12 EVOLUTION, OLD AND NEW. 



CHAPTER II. 



THE TELEOLOGY OF PALEY AND THE THEOLOGIANS, 



Let us turn for a while to Paley, to whom Sir W. 

 Thomson has referred us. His work should be so well 

 known that an apology is almost due for quoting it, 

 yet I think it likely that at least nine out of ten of my 

 readers will (like myself till reminded of it by Sir W. 

 Thomson's address) have forgotten its existence. 



" In crossing a heath," says Paley, "suppose I pitched 

 my foot against a stone, and were asked how the stone 

 came to be there; I might possibly answer that for 

 anything I knew to the contrary, it had lain there for 

 ever ; nor would it perhaps be very easy to show the 

 absurdity of this answer. But suppose I had found a 

 watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired how 

 the watch happened to be in that place ; I should hardly 

 think of the answer I had before given — that for any- 

 thing I knew the watch might have been always there. 

 Yet, why should not this answer serve for the watch as 

 well as for the stone ? Why is it not as admissible in 

 the second case as in the first ? For this reason, and 

 for no other, viz. that when we come to inspect the 

 watch, we perceive (what we could not discover in the 

 stone) that its several parts are framed and put together 



