142 



a push of which he is equally unaware what pushes it (p. 75), 

 can, after all, be so confident against prayer for favourable 

 seasons or, if so determined against that kind of prayer, is not 

 equally disposed to say openly that he " smiles at every other 

 kind of prayer. At all events, as a man of science, feeling, as he 

 says, "a natural pride in scientific achievement^^ — (though we 

 should have credited Dr. Tyndall with some higher feeling and 

 aim than what seems to us so poor as this " pride,'' — Newton's 

 modesty seems better), he should shrink from making assertions 

 which are found so entirely incommensurate with his inductions. 



14. We shall not, if we are allowed to speak for ourselves, 

 conseat, for our part, to have it thought that we wish the facts 



Its as3ump. of scicncc to be other than they are; we will only 

 facts,' a^echaS Stipulate that in science, as in all things else, the 

 lenged. asscrtious shall keep within the limits of the facts. 



"But it is perfectly vain," triumphantly exclaims Dr. Tyndall 

 (p. 92), " to attempt to stop inquiry as to the actual and pos- 

 sible actions of matter and force ; " as if he were in bodily fear 

 of some dreadful theologian very likely to attempt that feat. 

 We publicly afiirm that we never yet knew any educated theo- 

 logian who had jealousy of any facts of science. *^ But depend 

 upon it " (continues Dr. Tyndall) " if a chemist, by bringing 

 the proper materials together in a retort or crucible,, could 

 make a baby, he would do it." No doubt he would : and more — 

 we, for our part, shall raise no objection to the fact, when it 

 really takes place. Let it not be assumed then that we are, at 

 the present point, the anxious opponents of " the chemist." 

 Let him do, by all means, all that he can ; though, after that, 

 we should still inquire, what and whence was the primary 

 endowment of those molecular attractions and repulsions which 

 issued in their complex organization. We well remember the 

 applause of the Theatre, when we gave Dalton, at Oxford, the 

 honorary degree, which the " author of the atomic theory " 

 graciously accepted. The theologians of the Isis surely 

 evinced little of jealousy; but we are not therefore precluded 

 from pointing out still the unscientific character of any 

 approach to the assertion, or assumption, that we know 

 all about the beginnings of vitality, or its inner nature, or 

 its invariable treatment. Even if the Darwinian evolution 

 were ultimately established as science (as Dr. Tyndall owns, 

 p. 159), it would still remain true, that the human mind would 

 seek to " look behind the germ " and " inquire into the history 

 of its genesis." 



15. When Dr. Tyndall thus confesses that "of the inner 

 lality that enables matter to act on matter we know nothing," 



