FIRST day's sitting. 17 



obscure glance, apparently consisted of a group of marine 

 animals, resembling the larvse of existing Ascidians." 



Lord G. And Ascidians "have been recently placed," you 

 say, " by some naturalists, among the Vermes or worms." 

 Job, then, would almost seem to have anticipated your 

 hypothesis when he said to the worm, " Thou art my 

 mother." There is, however, this difference ; Job meant it 

 figuratively, you mean it literally and in reality. 



Darwin. Precisely so, my Lord ; and thus, as I have 

 said, " we approximately recognize our parentage, nor need 

 we feel ashamed of it." 



Lord G. Well, that is a matter of taste — I should rather 

 say, perhaps, of feeling or sentiment. 



Homo. I should say, my Lord, the imagination has a 

 good deal to do with it. 



Lord G. "We proceed now to look at the evidence. Is it 

 the case, then, Mr. Darwin, that in endeavouring to work 

 out the conclusion you have arrived at, you take no account 

 of evidence hostile to it, derived from such sources as Homo 

 has referred to — I mean such sources as revelation, tradi- 

 tion, the reasonings of philosophers, &c. ? 



Darivin. My Lord, I am a naturalist, and I follow the 

 line of evidence with which my favourite study has made 

 me familiar. 



Lord G. But is it wise to ignore other lines of evidence ? 

 In courts of law we feel bound to take note of evidence, from 

 whatever source it may come. It seems to me that the true 

 spirit of philosophy, which is just a sincere love of truth — 

 would lead you to pursue a similar course. How can you 

 justify yourself, in so serious a matter, in pooh-poohing 

 evidence which some of the greatest of your countrymen 

 have thought conclusive on the other side ? 



Homo. Pardon me, my Lord, but I think that, in wilfully 



