Ourfabulistwarns\"thosewhoinquarrelsinterpose\"ofthefatewhichisprobablyinstoreforthem；and，inventuringtoplacemyselfbetweensopowerfulacontroversialistasMr。GladstoneandtheeminentdivinewhomheassaultswithsuchvigourinthelastnumberofthisReview，<1>IamfullyawarethatIrungreatdangerofverifyingGay’sprediction。Moreover，itisquitepossiblethatmyzealinofferingaidtoacombatantsoextremelywellabletotakecareofhimselfasM。Revillemaybethoughttosavourofindiscretion。
Twoconsiderations，however，haveledmetofacethedoublerisk。Theoneisthatthough，inmyjudgment，M。RevilleiswhollyintherightinthatpartofthecontroversytowhichI
proposetorestrictmyobservations，neverthelesshe，asaforeigner，hasverylittlechanceofmakingthetruthprevailwithEnglishmenagainsttheauthorityandthedialecticskillofthegreatestmasterofpersuasiverhetoricamongEnglish—
speakingmenofourtime。AstheQueen’sproctorintervenes，incertaincases，betweentwolitigantsintheinterestsofjustice，soitmaybepermittedmetointerposeasasortofuncommissionedscienceproctor。Mysecondexcuseformymeddlesomenessis，thatimportantquestionsofnaturalscience——
respectingwhichneitherofthecombatantsprofessestospeakasanexpert——areinvolvedinthecontroversy；andIthinkitisdesirablethatthepublicshouldknowwhatitisthatnaturalsciencereallyhastosayonthesetopics，tothebestbeliefofonewhohasbeenadiligentstudentofnaturalscienceforthelastfortyyears。
Theoriginal\"Prolegomenesdel’HistoiredesReligions\"hasnotcomeinmyway；butIhavereadthetranslationofM。Reville’swork，publishedinEnglandundertheauspicesofProfessorMaxMuller，withverygreatinterest。Itputsmorefairlyandclearlythananybookpreviouslyknowntome，theviewwhichamanofstrongreligiousfeelings，butatthesametimepossessingtheinformationandthereasoningpowerwhichenablehimtoestimatethestrengthofscientificmethodsofinquiryandtheweightofscientifictruth，maybeexpectedtotakeoftherelationbetweenscienceandreligion。
Inthechapteron\"ThePrimitiveRevelation\"thescientificworthoftheaccountoftheCreationgiveninthebookofGenesisisestimatedintermswhichareasunquestionablyrespectfulas，inmyjudgment，theyarejust；and，attheendofthechapteron\"PrimitiveTradition，\"M。RevilleappraisesthevalueofpentateuchalanthropologyinawaywhichIshouldhavethoughtsureofenlistingtheassentofallcompetentjudges，evenifitwereextendedtothewholeofthecosmogonyandbiologyofGenesis：——
As，however，theoriginaltraditionsofnationssprangupinanepochlessremotethanourownfromtheprimitivelife，itisindispensabletoconsultthem，tocomparethem，andtoassociatethemwithothersourcesofinformationwhichareavailable。
Fromthispointofview，thetraditionsrecordedinGenesispossess，inadditiontotheirownpeculiarcharm，avalueofthehighestorder；butwecannotultimatelyseeinthemmorethanavenerablefragment，well—deservingattention，ofthegreatgenesisofmankind。
Mr。Gladstoneisofadifferentmind。HedissentsfromM。Reville’sviewsrespectingtheproperestimationofthepentateuchaltraditions，nolessthanhedoesfromhisinterpretationofthoseHomericmythswhichhavebeentheobjectofhisownspecialstudy。Inthelattercase，Mr。GladstonetellsM。Revillethatheiswrongonhisownauthority，towhich，insuchamatter，allwillpayduerespect：intheformer，heaffirmshimselftobe\"whollydestituteofthatkindofknowledgewhichcarriesauthority，\"andhisrebukeisadministeredinthenameandbytheauthorityofnaturalscience。
Anairofmagisterialgravityhangsaboutthefollowingpassage：——
Butthequestionisnothereofaloftypoem，oraskilfullyconstructednarrative：itiswhethernaturalscience，inthepatientexerciseofitshighcallingtoexaminefacts，findsthattheworksofGodcryoutagainstwhatwehavefondlybelievedtobeHiswordandtellanothertale；orwhether，inthisnineteenthcenturyofChristianprogress，itsubstantiallyechoesbackthemajesticsound，which，beforeitexistedasapursuit，wentforthintoalllands。
