lSjQ.\ 
and Ultimate Conceptions , 
663 
and shall know, if we be content with human insight,” — a 
saving clause capable of exceedingly wide application. As 
to Prof. Virchow, we distrust him. His ostensible watch- 
word, as here quoted, is “ That which honours me is a 
knowledge of my own ignorance ; ” his esoteric motto is 
said to be “ Restringamur,” i.e,, academic freedom, and, 
probably, the liberty of the author as well as of the pro- 
fessor. The charge brought against him, that he is 
intriguing to ejedt all Evolutionists from their chairs in the 
German universities, has not been formally demonstrated, 
but it is strongly countenanced by the following language 
which he has undoubtedly used : — “ I only hope that the 
theory of Descent may not bring all those horrors in our 
country which similar theories (!) have adlually brought to 
our neighbours. Anyhow this theory, if carried through to 
its consequences, has an extremely dangerous side, and that 
the Socialists have a certain notion of it already you will 
doubtless have remarked.” We will not dictate to Mr. 
Billing what estimate to form of the man who makes this 
artful and disingenuous attempt to excite the odium politicum 
against a theory which he dislikes. In spite of his well- 
known abilities Prof. Virchow might feel somewhat puzzled 
if bound to name the similar theories ” which have given 
rise to “ horrors ” in France. If he really believes what he 
here professes he can scarcely have taken the trouble to 
examine what the tendencies of Evolutionism truly are, and 
his “ knowledge of his ignorance,” before it can throw any 
great honour upon him, will require to be supplemented. 
Were this the legitimate sphere for such a discussion it 
would be easy to show that the dodfrine of Descent points 
in a diredtion the very opposite, and is flatly antagonistic to 
not a few of the leading principles of “ social democrats ” 
and “ advanced political thinkers.” This task, however, 
has been ably executed by Prof. Oscar Schmidt, to whose 
memoir we refer the reader. 
The author’s criticism of the Belfast Address and the 
Birmingham Oration, able as it must in many respedts be 
pronounced, comes too late. We cannot help, however, 
noticing that the story of the “ merchant convulsed into 
adtion by a telegram,” quoted by Prof. Tyndall from Lange, 
points in reality to one of the most powerful arguments 
against the materialistic (somatic) theory of life A man 
is, we will suppose, at dinner with a brisk appetite. Sud- 
denly he receives — whether by letter, telegram, or verbal 
message it matters not — some alarming message. A dear 
friend may have been taken dangerously ill ; or a litigious 
