VI. 



THE CHARGES AGAINST THE POPULAR 

 SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



THE publishers of this magazine, having declined any 

 longer to issue the North American Review because of its 

 recent articles from the pen of Colonel Ingersoll, have been 

 charged with inconsistency on the ground that, in respect 

 to the matter objected to, the periodical they retain is as 

 bad as the one they have dismissed. A writer in the Even- 

 ing Post says: "I would like to know how and where 

 Messrs. Appleton & Co. draw the line which makes the 

 same opinions detestable in the North American Re- 

 view, which are endured in The Popular Science Monthly. 

 The editorial views of the latter publication are certainly 

 as pronounced in their atheistical tendencies as anything 

 Colonel Ingersoll ever uttered, and for a long period of 

 years this journal has published everything of interest 

 written by pronounced atheists, and excluded everything 

 which has appeared of merit on the other side. The papers 

 of Herbert Spencer, and others of his class, have been pre- 

 sented, but such writers as the Duke of Argyll have never 

 been permitted to offer their views." 



This accusation against The Popular Science Monthly, 

 that it is a teacher of atheism, has been made before, and 

 met before ; but, as the present circumstances give it point 

 and revive its interest, we propose now to reconsider it, 

 and again see what it amounts to. We shall thereby be 

 enabled to judge whether the two magazines really teach 



(552) 