First，lookinglargelyatthelatterportionofthenarrative，whichdescribesthecreationoflivingorganisms，andwaivingdetails，onsomeofwhich(asinv。24)theSeptuagintseemstovaryfromtheHebrew，thereisagrandfourfolddivision，setforthinanorderlysuccessionoftimesasfollows：onthefifthday1。Thewater—population；
2。Theair—population；
and，onthesixthday，3。Theland—populationofanimals；
4。Theland—populationconsummatedinman。
Nowthissamefourfoldorderisunderstoodtohavebeensoaffirmedinourtimebynaturalscience，thatitmaybetakenasademonstratedconclusionandestablishedfact\"(p。696)。
\"Understood？\"Bywhom？IcannotbringmyselftoimaginethatMr。
Gladstonehasmadesosolemnandauthoritativeastatementonamatterofthisimportancewithoutdueinquiry——withoutbeingabletofoundhimselfuponrecognisedscientificauthority。ButIwishhehadthoughtfittonamethesourcefromwhencehehasderivedhisinformation，as，inthatcase，Icouldhavedealtwith[143]hisauthority，andIshouldhavetherebyescapedtheappearanceofmakinganattackonMr。Gladstonehimself，whichisineverywaydistastefultome。
ForIcanmeetthestatementinthelastparagraphoftheabovecitationwithnothingbutadirectnegative。IfIknowanythingatallabouttheresultsattainedbythenaturalscienceofourtime，itis\"ademonstratedconclusionandestablishedfact\"
thatthe\"fourfoldorder\"givenbyMr。Gladstoneisnotthatinwhichtheevidenceatourdisposaltendstoshowthatthewater，air，andland—populationsoftheglobehavemadetheirappearance。
PerhapsImaybetoldthatMr。Gladstonedoesgivehisauthority——thathecitesCuvier，SirJohnHerschel，andDr。
Whewellinsupportofhiscase。IfthathasbeenMr。Gladstone’sintentioninmentioningtheseeminentnames，Imayremarkthat，onthisparticularquestion，theonlyrelevantauthorityisthatofCuvier。ButgreatasCuvierwas，itistoberememberedthat，asMr。Gladstoneincidentallyremarks，hecannotnowbecalledarecentauthority。Infact，hehasbeendeadmorethanhalfacentury；andthepalaeontologyofourdayisrelatedtothatofhis，verymuchasthegeographyofthesixteenthcenturyisrelatedtothatofthefourteenth。Since1832，whenCuvierdied，notonlyanewworld，butnewworlds，ofancientlifehavebeendiscovered；andthosewhohavemostfaithfullycarriedontheworkofthechieffounderofpalaeontologyhavedonemosttoinvalidatetheessentiallynegativegroundsofhisspeculativeadherencetotradition。
IfMr。Gladstone’slatestinformationonthesemattersisderivedfromthefamousdiscourseprefixedtothe\"OssemensFossiles，\"Icanunderstandthepositionhehastakenup；ifhehaseveropenedarespectablemodernmanualofpalaeontology，orgeology，Icannot。Forthefactswhichdemolishhiswholeargumentareofthecommonestnotoriety。Butbeforeproceedingtoconsidertheevidenceforthisassertionwemustbeclearaboutthemeaningofthephraseologyemployed。
IapprehendthatwhenMr。Gladstoneusestheterm\"water—
population\"hemeansthoseanimalswhichinGenesisi。21
(RevisedVersion)arespokenofas\"thegreatseamonstersandeverylivingcreaturethatmoveth，whichthewatersbroughtforthabundantly，aftertheirkind。\"AndIpresumethatitwillbeagreedthatwhalesandporpoises，seafishes，andtheinnumerablehostsofmarineinvertebratedanimals，aremeantthereby。So\"air—population\"mustbetheequivalentof\"fowl\"inverse20，and\"everywingedfowlafteritskind，\"verse21。
IsupposeImaytakeitforgrantedthatby\"fowl\"wehaveheretounderstandbirds——atanyrateprimarily。Secondarily，itmaybethatthebatsandtheextinctpterodactyles，whichwereflyingreptiles，comeunderthesamehead。Butwhetherallinsectsare\"creepingthings\"oftheland—population，orwhetherflyinginsectsaretobeincludedunderthedenominationof\"wingedfowl，\"isapointforthedecisionofHebrewexegetes。
Lastly，IsupposeImayassumethat\"land—population\"signifies\"thecattle\"and\"thebeastsoftheearth，\"and\"everycreepingthingthatcreepethupontheearth，\"inverses25and26；
