66 
detriment to the true advancement of real Cd tKtS gtte 
of all Bacon’s principles and warnings. And that being tne 
case I quite accept as a necessity that we must look these 
theoretical speculations in the face and, if we f ^ 
I now come to the consideration of the analogy ot tne 
theory 5 of universal gravitation, adduced hy Mr. Warmgton as 
an example for our guidance in testing Darwinism, as he 
evidmitiy 5 intends it should he tested, by what he considers 
the most rigid of scientific tests. In my opinion, this an 
logy has be^n most happily chosen. Chosen happily b/ Mp 
Wanngton, because the choice proves how thoroughly he 
means^to test the theory the credibihty of which he pleads 
fo" Chosen happily, J>, Sir, because you preside over our 
deliberations, who are most competent to estimate both the 
abstract and the relative merits of the proofs relied up 0 ** °r 
the establishment of the two theories thus placed in . c - 
parison. And happily chosen, I beg leave to add besides 
on my own account because of the way m which my i aam ° ^ 
recently been publicly mixed up with the Newtonian hypothesis 
in connection with this society. I allude to an art “ le T e ®P® 01 ^ 
in the Saturday Review of 12th January last, and I g 
of the opportunity now given me to show to our members 
that I have some reason on my side. The theory un | v ® r ^ 
Gravitation being a subject to which, like yourself, I have 
|iven considerable attention, (though we 1 iave 
different stand-points— I as a sceptic, and you as a believer 
—and at present, perhaps, we have therefore naturally arrived 
at different results,) I am able to say that the analogy sought 
applicable than be imagined to tbe theory of ^ r - b, ? 
in the first test does the analogy entirely break down - ” e . ca “ 
nrove or disprove, by absolute mathematical demonstration, 
the possibility of universal gravitation. But, as I have already 
said this we certainly canSot do with respect to Darwinism. 
But as regards the other three tests-adequacy consistency 
harmoniousness— the analogy “runs on all^ fours. When 
once we get over the question of “ possibility, these bests can 
be applied equally to both the hypotheses. Before, however,. 
I proceed to examine how these tests have been or m 
applied to Darwinism, there is a prior part of the analogy to 
be glanced at. We must not forget, then, that the present dis- 
tinguished naturalist, Mr. Charles Darwin, is not the first pro- 
pounder of what we now call “ Darwinism. I am not even 
quite sure that the theory of “ natural selection, —as explana- 
torv of the resultant hypothesis of developmental transmuta- 
tion of species-can fairly be attributed to him as its sole 
