1876.] Biological Controversy and its Laws . 20i 
is unable to respond to most of the electrical tests, these 
phenomena might perhaps be explained ; but such a suppo- 
sition really begs all the questions at issue. 
IV. BIOLOGICAL CONTROVERSY AND ITS 
LAWS.* 
ANY edifying commonplaces might doubtless be writ- 
ten on the intellectual fermentation, if it may not 
rather be called confusion, of the age. Nor can it 
be denied that tendencies supposed to have been long ago 
slain and sepulchred have risen again, and are asserting 
themselves with a hardihood which our fathers would have 
deemed impossible. When we find a scientific work — at 
any rate a work written by an eminent scientific man, and 
devoted to the discussion of scientific questions — -formally 
dedicated to a dignitary of the Catholic Church as a vindi- 
cator of the rights of conscience (!), we may well ask, not 
jeeringly but sadly, “ What is truth ? ” We have witnessed 
of late brilliant progress in various departments of science ; 
but we have also seen attacks made upon the very founda- 
tions of science. These onslaughts are increasing in fre- 
quency and in boldness. Metaphysicians and ecclesiastics 
are calling in question the induCtive method, impugning the 
independence of Science, and seeking to re-assert over her 
the authority of “ the Church.” The battles of the six- 
teenth century seem about to be repeated. And some, who 
might claim to be the heirs of Galileo, think it no ignominy 
to wear the livery of Bellarmine and Caccini, 
When we first opened the book which has suggested our 
present article we fully expected to find an intellectual treat 
of thehighest order : its subjeCtis one on which amostvaluable 
work might well be written, and few living men indeed are 
better qualified to undertake such a task than is Mr. Mivart. 
Anti-Darwinian polemics we awaited, but such criticism, if 
conducted on legitimate— that is, on purely scientific — prin- 
ciples, we should be among the first to welcome, well 
knowing that in any issue Science must be the gainer. 
Although believing in Evolution, we have never given to the 
hypothesis commonly known as “ Darwinism ” more than a 
qualified and provisional adhesion. Whilst admitting that 
* Lessons from Nature. By St 0 George Mivart, F.R.S. London: Murray. 