presumablyitcomprehendsallkindsofterrestrialanimals，vertebrateandinvertebrate，exceptsuchasmaybecomprisedundertheheadofthe\"air—population。\"
NowwhatIwanttomakeclearisthis：thatiftheterms\"water—
population，\"\"air—population，\"and\"land—population\"areunderstoodinthesensesheredefined，naturalsciencehasnothingtosayinfavourofthepropositionthattheysucceededoneanotherintheordergivenbyMr。Gladstone；butthat，onthecontrary，alltheevidencewepossessgoestoprovethattheydidnot。Whenceitwillfollowthat，ifMr。GladstonehasinterpretedGenesisrightly(onwhichpointIammostanxioustobeunderstoodtooffernoopinion)，thatinterpretationiswhollyirreconcilablewiththeconclusionsatpresentacceptedbytheinterpretersofnature——witheverythingthatcanbecalled\"ademonstratedconclusionandestablishedfact\"ofnaturalscience。AndbeitobservedthatIamnotheredealingwithaquestionofspeculation，butwithaquestionoffact。
Eitherthegeologicalrecordissufficientlycompletetoaffordusameansofdeterminingtheorderinwhichanimalshavemadetheirappearanceontheglobeoritisnot。Ifitis，thedeterminationofthatorderislittlemorethanamerematterofobservation；ifitisnot，thennaturalscienceneitheraffirmsnorrefutesthe\"fourfoldorder，\"butissimplysilent。
Theseriesofthefossiliferousdeposits，whichcontaintheremainsoftheanimalswhichhavelivedontheearthinpastagesofitshistory，andwhichcanaloneaffordtheevidencerequiredbynaturalscienceoftheorderofappearanceoftheirdifferentspecies，maybegroupedinthemannershownintheleft—handcolumnofthefollowingtable，theoldestbeingatthebottom：——
FormationsFirstknownappearanceofQuaternary。
Pliocene。
Miocene。
Eocene。Vertebrateair—population(Bats)。
Cretaceous。
Jurassic。Vertebrateair—population(BirdsandPterodactyles)。
Triassic。
UpperPalaeozoic。
MiddlePalaeozoic。Vertebrateland—population(Amphibia，Reptilia[？])。
LowerPalaeozoic。
Silurian。Vertebratewater—population(Fishes)。
Invertebrateairandland—
population(FlyingInsectsandScorpions)。
Cambrian。Invertebratewater—population(muchearlier，ifEozoonisanimal)。
Intheright—handcolumnIhavenotedthegroupofstratainwhich，accordingtoourpresentinformation，theland，air，andwaterpopulationsrespectivelyappearforthefirsttime；andinconsequenceoftheambiguityaboutthemeaningof\"fowl，\"Ihaveseparatelyindicatedthefirstappearanceofbats，birds，flyingreptiles，andflyinginsects。
Itwillbeobservedthat，if\"fowl\"meansonly\"bird，\"oratmostflyingvertebrate，thenthefirstcertainevidenceofthelatter，intheJurassicepoch，isposteriortothefirstappearanceoftrulyterrestrialAmphibia，andpossiblyoftruereptiles，intheCarboniferousepoch(MiddlePalaeozoic)byaprodigiousintervaloftime。
Thewater—populationofvertebratedanimalsfirstappearsintheUpperSilurian。<2>Therefore，ifwefoundourselvesonvertebratedanimalsandtake\"fowl\"tomeanbirdsonly，or，atmost，flyingvertebrates，naturalsciencesaysthattheorderofsuccessionwaswater，land，andair—population，andnot——asMr。
Gladstone，foundinghimselfonGenesis，says——water，air，land—
population。IfachroniclerofGreeceaffirmedthattheageofAlexanderprecededthatofPericlesandimmediatelysucceededthatoftheTrojanwar，Mr。Gladstonewouldhardlysaythatthisorderis\"understoodtohavebeensoaffirmedbyhistoricalsciencethatitmaybetakenasademonstratedconclusionandestablishedfact。\"Yetnaturalscience\"affirms\"his\"fourfoldorder\"toexactlythesameextent——neithermorenorless。
Suppose，however，that\"fowl\"istobetakentoincludeflyinginsects。Inthatcase，thefirstappearanceofanair—populationmustbeshiftedbackforlongages，recentdiscoveryhavingshownthattheyoccurinrocksofSilurianage。Hencetheremightstillhavebeenhopeforthefourfoldorder，wereitnotthatthefatesunkindlydeterminedthatscorpions——\"creepingthingsthatcreepontheearth\"parexcellence——turnedupinSilurianstratanearlyatthesametime。Sothat，ifthewordintheoriginalHebrewtranslated\"fowl\"shouldreallyafterallmean\"cockroach\"——andIhavegreatfaithintheelasticityofthattongueinthehandsofBiblicalexegetes——theorderprimarilysuggestedbytheexistingevidence——
