336 FOOT-NOTES TO EVOLUTION. 



science useful only where belief is indifferent to the 

 subject-matter? If belief is subordinate to the tests of 

 science, to be accepted or rejected in the degree of its 

 accord with human experience, then it is simply an 

 annex to science, a footnote to human experience, and 

 the authority of the latter is supreme. If, however, 

 truth comes to us from sources outside of human ex- 

 perience it must come in some pure form, free from 

 human errors. As such it must claim the first place. 

 In this event the progress of science will be always on 

 a lower plane than the progress of belief. 



In a recent address before the British Association for 

 the Advancement of Science, the Marquis of Salisbury 

 made in brief this contention : The cen- 

 Views of the tra j t h ou ght of modern science is evolu- 



Marquis of 

 Salisbury. 



tion, the change from the simple to the 



complex. This implies, in his judg- 

 ment, not only the fundamental unity of all life, but the 

 fundamental unity of all matter, and perhaps of all 

 force as well. In spite of the claims of scientific men 

 even the fact of organic evolution is far from demon- 

 strated ; while of inorganic evolution, the development 

 of the chemical elements, science can tell us nothing. 

 Wherefore the marquis, in view of the failure of science 

 to keep up with the progress of belief, grows jocose 

 and patronizing. His advice to his scientific associates 

 might be stated in the words of Thackeray, that " we 

 should think small beer of ourselves and pass around 

 the bottle." 



More recently another British statesman, Mr. Arthur 

 J. Balfour, has discussed the Foundations of Belief. He 



contends that the methods of science can 



nOt g ' V6 US absolute truth ' Its methods 

 are "of the earth, earthy." Its claim 

 of trust in the infallibility of its own processes has no 



