456 A Characterisation of [August, 
not excused from praying), since another end (perdition) and 
another means (sins) are left unaccounted for. 
From this logical abyss the religious views of Charles 
Darwin (according to a pamphlet of that title) drifted to a 
verbal agnosticism. 
When will these blind partners, tottering Theism and 
capering Agnosticism, curvet together into the proverbial 
ditch ? 
Moral Characteristics. 
My prefatory paragraphs questioned whether colossal in- 
tellectual achievements can condone for moral obliquity ? 
And without discussing the propriety of humouring lunatics 
or answering children evasively, ascribing a literal meaning 
to “not at home,” or judging those whose personal liberty 
having been restricted by the State lie to evade the law, 
we may stigmatise mendacity as a sin now-a-days, and sub- 
scribe to the diCtum “Society cannot prosper by lies,” * 
whether or no we believe that the wise man may reassure 
himself, and fearlessly give full utterance to his innermost 
conviction ; though it may be mentioned that one value of 
aggressive veracity is recognised by Mr. Darwin himself, 
when he says — “ Whoever is led to believe that species are 
“ mutable will do good service by conscientiously expressing 
“ his conviction ; for thus only can the load of prejudice by 
“ which this subject is overwhelmed be removed ” (p. 423). 
The sin referred to is that insidious sort of mendacity 
known as hypocrisy, and that of an obtrusive, not of a 
passive, character. In the Or. of Sp. “ Mr. Darwin writes 
“ as a Christian, and,” continued the Quarterly Reviewer, 
“ we doubt not that he is one.” Mr. Darwin wrote like a 
Christian, inasmuch as opposite the title-page he printed a 
quotation recommending men to obtain endless proficience 
in the literal “ book of God’s word and divinity,” the piety 
of the quotation being enhanced, if possible, by the couple 
of quotations which precede it, — one being taken from a 
‘ Bridgewater Treatise,’ by William Whewell, DoCtor of 
Divinity; the other from Bishop Butler’s Analogy of Revealed 
Religion ; also inasmuch as, when quoting the impression of 
Leibnitz regarding the law of the attraction of gravity “ as 
* Social Statics, by Herbert Spencer. London, 1851, p. 471. It will be 
eminently fit to point out here that the paragraph concluding the ‘ Reconcili- 
ation ’ in First Principles (utilised in the next clause of the article) is a copy, 
with a few alterations, of the concluding portion of the last seftion but one 
of Social Statics. 