2。Landandair—population；
1。Water—population；
andMr。Gladstone’sorder——
3。Land—population；
2。Air—population；
1。Water—population；
canbynomeansbemadetocoincide。Asamatteroffact，then，thestatementsoconfidentlyputforwardturnsouttobedevoidoffoundationandindirectcontradictionoftheevidenceatpresentatourdisposal。<3>
If，steppingbeyondthatwhichmaybelearnedfromthefactsofthesuccessiveappearanceoftheformsofanimallifeuponthesurfaceoftheglobe，insofarastheyareyetmadeknowntousbynaturalscience，weapplyourreasoningfacultiestothetaskoffindingoutwhatthoseobservedfactsmean，thepresentconclusionsoftheinterpretersofnatureappeartobenolessdirectlyinconflictwiththoseofthelatestinterpreterofGenesis。
Mr。Gladstoneappearstoadmitthatthereissometruthinthedoctrineofevolution，andindeedplacesitunderveryhighpatronage。
Icontendthatevolutioninitshighestformhasnotbeenathingheretoforeunknowntohistory，tophilosophy，ortotheology。IcontendthatitwasbeforethemindofSaintPaulwhenhetaughtthatinthefulnessoftimeGodsentforthHisSon，andofEusebiuswhenhewrotethe\"PreparationfortheGospel，\"andofAugustinewhenhecomposedthe\"CityofGod\"
(p。706)。
Hasanyoneeverdisputedthecontention，thussolemnlyenunciated，thatthedoctrineofevolutionwasnotinventedthedaybeforeyesterday？Hasanyoneeverdreamedofclaimingitasamoderninnovation？IsthereanyonesoignorantofthehistoryofphilosophyastobeunawarethatitisoneoftheformsinwhichspeculationembodieditselflongbeforethetimeeitheroftheBishopofHippooroftheApostletotheGentiles？IsMr。
Gladstone，ofallpeopleintheworld，disposedtoignorethefoundersofGreekphilosophy，tosaynothingofIndiansagestowhomevolutionwasafamiliarnotionagesbeforePaulofTarsuswasborn？Butitisungratefultocavilateventhemostobliqueadmissionofthepossiblevalueofoneofthoseaffirmationsofnaturalsciencewhichreallymaybesaidtobe\"ademonstratedconclusionandestablishedfact。\"Inoteitwithpleasure，ifonlyforthepurposeofintroducingtheobservationthat，ifthereisanytruthwhateverinthedoctrineofevolutionasappliedtoanimals，Mr。Gladstone’sglossonGenesisinthefollowingpassageishardlyhappy：——
Godcreated(a)Thewater—population；
(b)Theair—population。
AndtheyreceiveHisbenediction(v。20—23)。
6。Pursuingthisregularprogressionfromthelowertothehigher，fromthesimpletothecomplex，thetextnowgivesustheworkofthesixth\"day，\"whichsuppliestheland—population，airandwaterhavingbeenalreadysupplied(pp。695，696)。
TheglosstowhichIreferistheassumptionthatthe\"air—
population\"formsatermintheorderofprogressionfromlowertohigher，fromsimpletocomplex——theplaceofwhichliesbetweenthewater—populationbelowandtheland—populationabove——andIspeakofitasa\"gloss，\"becausethepentateuchalwriterisnowiseresponsibleforit。
Butitisnottruethattheair—population，asawhole，is\"lower\"orless\"complex\"thantheland—population。Onthecontrary，everybeginnerinthestudyofanimalmorphologyisawarethattheorganisationofabat，ofabird，orofapterodactylepresupposesthatofaterrestrialquadruped；andthatitisintelligibleonlyasanextrememodificationoftheorganisationofaterrestrialmammalorreptile。Inthesamewaywingedinsects(iftheyaretobecountedamongthe\"air—population\")presupposeinsectswhichwerewingless，and，therefore，as\"creepingthings，\"werepartoftheland—
