1880. ] The Critics of Evolution, 407 
important undertaking of the age. This system is solidly based 
upon the sciences of observation and induction, and is undoubt- 
edly the largest scheme of systematic philosophy. Herbert Spen- 
cer is author of the only complete systematic statement of the 
doctrine of evolution. Now this Herbert Spencer is described 
by the most competent judges to be a thinker of larger calibre 
than has hitherto appeared in England, as keen an analyst as is 
known in the history of philosophy, not excepting Aristotle or 
Kant. In the highest realms of philosophical investigation he 
stands equal to all his predecessors, and has taken his position in 
the foremost rank of living thinkers. Now if a man of the char- 
acter I have here outlined has taken evolution as a profound and 
all comprehensive generalization, we surely may be permited to 
accept it as such. Let us not, my good critic, resemble the 
ostrich that hides her head in the sand and imagines that because 
she does not see, therefore neither can the world around see. 
Our critics add that evolution is not proved. Do they suppose 
that such a host of men, eminent in science, besides the honored 
name above given, would stultify themselves by admitting its 
truth and proclaiming it to be an invaluable boon, had they not 
convinced themselves of its inherent worth by bringing to its 
investigation all the lights at their command? Let us see what 
kind of minds entertain a firm belief that evolution has been 
proved to be a true philosophy. “It is Mr. Darwin’s misfortune 
to know more about the question he has taken up than any other 
man living,” says the learned Huxley. 
Sir Charles Lyell, after having for fifty years studied the sub- 
ject of life in connection with the past changes of the globe, and 
embodied all the older views in all his numerous works, at length 
in the tenth edition of his “ Principles of Geology,” abandoned the 
old ground as untenable, and adopted the views presented by 
arwin, 
Dr. Asa Gray stated before the Association for the Advance- 
ment of Science, that he had repeatedly attempted to catch Dar- 
win tripping, and had had referred to him many cases which he 
himself at the time considered opposed to the theory, but in every 
case had deen forced to withdraw his objections. Thomas Mee- 
han made the same remark. He had often supposed Darwin 
in error, but had always found him right. 
Dr. Fritz Müller, an eminent German naturalist, says he took 
