V MR. GLADSTONE AND GENESIS 177 



succeed fishes. Once more, as it is quite certain 

 that the term " fowl " includes the bats, for in 

 Leviticus xi. 13-19 we read, " And these shall ye 

 have in abomination among the fowls . . . the 

 heron after its kind, and the hoopoe, and the 

 bat," it is obvious that bats are also said to have 

 been created at stage No. 3. And as bats are 

 mammals, and their existence obviously presup- 

 poses that of terrestrial " beasts," it is quite clear 

 that the latter could not have first appeared as 

 No. 5. I need not repeat my reasons for doubting 

 whether man came " last of all." 



As the latter half of Mr. Gladstone's sixfold 

 order thus shows itself to be wholly unauthorised 

 by, and inconsistent with, the plain language of 

 the Pentateuch, I might decline to discuss the 

 adrnissibility of its former half. 



But I will add one or two remarks on this 

 point also. Does Mr. Gladstone mean to say that 

 in any of the works he has cited, or indeed any- 

 where else, he can find scientific warranty for the 

 assertion that there was a period of land by 

 which I suppose he means dry land (for submerged 

 land must needs be as old as the separate exist- 

 ence of the sea) " anterior to all life " ? 



It may be so, or it may not be so ; but where 

 is the evidence which would justify any one in 

 making a positive assertion on the subject ? What 

 competent palaeontologist will affirm, at this 

 present moment, that he knows anything about 



VOL. IV N 