population。ThustheoryisasmuchopposedasobservationtotheadmissionthatnaturalscienceendorsesthesuccessionofanimallifewhichMr。GladstonefindsinGenesis。Onthecontrary，agoodmanyrepresentativesofnaturalsciencewouldbepreparedtosay，ontheoreticalgroundsalone，thatitisincrediblethatthe\"air—population\"shouldhaveappearedbeforethe\"land—population\"——andthat，ifthisassertionistobefoundinGenesis，itmerelydemonstratesthescientificworthlessnessofthestoryofwhichitformsapart。
Indeed，wemaygofurther。Itisnotevenadmissibletosaythatthewater—population，asawhole，appearedbeforetheairandtheland—populations。AccordingtotheAuthorisedVersion，Genesisespeciallymentions，amongtheanimalscreatedonthefifthday，\"greatwhales，\"inplaceofwhichtheRevisedVersionreads\"greatseamonsters。\"Farbeitfrommetogiveanopinionwhichrenderingisright，orwhethereitherisright。AllI
desiretoremarkis，thatifwhalesandporpoises，dugongsandmanatees，aretoberegardedasmembersofthewater—population(andiftheyarenot，whatanimalscanclaimthedesignation？)，thenthatmuchofthewater—populationhas，ascertainly，originatedlaterthantheland—populationasbatsandbirdshave。ForIamnotawarethatanycompetentjudgewouldhesitatetoadmitthattheorganisationoftheseanimalsshowsthemostobvioussignsoftheirdescentfromterrestrialquadrupeds。
AsimilarcriticismappliestoMr。Gladstone’sassumptionthat，asthefourthactofthat\"orderlysuccessionoftimes\"
enunciatedinGenesis，\"theland—populationconsummatedinman。\"
Ifthismeanssimplythatmanisthefinaltermintheevolutionalseriesofwhichheformsapart，Idonotsupposethatanyobjectionwillberaisedtothatstatementonthepartofstudentsofnaturalscience。Butifthepentateuchalauthorgoesfurtherthanthis，andintendstosaythatwhichisascribedtohimbyMr。Gladstone，Ithinknaturalsciencewillhavetoenteracaveat。Itisnotbyanymeanscertainthatman——ImeanthespeciesHomosapiensofzoologicalterminology——has\"consummated\"theland—populationinthesenseofappearingatalaterperiodoftimethananyother。Letmemakemymeaningclearbyanexample。Fromamorphologicalpointofview，ourbeautifulandusefulcontemporary——Imightalmostcallhimcolleague——thehorse(Equuscaballus)，isthelasttermoftheevolutionalseriestowhichhebelongs，justasHomosapiensisthelasttermoftheseriesofwhichheisamember。IfIwanttoknowwhetherthespeciesEquuscaballusmadeitsappearanceonthesurfaceoftheglobebeforeorafterHomosapiens，deductionfromknownlawsdoesnothelpme。Thereisnoreason，thatIknowof，whyoneshouldhaveappearedsoonerorlaterthantheother。IfIturntoobservation，IfindabundantremainsofEquuscaballus
inQuaternarystrata，perhapsalittleearlier。TheexistenceofHomosapiensintheQuaternaryepochisalsocertain。
Evidencehasbeenadducedinfavourofman’sexistenceinthePliocene，orevenintheMioceneepoch。Itdoesnotsatisfyme；
butIhavenoreasontodoubtthatthefactmaybeso，nevertheless。Indeed，IthinkitisquitepossiblethatfurtherresearchwillshowthatHomosapiensexisted，notonlybeforeEquuscaballus，butbeforemanyotheroftheexistingformsofanimallife；sothat，ifallthespeciesofanimalshavebeenseparatelycreated，man，inthiscase，wouldbynomeansbethe\"consummation\"oftheland—population。
IamraisingnoobjectiontothepositionofthefourthterminMr。Gladstone’s\"order\"——onthefacts，astheystand，itisquiteopentoanyonetohold，asapiousopinion，thatthefabricationofmanwastheacmeandfinalachievementoftheprocessofpeoplingtheglobe。Butitmustnotbesaidthatnaturalsciencecountsthisopinionamongher\"demonstratedconclusionsandestablishedfacts，\"fortherewouldbejustasmuch，oraslittle，reasonforrangingthecontraryopinionamongthem。
ItmayseemsuperfluoustoaddtotheevidencethatMr。
GladstonehasbeenutterlymisledinsupposingthathisinterpretationofGenesisreceivesanysupportfromnaturalscience。Butitisaswelltodoone’sworkthoroughlywhileoneisaboutit；andIthinkitmaybeadvisabletopointoutthatthefacts，astheyareatpresentknown，notonlyrefuteMr。
Gladstone’sinterpretationofGenesisindetail，butareopposedtothecentralideaonwhichitappearstobebased。
