3) 
ON EVOLUTION. Zoo 
il. This being granted, it will easily be seen that the pheno- 
mena of Evolution are no less philosophically accounted for, 
if for that scientific term, so applicable when rightly under- 
stood, we should substitute a word which has become con- 
secrated by its theological use, and which is commonly taken 
to be antithetical to the other—I mean Creation. The 
supposed opposition between them is purely imaginary ; the 
compatibility of their applications is real and fundamental. 
Any undisputed product of Mind, contemplated simply as 
such,—for example, a picture or a statue,—it is permissible to 
regard as being, relatively to the artificer, a creation ; and 
this term, if it has any meaning at all, is unquestionably in 
such a case applied with strict propriety, while, relatively to a 
poetically-conceived store of hidden resource and potential 
development which has yielded the visible production, the 
latter may with equal propriety be represented as having 
been evolved from the former, or, to use a virtually equiva- 
lent metaphor, spun out of it; and the work, as it grows 
under the producing hand, may be termed a continuous 
evolution. In short, to evolve is to create, and to create is 
to evolve. Rival philosophies are alike superficial, if they 
drag these two concordant words into the arena of religious 
polemics for the purpose of pitting them against one another: 
12. Lest, however, the objection should be raised that, in 
conceiving the Original Cause to be an emittent source, we 
embarrass the conception of its immutability, and virtually 
comprehend with it in the same category of being the things 
to which it gives existence, making its effects to be self- 
developed modifications of its own substance, allotropic re- 
productions of some single all-involving element, we shall 
now do well to observe that the products of Mind, so far as 
we have any immediate perception of them as such, are 
essentially distinct from the conscious subject. A clear 
intuition assures us that they constitute no portion of the 
producing substance, and that in springing from it (I ignore, 
of course, all purely organic waste) they become no loss to 
the individual, imply no drain upon the resources of his per- 
sonality, no deduction from himself. The causal relations we 
evidently bear, although in limited degrees and respects, to 
forms of objective existence direct our attention to a definite 
subjective property. This, when distinguished as a specific 
force, is named volitional; when its efficacy is characterised 
it is known as creative; while if, in contemplation of its 
effects, regard be had to a hidden fund of corresponding 
resources, the adjective which suggests itself is evolutional. 
The proceeds of evolution may be numerous and endlessly 
