably 

 discover, not without some discomfort, that you really 

 had no reason to ascribe wilful blindness to those who do 

 not agree with you. 



He was now preparing to complete his campaign 

 of the spring on technical education by delivering an 