TheremustbesomepositionfromwhichthereconcilersofscienceandGenesiswillnotretreat，somecentralideathemaintenanceofwhichisvitalanditsrefutationfatal。Eveniftheynowallowthatthewords\"theeveningandthemorning\"havenottheleastreferencetoanaturalday，butmeanaperiodofanynumberofmillionsofyearsthatmaybenecessary；eveniftheyaredriventoadmitthattheword\"creation，\"whichsomanymillionsofpiousJewsandChristianshaveheld，andstillhold，tomeanasuddenactoftheDeity，signifiesaprocessofgradualevolutionofonespeciesfromanother，extendingthroughimmeasurabletime；eveniftheyarewillingtograntthattheassertedcoincidenceoftheorderofNaturewiththe\"fourfoldorder\"ascribedtoGenesisisanobviouserrorinsteadofanestablishedtruth；theyaresurelypreparedtomakealaststandupontheconceptionwhichunderliesthewhole，andwhichconstitutestheessenceofMr。Gladstone’s\"fourfolddivision，setforthinanorderlysuccessionoftimes。\"Itis，thattheanimalspecieswhichcomposethewater—population，theair—
population，andtheland—populationrespectively，originatedduringthreedistinctandsuccessiveperiodsoftime，andonlyduringthoseperiodsoftime。
ThisstatementappearstometobetheinterpretationofGenesiswhichMr。Gladstonesupports，reducedtoitssimplestexpression。\"Periodoftime\"issubstitutedfor\"day\"；
\"originated\"issubstitutedfor\"created\"；and\"anyorderrequired\"forthatadoptedbyMr。Gladstone。Itisnecessarytomakethisproviso，forif\"day\"maymeanafewmillionyears，and\"creation\"maymeanevolution，thenitisobviousthattheorder(1)water—population，(2)air—population，(3)land—
population，mayalsomean(1)water—population，(2)land—
population，(3)air—population；anditwouldbeunkindtobinddownthereconcilerstothisdetailwhenonehaspartedwithsomanyotherstoobligethem。
Buteventhissublimatedessenceofthepentateuchaldoctrine(ifitbesuch)remainsasdiscordantwithnaturalscienceasever。
Itisnottruethatthespeciescomposinganyoneofthethreepopulationsoriginatedduringanyoneofthreesuccessiveperiodsoftime，andnotatanyotherofthese。
Undoubtedly，itisinthehighestdegreeprobablethatanimallifeappearedfirstunderaquaticconditions；thatterrestrialformsappearedlater，andflyinganimalsonlyafterlandanimals；butitis，atthesametime，testifiedbyalltheevidencewepossess，thatthegreatmajority，ifnotthewhole，oftheprimordialspeciesofeachdivisionhavelongsincediedoutandhavebeenreplacedbyavastsuccessionofnewforms。
Hundredsofthousandsofanimalspecies，asdistinctasthosewhichnowcomposeourwater，land，andair—populations，havecomeintoexistenceanddiedoutagain，throughouttheaeonsofgeologicaltimewhichseparateusfromthelowerPalaeozoicepoch，when，asIhavepointedout，ourpresentevidenceoftheexistenceofsuchdistinctpopulationscommences。Ifthespeciesofanimalshaveallbeenseparatelycreated，thenitfollowsthathundredsofthousandsofactsofcreativeenergyhaveoccurred，atintervals，throughoutthewholetimerecordedbythefossiliferousrocks；and，duringthegreaterpartofthattime，the\"creation\"ofthemembersofthewater，land，andair—populationsmusthavegoneoncontemporaneously。
Ifwerepresentthewater，land，andair—populationsbya，b，andcrespectively，andtakeverticalsuccessiononthepagetoindicateorderintime，thenthefollowingschemeswillroughlyshadowforththecontrastIhavebeenendeavouringtoexplain：
Genesis(asinterpretedbyNature(asinterpretedbyMr。Gladstone)。naturalscience)。
bbbc1a3b2
cccca2b1
aaaba1baaa
SofarasIcansee，thereisonlyoneresourceleftforthosemodernrepresentativesofSisyphus，thereconcilersofGenesiswithscience；andithastheadvantageofbeingfoundedonaperfectlylegitimateappealtoourignorance。Ithasbeenseenthat，onanyinterpretationofthetermswater—populationandland—population，itmustbeadmittedthatinvertebraterepresentativesofthesepopulationsexistedduringthelowerPalaeozoicepoch。Noevolutionistcanhesitatetoadmitthatotherlandanimals(andpossiblyvertebratesamongthem)mayhaveexistedduringthattime，ofthehistoryofwhichweknowsolittle；and，further，thatscorpionsareanimalsofsuchhighorganisationthatitishighlyprobabletheirexistenceindicatesthatofalongantecedentland—populationofasimilarcharacter。
