INTRODUCTION. 17 



Nevertheless I again freely grant tliat I am not 

 a man of science. I have never said I was. I was 

 educated for the Church. I was once inside the 

 Linnean Society's rooms, but have no present wish to 

 go there again ; though not a man of science, however, 

 I have never affected indifference to the facts and 

 arguments which men of science have made it their 

 business to lay before us ; on the contrary, I have 

 given the greater part of my time to their considera- 

 tion for several years past. I should not, however, 

 say this unless led to do so by regard to the interests 

 of theories which I believe to be as nearly important 

 as any theories can be which do not directly involve 

 money or bodily convenience. 



The second complaint against me is to the effect 

 that I have made no original experiments, but hav^ 

 taken all my facts at second hand. This is true, but 

 I do not see what it has to do with the question. If 

 the facts are sound, how can it matter whether A or 

 B collected them ? If Professor Huxley, for example, 

 has made a series of valuable original observations 

 (not that I know of his having done so), why am I 

 to make them over again ? What are fact-collectors 

 worth if the fact co-ordinators may not rely upon 

 them ? It seems to me that nd one need do more 

 than go to the best sources for his facts, and tell his 

 reader where he got them. If I had had occasion 

 for more facts I daresay I should have taken the 

 necessary steps to get hold of them, but there was no 

 difficulty on this score ; every text-book supplied me 

 with all, and more than aU, I wanted ; my complaint 



E 



