4 SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT 



to natural religion. This view was never supported, 

 as far as I am aware, by any authority, nor do I see 

 how it ever arose. I mention it merely to show 

 what curious positions can be assumed by men of 

 the first order of intellect, when their minds have 

 been enthralled by, and wedded to, some par- 

 ticular theory. At any rate this may be said of the 

 pre-Darwinian portion of the era with which I 

 am concerned, that, from the biological side of 

 science, there arose no serious, even considerable 

 theory which was taken to be opposed to religious 

 doctrine. 



In the early days of the last century, in 1802 to 

 be precise, there appeared a work which may 

 fairly be looked upon as the high watermark of 

 pre-Darwinian apologetics in England. I allude 

 to that very remarkable work on natural theology, 

 commonly known as Paley's Evidences. Fallen now, 

 it would seem, and for reasons which will shortly 

 appear, into quite undeserved neglect, Paley's 

 book was well-known to the great biologists of the 

 Darwinian upheaval, and highly appreciated by 

 them. Darwin himself said, "I do not think I 

 hardly ever admired a book more than Paley's 

 Natural Theology. I could almost formerly have 

 said it by heart."* Huxley knew and grasped the 

 real teaching of Paley a good deal better than many 

 of his opponents, who would no doubt have thought 

 of themselves as ranged under the banner of Paley. 

 And Huxley very acutely calls attention to the 

 remarkable argument in the twenty-third chapter 

 of the Evidences. Here Paley argues that " there 



* Darwin s Life and Letters, vol. ii, p. 219. 