Then，sincetheland—populationissaidnottohavebeencreateduntilthesixthday，itnecessarilyfollowsthattheevidenceoftheorderinwhichanimalsappearedmustbesoughtintherecordofthoseolderPalaeozoictimesinwhichonlytracesofthewater—populationhaveasyetbeendiscovered。
Therefore，ifanyonechoosestosaythatthecreativeworktookplaceintheCambrianorLaurentianepoch，inexactlythatmannerwhichMr。Gladstonedoes，andnaturalsciencedoesnot，affirm，naturalscienceisnotinapositiontodisprovetheaccuracyofthestatement。Onlyonecannothaveone’scakeandeatittoo，andsuchsafetyfromthecontradictionofsciencemeanstheforfeitureofhersupport。
Whethertheaccountoftheworkofthefirst，second，andthirddaysinGenesiswouldbeconfirmedbythedemonstrationofthetruthofthenebularhypothesis；whetheritiscorroboratedbywhatisknownofthenatureandprobablerelativeantiquityoftheheavenlybodies；whether，iftheHebrewwordtranslated\"firmament\"intheAuthorisedVersionreallymeans\"expanse，\"
theassertionthatthewatersarepartlyunderthis\"expanse\"
andpartlyaboveitwouldbeanymoreconfirmedbytheascertainedfactsofphysicalgeographyandmeteorologythanitwasbefore；whetherthecreationofthewholevegetableworld，andespeciallyof\"grass，herbyieldingseedafteritskind，andtreebearingfruit，\"beforeanykindofanimal，is\"affirmed\"bytheapparentlyplainteachingofbotanicalpalaeontology，thatgrassesandfruit—treesoriginatedlongsubsequentlytoanimalsallthesearequestionswhich，ifImistakenot，wouldbeanswereddecisivelyinthenegativebythosewhoarespeciallyconversantwiththesciencesinvolved。AnditmustberecollectedthattheissueraisedbyMr。Gladstoneisnotwhether，bysomeeffortofingenuity，thepentateuchalstorycanbeshowntobenotdisprovablebyscientificknowledge，butwhetheritissupportedthereby。
Thereisnothing，then，inthecriticismsofDr。Revillebutwhatrathertendstoconfirmthantoimpairtheold—fashionedbeliefthatthereisarevelationinthebookofGenesis(p。694)。
TheformintowhichMr。Gladstonehasthoughtfittothrowthisopinionleavesmeindoubtastoitssubstance。Idonotunderstandhowahostilecriticismcan，underanycircumstances，tendtoconfirmthatwhichitattacks。If，however，Mr。
Gladstonemerelymeanstoexpresshispersonalimpression，\"asonewhollydestituteofthatkindofknowledgewhichcarriesauthority，\"thathehasdestroyedthevalueofthesecriticisms，Ihaveneitherthewishnortherighttoattempttodisturbhisfaith。Ontheotherhand，Imaybepermittedtostatemyownconviction，that，sofarasnaturalscienceisinvolved，M。Reville’sobservationsretaintheexactvaluetheypossessedbeforeMr。Gladstoneattackedthem。
TrustingthatIhavenowsaidenoughtosecuretheauthorofawiseandmoderatedisquisitionuponatopicwhichseemsfatedtostirunwisdomandfanaticismtotheirdepths，afullermeasureofjusticethanhashithertobeenaccordedtohim，Iretirefrommyself—appointedchampionship，withthehopethatIshallnothereafterbecalleduponbyM。Revilletoapologisefordamagedonetohisstrongcasebyimperfectorimpulsiveadvocacy。
But，perhaps，Imaybepermittedtoaddawordortwo，onmyownaccount，inreferencetothegreatquestionoftherelationsbetweenscienceandreligion；sinceitisoneaboutwhichIhavethoughtagooddealeversinceIhavebeenabletothinkatall；
andaboutwhichIhaveventuredtoexpressmyviewspublicly，morethanonce，inthecourseofthelastthirtyyears。
