62 A NEW THEOJRY OF EVOLUTION. 



understand, or something inexplicable by 

 any law of Nature of which we have any 

 knowledge, is, we presume, a " miracle." 



Huxley says, " A phenomenon is explained 

 when it is shown to be a case of some 

 general law of Nature." 1 



Is, then, a phenomenon we cannot explain 

 a miracle so long as it is inexplicable, and 

 does it become " a case of some general law of 

 Nature " when it can be explained ? Was it 

 a " miracle " that water should rise above its 

 level into a vacuum before Torricelli explained 

 the nature of a vacuum, and afterwards only 

 a case of some general law of Nature ? 



Again, is an inexplicable phenomenon that 

 constantly occurs not a " miracle " but only 

 "a case of some general law of Nature" 

 because of its frequent recurrence ? We 

 do not understand why a grain of seed 

 germinates and grows into a plant, but we 

 do not call germination a miracle, but " a 

 case of some general law of Nature." 



Why, then, should it be a "miracle" and 

 not some "general law of Nature," that 

 specific variation arose in the germ-plasm, 

 seeing that we can witness the processes of 

 variation in the embryo of every mammal, 

 as we can those of germination in the growth 

 of every seed ? 



1 Darwiniana, p. 57. 



