.Mi;. GLADSTONE AND 



lie was undertaking an enterprise of which he had 

 not counted the cost, if he had chanced upon a 



mission of the subject which I published in 

 1877.' 



Finally, I should like to draw the attention of 

 those who take interest in these topics to the 

 \v eighty words of one of the most learned and 

 moderate of Biblical critics : 



A propos de cetto premiere page de l;i Bible, on a continue de 

 iios join's de disserter, a perte de vne, snr I'accord dn recit 



i'[ne avec les sciences iiaturcllcs ; et comme celles-ci, 

 tout I'loigncYs iruYlles sont encore de la perfection absolne, ont 

 ivn.lu populaiivs ct en (jueliruc sorte irrefragable.? un certain 

 noinlur dr faits gt'neraux on de theses fondamentales de la 



..liigii' rt df la gt'ologie, c'est le texte sacre qu'on s'cvertue 

 :i t.MimtT ]K)iir le faire concorder avec ces donnecs. 3 



Ill my paper on the "Interpreters of Nature 

 ;md the Interpreters of Genesis," ^liile treely 

 i vailing myself of the rights of a scii-ntitie critic, I 

 endeavoured to keep the expression of my views 

 well within those bounds of courtesy which are 

 by self-respeet and consideration for others. I 

 am therefore glad to be favonre-1 with Mr. (Hail- 

 stone's acknowledgment of the success of my 

 tt<.rts. I only wish that I could accept all the 

 products of Mr. Gladstone's gracious appreciation, 

 l>nt tin-re is one about which, as a matter of 

 honesty. 1 hesitate. In fact, if I had expressed my 



1 I/rturrs "ii Kvnliitjon drlivnvd in Nrw York (Ann-i i- m 



', - 



t't Lvi, vol. i. p. 275. 



