286 
THE GEOLOGIST. 
Devonian on the evidence of their mutual relation with horizontal 
and inclined quartzite are all of one formation; all contain the 
same fossils, and all have the same relation to the quartzite in 
different localities. See Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc, vol. xv-, p. 196, 
&c. 
CORRESPONDENCE. 
DIFFICULTIES OF DARWINISM. 
Sir, — In the article on Mr. Darwin's theory that I contributed to your maga- 
zine in April and May last, I contented myself with stating the scientific argu- 
ments both for and against it, as they presented themselves to me. I did not 
touch on any of the points connected with theology, as I mistrusted my ability 
to deal properly with, them ; and now, if Mr. Grindley's attack had been directed 
against myself alone, I should not have troubled you with any remarks on the 
subject ; but as he has stated that this theory is opposed to the truths of Revealed 
Rehgion, I feel that I ought to do my best to show that I beheve such not to be 
the case. 
In his first pai'agraph Mr. Grindley says that " its direct efiect would be to 
shut the Creator out of the world of His own creation, and to set up instead wTiat 
the Rev. Baden PoweU calls the ' self-evolving powers of nature.' " Isow in this I 
cannot agree with him. They who speak of this theory as " shutting out the 
Creator from the world of His own creation," seem to imagine that its advocates 
dispense with the necessity of a Creator altogether ; and they talk of the " theory 
of creation and the •' theory of development" as if the one were the exact con- 
trary of the other. But the, theory of development, or of natural selection, is 
merely a theory of the wa.y in ichich the Creator has carried on His work of crea- 
tion ; not a denial of a Creator, nor of creation. I cannot imderstand why natural 
selection has been so often mistaken for a cause, when it is evidently the effect of 
the " struggle for hfe" acting on variations in species, which variations are the 
effects of an unknown law ordained and guided, without doubt, by an InteUigent 
Cause " on a preconceived and definite plan." I have neither time nor space to 
go into any of the proofs now, but I must refer Mr. Grindley to a most able 
pamphlet called " Natm-al Selection not inconsistent with Natural Theology," by 
Dr. Asa Gray, published in the "Atlantic Monthly" for July, August, and Octo- 
ber, and reprinted in England by Triibner and Co., 60, Paternoster-row, which I 
would also recommend to your other readers who take an interest in the subject. 
The second paragraph requires no notice. I leave it to your readers to judge 
whether satisfactory answers have been, or can be, given to most of the state- 
ments by any other hypothesis. 
With reference to the third paragraph, I must protest against Mr. Grindley 
saying that I profess " to have answered the principal objections to the Darwinian 
theory." If he looks at my article again, . he will see that I merely state the 
objections and the answers that have been given to them (the answer to No. 4 
being the only original one), and leave it an open question. It is not tmtil I have 
stated the arguments in favour of the theory that I say that, on the whole, the 
evidence seems to be in favour of it. He also puts four queries to me, upon 
which I must make a few remarks. 
