10 
that their investigations are really “ full and impartial , as 
they profess they shall be. But some might fairly retort— m 
fact, the objection has been made — that the admitted precon- 
ceptions thus entertained may interfere with the impartiality 
of such investigations. The members of the Victoria Institute 
cannot, of course, dispute the probable truth of that general 
proposition. But they may claim it as an argument equally 
applicable to those who differ with them, and on the other side 
assume that science is always right, and who are therefore 
ready, with the writers of the “ Essays and Reviews/ or Ur. 
Colenso, or with sceptics generally, to set aside Scripture, or 
force upon it new “ interpretations ' rf interpretations, that 
is, so-called, not of prophecies or “ dark sayings, but the 
“ explaining away ” of plain language, which requires no in- 
terpretation in order to be understood. 
But at this point the sceptic as to “ science ” may claim to 
join issue with the sceptic of Scripture, and say that he has good 
reason for his distrust of quasi science, such as the sceptic ox 
scriptural truth has nothing to offer. And this brings us to 
the second object of the Victoria Institute. It is — 
“ To associate together men of science and authors who have already been 
engaged in such investigations, and all others who may be interested in them, 
in order to strengthen their efforts by association ; and, by bringing together 
the results of such labours, after full discussion, in the printed transactions 
of an institution, to give greater force and influence to proofs and arguments 
which might be regarded as comparatively weak and valueless, or be little 
known, if put forward merely by individuals. ’ 
What we say is this, that what is called “ science,” and 
boasted of as so “ certain” by some, is far from certain,— is 
continually changing and altering, — is disputed and. denied and 
controverted, on scientific grounds, by very competent persons ; 
and that if the arguments and disproofs even already put for- 
ward by individuals were brought together and well weighed, 
the public would be astonished to find how much there was to 
be said against the acceptance of what some persons boast of 
as scientific truth. And, it may be admitted, they tacitly 
allege that opinions and facts and arguments which happen to 
be against the predominant opinions of the leading scientific 
men, have scarcely a fair chance of a hearing in the existing 
scientific societies, and, at least, that they lose all influence as 
against theories which happen to have obtained the sanction oi 
some man, or men, of high scientific reputation. 
But, to leave generalities, let us glance at a few actual in- 
stances of how “ science ” so-called, has recently shifted and 
changed ; and how the erroneous theories of the eminent have 
