446 
A Characterisation of 
[August, 
by a “ justly-celebrated naturalist ” and by “ our great plu- 
“ losopher (pp. xiii., xix., and Descent of Man, p. 123). And 
when confidence takes this shape it becomes the parent of 
dogmatism, nuu a. - . 
will rouse suspicion concerning its modus operandi in parti- 
cular instances. And we do find in the Or. of Sp. those 
literary misdemeanours which Dr. Mivart insists are so con- 
spicuous in the Descent of Man, namely, dogmatism and 
^ ThVreader should ever be on the alert to distinguish be- 
tween Mr. Darwin’s statements in natural history and his 
expression of opinion. To cite an interesting a . 01 
some reason Mr. Darwin substituted the statement that 
“ there is no difficulty in supposing ” that missing links 
“ formerly existed,” “ and that each was developed .owing 
“ to its] having been useful to its possessor” (p. I 39 > a , 0 
ed O for “ I see no difficulty in supposing ” that missing links 
“ formerly existed,” “ and that each grade of strufture was 
“useful to its possessor” (ed. 4, p. 208). Mr. Darwin 
affirms that “ as modern geology has- almost banished such 
“ views as the excavation of a great valley by a single dilu- 
“ vial wave, so will natural selection banish the belie! of the 
“ continued creation of new organised beings, or of any 
“ great and sudden modification in their structure (pp- 75 * 
76) • the proviso “ if it be a true principle,” inserted before 
the word “ banish ” in the first edition, being here with- 
in arguing against creation (p.365) Mr. Darwin styles 
“the vera causa of community of descent” (p._ 125). the 
“ only known cause of close similarity in organic beings. 
Possibly he is here referring to the close similarity ot the 
sexes, for he does “ look at all the species of the same genus 
“ as having as certainly descended from a common pioge- 
“ nitor as have the two sexes of any one sp-cies (p. 124), 
in the course of the argument implying that the special 
creation school holds such hypothesis concerning the differ- 
entiation of the sexes. Circumstances will permit me here 
to simplv remind the reader that a not insignificant section 
of that school teach that “male and female created he them 
(Adam and Eve), and that not only were they bidden to 
“ be fruitful and multiply,” but that great whales and winged 
fowl were saluted with the same mandate. Doubtless 
Moses thought it as little incumbent upon him to catalogue 
the secondary sexual characters of Homo, or other animals, 
as to enumerate the names applied by Adam to the several 
creatures brought unto him on that unique occasion. 
IlUC IctlS-tO Lino ... — -- * . . 
And a work thus characterised in its ensemble 