Theantagonismbetweenscienceandreligion，aboutwhichwehearsomuch，appearstometobepurelyfactitious——fabricated，ontheonehand，byshort—sightedreligiouspeoplewhoconfoundacertainbranchofscience，theology，withreligion；and，ontheother，byequallyshort—sightedscientificpeoplewhoforgetthatsciencetakesforitsprovinceonlythatwhichissusceptibleofclearintellectualcomprehension；andthat，outsidetheboundariesofthatprovince，theymustbecontentwithimagination，withhope，andwithignorance。
ItseemstomethatthemoralandintellectuallifeofthecivilisednationsofEuropeistheproductofthatinteraction，sometimesinthewayofantagonism，sometimesinthatofprofitableinterchange，oftheSemiticandtheAryanraces，whichcommencedwiththedawnofhistory，whenGreekandPhoeniciancameincontact，andhasbeencontinuedbyCarthaginianandRoman，byJewandGentile，downtothepresentday。Ourart(except，perhaps，music)andoursciencearethecontributionsoftheAryan；buttheessenceofourreligionisderivedfromtheSemite。IntheeighthcenturyB。C。，intheheartofaworldofidolatrouspolytheists，theHebrewprophetsputforthaconceptionofreligionwhichappearstometobeaswonderfulaninspirationofgeniusastheartofPheidiasorthescienceofAristotle。
\"AndwhatdoththeLordrequireofthee，buttodojustly，andtolovemercy，andtowalkhumblywiththyGod？\"
Ifanyso—calledreligiontakesawayfromthisgreatsayingofMicah，Ithinkitwantonlymutilates，while，ifitaddsthereto，Ithinkitobscures，theperfectidealofreligion。
Butwhatextentofknowledge，whatacutenessofscientificcriticism，cantouchthis，ifanyonepossessedofknowledge，oracuteness，couldbeabsurdenoughtomaketheattempt？Willtheprogressofresearchprovethatjusticeisworthlessandmercyhateful；williteversoftenthebittercontrastbetweenouractionsandouraspirations；orshowustheboundsoftheuniverseandbidussay，Goto，nowwecomprehendtheinfinite？
AfacultyofwrathlayinthoseancientIsraelites，andsurelytheprophet’sstaffwouldhavemadeswiftacquaintancewiththeheadofthescholarwhohadaskedMicahwhether，peradventure，theLordfurtherrequiredofhimanimplicitbeliefintheaccuracyofthecosmogonyofGenesis！
Whatweareusuallypleasedtocallreligionnowadaysis，forthemostpart，HellenisedJudaism；and，notunfrequently，theHellenicelementcarrieswithitamightyremnantofold—worldpaganismandagreatinfusionoftheworstandweakestproductsofGreekscientificspeculation；whilefragmentsofPersianandBabylonian，orratherAccadian，mythologyburdentheJudaiccontributiontothecommonstock。
Theantagonismofscienceisnottoreligion，buttotheheathensurvivalsandthebadphilosophyunderwhichreligionherselfisoftenwell—nighcrushed。And，formypart，Itrustthatthisantagonismwillnevercease；butthat，totheendoftime，truesciencewillcontinuetofulfiloneofhermostbeneficentfunctions，thatofrelievingmenfromtheburdenoffalsesciencewhichisimposedupontheminthenameofreligion。
ThisistheworkthatM。Revilleandmensuchashearedoingforus；thisistheworkwhichhisopponentsareendeavouring，consciouslyorunconsciously，tohinder。
FOOTNOTES
(1)TheNineteenthCentury。
(2)[Earlier，ifmorerecentannouncementsarecorrect。]
(3)ItmaybeobjectedthatIhavenotputthecasefairlyinasmuchasthesolitaryinsect’swingwhichwasdiscoveredtwelvemonthsagoinSilurianrocks，andwhichis，atpresent，thesoleevidenceofinsectsolderthantheDevonianepoch，camefromstrataofMiddleSilurianage，andisthereforeolderthanthescorpionswhich，withinthelasttwoyears，havebeenfoundinUpperSilurianstratainSweden，Britain，andtheUnitedStates。Butnoonewhocomprehendsthenatureoftheevidenceaffordedbyfossilremainswouldventuretosaythatthenon—
discoveryofscorpionsintheMiddleSilurianstrata，uptothistime，affordsanymoregroundforsupposingthattheydidnotexist，thanthenon—discoveryofflyinginsectsintheUpperSilurianstrata，uptothistime，throwsanydoubtonthecertaintythattheyexisted，whichisderivedfromtheoccurrenceofthewingintheMiddleSilurian。Infact，Ihavestretchedapointinadmittingthatthesefossilsaffordacolourablepretextfortheassumptionthatthelandandair—
populationwereofcontemporaneousorigin。