94 



knowledge, as a careful reader of the paper for the last twelve 

 years, it has again and again (wittingly or unwittingly) betrayed 

 the cause of Divine Truth, especially in matters relating to 

 Science in its connection with Theology. 



" I beg to apologise for thus addressing one to whom I am a 

 stranger. May I plead, as some excuse, my deep sympathy 

 with the spirit of your letter, the fact that I am a brother 

 clergyman, and your own words, ' holding the opinion I do about 

 it, I could not keep silent.' 



" Thanking you sincerely for your courageous testimony in 

 behalf of the ancient Belief, as against the most dangerous 

 scientific fallacy of the day, etc." 



Of the writers of these letters, one is a well-known dignitary 

 of the Church, and author of a most valuable work, etc., etc. 

 a decidedly High Churchman. 



Another is an eminent dignitary. He also is a very High 

 Churchman both of them personally known to me. 



Of the third I do not know the views, but I should incline to 

 think that he may be rather on the other side. He too, is the 

 translator of a considerable foreign work of high value, the one 

 sent to me. It is satisfactory that those of different opinions 

 should thus unite in defence of the " Common Faith " of 

 Christendom. 



It is not the first time that the " Guardian " has exhibited a 

 leaning this way. It shewed a little of the cloven foot so long 

 ago as December 16, 1874, when I wrote the following letter in 

 it: 



" THE NATURALIST IN NICARAGUA. 



" Sin, I have been reading with much interest your review 

 <f Mr. IMt's Naturalist in Nicaragua. I have no doubt but that 

 it i> well deserving of all you say in its favour, and a valuable 

 and \. rtahdng book. I should much like to have it and 



to read it. 



