304 
“ My dear Sir, “April 12th, 1874. _ 
“Mr. Row’s paper is excellent, and is remarkably successlul m 
embracing witbin a very limited space a very large field indeed of con- 
troversial matter. It is calculated to be most useful, and I desire to bear 
my humble tribute of assent to the soundness of the conclusions maintained, 
and of the principles upon which they are grounded. 
“ I thank you much for allowing me to study this valuable paper, and 1 
congratulate your Society on having the privilege of giving to the world 
so powerful an antidote to the unbelieving tendences of Positivism and 
Pantheism. 
I remain, faithfully yours, 
“ Capt. F. W. H. Petrie.” “ William Lee. 
Rev. Canon Mozley, D.D., Regius Professor of Divinity at Oxford, 
writes as follows: — 
“ April 18th, 1874. 
“ I have read with the greatest interest the Victoria Institute 
paper, which is full of important thought upon the question of the day. 
The discussion of the Darwin question seems to be especially able, and 
charged with strong argument upon the turning-points. _ The resort of a 
blind infinity, to which everything is referred, and which is thought to carry 
off any amount of contrivance under the shape of chances (of which it in- 
cludes an infinite number), is admirably exposed. The paper shows, with great 
power, that contrivance cannot be identical with an infinite chaos of jostling 
chances, one going against another ; and that an infinity of time does not 
give you a reasonable foundation of apparent works of design, if there is 
nothing to be taken into account but that, to reduce a confusion and medley 
of blind laws to order. 
“ The terrible melancholy of Strauss’s system must, one would think, 
limit its adoption to the most determined of the despairing school, lie 
seems to grasp with considerable power in his mind, the frightful end o 
annihilation, as he maintains it, and to make that power which he exerts 
a consolation to him for the dreadful truth, as he regards it ; but it is a 
barren consolation indeed. J , 
“ I am, yours very truly, 
“ J. B. Mozley.” 
The Rev. Prebendary Coleridge writes 
“April 11th, 1874. 
“ I have read Mr. Row’s able paper with much interest, and very 
general approval. I shall not be able to be present at the discussion, and 
even if I had more time at my disposal, I feel that any remarks of mine 
would scarce be worth the attention of the meeting. . 
“ As regards the great question at issue, my main reliance under God is - 
“First,° on the zeal, the discretion, and the religious wisdom of the 
Christian ministry; on their good example and personal influence. 
Christianity, truly and rationally exhibited, shines by its own light ; while 
as regards pure theism, the Gospel of Christ, in its fulness and pun y, 
believe to be at once the best exponent, and the only safe guardian, of the 
great fundamental truth which it pre-supposes and embodies. 
“ Secondly, in the spread of a spiritual philosophy, not set forth m overt 
opposition to the materialistic tendencies of the age,— rather embracing and 
welcomino- the discoveries of modern science, though placing them in a truer 
and fuller light,— a philosophy underlying what now assumes, too exclusively, 
the name of science — scientia scientiarum. . , , * 
“Still, there maybe need of direct controversy m the way, whether o 
