196 THOMAS HENRY HUXLEY 



and raising a variety of matters in different branches 

 of science. There were also some hyperbolic remarks 

 about a scientific " Reign of Terror," against which a 

 revolt was to take place. 



Huxley's rejoinder "Science and Pseudo- Science" 

 (Nineteenth Century, April 1887. Coll. Essays, v, p. 90) 

 demolishes his opponent's arguments to some purpose, 

 deals with the subjects advanced, reviews the chapter 

 on "Law" in the Duke's book. The Reign of Law 

 (" . . , from my point of view, a sort of ' summa' of 

 pseudo-scientific philosophy"), and dismisses with a jest 

 the idea of a " Reign of Terror." 



The Duke, however, adventured a further attack, " A 

 Great Lesson" (Nineteenth Century, September 1887), in 

 which he tried to prove the existence of a scientific reign 

 of terror by alluding to Bathybius as a mistake arising 

 from an attempt to bolster up Darwinism, and asserting 

 that Dr. (now Sir John) Murray's theory of coral reefs 

 had been suppressed for some time lest it should injure 

 Darwin's reputation by disproving some of his specula- 

 tions on the same subject to be invalid. 



Huxley's reply formed part of an article on " Science 

 and the Bishops " (Nineteenth Century, November 

 1887), afterwards republished with the new title of 

 "An Episcopal Trilogy" (Coll. Essays, v, p. 126). In 

 the meantime, it should be added, another bishop had 

 introduced the coral-reef myth into a sermon, which had 

 been sent to Huxley by "an unknown correspondent." 

 This fact indeed is the occasion of a very humorous 

 passage in the " Trilogy " : — 



" There seems to be an impression abroad — I do not desire 

 to giye any countenance to it — that I am fond of reading 

 sermons. From time to time, unknown correspondents — some 

 apparently animated by the charitable desire to promote my 



