201 
Creation. Whately expressly says tliat in his argument he 
has not appealed to the Book of Genesis as an authority, as 
he thought it important to show, from what was actually 
before our eyes, viz., the existence of civilized man , quite inde- 
pendent of, and superadded to, the conclusions of the Bible 
narrative, from which there is no escaping. 
The opposite argument, of course, starts also from the basis 
of scientific independence, without professing or caring to 
reconcile the conclusions of the Bible narrative. Sir John 
Lubbock says emphatically, at the close of his paper, “ These 
views follow, I think, from strictly scientific considerations.” 
If the inquiry is to be pursued at all on the scientific basis, it 
must be conducted rigidly and honestly, and only those con- 
clusions legitimately accepted which are justified and supported 
by the nature of the data, and the reasoning employed. 
The question upon such a speculative subject is often shirked, 
from the apprehension that it transcends our faculties to 
ascertain the truth. The timidity of this confession ought to 
receive but one answer, viz., that the explanation of a question 
which ought to be understood by all, so far as our mentality 
permits, when prosecuted wfith the simple and humble desire 
for truth, is for our own benefit and that of our brethren of 
mankind. 
When the Archbishop of Dublin entered on this discussion, 
declaring that, independently of all Bible authority, certain 
conclusions can be shown to be unavoidable by natural reason, 
we cannot prohibit others from entering upon the same ground 
and producing such arguments as enable them to support an 
opposite conclusion. This shows that the subject must be 
encountered as a matter of necessity, though some tender 
consciences may deplore this, if only on the ground that the 
thirst for knowledge may be carried to excess when mere 
idle and vicious curiosity impels it. But surely, when directed 
to the higher pursuit of intellect and science, it may not only 
be permitted, but is praiseworthy; as David says : “ Lord, my 
heart is not haughty, nor mine eyes lofty : neither do I exer- 
cise myself in great matters, or in things too high for me.” 
(Ps. cxxxi. 1.) 
On the other hand, it must be admitted that nowhere are 
human speculations more liable to the delusions of superstition 
than in the conception of subjects of this nature, leading 
to ideas which are forbidden to investigation, did we not 
observe the cautious restriction proposed by Baron Bunsen, 
“ That all speculations, however lofty or obscure, should be 
subject to the strict dictates of common sense.” It is well 
known that many of the wildest fancies of our generation have 
VOL. iv. " P 
