338 



KNO\A/'LEDGE 



[Fea 17, 1881 



silt KDMiND I'.iX'Kirrr on Tin: laws ok 



>ATUUE 



SIR EDMUND r.ECKETT'S writings arc always 

 ilcliglitful, wliatfvir liis subject, and wlii-tlicr one 

 ugrcH's with iiini or not. His sulijci-t in tlic l)ook l)i-forc us 

 (which has liccn some time licforo tlu; public, but the new 

 edition has not), is recondite, and Sir Edmund's views arc 

 strongly opposed to those wliich ar(! geiu;rally held by men 

 of science in these days. But from the (irst pag(! to the 

 last, the book is attractive, if only through the clearness of 

 the reasoning and the strength of the style. There is not a 

 writer living who has a style more markedly his own than 

 Sir Edmund Beckett, and though Carlyle, among writers 

 ■who have passed away, had a style more marked than Sir 

 Edmund's, the peculiarities of the author of " Sartor 

 Resartus " were assumed, whereas those of Sir E. Beckett 

 are the result of true mental idiosyncrasies. 



In the present work. Sir E. Beckett has very plainly — 

 and, on the whole, very fairly — presented the issue between 

 the belic\ers in special creative, and as it were legislative, 

 acts on the one hand, and in evolution pure 'and simple on 

 the other. He has shown well the insufliciency of evolu- 

 tion as at present understood as regards explanation of the 

 mysteries of the universe, and he has pointed out very 

 definitely the sufficiency of the theory of an omniscient all- 

 powerful Being to account for all the phenomena, including 

 the existence of uniform laws existing so far as can be seen 

 throughout all space and operating during all time. An 

 evolutionist might with equal clearness, we conceive, point 

 out the utt^'rly iuconcci\able nature of such a Being on the 

 one hand, and the sulliciency of laws of evolution within 

 tlie range over which scientific research can extend to account 

 for those observed relations which, referred to an absolute 

 beginning, seem only cxjilicable on the hypothesis of special 

 creation. After all, what is science now doing Ijut some- 

 what extending the i-ange ovci- which uniform law may be 

 si-en to extend its influence (not the range over which it 

 actually does so) ? What an overwhelming thoiight it would 

 seem to an ephemeron that a giant tree whicli, during the 

 brief lives of millions of his race, had seemed scarcely to 

 change except in its leaves or blossoms, had been developed 

 to be what it has been during the continuance of generation 

 after generation of his kind ! Nothing in the widening of 

 the domain of law which lias been seen during the last 

 century can be compared to the tremendous nature of siich 

 a revelation to a being who had regarded the pushing of a 

 bud or leaflet as the limit of the operation of natural laws. 

 And yet how little such a revelation compared to the con- 

 ception that a whole forest had grown, and that the verv 

 earth in which it grew contained the remains of past 

 generations of trees. Science is widening somewhat like 

 this our conception of the extension of law. But the man 

 who thinks that this widening of the domain of law means 

 the rejection of a Law-giver ; or that, by carrying back 

 the operation of dependent causes a few steps — or even 

 (were that possible) a few millions of steps — we get rid of 

 the necessity of recognising a First Cause, must be strangely- 

 minded indeed. For such a one, the book before us will 

 be useful ; to those who view aright the operations of 

 nature, it cannot fail to be interesting. 



Two points have occurred to us as open to exception in 

 this book. One is the reference to Tyndall's work on the 



• " Oripin of the Laws of Xature." By Sir K. Bockott, Bart., 

 LL.D., F.K.A.S., eecoiul edition. (London: Society for Promoting 

 Christian Knowledge, 1880.) 



subji'ct of .spontaneous generation, as a "curious retribu- 

 tion" (though Sir E. Beckett frankly admits it i.s creditable 

 t'J the honesty of the? most eloquent prophet of the doctrine 

 of evolution). If there is one feeling wliich Tyndall haii 

 shown more strongly than another, it is the desire to 

 come at the truth, and surely another dcscrijition might 

 be found for one of the most interesting of Tyndall's 

 labours in the search for truth. Tyndall has found, indeed, 

 that in a particular direction the Ijeginning of life cannot 

 be found. Darwin has shown that, in his opinion, no re- 

 searches men can make will take them to the beginning 

 of life, any more than the study of second causes 

 will lead men to the First Cause. All this is in per- 

 fect harmony with the views of evolutionists — it is no 

 retribution, but a confirmation of their views. The 

 other point to which we would take exception is the remark 

 thrown in more than once, that natural selection acts " for 

 no cause, so far as we can see.'' The cause has beeu 

 repeatedly indicated by evolutionists — this, namely, that 

 those who have not the qualities iji question die out : 

 surely the death of those who have not such qualities is a 

 tolerably good reason for the selection of those who possess 

 them. We may note again that our author somewhat too 

 confidently assumes that certain qualities could be of no 

 use till fully developed ; that, for instance, until or uidess 

 spiders made perfect webs, they might as well make none 

 at all. We know that imperfect cell-making by certain 

 orders of bees is better than utterly bad cell-making or no 

 cell-making at all. Why should it not have been so in the 

 past w ith spiders 1 A few lines of web might have been 

 useful — even a single line, however short— in the earlier 

 stages of the struggles for existence through which the 

 Arachnida have passed. 



THE FOOD WE EAT. 



Tins is a useful book, though Dr. Fothergill's instruc- 

 tions are not always so definite as they might be. He 

 tells us roast mutton has a baneful history ; but there is 

 nothing in the chapter on flesh meat to suggest that we are 

 too carnivorous ; on the contrary, we rea<l, " beef and 

 mutton are the meats allowed by the trainer and prescribed 

 by the physician : and the choice is a wise one, if not madf 

 too absolute." If it is suggested iu one place that 

 Cain killed Abel in a fit of irascibility brought on by gout ' 

 — the result of flesh food — it is carefully explained in an ' 

 editorial note that for this theory there is no authority iu 

 the Hebrew record. The rules for the taking of alcohol ' 

 are sensible. They are these : — It is well to do ■ 

 ^\ ithout alcohol during the day : alcohol may be taken ' 

 at bed-time, with advantage, by those whose sleep is i 

 liroken by worry " (yet what poor rest whisky-bred sleep 

 gives) ; " when a little wine or its alcoholic equivalent \ 

 enables a person to take a little food when exhausted and 1 

 digest it, which otherwise could not be taken, it is permis- •■ 

 sible." Taking "something" early in the day to set om\ 

 up, is, as our author well says, the best way to destroy 

 working energy, and alcohol is the worst possible resource 

 against trouble. The narcotic dose recommended as at 

 times a useful sleeping draught, is too much for any but ' 

 confirmed topers — it is "a dose at least twice the amount i 

 usually taken in a tumbler." In the cluipter on fruit, our \ 

 author sajs that the raspberry is scarcely second to the 

 strawberry : </<■ giislilms noti exl dispufandxm, but many 

 ]irefer raspberries. It was not " an irreverent American," , 

 by the way, but the Rev. Cotton Mather, a devout j 



*" The Food We Eat." By J. Milner FothcrgilI,M.D. (GrilBth I 

 & Farran, London.) I'rice, Is. 



