i860.] 



'QUARTERLY REVIEW.' 



325 



parts, and brings forward well all the difficulties. It quizzes 

 me quite splendidly by quoting the 'Anti-Jacobin' versus 

 my Grandfather. You are not alluded to, nor, strange to say, 



Huxley ; and I can plainly see, here and there, 's hand. 



The concluding pages will make Lyell shake in his shoes. 

 By Jove, if he sticks to us, he will be a real hero. Good- 

 night. Your well-quizzed, but not sorrowful, and affectionate 

 friend. C. D. 



I can see there has been some queer tampering with the 

 Review, for a page has been cut out and reprinted. 



which is conceived to have moved 

 " forward in a right line, ad infini- 

 ///;, till it grew tired ; after which 

 the right line, which it had gene- 

 rated, would begin to put itself in 

 motion in a lateral direction, de- 

 scribing an area of infinite extent. 

 This area, as soon as it became 

 conscious of its own existence, 

 would begin to ascend or descend 

 according as its specific gravity 

 would determine it, forming an 

 immense solid space filled with 

 vacuum, and capable of containing 

 the present universe." 



The following (p. 263) may serve 

 as an example of the passages in 

 which the reviewer refers to Sir 

 Charles Lyell : "That Mr. Darwin 

 should have wandered from this 

 broad highway of nature's works 

 into the jungle of fanciful assump- 

 tion is no small evil. We trust 

 that he is mistaken in believing 

 that he may count Sir C. Lyell as 

 one of his converts. We know, 

 indeed, the strength of the tempta- 

 tions which he can bring to bear 

 upon his geological brother. . . . 

 Yet no man has been more distinct 

 and more logical in the denial of the 



transmutation of species than Sir 

 C. Lyell, and that not in the infancy 

 of his scientific life, but in its full 

 vigour and maturity." The Bishop 

 goes on to appeal to Lyell, in order 

 that with his help " this flimsy 

 speculation may be as completely 

 put down as was what in spite of all 

 denials we must venture to call its 

 twin though less instructed brother, 

 the ' Vestiges of Creation.' " 



With reference to this article, 

 Mr. Brodie Innes, my father's old 

 friend and neighbour, writes : 

 " Most men would have been an- 

 noyed by an article written with 

 the Bishop's accustomed vigour, a 

 mixture of argument and ridicule. 

 Mr. Darwin was writing on some 

 parish matter, and put a postscript 

 'If you have not seen the last 

 ' Quarterly,' do get it ; the Bishop 

 of Oxford has made such capital 

 fun of me and my grandfather.' 

 By a curious coincidence, when I 

 received the letter, I was staying 

 in the same house with the Bishop, 

 and showed it to him. He said, ' I 

 am very glad he takes it in that 

 way, he is such a capital fellow.' " 



