229 
culties, and I think may do much to reconcile men, and bring them in 
harmony to the Author of divine revelation. 
The Chairman. — In relation to this subject, I cannot avoid offering my 
strong protest against the tendency of the work lately published by* Mr. 
Darwin on the Descent of M!an, and on Natural Selection. That work has 
been very ably reviewed in the Times lately, and I call attention to it 
because it appears to me that its obvious tendency is to rob man of that 
inestimably superior portion of his existence, the 7 rvtvfxci, since the gist of 
that work is to show that man is derived from the lower animals, not by 
any sudden change, but by a gradual amelioration and adaptation to circum- 
stances. The book also goes on to show that probably all kinds of animals 
are derived from those of inferior organisation. The whole tendency of the 
work is simply this : It is elsewhere argued that the simplest forms of 
organic life are capable of being produced by a concurrence of inorganic 
particles without the influence of any pre-existing germ, and the doctrine is 
advanced by Mr. Darwin that we can ascend, step by step, from the lower 
to the higher forms of organic life, and even from apes to man himself. 
Now what is the effect of this but to show that there is no necessity for a 
Creator ; that man has proceeded by degrees from inorganic matter simply 
in obedience to the laws of inorganic matter ? Mr. Darwin does not say so 
much, but that is the obvious tendency of the work ; as it tends to get 
rid of the m /tv pa altogether — to annihilate it entirely — I enter on this 
occasion my intensely strong protest against that tendency. The book 
throughout is written in the potential mood : such and such things may be, 
and could be, and might be, if— but he does not supply the “ if.” If there 
were no God, no Creator, no truth in the Bible— if the Bible were a series of 
ideas and notions having no solid foundation— then, perhaps, such things 
might be. 
Rev. G. Henslow. — There is a passage at the end of Mr. Darwin’s 
book in which he protests against the idea that these things are not the work 
of a Creator. 
The Chairman. — But I am simply stating what is the obvious tendency 
of the book. It is all very well for the author to say he does not mean it to 
be so. I am glad that point is disclaimed by Mr. Darwin, but I do not think 
it interferes with the obvious tendency of the work, and I merely mention 
this matter in connection with the very important subject of the tripartite 
nature of man. (Cheers.) 
Mr. Graham. — I have to thank the various speakers for their agreement 
with so much of my paper— indeed I think I may say for their agreement 
with all the essential principles contained in it. You, sir, have touched 
upon a point which, to me, is profoundly important* — the view, I mean, 
that our ethical and moral nature is not in the 4>vxv } but in the 7rvs v/xa. 
I feel that the moment we admit that our ethical and moral nature is in the 
'4 JV XV, and then admit the fact that the 4 >V X^ may perish, we give up what 
Mr. Row has properly denominated the dignity of our nature, and I think * 
we give up the one great argument which distinguishes man from the in- 
VOL. VI. T 
